

Today I had to do an interview project for a DMA class. Honestly, I didn't feel like doing it. I'm gonna be outta here in about 2 months, and I'm switching majors. So my mind set was "Argh, this is gonna be a pain today. Let's just get this over with." However, opting out a few problems, the process was smooth enough. While I was walking out in my group, a friend of mine was giving me some good recommendations to watch, we kind of got into discussion about the movies that are from the first person point of view of a guy holding a camera. We've all seen them. The best examples that I can think of today are Battlefield: Los Angeles and Cloverfield. There are both positives and negatives to shooting a movie in this fashion. The positives are that you don't have to worry about setting up as much equipment, and it can make some viewers feel like they're actually there. I honestly think there's a lot more downfalls to making movies this way. For one, it really seems unoriginal anymore to try and make it look realistic when it clearly is not. I don't see how having some guy run around shaking a camera improve the reality of it. Here's the real kicker: it makes people sick to their stomach. While I did sit through Cloverfield just fine, and don't get me wrong, I'm not criticizing the plots of some of these movies, just the style, some people couldn't even focus on the plot or storyline because of the headache inducing visuals. Some people I talked to walked out of the theater half way through. But bottomline: I find that style to get on my nerves after a while, and if you want people to actually
watch the movie, and if you must film it that way, take it easy on the shaking.
I don't really like the camera shaking in movies either, but I understand that it's done for a purpose. Like you said, it's done in order to achieve that first person feel.
ReplyDeleteIn Citizen Kane they used a handheld camera to shoot a scene for the newsreel. That scene is extremely shaky naturally, but it makes the scene look like we are intruding on Kane's personal life. In the end, the shaky camera movement was a good choice on Orson Welles', or Gregg Toland's, part.