I saw Hancock last night, and absolutely loved it. It definitely had a Götterdämmerung feeling about it which was both inspiring and a little sad. Wagner would have been impressed, if he could have gotten over the idea of his operatic Sigfried being played by a rapper!
That said, I would like to take director Peter Berg out to the parking lot behind the cinema and beat his ass to a pulp. Why? Because he is a television director who has been given a shot at movies, and thinks he will be taken more seriously if he uses fancy camera work that makes people vomit. As much as I was enjoying the movie, I had to keep my eyes closed for nearly half of it. Berg decided he would have more credibility if he got “arty” and made the camera spin and slant all over the place. Why is the necessary? Why do directors feel they have to actually nauseate their audiences in order to appear cutting edge?
May I suggest that the problem isn’t with their camera work, but rather with you? Rapid camera movement can add significantly to the “feel” of a film – it can be used to enhance the emotional subtext, or to add excitement to an action-scene. If you don’t like it … tough. I’m sure there are some old-timers out there wondering why modern movies are so noisy – that doesn’t mean we should go back to the era of silent film.
Perhaps too many late night viewings of the scene on the The Odessa Staircase from The Battleship Potemkin. It’s one thing to have a scene of frenzy because of the editing such as the first gang battle in The Gangs of New York and the current trend to fill the screen with frenetic images that simply convey cleverness rather than frenzy. The images need to build on each other rather than simply flicker unconnected to the precedding or succeeding image.
And since films are a popular entertainment the idea that if one gets sick, from the poor editing, it is just tough luck seems counterintuitive to getting more people in the theater. Peter Berg is an ok director and like many of the current big budget action features probably works cheap and gives the studio exactly what they wanted.
Next up another bad version of Dune!
“…Odessa Staircase?” What the heck was I thinking. The Odessa Steps!
“And since films are a popular entertainment the idea that if one gets sick, from the poor editing, it is just tough luck seems counterintuitive to getting more people in the theater.”
That depends – I personally don’t get sick from it, and am quite drawn to create cinematography. The accuracy of your statement hinges on whether there are more people like me, or more people like right-girl
It also depends on the film in question – I haven’t personally seen Hancock so I can’t say that her assessment is wrong per say. However, I’ve heard others complaining about the camera work in shows like the new Battlestar Galactica, and I’ve heard reports of nauseous people leaving the treater during showings of Cloverfield and The Blair Witch Project. I didn’t have a problem with the camera work in any of the above, and I think that Battlestar Galactica in particular is very well done, so I tend to be weary of any such claims.