Name a more unpleasant and pointless camera effect than the snap zoom

fuck off jarjar

>Do we really need more films where the action is randomly spliced together with six cuts per second from footage taken by a one legged epileptic with a vibrator up his ass riding a three wheeled skateboard?

this movie sucks

JJ is shit

disney needs to fuck off

I'm gonna watch VII again and try to enjoy it

Weren't snapzooms invented for Firefly? They looked cool in that. It was also a cool way of halving the cgi cost because the first half of the shot would be blurry and out of focus so you could just throw any shit at the screen.

Like by invented I mean, as an fx shot. Obviously snap zooms existed as a physical shot beforehand.

No idea about their first appearance, but I distinctly remember watching Avatar and noticing just how liberally they used this effect.

Meesa think you needsa holiday

Yeah that was my first thought on seeing OPs .gif. But I think the reason it was able to work in nuBSG so well was because it worked in conjunction with the other elements, like the muted space-sound, radio crackling on the voices and film grain effect that really reinforced the kinda "surveillance camera" style atmosphere.

In Star Wars - with the crisp cg and pewpew lasers, it's rubbish.

>taken by a one legged epileptic with a vibrator up his ass riding a three wheeled skateboard?

Dutch angles.

Dutching can work in certain circumstances. However this is inexcusable and was a huge red flag when it appeared in the first trailer.

Why can we see it at all user?

The snap zoom, or the lensflare, or hard-coded subtitles are no different to the suspension of disbelief when you read a novel or watching a play.

It all forms part of the stylistic form, the "language" of cinema.

I mean, why does a Lensflare remind you of the artifice of the film, yet the fact that no one talks over oneanother or that everyone is a fucking archetype and doesn't act like a real human being would in the dramatic situation before us pull not remind you it's artifice.

What effect is it supposed to produce for the audience then?

What does snapzoom do for the audience? What does lensflare do for the audience?

Jarring analysis

What did he mean by it?

...

kek

spin around characters camera movements

hola reddit, that technique is the mark of kino

-Draws their attention to the moving object.
-Artificially creates a greater sense of momentum (in the 1970's telelphoto lenses panning to create "motion blur" were used for the same sensation)
-Provides geographical context for the action by moving from the wide panorama to a fixed point
-subconsciously reminds audiences of "found footage" or war/tornado -footage which evokes a subconscious association to "real"
-keeps the film in vogue

>Not gonna lie, it's a stupid meme technique and I wish Hollywood would kill it already

At least when it was being used by guys like boyle or greengrass i think the point was to put yourself in the situation, almost like a documentary where the camera and the viewer are there inside the scene. Breaking down the separation between audience and subject.

It has since just become the way hacks direct shitty action.

Can we all agree a dolly zoom is the greatest reaction shot?

post snap zooms you think actually pulled it off

youtube.com/watch?v=Wffv5FER9S4

yes

It always catches me off-guard but I think it looks badass. Someone post the Batman one.

so when did hollywood start using this? avatar?

>It's a shaky cam, quick cut fight scene.

...

What are Cred Forums's thoughts on cloverfield? I thought it worked in that, but at the same time, I don't want to see another movie do it.

>hola reddit,
>kino
you buzzworder faggot are the black sheep here, kid

It works in Cloverfield because it's a damn dude running around for dear life with a camera.

Christ, this is awful. But then again, that whole movie was just a long, loud fart.

I remember Star Wars Empire At War had a 'cinematic view' and it consisted of snap zooms just like that.
Good job JJ you fucking hack.

As much as I like Snyder as a director he needs to stop doing this.

Can work sometimes, unlike

here ya go

I love this film

And JJ has no creativity, so he simply ripped off what looked cool in a different context

God dammit I love movies where people interrupt and talk over eachother.

Man, I just love his visual style and aesthetic.

That's funny because I remember seeing Elysium and thinking "what the fuck is going on?" during all the fight scenes. Shaky cam is the worst thing ever invented.

an object flying this fast would wipe a significant portion of life off the planet, snyder is a hack

really? it's hilariously bad

that was quick

highly paid I see

It had a non-life-destroying repulsor field around it.

This shit looks like something a 15 year old edgy teenager would consider "aesthetically pleasing".

>edgy
name ONE thing edgy about that webm you meme hustling jew

Immediately breaks all my imersion when movies do this

He is so fucking awful. Saturn ruining hack. Eye bleach:
youtube.com/watch?v=TV3IgZeQk_Q
Cloverfield is good because there is actually some quality work going on behind the shakycam. It's when people take that technique and apply it to every single bland horror movie to mask the lack any quality set design or imagination that it becomes a problem

nah

I wish Uwe Boll's Darfur had less shaky cam.

A really good "couple of good guys try to save a village filled with murdering rapists" episode but unfortunately the shaky cam gets in the way.

...

It's a crappy movie with crappy characters you're stuck watching meander around stupidly.

This scene worked well with the close ups though. Seconds before the good guy's death and the tension.

That Arab actor was very based

That looks like something a news helicopter would film.

> Channel 5 with a high speed chase live from Jakku
> as you can see, the white Millenium Bronco swerves left and right to shake off his persuers.

Blair witch did it right. Even the disappearance was done right and the nice buildup.

Cloverfield was all right. Too bad the whole stupid movie wasn't about the creature but a fucking love story.

Same thing with Monsters. A fucking photographer escorts his boss' bitch back to the border.

One of the best recent monster movies ever made

Shaky cam doesn't have to be bad, but that's excessive

...

I think its mainly being all close ups is what makes it not feel too good. Needs more of a wider shot and yeah less shakes

I hate this type of shots so much, it's the worst trend. Never seen it done well, always looks like shit

>literally superman
>takes 10 seconds to climb what appears to be a 4 foot ledge

>dat focus puller like "fuck it i'm union"

being crew is fun

this

t. armchair scientist

Noice.

Maybe write "swerves wildly" so it all fits on the banner

sure thing, Zack Snyder

Trying to give a serious answer: I think its because this (Im not sure Im apart of the current generation but Im guessing so, 24y) generation is so used to fast paced clips they have to make it like that or the audience will lose interest. Just look at how videogames have developed, we went from MMORPGs which took fucklong if you wanted to get somewhere, to MOBA's which is more fast paced, and now to Overwatch which is even more fast paced.

I thought Attack of the Clones was first

I remember watching a doc about the making of and the people at lucas film made a big deal about it, since I guess it was hard to do at the time

this film is so accidentally funny

A 10/10 kinography shot from show Curb Your Enthusiasm

I've never seen this done before.

Stop watching bad movies.

this shit singlehandedly ruined man of steel for me

Far better then fucking JJ

I remember BSG doing it all the time and it looking awful

>I've never seen this done before.
That's because they are very rarely done... something that I am greatful for

>quick zooming not only once but twice on same object
FUCKING KEK

What popularized it? I never really noticed it before Battlestar Galactica, which did it all the fucking time.

>Also, what the fuck happened to long takes?

this

kek season 3 of this show was great

long takes and summer blockbusters are incompatible

Zack Snyder overdoes them so bad. I can't watch any movie of his without noticing it being overdone.

>that zoom on Jeff's fat face eating

Fucking hilarious

Has anyone except Greengrass done shaky cam well?

Excluding found footage movies since that's a different matter entirely.

>4 cuts in 15 seconds to better soak in the scene

I know you have a short attention span but Snyder's films like to take their time, this is he has a great visual style.

Anything "found footage or handheld camera"

All garbage that goes intrinsically against what film is supposed to be.

Thats a legitimately great crane shot.

Boyle in 28 days.

Anything that reminds the audience that the are watching something that was filmed on camera is cancerous and should never be done.

I think dutch angles are a pretty effective visual tool for conveying unease. There's a lot of very good usage of them in older classics, from "M" to the Twilight Zone.

Not sure how much of a place there is for it in modern cinema given that tone can be so much more effectively conveyed by color than black and white.

Depends on context. Saving private ryan and the normandy scene with blood and dirt hitting the lense was pretty effective.

Gilf fever activated

That isn't entirely the same, you can get shit in your vision as a person there, you can fucking snap zoom your eyes though.

Clones came after and both used it

Stop talking about things you don't understand

The food that he's eating plays an important part in the episode so it makes sense

Genuinely better camerawork than is shown at any point during most multi million dollar blockbusters

Why did they even bother though? Were they just bored and wanted to have fun with a crane? I bet timing that extra walking into its path was interesting

>Clones came after and both used it

clones was 2002, BG remake was 2003

>cutting at all during a 15 second scene
Totally unnecessary.

I think you're overestimating 3 video games as being representative of an entire generation.

To your point though, it's remarkably cost efficient to hide bad fight choreography in film with quick cuts. God fucking knows there isn't much art left in Hollywood.

As a whole, American films have been driven through a narrowing tunnel of film funding to make way for big picture blockbusters. Blockbusters, of course, are fundamentally action driven instead of dialogue driven because it appeals better in foreign markets.

Hard to do 18 cuts in four seconds when it's just two people talking.

CYE is the most kino kino show ever. Certainly the most underrated.

Yeah well, summer 'blockbusters' haven't been doing so good lately.

Yeah this shot surprised me because you never see stuff like this done in the show.

What about the opening sequence of Spectre?

Every season of this show was great. 3 was exceptional, though.

yeah, if you want long takes or good handheld camera watch more authorial cinema

Oh is that so user? Ye of little faith

didnt watched Spectre. Is it good? I really dont follow commercial cinema

for fuck sake Snyder, stop browsing Cred Forums

>he hasn't seen Jodorowskys Dune
The opening shot is a 1 camera take of the galaxy, showing space life whilst zooming down to the Dune planet's surface.

Imagine if this film was actually made in the early 70's

>I really don't follow commercial cinema
Try to sound like a bigger pretentious faggot than this

I dare you

What? Is there a problem?

prittay...prittay...prittay...prittay good

the fact it hasn't been made is a proof

It wasn't made because the director couldn't give the studio a time limit of the film. He didn't want to make it into a 2 hour piece.

But no doubt it would have been the greatest piece of sci fi cinema ever made.

A lot of his scenes were spiritually symbolic. Way better than what Zack Snyder does with the religious symbolism. You need to watch the documentary

>the first person camera

God I'm glad hardcore henry flopped hard

Not him, but cheap camera positioning, tons of stupid unnecessary fx, weird angles, it looks flashy and doesn't hold any substance.

>But no doubt it would have been the greatest piece of sci fi cinema ever made.
I don't think it would. It would also be a horrible adaptation as well. But it would be a masterpiece in its own right, like all of his weird kinos.

I've always seen jodo's symbolism more like an aesthetic thing, some kind of texture he uses to wrap his movies in it

>flopped
>Hardcore Henry has grossed $9.3 million in North America and $5.1 million in other territories for a worldwide total of $14.3 million, against a budget of $2 million

Fuck you those type of films are amazing. Maniac is a masterpiece of a film due to it being filmed like that

It's fun as fuck in Metal Gear Solid 2-4

I loved enter the void. Would love a Joyce's Ulysses adaptation in first person

video games and movies are not the same thing damnit...

I love 60fps gaming but I absolutely cannot stand 60fps in movies

How about a remake of Ridley Scott's Gladiator but in first person?

Would be brutal.

Now THAT'S a remake that I would pay to see

in metal gear solid 5 cutscenes are all longshot. They are great

It's really impressive that it was that cheap. Some of the scenes looked really expensive.

I was impressed with how low budget Blair Witch 2 was considering that film looked entirely practical

It could work as a short movie in my opinion

Just don't see how practical effects could have fully realised Chris Foss's spaceship designs. Just know they would have looked like shit.

usually those kind of movies costs pratically nothing. No set, no strange camera movements, no super light rigs

Anything done by Paul Greengrass. Also POV's are overrated.

fuck, I hate that guy's work

It did because it gave a reason for it being in that format.

Diary of the Dead was some shakey excuse that he wanted to document the zombies. Even had a scene where a girl was begging him to remove it so he could help and he just stood in a mirror and said "no"

Didn't work in Chronicle because no school in America is going to let some kid record other children without their consent. Him sneaking it on to the bleachers is more believable as is the cheerleaders calling him out for being a creep.

Seriously I don't get why he keeps the camera zoomed in while shooting the film handheld. I got seasick when I saw Borne Ultimatum on the big screen.

yet not edgy in the slightest

the long shot in London has Fallen felt out of place, the whole thing has shitty effects and le shakey cam and suddenly they wanna be artsy? fuck off

>I got seasick when I saw Borne Ultimatum on the big screen.

People like you should be euthanized

this

Eat dick, the cinematography was awful.

People like you should kill themselves.

Cinematography is top tier, scenario is pretty much typical for a 007 movie but less serious than the other Craig bonds. It's not really good nor bad.

if the cinematography is good I'm in

The cinematography isn't Spectre's problem. The problem is the pace of the film which kinda looses track half way through and the short screentime of Blofeld along with the bizare plot twist.

Spectre could have been something special if they got better writers to write the script.

But instead it has become pretty forgetful although I do enjoy a few scenes out of it and I like the henchman guy which reminded me of the good old Connery days.

I feel like snap zooms are out of place in any action film. I mostly see snap zooms in comedies doing the whole pseudo documentary style, when they want reaction shots for a cheap laugh. It doesn't fit in movies like this. We get an omniscient perspective through most of the movie then BAM, snap zoom. It's like they are saying "look it's like someone else is watching and filming!". Super annoying.

Explain to me what's wrong with a snap zoom without saying it breaks immersion or looks cheap. A snap zoom is equally nonimmersive as any camera change or the fact that you're watching a filmed movie at all, you only think it's immersion breaking because you focus on it because you fell for a meme. Anything about cheapness is pointless because it's literally not any cheaper than filming or cutting anyways.

TFA was good, and the shit you people make yourself believe in order not to think so is hilarious.

it's more like they are overcompensating for having shitty choreography. The director doesn't believe his actors can perform a realistic fight scene so he compensates by shaking the cam around to exaggerate the action making it appear for hectic than it actually is.

It doesn't fit in movies like this. We get an omniscient perspective through most of the movie then BAM, snap zoom. It's like they are saying "look it's like someone else is watching and filming!". Super annoying.

Ugh I KNOW. It's soooo immersion breaking I thought I was on Jakku then it's like, whaaaat? Also then after the scene he whole world changed and I get teleported to a completely different place?! What the fuck? And it kept happening, too, they kept moving my head and eyes around and I couldn't even control it, what the hell? So retarded.

When they were compositing the entire thing, the director felt that the whole thing came off as artificial. He wanted to do the same thing that Battlestar Galactica did by using the same trick, making it seem like the camera is either on the ground or tied to a heli to give it some bit of authenticity. It worked quite well. Compare it to the shots with other star wars where they all look like they were made for video games.

It's no more distracting than any camera shift, scene transition or swipe, to people who don't arbitrarily associate it with holding a camera.

A lot of people underestimate how difficult it is to do a good fight scene with no cuts every other second. Im not defending the practice, as im sure all the edgy argumentative Cred Forums posters will try to jump on me for. Im just saying it typically makes sense, either an actor can act or fight, its rare to find someone who's incredible at both. So if they cant fight but are great for the role otherwise, they pull out doubles and to hide that they use cuts. Thats the simple explanation for it, obviously with so much money involved they should do better.

long takes and quick cuts have been done to death.. who is going to popularize the medium take?

I cant fathom how shaking the camera like this is actually a calculated fucking effort approved by people throwing multi millions at the project. They seriously have to TELL the fucking camera crew to shake like that. How is there so little self awareness involved here?

can someone translate this to english?

"i am making fun of your assertion that the 'camerawork', of all things, ruined your immersion, when such an outlandish thing as being on another fictional planet or, more, jumping from one fictional planet to the next, did not"

I never said anything about it ruining my immersion. It just doesn't fit an action movie. Unless it's found footage, pseudo documentary, or a comedy it doesn't mesh well.

10,000% this.

Film making is a fucking tragedy now.

Do you know what my theory is? You know how people play speed chess where there is this clock with 2 buttons on it? One player hits the button when he's done moving and the time ticks away until the other player is done and presses his button.

Well, I think there's 2 editors and they are editing using one of those clocks. One makes a cut, hits the timer then the other one makes a cut and hits his timer, repeat. Here's an example of what I mean. Instead of long takes and actual acting, everything is close up, singly on an actor and cut cut cut.

this is fucking horrific

I cant believe it, someone is not completely an idiot

...

hey man i agree with you.. i'm just translating for the guy who asked

It is only difficult if the direction is shitty and the scene is setup being shitty.

if low budget films can do it, big studios can do it.. they're just lazy

youtube.com/watch?v=vaLIkQBoRag

It is mostly a division between western and eastern film styles for stuff like that.

youtube.com/watch?v=Z1PCtIaM_GQ

...

Except all the people involved in the production, after it fell apart, went off to do exactly what they were planning to do for dune.

>I love 60fps gaming but I absolutely cannot stand 60fps in movies
It literally has everything to do with agency.

Disagreed, it's great for comedic effect:
youtube.com/watch?v=YtyU2PJCk7Y

HH wasn't a very good movie and it was riding on a gimmick.

You want cheap movies that are good? Try Hunter-Prey (2009; Budget $425,000) and don't google anything about it.

>Try Hunter-Prey
That movie was such a plesant fucking surprise.

I think the biggest take away from this is that Jackie had the leeway to do take after take after take until he got it right. Hollywood producers would never stand for that shit. Hell neither would the actors, probably.

No one has never seen a real Hollywood movie in 60fps. None have been shot in 60fps. Everything that is in 60fps was shot in 24fps and interpolated to be 60fps. That means they used a program to fill in the extra frames. The new avatar movies and the new "George Orwell's Animal Farm" are being shot in full 60fps and will be the first Hollywood movies to have been shot and released in 60fps. Even The Hobbit, that was shot in 48fps wasn't shown as 48fps in normal theaters and the bluray release is only 24fps.

Like this shit here is interpolated 60fps, not actually shot in 60fps.

youtube.com/watch?v=4YY6mymW4oA

Thereinlies the cancereous problem that is Hollywood filmmaking. They don't care about the art. They only care about the money via the cheapest methods and fastest method possible.

And, this is what interpolation does to fast action sequences. Note the blurry blobs everywhere, frame-by-frame if you need to.

>that mirror reveal

well played edgar, well played

Such a cute snek :3

wtf i thought it was to cover up choreography so they didnt have to spend on that, but that fight looks pretty good from a flat shot.

You're only proving my point as most of the actors in both Raids aren't very good. Im not saying thats a bad thing but they simply aren't, and its because they were picked for the fight scenes.

I guess you're just more educated than me but I thought movies were shot at a higher frame rate and then motion blurred and made 24fps in post

Pythons are cuter.

>Jodorowsky
>Hollywood
>Blockbuster
His films that got made were funded by some French eccentric

There's nothing wrong with this. The human eye sees blur when objects move anyway

Snap zooms were very popular in 60s / 70s movies. Think Deep Red, Theater of Blood

The Raid was made by a Welshman

Not globular blur. It sees smooth blur. This looks like a fucking 5 year old finger painted it.

Who do you think did the cinematography?

You've got me there

Motion blur doesn't have anything to do with framerate you retard, it's about shutter speed.

When the scene cuts 1,292 times per second

youtube.com/watch?v=gCKhktcbfQM

If I notice something and point it out online that means it's bad!

someone post the one from the Avengers where thor is fighting loki

SO MUCH TENSION!
I FEEL LIKE I'M THERE!

hahaha

not finishing the cgi

>It's no more distracting than any camera shift

That's clearly not true.

Cross-fading or fading to black shittly. Usually it's done well but sometimes it's really annoying, don't know why. For example in The Cube
youtube.com/watch?v=Bhb71ToFaOs&t=54m55s

lol wtf is this

man I love this movie

no you're a retard

Thats the moment I gave up on the film OP

This

>Just got out of a movie and it had an after credits scene. I mean fucking come on.

> Hire JJ Abrahms as director

> Get lens flare

> The zoom punch ins

> Redo the same story as A New Hope for Episode 7

That guy does short takes and stitches them together.

Speaking of Mad Max
>let Miller do it
>last movies were Happy Feet and Babe, last action movie Reagan was president and digital cameras and storage didn't exist
>make best directed action movie of the last 10 years

Because you go out of your way to notice it. It reminds you of Cred Forums bullshit and movie criticism and you allow your mind to go into that world instead of the one on the screen. Aside from that, there is absolutely nothing inherently different between a snap zoom and any other movement of a camera. If you want to enjoy movies more and avoid the immersion breaking that you claim to hate, then you should get over this.

Wow so cool

perfect description

miller is actually a miracle

The only time I like it is that one time a sniper took out a guy and then they snapped zoomed and music started blasting. I was like 12 at the time and it was so hella fucking epic haha.

>Unpleasant
Opinion
>pointless
To establish scale. To show a large scene then to focus the frame on a smaller object within that scene. To give a feeling of speed.

But you're all the type of people who only enjoy movies when you're reviewing them like a movie critic, so I guess you'd rather enjoy feeling insulted by a filmmaker than actually focusing on the movie.

>>last movies were Happy Feet and Babe
Both highly acclaimed for the record.

fucking awful

MARVEL KEK KUCK LMAO KEK

Babe 2 is actually kino

THAT

WAS

INTENSE!

You can really feel how much the actors where in their roles, as the camera man was LITERALLY shaking with fear. And the camera man's shaking only adds to the excitement! Wow, I truly feels like being there.

I unironically liked it

I haven't seen it. Apart from shaky cams, was the story good?

I've never finished a movie if the camera is shaking like those, at some point. I started Hunger Games because I was curious about what it was all about, and it was shaking so much I could not finish it.