Jump to content


This is a read only archive of the old forums
The new CBn forums are located at https://quarterdeck.commanderbond.net/

 
Photo

Herky Jerky Camerawork and Fast Cut Editing...


12 replies to this topic

#1 B5Erik

B5Erik

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 465 posts
  • Location:Southern California

Posted 17 November 2008 - 01:22 AM

Like it? OK with it? Hate it?

Personally, it ruined the pre-credits sequence for me. Add in a lack of long shots in the action sequences (without long shots there is no sense of placement and what is really going on) and you've got the QOS pre-credits sequence (and some of the other action scenes as well).

Honestly, I thought that this was the worst job of direction, cinematography, and editing out of all the Bond movies.

(I don't think the movie itself was bad - see my review - but I thought the technical aspects of the movie just knocked it down a peg from what it could have been.)

#2 Cody

Cody

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1393 posts

Posted 17 November 2008 - 01:39 AM

It's not a style I'm fond of, but I was OK with it in this case. I wouldn't want to see it become the norm.

#3 danslittlefinger

danslittlefinger

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 3680 posts
  • Location:“If not here . . . then elsewhere.”

Posted 17 November 2008 - 02:06 AM

I was wondering where my tremendous headache came from after watching it..now I know.

Thanks for that.

Edited by danslittlefinger, 17 November 2008 - 02:06 AM.


#4 Jim

Jim

    Commander RNVR

  • Commanding Officers
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 14266 posts
  • Location:Oxfordshire

Posted 17 November 2008 - 02:08 AM

I am not a film director, Nor am I an editor. I have nothing to observe here.

#5 00Twelve

00Twelve

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 7706 posts
  • Location:Kingsport, TN

Posted 17 November 2008 - 02:08 AM

I've actually never seen such rich photography in a Bond film (and that includes, as I mentioned in my review, YOLT). If there's been any movie in a while to convince me to plunge myself into debt just so I can own a Blu-Ray player & HDTV, it's this.

The action editing is fast, yes, but I think that since the movie bears more than one viewing anyway, the fast cuts will be less offensive to the folks that hate it so much. Just IMO.

#6 mario007

mario007

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 301 posts

Posted 17 November 2008 - 03:25 AM

The action editing is fast, yes, but I think that since the movie bears more than one viewing anyway, the fast cuts will be less offensive to the folks that hate it so much. Just IMO.


In my first viewing, I was very dissapointed with the editing of the action scenes especially the char chase and the rooftop race. But I did not have the same problem with the second viewing ... i was able to follow the action much more. The only thing I needed more clarity on was the rope sequence ... it was very confusing ... although, I think this was the whole point (why it was edited that way).

#7 Fiona Volpe lover

Fiona Volpe lover

    Sub-Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • Pip
  • 347 posts

Posted 17 November 2008 - 07:30 PM

The more I think about it, the "herky-jerky camerawork and fast cut editing", although I loathed it, may well be the least of the film's problems.

#8 Paul Scrabo

Paul Scrabo

    Midshipman

  • Crew
  • 60 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 03:30 PM

Whenever EON tries to be "hip", whether the slo-mo shot of the drug agents running in the PTS of LTK, or the time-remapping that ruined the ice chase in DAD, they make the film more cliched, more dated than ever. I felt no suspense in this film. Very odd.
Pauk

#9 FlemingBond

FlemingBond

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 610 posts
  • Location:Phoenix, Az U.S.

Posted 25 November 2008 - 02:54 AM

I didn't mind it a lot in the PTS, but after that the editing hurt the movie. In the interogation scene fight i couldn't tell what was going on. IN the boat chase i couldn't tell how it ended.
There were some artistic shots by Foster, or the cinematographer, but the editing did hurt the film

#10 HildebrandRarity

HildebrandRarity

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 4361 posts

Posted 25 November 2008 - 03:00 AM

We all know that Daniel Craig in interview after interview said that the movie starts with James Bond "in turmoil" and "confused". I think the lightning fast edits echo or mirror this sentiment from the PTS through the Palio and the rooftop pursuit in Siena.

#11 Roebuck

Roebuck

    Lt. Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPip
  • 1870 posts

Posted 25 November 2008 - 05:39 PM

Was watching GoldenEye last night. In the fight with Ourumov (after Mishkin is killed) Bond is teleporting all over the detention cell, yet there aren’t scores of fans baying for Terry Rawlings head. Thirteen years later, as there’s been progressively more of this brisk action movie directing, you’d think audiences would be more comfortable with it now.

#12 avl

avl

    Lieutenant

  • Crew
  • PipPip
  • 871 posts
  • Location:London

Posted 25 November 2008 - 11:24 PM

Just watched the Bourne Ultimatum. Great film (not as good as Supremacy). But the point is - there is almost no scene in which the camera stays still. This is the summit of interventionist camera - and QoS is nothing like it!

#13 Mr. Blofeld

Mr. Blofeld

    Commander

  • Veterans
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 9173 posts
  • Location:North Smithfield, RI, USA

Posted 25 November 2008 - 11:51 PM

Just watched the Bourne Ultimatum. Great film (not as good as Supremacy). But the point is - there is almost no scene in which the camera stays still. This is the summit of interventionist camera - and QoS is nothing like it!

Agreed; when I watched Ultimatum in the theatre, I grew incredibly annoyed very quickly; not only could I not make out a single frame of the bathroom fight, but I also got fed up with the whole "shakeycam-over-the-shoulder" framing during the CIA scenes! WTF? :(