10 replies to this topic

[HildebrandRarity]

First review where the critic distinguishes between shakey-cam and quick cuts.

For what it's worth:

http://www.sfgate.co.../DDEO143VED.DTL

[sorking]

First review where the critic distinguishes between shakey-cam and quick cuts.

For what it's worth:

http://www.sfgate.co.../DDEO143VED.DTL

Worth a lot to me. I've been saying for a while now that the camera isn't doing what people say it is - it's the cutting rhythm that's swift.

[HildebrandRarity]

QUOTE FROM LINK ABOVE:

"On a more tangible level, "Quantum of Solace" benefits from imaginatively conceived action sequences and from a director, Marc Forster, who knows how to film them. Instead of lazily relying on a shaky camera to impart excitement, Forster uses montage. His shots are quick and artfully assembled. Take a look at the opening car chase, which gains all its energy through vigorous cutting. This is a director willing to do the actual work of building a sequence."



I ing hated shakey-cam in Bourne Ultimatum. It made me sick enough that I sat WAY back during my second/final viewing.

I was dreading only one thing about Q0S...and now i'm not dreading a thing.

12:01 tonight is around the corner! HERE I COME!

Yippie!!!!

[MarkA]

Worth a lot to me. I've been saying for a while now that the camera isn't doing what people say it is - it's the cutting rhythm that's swift.

You can come up with all the arty farty nonsense you want. It still make the action sequences incomprehensible and totally lacking in suspense or thrills

[HildebrandRarity]

Worth a lot to me. I've been saying for a while now that the camera isn't doing what people say it is - it's the cutting rhythm that's swift.

You can come up with all the arty farty nonsense you want. It still make the action sequences incomprehensible and totally lacking in suspense or thrills

I'll have to see form myself. Tonight.

TONIGHT!!!!!!

[MattofSteel]

Saw it last night, and the viewer is quite correct. Never had a problem seeing what was happening. It's not shaky, just fast. Contemporary, and not messy. Well maybe a little messy:)

[kneelbeforezod]

The camera does shake in the PTS... several of the shots in the car chase have that vibrating thing going on. Just saying...

[sorking]

Worth a lot to me. I've been saying for a while now that the camera isn't doing what people say it is - it's the cutting rhythm that's swift.

You can come up with all the arty farty nonsense you want. It still make the action sequences incomprehensible and totally lacking in suspense or thrills

Clear information being dismissed as 'art farty nonsense' there.

I followed the action fine. I'm not the car chase's biggest fan, but the rest were thrilling and suspenseful. The audience who gasped along with me during the rooftop and plan sequences seem to agree.

If it ain't to your taste, fine. But there's no need to be childish about it.

[MarkA]

If it ain't to your taste, fine. But there's no need to be childish about it.

I have every right to be childish about it if I choose. But to be serious about this, this criticism about the action sequences is coming from so many sources now that I feel it is a legitimate criticism. I feel they are a mess and a tad pretentious. Crosscutting when done properly (Coppola, DePalma), and for a thematic reason they can be thrilling. But not these.

[dee-bee-five]

Saw it last night, and the viewer is quite correct. Never had a problem seeing what was happening. It's not shaky, just fast. Contemporary, and not messy.

Quite. Alas, it appears some people are having difficulty reconciling James Bond and "contemporary". But, for me, QoS has remarkable visual flair and is the most stylish of the entire series. And that's down to the extraordinarily fine direction and editing.

[sorking]

If it ain't to your taste, fine. But there's no need to be childish about it.

I have every right to be childish about it if I choose. But to be serious about this, this criticism about the action sequences is coming from so many sources now that I feel it is a legitimate criticism. I feel they are a mess and a tad pretentious. Crosscutting when done properly (Coppola, DePalma), and for a thematic reason they can be thrilling. But not these.

Never said the complaints of confusion weren't legitimate. Just said it was about editing rather than camera movement. Why that singles me out for an attack of being 'arty farty' from the guy who just cited Coppola and DePalma I have no idea.