Bad Movie Logo
"A website to the detriment of good film"
Custom Search
HOMEB-MOVIE REVIEWSREADER REVIEWSFORUMINTERVIEWSUPDATESABOUT
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 03:18:57 PM
713361 Posts in 53058 Topics by 7725 Members
Latest Member: wibwao
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  Camera Tricks that Normally Look Crappy « previous next »
Pages: [1]
Author Topic: Camera Tricks that Normally Look Crappy  (Read 1903 times)
AndyC
Global Moderator
B-Movie Kraken
****

Karma: 1402
Posts: 11156



« on: May 27, 2006, 09:15:41 AM »

The thread about overrated action scenes made me think of this. I believe it was Odinn who mentioned that undercranking to speed up the action often looks bad in movies. It's one of those effects that, when done carefully, looks good, but when done poorly, looks awful. I was just thinking that the effect was used to much greater effect in Vanishing Point, where it is much less noticeable because some effort was made to make sure there was no other movement that would give the effect away. It's either the white Challenger by itself on the desert highway, or passing slowly moving cars. They practically doubled the speed of the car on film, and it looked good.

Another camera trick that takes a certain skill to use is day-for-night. How often does that come out looking like slightly underexposed afternoon? But if the exposure is just right, and there are no hard shadows or other telltale signs in the shot, it does work. In this case, I can't think of an example of good day-for-night, because there are too few (and probably many I didn't notice). There are too many examples of bad day-for-night to pick just one.

So, what are some other examples of camera tricks that can look like crap or like gold, depending on the skill of the filmmakers and the care taken?
Logged

---------------------
"Join me in the abyss of savings."
Scottie
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 8
Posts: 433



WWW
« Reply #1 on: May 27, 2006, 11:19:38 AM »

The zoom is often the most overused and underappreciated tool in cinema. Too many people in the lower level of the movie industry have taken it for advantage and used it in the most absurd ways. Examples of good use of zoom are Robert Altman's zooming in on characters in his movie M*A*S*H. Bad examples are almost every kung fu movie, most spaghetti westerns, and even blaxploitation. People don't seem to realize that the zoom is a tool to draw attention to an object, not to behave like a roaming eye that has no anchor point. It's purpose is to emphasize an event by creating visual motion towards a subject.  It's usually hokey if used improperly, but if you can control the zoom, it's a great tool. In the movie I just finished shooting, I think I zoomed in on someone or something maybe four times in a 90 minute movie. I still think that was too much.
Logged

___<br />Spongebob: What could be better than serving up smiles? <br />Squidward: Being Dead.
Andrew
Administrator
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 0
Posts: 8457


I know where my towel is.


WWW
« Reply #2 on: May 27, 2006, 10:27:37 PM »

One of my peeves comes from Peter Jackson, of all directors.  During the hyper action sequences when he uses the shaking camera along with playing with the frame speed, it is really annoying.  You can see it during some of the fight scenes in the Lord of the Rings and also when the natives first come out and attack the visitors in "King Kong."
Logged

Andrew Borntreger
Badmovies.org
dean
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 267
Posts: 3635



« Reply #3 on: May 27, 2006, 10:30:14 PM »

Speaking of zoom, you really have to mention the vertigo camera trick, where as you move back from your subject the camera zooms in, making the background seem to be moving.

Very tacky effect that has been used so much in a bad way that it normally doesn't add alot to the scene it's in, but for some reason I have a soft spot for it anyway, so much so that when it works well I almost feel like giving the filmmakers some kind of award!
Logged

------------The password will be: Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch
LilCerberus
A Very Bad Person, overweight bald guy with a missing tooth, and
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 703
Posts: 9082


Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?


« Reply #4 on: May 27, 2006, 11:44:18 PM »

I always find it kinda funny when they use ultraviolet black-out lights to imply darkness, especially when the filmstock is way too colorful.
Logged

"Science Fiction & Nostalgia have become the same thing!" - T Bone Burnett
The world runs off money, even for those with a warped sense of what the world is.
Jim H
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 314
Posts: 3669



« Reply #5 on: May 29, 2006, 06:45:48 PM »

"Another camera trick that takes a certain skill to use is day-for-night. How often does that come out looking like slightly underexposed afternoon? But if the exposure is just right, and there are no hard shadows or other telltale signs in the shot, it does work. In this case, I can't think of an example of good day-for-night, because there are too few (and probably many I didn't notice). There are too many examples of bad day-for-night to pick just one. "

They usually don't use day for night, but they use the roughly hour of time between the two to simulate light while still having enough for it to look like night.  There's a name for this, and a gigantic chunk of night time scenes in Hollywood films are filmed at this time..  There's a name for the two hours of a day when they can film for night scenes, but memory escapes me.  You've seen the effect hundreds of times in all likelihood.

As far as camera tricks that normally look crappy...  Solarizing and other video effects usually look crappy (think Redneck Zombies), but can occasionally be used to good effect.
Logged
Ozzymandias
Bad Movie Lover
***

Karma: 23
Posts: 322


« Reply #6 on: May 30, 2006, 11:07:38 PM »

Roger Corman and the Twilight Zone used to pull off of the swiviel camera thing, but Andy Milligan made it look like a dropped camera.

Also the psychedelic effect with Vasaline on the lense was okay until Andy Milligan did it in Body Beneath. He either used too much or used KY jelly.

When I bought my dad a DVD player, I got a box of westerns at Big Lots. I watched at Johnny Mack Brown film called Desert Phantom over the Memorial Day weekend.  The effect they used that drove me crazy was undercranking the fight scenes, which cause them to be in a comical high speed. It worked to make the Batmobile seem to go faster, or when people ran away from the Munsters or when the drank Granny Clampetts moonshine. However in a Western fight scene it looks stupid.
Logged
ulthar
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 368
Posts: 4168


I AM serious, and stop calling me Shirley


WWW
« Reply #7 on: May 31, 2006, 07:59:51 AM »

I've mentioned this one before, but I cannot stand it when there is something just off-frame of the camera that we know is there, but the character cannot see it even though they obviously COULD see it.  They use the camera FoV to define the character's FoV.  (there are times where this works, though, like if the camera is looking at the BACK of the character's head and the something is also behind the character; then it is reasonable that the character does not see the something).

This one is not really a camera trick but an editing trick, and I cannot stand it either: they show the same scene multiple times, either from different angles or over cranked or whatever.  For example, an explosion, a car jumping over something (or into something), etc.  You see it like three times, and it destroys the effect of being "in" the movie.
Logged

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Professor Hathaway:  I noticed you stopped stuttering.
Bodie:      I've been giving myself shock treatments.
Professor Hathaway: Up the voltage.

--Real Genius
Neville
Frightening Fanatic of Horrible Cinema
****

Karma: 142
Posts: 3050



« Reply #8 on: May 31, 2006, 11:10:25 AM »

I really hate when they show somebody taking pictures and they frame and freeze the shot as if it was the finished picture. It just doesn't feel natural. I've promised myself that if I ever film something like that I'll just add the camera noise over the normal shot, without doing anything else. Or, if it's dark shot, I'll allow the flashes to be included, without any sound effects.

I also hate montages. Any. Probably it's because I watch CSI regularly and they tend to overuse them. They also can't be "normal" montages, you know, they have to throw any visual trick available in the editing program, and add "hip" music.
Logged

Due to the horrifying nature of this film, no one will be admitted to the theatre.
Pages: [1]
Badmovies.org Forum  |  Movies  |  Bad Movies  |  Camera Tricks that Normally Look Crappy « previous next »
    Jump to:  


    RSS Feed Subscribe Subscribe by RSS
    Email Subscribe Subscribe by Email


    Popular Articles
    How To Find A Bad Movie

    The Champions of Justice

    Plan 9 from Outer Space

    Manos, The Hands of Fate

    Podcast: Todd the Convenience Store Clerk

    Faster, Pussycat! Kill! Kill!

    Dragonball: The Magic Begins

    Cool As Ice

    The Educational Archives: Driver's Ed

    Godzilla vs. Monster Zero

    Do you have a zombie plan?

    FROM THE BADMOVIES.ORG ARCHIVES
    ImageThe Giant Claw - Slime drop

    Earth is visited by a GIANT ANTIMATTER SPACE BUZZARD! Gawk at the amazingly bad bird puppet, or chuckle over the silly dialog. This is one of the greatest b-movies ever made.

    Lesson Learned:
    • Osmosis: os·mo·sis (oz-mo'sis, os-) n., 1. When a bird eats something.

    Subscribe to Badmovies.org and get updates by email:

    HOME B-Movie Reviews Reader Reviews Forum Interviews TV Shows Advertising Information Sideshows Links Contact

    Badmovies.org is owned and operated by Andrew Borntreger. All original content is © 1998 - 2014 by its respective author(s). Image, video, and audio files are used in accordance with the Fair Use Law, and are property of the film copyright holders. You may freely link to any page (.html or .php) on this website, but reproduction in any other form must be authorized by the copyright holder.