Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (March 24th, 2016)

[jpuli28]

For those who love Batman...

Appears this is WELL worth the delay, oh man!

 

[RIDDICK]

​

 

[GasparZizou]

The point is... ok, let's talk about that "shaky cam" example.
The scene is a flashback, a look into main character's memory - something very personal and important for him. It contains a conversation with his father who tries to explain his own view on the world and teach his son a life lesson. And how is it shot? From a long distance with constantly shaking and sometimes moving camera, like if we were spying on them from the field. It separates the viewer from what's happening instead of making him empathize. In other words, the way this scene was shot makes absolutely NO sense.

So, the point is... Snyder has skills but no vision.
He has knowledge but no understanding. He knows "how" but not "why".
He's only good at adapting pre-existing materials, nothing more.

For the dude from the video shaky cam and handheld are the same, lets take that logic for the sake of argument and he ends up contradicting himself, you explain that the shaky cam distances the viewer from a personal moment, but aren't all personal family moments recorded in shaky handheld? See, shaky handheld does not distance the viewer, it does the opposite, it brings him/her into the movie, it's a technique that conveys both realism (as explained by his example of Private Ryan) and personal involvement, so right off the bat his opinion is fully contradictory.

So, the scene, and the whole movie being filmed that way makes perfect sense.

I see many good criticisms when people dissect the plot and script of MoS, and rightfully so, it's got various structural flaws, but that's not really Snyder's fault is it? I never really see a good objective criticism towards Snyder's technique or vision, he isn't lacking in any of those, you say he lacks vision but I completely disagree and there's no lack of material to back that up as shown by the video of the MoS thesis, I understand if you don't like his vision or his approach but that doesn't mean it's flawed.

 

[jye4ever]

I watch 300 just because it's gorgeous to look at. Those reds, that slow mo, those abs.

The man has talents.

 

[GasparZizou]

It's a cool flick, plus I always end up crazy motivated to do stuff afterwards

 

[Rorywan]

For the dude from the video shaky cam and handheld are the same, lets take that logic for the sake of argument and he ends up contradicting himself, you explain that the shaky cam distances the viewer from a personal moment, but aren't all personal family moments recorded in shaky handheld? See, shaky handheld does not distance the viewer, it does the opposite, it brings him/her into the movie, it's a technique that conveys both realism (as explained by his example of Private Ryan) and personal involvement, so right off the bat his opinion is fully contradictory.

So, the scene, and the whole movie being filmed that way makes perfect sense.

I see many good criticisms when people dissect the plot and script of MoS, and rightfully so, it's got various structural flaws, but that's not really Snyder's fault is it? I never really see a good objective criticism towards Snyder's technique or vision, he isn't lacking in any of those, you say he lacks vision but I completely disagree and there's no lack of material to back that up as shown by the video of the MoS thesis, I understand if you don't like his vision or his approach but that doesn't mean it's flawed.

No man, you are wrong about the emotional significance of handheld camera on a scene. Riddick is 100% correct. It removes the viewer from an intimate involvement between characters, the example you use is a war movie and a completely different thing. In that case it helps the feeling of reality, of documentary style cinema verite. It doesn't matter that you sense somebody holding the camera.

You use the example of intimate home movies. They are particularly intimate because you are always aware of who is holding the camera, it breaks the filmic reality wall if that person is not part of the narrative.

For example in a two character scene, like the one between Costner and young Clark, there should be no hint at a 3rd person involved. You shouldn't feel the camera being held, it's basic film school stuff. Which is why people point it out in a couple of MOS scenes in particular. Handheld is great in certain narratives or scenes, it's just another example of Snyder throwing everything into the pot without thinking.

 

[spindrift]

Snyder is genious- he will fill the seats for BVS and it will be a monster hit- WB is going to make sure of that-all the stops are being pulled out and nothing being held back- plenty of money and plenty of time to get it right.

 

[GasparZizou]

No man, you are wrong about the emotional significance of handheld camera on a scene. Riddick is 100% correct. It removes the viewer from an intimate involvement between characters, the example you use is a war movie and a completely different thing. In that case it helps the feeling of reality, of documentary style cinema verite. It doesn't matter that you sense somebody holding the camera.

You use the example of intimate home movies. They are particularly intimate because you are always aware of who is holding the camera, it breaks the filmic reality wall if that person is not part of the narrative.

For example in a two character scene, like the one between Costner and young Clark, there should be no hint at a 3rd person involved. You shouldn't feel the camera being held, it's basic film school stuff. Which is why people point it out in a couple of MOS scenes in particular. Handheld is great in certain narratives or scenes, it's just another example of Snyder throwing everything into the pot without thinking.

You make a good point in not having to feel a 3rd person in the scene, and I understand that, however the logic in the video is still flawed for the reasons I mentioned.

But you're mistaken if you think a tool can be restricted from being used in more than one way or has only one purpose, the occasions I gave that justify the use of shaky cam in personal moments are still completely valid, the war example is a good one and can be applied to MoS because of its chaotic action, then you have the personal moments, and that's where my example comes into play, the family moments, perfectly applied by bits like Pa & Clark's talks, Clark running around with his cape, etc etc, because I did not feel one bit excluded in any of those scenes because of the shaky cam.

Do you see how it can be applied too? It's not a matter to questioning the application of the technique, it's in reality a matter of questioning the style based on preference.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

 

[a-dev]

You make a good point in not having to feel a 3rd person in the scene, and I understand that, however the logic in the video is still flawed for the reasons I mentioned.

But you're mistaken if you think a tool can be restricted from being used in more than one way or has only one purpose, the occasions I gave that justify the use of shaky cam in personal moments are still completely valid, the war example is a good one and can be applied to MoS because of its chaotic action, then you have the personal moments, and that's where my example comes into play, the family moments, perfectly applied by bits like Pa & Clark's talks, Clark running around with his cape, etc etc, because I did not feel one bit excluded in any of those scenes because of the shaky cam.

I don't know if I'd use the word ''excluded'' but personally I find the use of shaky cam in any non-action scene....well..a bit bizarre. I noticed it in those Pa Kent and Clark scenes, I was too aware of it, and instead of listening to the dialogue I was wondering ''WTF, are they implying some sort of earth tremor here?''

 

[GasparZizou]

That's fair, I was aware of it too at times but in a positive way, it was never intrusive for me.

But, to anyone who didn't like it, if the BvS teaser is any indication seems Snyder got rid of the shaky cam.

 

[jye4ever]

TWS is KING of shaky cam done the right way.

It's like Saving Private Bucky.

 

[The Clown Prince of Crime]

It's like Saving Private Bucky.

 

[Sachiel]

TWS is KING of shaky cam done the right way.

Extra Shaky.

 

[Cap'n Cook]

He seems awfully convinced. From the trailer.

Like saying Spiderman 3 WILL be amazing. Because of the trailer.

 

[Rorywan]

I don't know if I'd use the word ''excluded'' but personally I find the use of shaky cam in any non-action scene....well..a bit bizarre. I noticed it in those Pa Kent and Clark scenes, I was too aware of it, and instead of listening to the dialogue I was wondering ''WTF, are they implying some sort of earth tremor here?''

Exactly!

You make a good point in not having to feel a 3rd person in the scene, and I understand that, however the logic in the video is still flawed for the reasons I mentioned.

But you're mistaken if you think a tool can be restricted from being used in more than one way or has only one purpose, the occasions I gave that justify the use of shaky cam in personal moments are still completely valid, the war example is a good one and can be applied to MoS because of its chaotic action, then you have the personal moments, and that's where my example comes into play, the family moments, perfectly applied by bits like Pa & Clark's talks, Clark running around with his cape, etc etc, because I did not feel one bit excluded in any of those scenes because of the shaky cam.

Do you see how it can be applied too? It's not a matter to questioning the application of the technique, it's in reality a matter of questioning the style based on preference.

I never said a tool needs to be restricted to one purpose Gasper, it's all about the hands holding the tool, their understanding what they are doing with it. That's why people have issues with those scenes of Snyder's. He used handheld camera in the wrong places. It was distracting and damaging to the narrative for many. That's bad direction.

But I'm not saying you shouldn't like those scenes. It's all subjective.

 

[Sundowner]

He seems awfully convinced. From the trailer.

Like saying Spiderman 3 WILL be amazing. Because of the trailer.

trailers are misleading, I learned that after watching MoS

 

[jye4ever]

I don't know boys, technically on paper you may be correct about when to use shaky cam, but I agree with Gaspar on this one, the use of it during the dialogue scenes didn't bother me in MOS, if anything it made me feel as if it was me walking by next to the pick up truck listening in on their private conversations.

I felt like a peeping Tom.

 

[Rorywan]

I don't boys, technically on paper you may be correct about when to use shaky cam, but I agree with Gaspar on this one, the use of it during the dialogue scenes didn't bother me in MOS, if anything it made me feel as if it was me walking by next to the pick up truck listening in on their private conversations.

I was was like a peeping Tom.

Which is why it was wrong Mr Cannibal Campout.

 

[jye4ever]

I'm so confused, **** this movie.

Oh and