"Modern" cinematography! (or is it directing?)

[Elsie N]

While I haven't seen the movie, I am aware of the line "The first rule of Fight Club is there are no rules." And since real Fight Clubs are unsanctioned, it makes perfect sense they do not follow rules.

I think it is equally apropos that outside of 'Hollywood' (Hollywood used in this case to represent mainstream movie-making world wide) the new Tarzans (raised by apes, therefore have not learned the normal rules... only Ape Rules, if any) are free to work from the gut. Sometimes they (we) may weaken good content with the style with which it is shot. Sometimes we may emulate the present rules without knowing we are doing so. And sometimes they (probably not me because I'm not trying to invent something new for the sake of being different) may make something that works and thus becomes a new 'rule'.

I know that similar to what's happening to the oceans due to our individual contributions to global warming... that is, rising oceans... it must appear we are faced with a sea of movie-makers who are not only becoming a bloated sea of movie-makers but one with a rising acidity as well. But not to worry. If the acidic element of the sea can't capture the public's imagination, they (the public) will put them in a deep freeze and the oceans will level off and perhaps start falling once the new rules are in place.

In other words, let the market decide.

 

[Andrew Burhoe]

something I notice is that people tend to stick to the 180 which is fine, but then go dead center. WHY?! But if I have a guy frame right looking to frame left the reverse should frame left looking frame right. Well some dont see that and shoot the reverse the same as the first shot. When I see this in close up and the actors are moving it makes editing a god awful nightmare in editing. It means you have cut fast around the mistakes. Using secs/frames you alreayd used. I tend to be annoyed by people saying people won't notice. That is an insult. Truly is.

As for more freedom to get what was once $60,000, but now is $8,000 is not that big of a deal. It's fine. More people learning. What I am against are those who hire those with the equipment. The clients. They at times can pick bad ideas and then those who are not trained enough or skill is no good get hired and ruin it for many. I was trying to be a DP for a feature a few months back. In the middle of the talks about pay and camera to be used they ask me if some how I had my own equipment. Now I know some do and others just rent. What you do is fine. They tell me they just worked with a DP who was the gaffer and grip as well. The expectation that because you do one job means you can do 30 others at the same time. Can a DP be an operator/focus and build camera and be his own crew? Yes, but to be dolly and gaffer at the same time and have that equipment? Maybe if you doing interviews and documentaries. They wanted me with my own crane. I turned it down after that.

I feel that many today see the rules and go I can break them because rules are meant to be broken. Well yes in short. But do not go around hailing F*** RULES and do horrible mistakes to say I broke the rules. Jump cuts can be a wonderful feature for a scene, but done badly and it makes it look like the director was an idiot. Did a project where the DP wanted to handheld and then when it came time to shoot handheld had no idea of to truly utlize the camera correctly. During dailies they pointed this out over and over. He kept saying, "Well isn't the point of filmmaking to learn and make mistakes." The professor returns the arguement, "Yes, but not when you are screwing around with other peoples education." To me that is a good way of looking at this arguement of breaking rules. Break them and have fun in doing so. Yet do not break them if it means you are going to screw someone else's job up.

When I people get mad over sharpness I feel that you are missing so much. If you have a sharp image and when later screened why would you want a soft image? I mean imagine City of God shot with a glimmer glass. It'd feel like some love story. If it calls for it then do it.

One thing i feel that is happening nowadays are editors being treated like a,b,c. In other words the director wants his vision cut a certain way. You get an editor and have him cut the film. You hate the first cut and tell them they screwed it up. Then so for the next month the editor cuts what the director wants. Then it gets released and the director goes well in post there were great moments we couldn't use. Never do we hear that the editor probably said, "That makes no sense." "Why are we cutting like this?" "To have a deeper connection we should leave the take in longer and let it play out." "Notice how there is a pause between them so that s/he thinks about what was just said." and the list goes on. No matter what I will always feel today's editors are being under utilized. the 2000s til now have not been good years for editors. More for VFX which is a shame.

correct me if I am wrong or too pessimistic.