Not all messages are displayed:
show all messages (3049 of them)
Okay, I watched the video. It's actually pretty good and gives you a lot to chew on - anyone who hates how little clarity is prized in today's action movies should get something out of it. He walks you through some of the technical aspects that are treated differently in an action scene versus say a dialogue scene, aspects of blocking and composition like the 180 rule. I think he makes a mistake in not attempting to understand why Nolan was crossing the line wrt stuff like the truck t-boning the SWAT van - the disorienting effect there is clearly intentional! And some of the nitpicks don't hold up, like 4 minutes in he clamors for an interior two-shot to establish the geography of the scene, but the reverse shot has already established that the SWAT guy is sitting across from Harvey, and the movie never contradicts that by revealing that he's sitting next to him or anything like that. He's right that the way the truck recovers is clearly impossible, but I can chalk that up to movie magic. And some of the information that the scene fails to convey with visual storytelling is still present for the audience via context. The scene still works.
But this is all technical stuff - the truck chase works because he understands that the things that make for a good action scene are the same things that make for any other kind of good scene - the audience understanding and caring about what's happening, what's at stake, why characters are doing what they're doing, and the scene serving some narrative purpose in moving things from the scene before it to the scene after it. This is why crystal clear visual storytelling should be an action filmmaker's best friend - it's just a physical dramatization of the movie's conflicts! If you had some epic verbal confrontation in a script you were shooting, you wouldn't have the actors mumble the whole thing and then blare techno music over it to make it even more confusing, would you? OK, some directors would. But it'd be a bad idea if what you want is for the audience to care about what's happening.
Wrt Nolan I'm not sure what to think. I'll take it in good faith that in certain instances he's breaking rules he's familiar with to achieve a certain effect. But I do sorta wonder if shooting his own action means he stretches himself too thin, because in Inception there's a lot of papering over of geographical incoherence with nonsense cutting. Avid is seriously the worst thing to ever happen to action movies. I really think most directors are just lazy and this new school of action directing - handheld, tight close-ups, constant cutting - is a way for them to dispense with putting effort into staging interesting scenes. Great scenes have been done in this style, but it takes effort to set yourself apart.
i really love this pinefox post btw:
- I just really liked Batman! with his great virtue, realiability, proficiency, infinite skill, Batmobile, motorbike, incorrigibility - he was terrific to watch! and every time he shows up in a scene (including suddenly the one where Jokes is interrogated), it's really exciting!― the pinefox, Monday, July 21, 2008 8:23 PM (3 years ago) Bookmark
So that and the original piece cancel each other out and the rest of us can just enjoy shit crashing into each other as it stands, yes?
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 16 September 2011 17:25 (twelve years ago) link
five months pass...
five months pass...
Love the South Park parody of this with Butters threatening to blow up a hospital, in his own way.
― xyzzzz__, Saturday, 25 August 2012 08:43 (eleven years ago) link
one year passes...
one year passes...