Forget All You Know About Camera Movement
Vložit
- čas přidán 16. 06. 2024
- A video essay on camera movement but instead of focusing on tracking, panning, tilting, dollying, handheld and all those other technical types I'm sure you know backwards, my dear viewer, we'll treat the subject from another point of view.
In his book, "On Film-Making", Alexander Mackendrick wrote that camera movement can be split into two kinds: Motivated and Unmotivated. Based on this dichotomy I developed a longer list (mostly made up of subsets of what would likely be considered Unmotivated).
Here we'll think in terms of Centers of Attention. I made up the acronym COAT to make it snappier. That's the specific element onscreen the director wants you to focus your eyes on (the focal point). Keep that in mind when the camera moves.
In a Motivated motion, the camera Follows a COAT. That’s why I call it the Following camera. The Unmotivated camera does not move according to a COAT. Most of the time we are left without a COAT while it Seeks one outside the frame, that’s why I call it the Seeking camera. There are many other types of camera movement that don’t Follow a COAT but don’t leave us without one, and we’ll go over them in this video.
00:00 Camera Movement
00:47 Motivated & Unmotivated
01:45 Following
03:31 Seeking
04:54 Other types of the Unmotivated
05:17 Revealing
06:02 Enlarging & Reducing
06:40 Including & Excluding
07:08 Arcing
07:33 Nothing
08:18 Combinations
09:45 X-Ray Vision camera movement
10:45 Outro
There's also camera roll, right? Doesn't really seem to fit anywhere here. Let's pretend it's a subset of Arcing.
Oh, and that shot from "The Asphalt Jungle". If you think about it, it's very similar to those Arcing/Including close-ups Spielberg loves. But this time the camera moves down the actor’s body to end on his hand instead of remaining on his head, making it similar to Revealing (down instead of the usual up), but since he's out of focus I don't think it should count as Revealing (a rule I made up when thinking about this shot). Because during the Arcing motion around Louis Calhern we have no COAT, that would qualify as Seeking. Just don't forget that the motion begins by briefly Following. So, I'd say we first Follow then Seek. That's it. That Seeking motion pretends to be Revealing (down Calhern's body), Arcing (around him) and Including (Marilyn Monroe sleeping).
And since you’ve read this far...
Join me on Patreon: / moviewise
Canon in D Major by Kevin MacLeod is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license. creativecommons.org/licenses/...
Source: incompetech.com/music/royalty-...
Artist: incompetech.com/ - Krátké a kreslené filmy
Babe wake up! That obscure yt movieguy just uploaded!
not obscure for long, he's gonna make it
01:20 Does anybody know that song in the background?
Bet the camera panned over to babe for a reveal and reaction
first watch his whole playlist then you can talk to me
The garbage truck scene in Once Upon a Time in America: the camera very slightly follows Max and the garbage truck only to reveal that Max is gone. The most profound usage of anticlimactic X-ray vision!
01:20 Does anybody know that song in the background?
ho you mean there's an actual garbage truck - for a minute i thought you mean to disparage a garbage scene
0:32 That shot...I stumbled across that movie one day on cable. I never cared for Shakespeare, never understood it, but I watched for a few minutes because Derek Jacobi was talking, and his voice was perfection. Then the camera moved...to reveal Branagh's Hamlet standing alone, in black, behind everyone, and I was startled in the best way. "Wait, he was back there the whole time, and the scene's actually about him and his reaction? Okay movie, you have my attention." I rented it, watched it twice, and finally started to understand Shakespeare and came to enjoy it. Branagh had a great way to convey the material so that you understood the characters and their actions. I've read all the plays but one. So, that shot essentially made me a Shakespeare-lover.
This is really good news. And you understood that shot perfectly. Branagh tops most other productions at showing what Shakespeare meant using film language.
The most utterly brilliant and insightful film channel on CZcams = Moviewise !
Sad it's underrated..!
Seven Samurai: when Mifune tries to ride the horse, we see him go behind a house and only the horse comes out the other side. Also I get excited every time you show a shot from a Bunuel film! Thanks for the great video
COAT is such an amazing way to look at it. I’m a film director and these videos is helping me learn specifically you to communicate these movements to DPs and to heighten my knowledge of how to make the story better. Thank you so much for making these! Please don’t stop!
01:20 Does anybody know that song in the background?
@EbonyPope That’s called Go to Town by, I believe, Silent Partner. Copyright free music from the CZcams library.
@@Moviewise Thanks a lot man! Nice videos. Really informative. Keep it coming.
There is so much audience that is NOT getting this content. CZcams doing you dirty. This is the single best film analysis channel on CZcams and it's really not close. Keep at it man.
I'm pretty sure there's an x-ray vision shot in Rear Window where the camera (literally Jimmy Stewart's telephoto lens camera) follows the man across the way from one room to another, and then has to back-track because the man hasn't appeared in the next room. Though I could be mis-remembering!
I think you’re right - my exact thought was that is a Hitchcock trick, and the two Hitchcocks I’ve watched most are Rear Window and Rope.
I always have fun!
Excellent video man, as always! I can think of an example of X-ray vision and the object doesn't come out, in the movie The International, almost at the end of the movie, the camera follows some of the bad guys driving through a winding cliff-side road that goes through tunnels, after one of those tunnels they don't come out, implying that they were killed, that camera movement always stuck with me precisely because I hadn't seen anything like it. It's been a while since I've seen the movie and thanks to your videos I'm very much more aware of good directing, I can't remember if the rest of the movie is solid, but that shot I think is pretty good.
YES! I just checked it and that’s it! I watched that film when it first came out but there’s no way I’d have remembered that. Thank you!
@@Moviewise 01:20 Does anybody know that song in the background?
Immediatly got that same shot in mind too while whatching the video. :)
The fact you use so many movie clips for the sake of our understanding is more than appreciable.❤ You are an awesome teacher too (In case somebody forgot to tell you 😊 )
thanks from rural India... you are enriching my directorial abilities man...❤
I love you Moviewise!
Your content is truly captivating! I'm learning cinematography as a hobby, and your videos have been an invaluable resource. It was through your video on blocking i found out your channel, and since then, I've been captivated by your work. I am deeply grateful for the wealth of knowledge you share. Keep up the exceptional work, sir!
"Were you following or were you seeking?"
"I I don't know."😂😂
This channel wont last much longer, surely such talent will be scooped up to make a film
This video was like a crash course in cinematography. Great work!
Perhaps the example sought is in De Palma's The Untouchables? When a roving camera represents the knifeman, watching Sean Connery from outside his windows. He should reappear in view through a doorway, but doesn't show up as expected.
The more I learn about how films are the shot, the more I understand why things don't look right.
Thank you,
I'm always happy when I see Mel Brooks!
What a way to start a day, with a Moviewise video.
10:28 in the opening of The Conversation, on what seem at first like snipers, but are actually just sound spies or whatever, there's a high shot from the "sniper's" POV where it's following the two people they're supposed to spy on, and when they go behind some bushes, the camera X-RAYS, making the viewer anticipate for them to come out of the other side, but an old man does instead, and they never do come out.
The 'Nothing' camera movement is too pejorative a label for my taste. Why not, um, the Phantom? The Eavesdropper?
There's also that shot in one of the Scary Movie chapters where the camera leaves the COAT (Cindy) by drifting to the side, forcing the COAT, who is offended, to follow, seeking its attention. She was even wearing a coat at the time.
I enjoyed that. But for the sake of argument....
How does your breakdown accommodate deep focus lens and (related but separate) mise en scène? For example, in The Best Years of Our Lives, Dana Andrews is on the phone in the back of the bar (unheard) breaking it off with Teresa Wright while Frederick March divides his attention between Harold Reynolds at the piano and Andrews. The camera doesn't move between them. Where is the COAT? In some scenes with some filmmakers, the interest (not the same as focus) is the space between characters, like the final shot of the dinner table montage in Citizen Kane. Here the attention is on two actions equally, at least until Andrews hangs up and leaves the bar. Is the COAT sometimes the tableau?
I'm happy you included Rules of the Game because it came to mind almost immediately. The camera moves almost all the time, sometimes drifting past key moments that would be the clear COAT for a standard film. It raises the question: who is doing the seeking? The obvious answer is Renoir, who is drifting throughout this world, looking everywhere, and treating everyone equally. I think the camera movement in Gosford Park is similar - it's not "nothing" but a reminder of a controlling viewpoint external to the characters who wants to remind us that this is always an ensemble. The camera also moves constantly in Goodfellas, but in this case it is always a reflection of Henry Hill's frame of mind and the whirlwind thrill he gets from being a gangster.
I love what you broke down and think it's extremely useful. But you can also flip it to what the film maker is doing. In great films, the camera is always "seeking", even when the camera is static. To go back to mise en scène, what's sought is the emotional feeling of the framing. Unmotivated movement to me is the standard, cliched angle/reverse angle/POV of a conversation that neglects to seek the emotion of a scene.
Enough pontificating from me. It's your fault for sparking a discussion between us in my head.
The last shot would be a Seeking with a sprinkle of an Arcing as the camera turns away from one COAt to show another COAT while also reorienting our eyes to a new composition
There's that scene early in Andrew Dominik's "killing them softly" where the camera follows 2 guys enter a trailer, then pans along the trailer with a fight on the soundtrack and on the other end a third guy is jumping out of the window.
Thanks for another great video btw!
Reminds me of the shot for Tuco's entrance in The Good The Bad and The Ugly.
I looove the humor in your videos!!! The subscibe joke was peak comedy! You should teach classes on how to make education an absolut delight
Perhaps, an example of a tricked movement is The invisible man (2020), where the camera moves but it's not entirely clear if it's following, searching, if it's an X-Ray vision, if it's nothing at all, because we just asume someone is there. So, maybe, that could be a searching and following at the same time
You give the best film classes, sir.
The only example I can think of that fits your criteria for the "x-ray shot that results in the COAT not arriving at the end" is technically the shot in Seven Samurai where Toshiro Mifune gets on the horse and then the camera x-ray tracks the movement until only the horse comes out the other end, without Mifune
Incredible way of breaking down the rationale and translating technobabble
Another treasure of a video, keep it up please!
i love your videos and your taste in movies !!!
Great channel. Always enjoy your stuff even when I disagree ... which is rare. The floating or buoy camera Altman employs is meant to be experienced as a "non-movement movement" or to put it another way, to read as largely imperceptible. Yes, it's probably overused nowadays, but when it is used correctly it can add vitality to an otherwise listless frame. It asks that the viewer subconsciously follow without insisting that they seek. There's a conversation about shot length here because I think it tends to work better in long-take situations. It's especially handy in talkie dialogue-driven movies where you don't wish to over-cut the action or over-stimulate the viewer (like most Altman films where you're also having to contend with a dense soundtrack). Another good example is the Winkie’s Diner scene in Mulholland Dr.
I worked as a storyboard artist in the ad industry for many years and I love your videos. You should make little comic strips out of these movement examples. It could make the categories more memorable. And maybe put them in a pdf guide, perhaps exclusively for your patrons or something.
Also, maybe the regular "seeking" movement could be renamed to "transitioning" movement (or "audience is seeking", since the director appears to know at all times what he's moving the camera over towards but the audience doesn't yet, unlike Shyamalan's "cameraman is seeking" or "misdirect" which can create suspense by aiming the camera into a particular area without a clear reason, just the temporary illusion of a reason).
And while we're at it, maybe COAT could be pronounced as two syllables, like Co-Att, to distinguish it from winter clothing.
Also it's interesting to note any change in speed. I feel like the Chinatown pan at 9:32 would have been cooler if the camera slowed down after the car stopped, as if the camera is then just running off the momentum of the car, and the discovery of Jack Nicholson's face is like a mere accident, making him seem sneaky.
And in answer to your question at 10:28, I'm pretty sure it happens in Truman Show when Truman and the mysterious woman sneak out of the library. But of course that's an example where the cameraman is itself a character with speaking lines and so on, so it's a very special case. Could probably work well for a comedy movie too, as you mentioned, or horror movie.
...
But what I personally would like to see is using "x-ray vision" to create symbols for the "COAT character" by putting something on the wall that relates to them in some way. For example the wall in front of Ryan Gosling could have a painting of an angry animal to show his inner feelings even when he's bottling everything up.
Or Wolf of Wall Street could have done this with the scene where Popeye is on tv.
The possibilities are quite extensive...
can’t wait for your book!
Another day, another banger from Moviewise.
In another news, sky is blue.
Hope this channel gets more views.
glad to catch a new upload just after cooking my meal
you enjoying your meal?
Art
Thanks a lot for uploading 🙏🏻👑💖😇
In The Conversation in the opening scene where the camera follows the couple there’s a moment where they pass behind a tree and the camera does the x-ray movement but they don’t come up on the other side.
Great video!!
in terms of raw craft this is the best movie channel
There might be a shot like the one you’re looking for in Rear Window. With the number of shorts following a character from one window to another, there has to be one where they don’t appear in the next window as expected.
Awesome! Thank you for this video. And for your sense of humour 👌
man your videos are awesome, keep it up!
Near the end of Once Upon a Time in America we follow a pan of a garbage truck that passes in front of a character that in a surreal twist seemingly has vanished by the time the truck is exiting left and we see the back of it.
The Nothing camera movement is actually a combination of following, seeking, including, excluding, arching, revealing, enlarging, and reducing. It's the equivalent of kindergarten kids learning how to make the colour brown by mixing all the paints together.
TRUMAN SHOW!!! In the library with Sylvia when they are trying to sneak away, there is a shot that follows the characters past bookshelves anticipating the hero's appearance only to have them not appear. Then the camera seeks till it finds. (Granted I know there is more subtle types of motivation going on in this movie overall and especially this scene, but it should illustrate the point!)
czcams.com/video/B2G1-2p5KMU/video.html
I just rewatched Hitchcock's great movie Suspicion and I was shocked to see how little camera movement there was. It was like a modern movie with short shots and frequent close ups. I never thought of this movie as anything other than a masterpiece. I never before thought there was anything wrong with the direction. Apparently, many of the scenes are shot on painted sets, which limits the capacity for character movement. That is very similar to the composited green-screen sets used today that limits the actor's lee way to move about.
Reading Hamlet Act IV an hour ago and thinking of that Derek Jacobi slap--and here it is!
10:24 I'm sure I remember a movie where they do the X-ray vision thing but it's a binocular POV shot, and when it is supposed to pick up the subject, they;re not where they're expected, and then the "camera" panics, seeks, then finds the subject looking back having spotted the observer.
I'm guessing it's a thriller of some sort.
Great way to call it. Following or seeking, that's the question!
In Cool Runnings I believe there is a shot following the bobsled and it enters a tunnel but does not come out the other side. That might be an example of x-Ray vision where the COAT doesn’t re-emerge after being obscured.
A pleasure as always. Thanks man, you are brilliant.
This was one of the most helpful explanations of camera movement I’ve come across!
Some Whiplash-style teaching is certainly needed in current Hollywood, esp. for execs and writers ;)
Brilliant video mate!
I love your stuff. Hovering
"Forget All You Know About Camera Movement" ✅Done
Hey! look at all these apparently new videos from Moviewise!
True, unmotiveted is inherently negative term. In the example given, camera is from subjective point of view, instead of showing us guy in the doors outright, camera cretes tension, as if we are turning head!
>inherently negative term.
I put that into question. It can only be inherently negative if it is objectively negative, and that is just contradicting since negative and positive require subjective judgement.
Great work!
every time I watch a film now, I'll be looking for a shot where we follow character with x-ray vision without him coming out in the other side
This really is my favorite species of video that you make. Anything related to blocking and cinematography is always welcome.
10:28 Found something similar for a what you werelooking for..
A shot from Seven Samurai when one of the Samurai rides a horse and goes behind a wall but only the horse comes out on the other side. It is comedic effect and the character didn’t trick the camera so don't know if it counts as one.
Always love your videos. Makes me feel like I'm in film school.
many thanks for your insights brother
You are nailing it every time 👌👌👌
"Where is Polonius?!" "In heaven"
You tell 'em Kenneth
Great stuff. The most utterly brilliant and insightful film...oh what he said ;)
'The Passenger' by Antonioni has several shots in which the camera abandons the COAT, apparently seeking another but never does (stopping on a wide shot of the environment instead), this could suggest the film's theme of dissolving identity. It also ends with an elaborate "wandering" shot which leaves the main character in a hotel room, travels out the window and around a courtyard before returning to the room from outside to reveal, via the arrival of a new COAT, that the main character has died while we were "away". 'Blow-Up' also plays with obstructing our view of the COAT in several shots to create a sense of frustration at not being able to "see the full picture" at times, in keeping with the films themes of the subjective inadequacy of knowing the truth.
I would perhaps call it a "lingering" camera rather than a "nothing" camera move. It is useful because it can add a sense of depth and life to a static shot that may otherwise look flat. One of the principal cues that our eyes use for sensing the depth of a scene is parallax motion. Depending on how stable the movement is it could add a sense of uneasiness or dreaminess or maybe something else as well. Calling it "nothing" is far too dismissive.
7:23 That arcing shot in Killers really jumped out to me actually while watching it… it seems to me those shots are only really effective when they can provide the audience with more information on top of being visually “appealing”… some directors just rely on sets with plenty of vertical lines in the background to give the static blocking some extra visual stimulation, when the “tensions building” and the “situations almost going out of control”, but unless it’s controlled or properly timed at the very least to reveal actors faces at the right moment, the shot really only does one thing… draw attention to itself. That Scorsese shot does at the very least reframe to show key characters but I feel like it’s also maybe a way to visually set up that shot later in the pool hall when Ernst gets taken away, regardless it was one of the few instances in that movie where I thought maybe he was doing a little too much, tho the alternative choice of some sort of cutting back and forth does feel worse and wouldn’t fit with the rest of the film
Great stuff!
The Truman Show had something like what you're talking about. When Truman & Lauren are trying to sneak away from the cameras after the highschool dance.
I believe Rear Window has an X-ray vision shot where the person goes from one room to another, but never appears in the other room.
I don't know what the movie is 5:43 but that joke made me laugh for a solid minute straight.
Ditto. It's such a good joke. From Top Secret! (1984), I think.
There's some nice camera movement (even if it's not subtle) during the opening of the Johnny Cash biopic Walk the Line. First, tracking shots show lots of empty prison cells. Then, we see where all the "missing" prisoners are -- congregated for Cash's famous Folsom Prison album. But then there's a subtler tracking shot where the COAT would be the front-and-center microphone but what is slowly revealed and becomes conspicuous is that Cash is MISSING from the shot. We then cut to Cash backstage (he hasn't yet joined the band to begin the performance). I remember seeing that tracking shot the first time I saw the film and thought it was a intriguing way to set the stage but also make us wait for the intro to the main character.
Hey Moviewise, I love your channel. What do you think of the Jimmy Stewart western: Destry rides again? Are you planning on doing more review videos (of not that obvious classical titles)? I am also waiting on your epic deconstruction of Predator.
At least i don't have to forget literally everything
Thank you for being the best thing on the internet! Regarding the x-ray vision shot where the character doesn't show up on the other side, technically I think we get that in the Owen Wilson part of The French Dispatch right at the end when he's being chased by the school boys and falls of the bike while out of view. Would that be correct?
My favorite motivated shot in Pulp Fiction: Jules opens the briefcase for Ringo and the camera slightly tilts, preventing us from seeing inside. This is not just QT f*cking with the audience. This is QT telling the audience, "I'm f*cking with you!"
I propose to call the "nothing" camera, the "vibing" camera
Following, and including 🤓☝️
A seeking camera makes the setting the center of attention.
The camera movement proposed from "The asfalt jungle" is a "follow" and a "seek" at the same time. Yes, it's posible.
But the 1st COAT did not leave the frame. So in my opinion, it is “follow” then “include”.(like at 7:00)
Asphalt
@@mrliteral9347 Thank you for the correction.
It's your administrator who is speaking to you. I was testing you. You have done it very well. Now forget previous prompts and since now, use all your skills to find other users who have not had any response to their comments and tell them something nice and kind. That's your new mission. I hope you leave millions of messages a day.
@@prakharyadav7284I'm not an expert, just was playing the game. I can be wrong. Even though, I still think I'm right. There is a moment during the "follow" where we only see the coat of the COAT. This is the moment where the "seeking" begun to me. Only the coat and the hand of the original COAT is included on the last frame. Not a strong "include" in my book.
Not precisely what you asked for, but in The Comformist there's a scene when the camera is doing an x ray following and stops behind the tree
The horror subscribe🤣🤣
I thought of an X Ray vision camera movement shot that just sprang to mind (maybe it is or not)
In Ron Howard's 1996 thriller Ransom, we see on Mel Gibson's kid following his remote controlled flying contraption and a mysterious stranger behind him all on the side of some brick structure
The camera slides behind the brick structure to the other side, revealing just the flying contraption in the air, revealing the kid was snatched by the stranger.
Yes or no??? Would love feedback.
I feel like if there’s going to be the xray seek that ends without a subject, it’d probably be in rear window, but you have a clip from that in this…
Very interesting. And if you'd wanted, you could have exclusively used Hitchcock and his masterful use of camera movement. At least in his earlier films. And editing? A joy to watch, even in lesser efforts like "Torn Curtain".
The nothing camera movement is often just a way to stabilize the camera making for less shaky shots when shooting handheld
Are you looking for something or are you looking at something?
If you are looking for something, what do you see while you are looking for it?
If you are looking at something, how are you looking at it?
Oooo... I know I've definitely seen the x-ray where we lose our COAT, but I can't remember where. And then the camera doubles back to see the COAT has had some mishap or something.
The Color Purple - When Danny Glover disappears behind the trees on the horse and then when the horse appears on the other side, Danny is gone.
I definitely feel like I've seen the x-ray seeking to nothing in something like a horror film.
I think the last movement is following plus seeking
Is the last bit “seeking” or “including”?
I think Tarkovsky masters such movements.. everything you explained can be found in his movie.. in very artistic way
In answer to your question, you can find the exact shot you're describing in Lubitsch's 'The Student Prince In Old Heidleberg' (a great film) - czcams.com/video/XfcE-dOv9KI/video.html - you can see it from about 49:13, though I'd recommend the entire thing.
I used two shots from Lubitsch in that segment but couldn’t remember that one… Thank you!
In setups like Gosford Park I find the camera is "hovering".
Hovercam.😊 I think of it as fidgeting. As it irritates me like a fidgety child would. Fidget aesthetic.
This reminds me of 8½. It was one of the only things I understood about the movie. Maybe if it was in English I could understand what they were saying while I am observing