The "shaky camera" effect

Am I the only viewer who gets annoyed by this? The camera keeps shaking around and I can't even keep up with the action. Am I looking up? Down? Which direction is the camera facing now? I think I'm getting dizzy.

I first noticed it in Saving Private Ryan. It was only a slight shaking, in a few scenes. That was pretty cool. It was also in Gladiator. Again, that was done in moderation.

Now it seems like EVERY action movie has an excessive use of that effect. It was at its worst in The Bourne Supremacy, but I also saw way too much of it in Transformers and The Kingdom. Why the hell do film producers feel the need to overdose on this effect? The film becomes harder to follow, and it irritates me to no end.

I hate it and its garbage, I want good cinematography not **** that is used to make you not able to see whats going on as if they are trying to hide mistakes.

It's designed to make home and low-budget movies look better

They shake the camera because they don't want you to see how bad the choreography really is.

But really, "Saving Private Ryan" and "Gladiator" did it to good effect. But other movies like "Batman Begins," "Transformers," "Bourne Supremacy," etc have gone way too far with it. Cinematographers today act like children who can't stop playing with their new toys.

Mass Effect does it to, but only when you need to run really quick during battle. It adds an effect that makes you feel like you're watching a battlefield corespondent.

But id does get old quick.

It does seem too overused...
In some movie scenes I cannot tell what its going on because its so shaky.

If you want to see it at it's worst, look up "Behing Enemy Lines II: Axis of Evil"

It's a bad movie in it's own right, but watching 3 minutes of "action scenes" made me queasy.

Originally Posted by Flavius

If you want to see it at it's worst, look up "Behing Enemy Lines II: Axis of Evil"

It's a bad movie in it's own right, but watching 3 minutes of "action scenes" made me queasy.

Oh dear lord I remember that movie, it was practically all shaky camera...I had to change to something else every few minutes because it would get too much for me to handle, seriously - never ever had that problem before or after that "thing"

The shaky camera bit in Saving Private Ryan almost MADE that film. Those opening twenty minutes of the D Day landings would've been **** without the first person view and the shaking. Its called realism, look it up.

Originally Posted by Shyam Popat

The shaky camera bit in Saving Private Ryan almost MADE that film. Those opening twenty minutes of the D Day landings would've been **** without the first person view and the shaking. Its called realism, look it up.

Exactly. Like I said in the original post, Saving Private Ryan did it right. However, you could actually keep up with the action because the camera only shook moderately. In Transformers, I couldn't tell what the hell was happening half the time.

Originally Posted by IronBrig4

but I also saw way too much of it in Transformers

God I hated that. I couldn't tell what the **** was going on when the big bad robots...

It does get really annoying, it's like when CGI came out, everybody overkilled it, it was like the new thing to do.

Sometimes it works very well like in Saving Private Ryan, other times it just seems Michael Bay-ish.

Originally Posted by Da Skinna

It does get really annoying, it's like when CGI came out, everybody overkilled it, it was like the new thing to do.

Sometimes it works very well like in Saving Private Ryan, other times it just seems Michael Bay-ish.

Michael Bay made a great job of Pearl Harbour except that absurd "let's play chicken with these Japs" part where they make two Zeroes collide. But that's the only hint of it being a Michael Bay film really. Transformers on the other hand reeks of him...

Fair enough, rereading your post I think I may have misread. Ah, hell, I was arguing with... Kanaric. There.

NYPD Blue was the first TV show to begin using the 'shakey camera' affect. We used to put rubber bands on the wheeled heads on the tripods and call it the NYPD Blue mount. I personally can't stand it. Its supposed to make the scenes more realistic, like someone is standing there in the room with a hand held video camera recording the events as they take place. Battlestar Galactica uses it a bit too much as well, or as my friend put, "Why do I need to zoom into Adama's nostril every time he speaks."

I know that in Batman Begins the effect was used because Christopher Nolan hated the bat suit and didn't want to audiance to get a chance to focus on it and i think Transformers did it for the same reason, if you focus on the transforming effect is falls apart.

Now shows like Firefly and Children of Men got it right using the effect either when a ship is passing the camera in space or the scene calls for something dynamic.

The way it was used in Saving Private Ryan sort of set a new standard for how we now expect to see action in war movies. A similar effect was used quite often in Band of Brothers. The basis for such an effect in war movies comes from Vietnam war footage shot from vibrating helicopters, its why Lucas used it a lot in the Clone Wars movie.

But yes, when used for the sake of using it or during scenes where its not necessary, its just distracting. Transformers this was really apparant when I went to see it in IMAX. I couldn't focus on anything.

I think its great, it really makes you feel like your in the eyes of someone else.
SPR almost made me feel like I was on Omaha beach in 1944.

Its great.

It really depends. Some can get away with it, others not so much

I liked the Bourne movies, but they are a prime example of overusing that effect.

This is very true. I had serious problems understanding fighting scenes in "The Kingdom" and this made the movie terrible. I don't know about you guys, but personally, I think "The Kingdom" SUCKED.

I just watched Dr. Strangelove recently, and I noticed they used a mild shaky camera effect during the attack on the base.