Steadicam operator london uk steadicam ultra cine steadicam op
Introduction
Cinema, by its nature, is a lens-based representation of a story, where the audience observes from the viewpoint of the camera. Camera movement is a technique that is unique to filmmaking and furthers our abilities to enhance and heighten the drama of a scene.
I will be studying the history and development of camera movement from the birth of film until the present day. I will explore how these advances in technology and understanding have aided the filmmakers and whether the unlimited possibilities of computer effects and virtual cameras are always beneficial to the film. In order to examine these concepts, I will be drawing on a wide range of films as examples that demonstrate both the technology and principles that motivate its use.
Developments in Camera Movement
In the Beginning
The earliest filmmakers, such as Auguste and Louis Lumière and Thomas A. Edison, used the camera simply as a technical recording tool, in front of which the scene would play in a single, static shot. They were afraid that camera movement would disorientate the audience, who were used to watching drama from the fixed viewpoint of a theatre seat. In fact, early cinema was often referred to as “filmed theatre.”
Camera pans and tilts became possible as these early pioneers developed tripod heads that could move smoothly under the weight of the cumbersome cameras. However, it was difficult for an operator to perform such movements, as they were also responsible for hand-cranking the mechanism of the primitive cameras. Pans can be seen as early as 1903 in The Great Train Robbery (Edwin S. Porter), which also broke much new ground in the use of the camera to enhance narrative structure instead of just being a visual recorder.
The next advance came with the ability to move the camera itself, rather than simply rotate it around the axis of the tripod head. It is generally considered that the first dolly shots were used in the 1914 Italian feature Cabiria. Even when viewing the film today, the tracking shots stand out, adding vibrancy to the scene.
The first “crane” shot can be credited to Allan Dwan just one year later in 1915. Dwan had trained as an engineer but converted to filmmaking in 1909. His visual creativity helped him to imagine shots and his engineering knowledge allowed him to build equipment that could achieve them.
Dwan also worked closely with D W Griffith. The combination of Griffith’s visionary genius and Dwan’s ingenuity, revolutionised camera movement. In Intolerance (1916) they devised many new systems, including a camera mounted on a hot air balloon that was slowly reeled in towards the scene, creating the effect of moving in on a giant crane.
These possibilities gave Griffith far more freedom to capture his films how his visualised them, resulting in more engaging and spectacular productions. As the actress Lillian Gish said about D.W. Griffith:
He gave us the grammar of filmmaking.
With The Birth of a Nation (1915), Griffith had paved the way for the silent films that followed. In 1921, he made another advance with his film Dream Street becoming the first feature to use sound. Despite initial industry reservations, sound was quickly to become the norm in film production. As Fortune magazine wrote:
The talkie has completely nullified the silent screen. This is entirely characteristic of the machine. A new machine (or process) does not merely add; it replaces.
Fortune magazine, 1930 (anon.)
- Movies, Flicks and Film, p78
This forced filmmakers to start shooting with sync sound, before the camera technology had been developed sufficiently and temporarily hindered the use of dynamic camerawork. By the late 1920s, the use cranes and dollies had been commonplace, with many silent film directors mastering narrative to the extent that they hardly needed to use any explanatory intertitles. However, the noise produced by early movie cameras meant that they had to be acoustically isolated in a booth, or “blimp,” if sound was to be recorded. This obviously made it far harder to create fluid camera moves and many of the first talkies appear visually static when compared to earlier silent films.
Sound also shifted much of the focus of filmmaking away from the visuals, further stifling the cinematography. It took several years for the technology to catch up and allow the camera to be as liberated as it had been in the silent era.
The Expanding Palette
As cranes and dollies advanced and grew, so did the possibilities that opened to directors. It became possible to sustain long takes in a single shot and by the use of camera movement keep the shot fresh and interesting throughout the duration.
Orson Welles used long, dynamic takes extensively in his heralded feature debut, Citizen Kane (1941). The film was a landmark for many reasons; none-more-so than Welles’s innovative use of camera. What is remarkable when considering the cinematography of Kane, is that instead of it being a result of years of practice and study, it feels so fresh because Welles had no previous experience and was forced to invent his technique on the set.
Another master of cinematic technique at this time was Alfred Hitchcock. Unlike Welles, Hitchcock preferred to create narrative through editing. As he wrote in 1938:
…if I have to shoot a long scene continuously I always feel I am losing grip on it, from a cinematic point of view… The screen ought to speak its own language, freshly coined, and it can’t do that unless it treats an acted scene as a piece of raw material which must be broken up, taken to bits, before it can be woven into an expressive visual pattern.
-Hitchcock on Hitchcock, p255-256
However, in 1948, he broke from this inclination when he directed the film Rope. Although comprising of only 11 separate shots, (due to the limitation of film cameras only being able to hold 10 minutes of negative), Rope is edited to give the impression of a single, continuous shot. Although long takes had often been used to give uninterrupted narrative and a sense of observation, this was still the most extreme use.
Of course, central to this film is the almost continual movement of the camera. The camera becomes a character in the film, through which the audience can observe the scene. Many critics claim that Rope is one of Hitchcock’s weakest films and that he sacrificed quality for the gimmick of the continuous shot. It can be argued that in this case, Hitchcock was using the technique because he could not because it was beneficial to the narrative.
A wartime development was to provide the next major leap in camera movement, with the introduction of helicopter shots in Nicholas Ray’s film They Live by the Night (1949). The camera was now able to soar like a bird above the scene leading to some spectacular shots. Many films now use helicopters for their closing and opening shots due to the ability they have to dramatically swoop in and out from the action. A good example of this is the final shot of The Bourne Identity (2002) as the camera swoops away from the final scene and out to sea.
Orson Welles continued to advance the boundaries of camera movement and with the opening of Touch of Evil (1958), he achieved one of the most complex moving shots of the time. The shot opens on a close up of a timer being set on a bomb, which is then placed into the boot of a car. The shot then follows the car driving through a Mexican town and up to the border control, where it cranes down to focus on a young couple. The car leaves shot and then we heard an explosion off screen. Only then does Welles cut to show the car being engulfed by a fireball.
It total the shot last over three minutes and is so effective because of the sense of tension it builds in the audience: From the start, we know that the bomb will explode but by holding on one shot throughout the action, the audience are constantly bracing for the blast. If the scene was made up of shorter edited shots, each cut would only act to defuse the anxiety of knowing that the people in the car are about to die. A shot such as this is only possible when a visionary like Welles is presented with the technology by a skilled gripping crew.
Welles also experimented with handheld camerawork in Touch of Evil, giving a more edgy feel to the scene, however this style was immortalised just two years later: In 1960 the French director, Jean-Luc Godard, released a film that revolutionised the way that movies could be filmed: A Bout de Souffle (aka Breathless). The film was shot almost entirely handheld and edited with little regard for continuity or established structure. Whether these breakthroughs were the result of ingenious filmmaking or just time and money restraints is still a debate, however their importance and influence is certain.
Godard had broken filmmaking rules that had been established since the turn of the century. His freely wheeled camera work gave the film a real feeling of spontaneity, echoing the on screen improvisation. The continual jump cuts increased the feeling of pace of the film, more so than high-speed continuity cutting would. Although this unrefined method was slightly jarring to an audience, this all added to the mood that Godard was trying to create. It also serves to heighten the realism of a scene by its psychological link with documentary filmmaking.
Godard’s influence since 1960 has been immense, as director Jean-Jacques Beneix commented:
Godard is like an elite. It's not cinema anymore. It's Godard.
In America, Godard was revered for the freedom he had brought to camera work, however, his techniques were still considered to harsh and unrefined for mainstream audiences. However, a new invention in 1975 was to offer the liberty of a handheld camera without its inherent instability: The Steadicam.
Steadicam was developed by cameraman and inventor Garrett Brown in a quest to tame the handheld camera. It was first used in a single scene of Bound for Glory (1976) and shortly afterwards immortalised by defining shots in Rocky (1976) and The Shining (1980).
The Steadicam has become such a useful commodity to directors and cinematographers that it is now unusual to see a modern feature film that doesn’t use it. It allows the camera to be a perfect observer, moving freely like a person through a scene. A Steadicam can also be linked to vehicles or a crane to allow almost endless possibility of camera movement. An excellent example of this is in the opening shot of Paul Thomas Anderson’s Boogie Nights (1997), in which the camera cranes down the front of the nightclub, before the Steadicam dismounts and enters through the front door. Here it moves around the interior introducing the central characters in one shot lasting over three minutes.
By the 1970s, it seemed as though film was a well-developed medium and that in the 75 years since its birth, almost all theoretical possibilities had been considered. However, developments in technology have continued to expand the possibilities that are open to directors and cinematographers.
New gripping equipment is continually invented and old designs refined:
Modern camera dollies can switch track and turn at right angles. This is known as a Switcher Track and was developed by Jim Kwiatkowski and Peter McKie for use by Steven Spielberg in The Lost World (1997) and Saving Private Ryan (1998).
Steadicams of today have come a long way from the prototypes of the 1970’s, now offering low shots, high shots, whip pans and a more stable performance.
Camera cranes can be mounted onto vehicles or even other, larger cranes, giving an amazing range of movements. Motion control systems developed by Industrial Light and Magic in the 1970s for Star Wars (1977), have allowed craning moves to be used in special effects shots, which before would have to remain static.
Another major development is the Cablecam – A system that flies the camera on a sled supported by cables. This can achieve helicopter like shots but with guaranteed repetition and in far tighter spaces.
Radio-controlled helicopters are another alternative for shots that cannot be achieve with a full-sized machine. Although they do not have the stability of a Cablecam rig, they can move without the limitation of cables. A good example of this type of equipment in use is in Mathieu Kassovitz’s La Haine (1995) where a radio-controlled helicopter was used to achieve the shot where the camera seems to float above the urban landscape. This detaches the camera from the scene, giving the audience the impression of looking down, studying this world.
For his debut feature Pi (1998), Darren Aronofsky developed a rig to give exactly the opposite effect to the objective viewpoint in La Haine. As Aronofsky said in interview:
"Pi," we tried to make a fully subjective movie from Max's POV.
In order to achieve this, a “Snorri” rig was adapted to carry a lightweight Bolex camera. This rig mounts the camera on the actor’s body, so that the camera moves relative to him. This gives a unique blurring and detachment of the background, whilst keeping the character in a sharp close-up. As Aronofsky says about one such scene:
…we’re using the Snorri-cam here to sort of separate him from his environment and sort of capture his insanity and his loneliness.
- Pi, DVD Audio Commentary
This concept has since when developed into a professional rig by Doggicam systems and has seen action in features such as Any Given Sunday (1999) and Get Carter (2000), as well as proving very popular in many stylised music videos.
As cameras continue to diminish in size, they become more portable, allowing far greater flexibility of movement, with less equipment. This allows low-budget filmmakers the same camera dynamics that would normally be reserved for lavish Hollywood productions. Certain cameras have been miniaturised to the extent that they can even be attached to a bird in flight! Modern advances in video technology now allow feature films to use this as an alternative to film negative, allowing for further reductions in size.
The Computer Generation
The surge in computer advances in the 1990s presented directors with incredible new possibilities. Otherwise unachievable elements could be added and shots could be morphed together or even be completely computer generated.
The opening and closing shots of Forrest Gump (1994) feature elaborate crane shots that follow a feather as it blows in the wind. Of course this would be impossible to shoot practically, as the feather would be to unpredictable to follow. Therefore an empty camera move was filmed without the feather. The feather was then added using computer superimposition and made to follow the movement of the camera crane instead of visa-versa. These shots provide an emotional and appropriate bookend to the film but would not have been possible without computer enhancement.
The advent of entirely computer-generated (CG) feature films with Toy Story (1995), allowed modern filmmakers the ultimate in camera movement, the possibility to capture the scene in any way that they could imagine. What is interesting is that instead of using this opportunity to make every shot fantastic, CG filmmakers have tended to adhere to very traditional camera positions and movement. This helps the audience to believe in what they are seeing, as the techniques used mimics live action filmmaking. Although entirely computer generated, Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within (2001), utilises much Godard style handheld camera in order to trick the viewers’ subconscious that what they are watching is real and spontaneous.
The Matrix (1999) popularised the use of time slice photography, or Bullet Time, in feature films (although it had been seen as early as 1981 in To Kill and Kill Again). This enables complex dolly and crane movements whilst the action remains frozen in time. In order to achieve this effect a series of still cameras are set up along the path of the desired camera movement. These are then computer controlled to take a single frame in rapid or even instantaneous succession. The resulting stills can be edited together to form what appears to be a smooth dolly or crane shot. This is actually a virtual camera movement, as the photographic rig remains completely static throughout the shot.
Although time splice photography appears cutting edge, it can be traced back to Eadweard Muybridge, whose moving images of 1878 predate even motion picture film. Muybridge had developed a system for capturing a series of images of a horse galloping in order to win a bet that all four hooves left the ground at once. In order to achieve this he used a series of twelve stills cameras, triggered by trip wires as the horse passed.
The reason for this similarity in method is simple: both rigs aimed to solve very similar problems. For Muybridge he had no flexible film stock and could not cycle glass plates through a single camera fast enough to create smooth motion. For time slice, it is not possible to move an actual camera at the speed required to produce the effect. Therefore both methods settled upon multiple cameras as the viable solution.
We are now on the dawn of using entirely CG sequences in live action films, leaving the filmmakers imagination as the only remaining hurdle. Although this may appear to be an ideal situation, there is much debate over whether CG effects sterilise the atmosphere and repel the audience. Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace (1999) was the first feature to contain entirely computer generated, “pseudo” live action scenes. Although this allowed the director, George Lucas, to achieve visually striking and dynamic virtual camerawork, it left many of the fans calling for a return to the less spectacular, but more engaging, practical way of shooting.
The principles that lie behind effective camera movement are still the same as they were for pioneers such as D W Griffith at the turn of the century. Modern Filmmakers have the advantage of technology being available to realise their vision. However, when vision is led by the technology, the film seems to suffer as a result.
Into the Future
We are currently at a very exciting time in cinematic history. As well as the possibilities already available to directors, new technologies are being continually born that will enhance the cinematic experience further still. Three-dimensional filmmaking is just beginning to become mainstream and will bring a whole new set of opportunities to enhance storytelling by the use of camera movement.
The Psychology of Camera Movement
Motivation
Audiences view films entirely from the point of view of the camera and therefore any camera movement will have an effect on their perception of the scene, although sometimes only at a subconscious level. Therefore all movements must draw their motivated from the drama.
The motivation may be as simply as to follow action: dollying with at actor as they walk across the room. Action-motivated camera movement serves an obvious purpose, however, camera dynamics can also be used in order to enhance the understanding and emotion of the scene. In certain instances, a movement alone can stimulate the sensation that is required. In order to understand how these techniques can be utilised, we must first understand the psychological effect that different shots have on the audience.
In considering the psychology behind camera movements, the technology used becomes irrelevant, as the audience is, almost always, unaware of it. Technology simply makes a greater range of movement possible.
Moving in and out on a Subject
After action-motivated movement, dollies in and out from a subject are the next most common form of camera move. The famous “Hitchcock Rule” states:
The size of an object in the frame should equal its importance in the story at that moment.
-Cinematography, Theory and Practice, p25
With this rule in mind, a move in on a subject increases its importance, forcing an audience to focus on it. At the start of The Sum of All Fears (2002), a camera move is used to reveal a swastika engraved on the rear of the villain’s watch. This is a demonstration of using the movement as a narrative aid and yields better results than simply cutting to a close up as it links the swastika with its owner in continuous motion.
When in conversation, people will tend to focus on another person’s eyes because we know that it is through their eyes that people convey much of their emotion. In cinematography this principle is often exploited by moving the camera in on a characters eyes in order to focus the audience on their emotional mood. This effective technique is used very regularly and is particularly popular in American cinema. The camera movement itself is sometimes so powerful, that the actor is required to do very little in order to convey the required emotion. It can be used to aid in the expression of anything from shock and horror, to love and happiness. Director Elia Kazan commented on the expressional ability of the camera:
The camera is more than a recorder, it’s a microscope. It penetrates, it goes into people and you see their most private and concealed thoughts and I have been able to do that with actors. I mean, I revealed things that actors didn’t know they were revealing about themselves.
- Interview taken from “A History of American Film”
Moves in and out on a subject can also be used to transition to and from a flashback, dream or memory sequences. A slow move in towards a character’s face will give the effect of moving inside their thoughts. At the end of the sequence, the camera will cut back to the original timeline and pull back from the character, creating the feeling of pulling back out of their mind.
The advances in technology discussed before, now also mean that moving in and out from a subject is not limited to tracking shots. The use of advanced rigs and computer graphics allow directors to move the camera in previously impossible ways. The opening shot of Hard Rain (1998) uses a Cablecam shot, blended with special effects miniature photography, to fly across a flooded landscape, then down a town high street, ending in close up of one of the central characters. As well as being aesthetically brilliant, the shot establishes the situation and skilfully sets the tone for the film.
Contact (1997), uses an almost entirely CG opening shot which pulls back from the Earth across the solar system and into outer space. The shot ends as the camera pulls out of a young girl’s eye, to introduce Nellie, our main character. Within one shot, this demonstrates the vastness of space as a central theme, and establishes it firmly in Nellie’s thoughts. Shots like this are typical of director Robert Zemeckis, who continually pushes the envelope of camera dynamics in his films.
Counter-Move
Although tracking movements tend to follow the direction of movement of the subject, a “counter-move” against the subject can lead to a very different effect. Instead of giving the impression of the camera “following” the subject, it detaches the camera, creating the sense of it having its own will. This makes the audience look objectively at the subject, examining it closely. Oliver Stone uses such a movement at the start of Platoon (1986), when Chris arrives at the airfield. As he walks away from the aeroplane he returns the stare of a hardened veteran heading in the other direction. Stone cuts between the two points-of-view as the men study each other. The mirrored counter-tracking movements encourage the audience to do the same, juxtaposing the worn, veteran against Chris clean, green appearance. It suggests to the character and the audience what lies ahead.
The “Trombone Shot”
Tracking shots can also be used to create psychological effects such as in a “trombone shot.” This refers to a move in or out on the subject whilst zooming to keep it the same size in the frame. This causes a warping of perspective that is inexplicable to the human eye and therefore causes a sense of unease in the audience.
This shot was invented for Vertigo (1958) to convey the fear that Scottie fells as he peers down a high stairwell. This effect has been used, and over-used repeatedly since then with various degrees of effectiveness. One of the best is by Peter Jackson in The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001). Here a trombone shot of an empty forest track expresses Frodo’s sensing of the Black Riders’ evil presence. Jackson comments:
It creates a sense of unease, because you don’t quite know what you’re looking at… It defines the laws of physics.
-LOTR: Fellowship of the Ring, Extended Edition DVD, Audio Commentary
The Effect of Changing Position
The position of the camera relative to the scene can have a major impact on the audience’s perception. Moving the camera to alter its position can therefore be used to alter their perception.
In order to imitate a human-eye view of a scene, the camera tends to be set at level height with the actors’ eyes. The most common variation of this is the use of a high angle to convey subjugation of the subject or a low angle to convey domination. The psychological reasoning behind this stems back to childhood, when a child continually looks up to taller, adult authority figures.
Conversely, if the subject is physically massive, a high angle can be utilised to emphasise its vastness and a low shot to diminish it against the horizon. In K-19: The Widowmaker (2002), Kathryn Bigelow uses a helicopter shot to raise the camera up from the captain’s eye level atop the conning tower as the submarine sails out to sea. This demonstrates to the audience the vastness and power of the vessel.
Camera height can be used suggest a variety of other feelings as well. For example, after Kane’s defeat in the elections in Citizen Kane (1941), Orson Welles uses low angles to give the feeling of the camera lying dejectedly on the floor, reinforcing the sense of hopelessness. Welles was so determined to achieve such a low angle, that he famously dug holes in the studio floor for the camera!
An elevated camera is often used to reveal a sense of isolation, by emphasising the environment around a character. After his fishing boat sinks in The Perfect Storm (2000), Bobby swims to the surface of the raging ocean. Wolfgang Petersen utilises a computer-generated movement to pull the camera high into the air leaving Bobby bobbing like a cork in the giant swell. On a large screen, the shot provokes an amazing sense of powerlessness and sorrow for the character. In shots such as this, the distance of the camera from the character is as important as its height.
As we have discussed, it is typical to move the camera towards a character to convey a sense of heightened emotion. However, a director can also reverse this premise on occasion for even greater effect:
In Forrest Gump (1994), director Robert Zemeckis demonstrates his mastery of camera dynamics by keeping the camera distant from the most personal scenes. When Jenny climbs into Forrest’s bed and they make love for the first time, Zemeckis creeps the camera back out of the room, observing them through the glass doors. This makes the scene seem so much more personal because it seems like not even the camera dares to intrude on them. Steve Starkey, the film’s producer comments on Zemeckis and Don Burgess’s technique:
...the camera starts here with them [Forrest and Jenny]… Then they decide to move the camera outside and let them have this moment, this very intimate moment… by themselves.
- Forrest Gump, Special Edition DVD, Audio Commentary
Reveal, Establishment and Closure
Movement is frequently used in order to reveal information to the audience, by literally giving them a different viewpoint. Throughout Empire of the Sun (1987), director Steven Spielberg uses camera movement to help the audience relate to young Jamie, the central character. When Jamie loses his model glider after it lands behind a small mound, he climbs over to search for it. The camera cranes up as he does so, revealing, to both Jamie’s and our surprise, a Japanese army camp. Without this movement, Spielberg would have had to make a cut in order to show the soldiers, however, with the crane shot, the camp is revealed to Jamie and the audience simultaneously. This gives the audience a feeling of connection with Jamie that is carefully built upon during the film.
A dynamic establishing shot can also be thought of as a form of reveal, introducing us to the scene before we are thrown into it. Vertical movement tends to be particularly effective for this purpose as it can act to bring us down from an objective point-of-view and place the subjectively into the scene.
Moving away from the subject is often used to end a scene, or even a film. A dramatic pull back can contextualise a final action and bring a sense of closure to a scene. Gladiator (2000) uses another example of a CG crane shot to pull away from Juba as he symbolically buries Maximus’s carved figures in the centre of the Colosseum. This reveals a magnificent view of the Sun setting over ancient Rome, beautifully rounding off the film.
Movement and the Long take
Shooting long takes almost always involves camera movement in order to keep the shot interesting enough to hold the audiences attention. Although it is easier to construct a scene from individual shots edited together, many filmmakers prefer the long take due to the effect it has on the audience. We have already discussed Orson Welles and Alfred Hitchcock’s use of this technique but Robert Zemeckis provides a more modern advocate. He explains the benefit of his regular use of long takes:
That has a real power; it really takes the audience out of the filmmaking process and makes them… the voyeur. They really get to eavesdrop on what is going on with the characters.
- What Lies Beneath, DVD Audio Commentary
Deep focus, sustained takes are often used when everything in the scene is of importance; this allows the audience to decide what they pay attention to in the frame. In effect you are asking the audience to edit with their own eyes, much as they would do in real life. As cutting is not possible, camera movement is relied upon to emphasis any necessary details or a shift in focus during the take. For example, during the first psychiatry session scene in What Lies Beneath, the camera starts on an objective two-shoot but moves in to a subjective close up as the scene becomes more personal and emotional.
Handheld – Mimicking Documentary
Shooting handheld puts the camera in a constant state of movement in the form of shaking transmitted through the operator’s body. It seems ironic that this effect, which documentary cameramen try so hard to avoid, is now deliberately utilised in fiction production.
This style makes the scene seem more edgy, more real, as if the audience are right there in the action. The psychological reasoning behind this is two-fold. Firstly, due to cultural conditioning, handheld camerawork reminds us of real life footage that we see everyday on the news and in documentaries. Therefore when we see the same style used in fictional drama, and brain tells us that it must be real too. Secondly, the vibration of the picture and deviation of the frame makes up feel slightly uneasy, adding the edgy quality to the scene.
One of the most effective applications of handheld camerawork is by Steven Spielberg and cinematographer Janusz Kaminski for the film Saving Private Ryan (1998). In addition to shooting most of the film handheld, they also used other techniques to such as a bleach-bypass process to de-saturate colour and a narrow shutter angle. This gives all movement a staccato like quality by reducing motion blur. The camera operators were also given no rehearsal for many scenes resulting in a very improvised feel to the movement. These techniques combine to simulate a news cameraman being thrown into the heart of the action and create a highly realistic and engaging spectacle for the audience.
The Blair Witch (1999) took this concept to the next level by posing the entire film as a real documentary. Although this had some audiences running from the cinemas in fear, it is unsustainable as a regular technique.
During the production of Saving Private Ryan (1998), a device was developed using an electric drill and an off-centre weight. This was attached to the camera and used to shake it whenever an explosion was set off. For the audience, this has the effect of shaking their vision and conveys a sense of destructive power on the screen. This concept proved so effective that it has since been developed into many professional “camera shaking” devices. Any Given Sunday (1999) also uses this principle to exaggerate the bone crunching tackles during the high-octane American football matches.
Emphasising Action
Moving the camera can bring a sense of kinetic energy to the frame. Therefore, action scenes are almost always shot with elaborate camera movement to reflect the tone inside the frame. War films in particular use this technique; in Paths of Glory (1957) and Platoon (1986), directors Stanley Kubrick and Oliver Stone use extensive tracking shots to add energy to the battle scenes.
Changing to a Static Camera
Filmmakers will often choose to opt for a static camera as a deliberate statement of stillness, order or serenity. This is particularly effective when juxtaposed again scenes with a great deal of movement. For the first act of Cast Away (2000), director Robert Zemeckis extensively uses Steadicam shots in order to convey Chuck’s hectic lifestyle. However, when he becomes stranded on an isolated island, the camera movement ceases, echoing Chuck’s experience. This adds a subtext to the technique that audience respond to at a subliminal level, enhancing their engagement with the story. Director of photography Don Burgess describes his principle:
In this case, in the simplest terms, in the first act, the camera’s moving like crazy, as is the character. In the second act on the island… the character comes to a screeching halt in his life and so does the camera. So the camera becomes almost locked off.
- Cast Away, Special Edition DVD, Audio Commentary
Circling a Subject
Using movement to circle around a subject is a very apparent technique, which makes it redundant for many filmmakers due to the attention it calls to the shoot itself. By circling around a subject and staying fixed on it, the background is blurred out, focusing the audience’s attention on just the subject. This can be used to exaggerate the importance of what lies at the centre of the circle, such as the final “big kiss” at the end of There’s Something About Mary (1998). The spinning motion is also used to demonstrate bewilderment of a character such as in the empty Time Square dream sequence at the start of Vanilla Sky (2001).
Impossible Movement
Whereas most directors are content to use a moving camera to simply enhance a scene, others such as Welles, Hitchcock and more recently, David Fincher and Robert Zemeckis seem to be in constant pursuit of what appears to be an impossible movement.
An early example of this is seen in Citizen Kane (1941), in the “El Rancho” scene when the camera moves across the roof, through the middle of a neon sign and then down through the glass roof light. In order to achieve this, they utilised a breakaway sign and a dissolve between two shots, which seems crude by today’s standards but was revolutionary at the time. Fincher takes this idea further in Panic Room (2002) flying the camera through various impossibly tight spaces, including the handle of a teapot. Although these shoots are designed to heighten the visual impact of the film, computer graphics make them so easy to achieve, that they now seem to be used without consideration of the effect.
Panic Room is a film that relies on conveying a sense of entrapment and confinement. However, having such a freely roaming camera only works against this. It has to be questioned whether the motivation behind such camera movement is really taken from the drama, or is an attempt to surpass the likes of Hitchcock and Welles. Robert Zemeckis admits to imitating a Hitchcockian style as motivate for such impossible moves in the film What Lies Beneath (2000):
Like I said to Rob Legato, who was my special effects supervisor, I said well imagine what would Alfred Hitchcock do if he had computer graphics.
- Interview in the documentary: Constructing the Perfect Thriller
Point-of-View Shots
For point-of-view, or POV, shots, the camera adopts the viewpoint of one of the characters. Movement is often used to compliment this effect, be it by a slight camera tremble to simulate a character’s natural movement, or fast Steadicam dash to imitate the vision of a hunting Werewolf. POVs are especially used in thrillers and horrors as a way of building suspension but what makes them so effective? When viewing a POV shot, the audience is forcefully transported into the mind of the character, seeing what they see. This plants the audience right into the heart of the scene and makes the viewing experience seem interactive, like a first person computer game.
Hitchcock used POVs for nearly a quarter of his shots; to quote Robert Boyle, a multiple Oscar-winning production designer and Hitchcock collaborator:
… a Hitchcock picture looks more open, because he doesn't resort, too often, to over-the-shoulder shots. He'll go into a close-up and then you'll see what that person sees. It may be a moving point of view, but he uses the point of view as a subjective thing to put the audience within the person. I think Hitchcock uses the subjective point of view better than any director I know. You can quarrel and argue about his content or lack of content, but his use of the film language is a very hard thing to argue about because he uses it so instinctively.
- AFI, Getting the Impossible Shot: A Conversation With Robert Boyle
A POV is used to excellent effect during the climax of The Silence of the Lambs (1991), when we watch Clarice through the eyes of the murderer “Buffalo Bill.” The shot follows Clarice around the room, with the simulated eerie green glow of night vision goggles that he is wearing. This puts the audience into the mind of the killer and because they cannot see him, it is impossible to predict what he is going to do, building the tension beautifully.
Although not strictly true POVs, Michael Mann used head-mounted miniature cameras for fighting scenes in his biopic, boxing epic, Ali (2001). This puts the audience right in the path of the punches as they are thrown. Combined with the jarring movement the head mounting creates, the technique is highly effective.
Evaluation and Conclusions
The last 110 years have witnessed cinema advance a long way. However, as the standard has risen, so have the audiences’ expectations. There has been a constant development in the technology available, presenting more and more options to the filmmaker.
Dynamic camerawork plays an important role in the director’s palette, being able to greatly enhance a scene with the subtlest of dollies or the grandest of reveals. However, the drama still remains the core of the film and it is only from this that the motivation to move the camera should be drawn.
Many films have faltered because they have allowed technology to lead the drama, resulting in distracting or unnecessary camera movement. The spectacular effects that have recently become available have tempted many less disciplined directors to move the camera because they can and not in order to enhance the story.
When appropriately utilised, these advances are nothing but an aid to filmmakers. What appears to be the defining constituent is not the technology available but the knowledge and ingenuity of the filmmaker using it. As legendary film maker George Lucas puts it:
You're always faced with certain limitations but it's how well you work in those limitations that defines a really talented filmmaker from someone who's just average. Because everybody has problems, everybody has limitations. Only some of us learn how to manipulate through those in a more efficient manner than other people. And that's really the secret.
- Tribute Online, Director Biography – George Lucas
When a filmmaker who understands the underlining principles of cinema is presented with the possibilities now available, it can lead to some of the most powerful and engaging cinema yet created. We can only hope that these advances will continue into the future, fuelling even greater cinematic accomplishments.
Copyright © Mike Marriage 2005
