matrix_ghost
movie fan
- Joined
- Aug 19, 2004
- Messages
- 5,585
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 58
http://denofgeek.com/movies/162650/an_open_letter_to_action_movie_editors_directors.html
Hi,
I am but a mere punter. I stump up my cash, I go and see films, I buy the DVDs, and I then jabber on about them until my friends decide its time to go and find new friends instead. And I passionately believe that there are few relaxing pleasures in life quite like a good, rock-solid action movie.
Over the course of my lifetime, Ive been spoilt by an abundance of action-packed movies that I watch, re-watch and watch again. Die Hard, Aliens, Shoot Em Up, Con Air (my love for which is explained here), Armageddon (thats explained here), Crank, Starship Troopers, Bourne, Mission: Impossible, Casino Royale I could, quite literally, babble on forever, and keep the list going for some time yet. Ask my ex-friends.
However, in recent years, theres been an increasing trend towards, what seems to me, a bit of madness in the editing suite.
I first noticed it, or it was at its most obvious, in Michael Bays Transformers movie (and I say this as someone who likes many of his films). Thats perhaps the first film Ive seen thats ever made me feel old. Because while the effects were stunning, the build up was good and the idea of seeing big mechanical constructs whacking seven shades of **** out of each other was utterly endearing, I got to a point where I had absolutely no idea what was going on. Genuinely: none whatsoever.
So fast were the edits, and so tight were the shots, that for too much of the running time, I felt like I was watching flashes of colour going by, as if I was undergoing a glorified new and experimental eye test. I understand that film editing theory often remarks something along the lines of when was the last time you saw a film that was too quick?, but if anyone is asking that question, Id like to stick my hand up in the air right now.
Now dont get me wrong: film editing is a remarkable skill, and action movies have always relied on fast cuts to get across an energy and momentum. I have no issue with that whatsoever. Im not being a moaning fuddy-duddy either, who is about to reminisce about how things were in the good old days. Action cinema evolves and moves on, and weve felt some very big benefits of that in recent times.
I also understand that sometimes the effect of very, very fast cutting can get across, successfully, the idea of quick and brutal fighting, such as in Batman Begins or The Bourne Trilogy. Those films, for me, get across the notion that youre not supposed to see everything thats going on, because these are fast, borderline-ruthless fighters were talking about. But at least they give you a clue, and let you have an idea of whats going on. You can at least see the back of their proverbial shoes as they run off ahead of you, and they get the balance right between quick, close cuts and treating you fairly as an audience member.
But then I sit through something like Quantum of Solace (a film so aching to be a Bourne sequel its staggering, but perhaps thats a conversation for another time). The opening sequence of Quantum is cut so ridiculously fast, for no obvious such effect, that again, I didnt feel like I was supposed to or be allowed to know what was going on. Its not the only recent example: just this week, Stuarts review of Transporter 3 noted the decision to edit the fights down into an incomprehensible mess of flashing lights and sound effects. Ive not seen Transporter 3, but as a devotee of action cinema, I do understand where hes coming from.
So if this, then, is the latest trend in Hollywood action films, can I now please ask that it stops, in favour of giving the viewing audience a chance to see whats going on?
It really is okay not to be a Bourne movie, and its absolutely fine to believe that you dont have to bombard an audience repeatedly to get across the message that your film is fast and furious. I rewatched Die Hard recently, and while its certainly cut fast, the excitement of its action is right there in front of the lens of the camera, and the razor-sharp editing gives us ample opportunity to enjoy it. Thats without the film ever losing pace or energy.
I write this, as I said, as a huge fan of action cinema, and Ill continue to be so. Whats more, Ill continue to stump up my cash, Ill no doubt pick up another copy of many of my favourite action movies when they hit high definition, and Ill gleefully check out the trailers for the next action extravaganzas just around the corner.
I just ask, of the people making these films, that you do this one thing for me. And thats please give me a least a sporting chance of seeing whats going on.
Many thanks for your time.
Sincerely,
Simon Brew
Glad i'm not the only one who getting sick of shakey cam bourne action.
While QoS is nowhere near as bad as the nausea-inducing action of the bourne series , it does have it's fair shair of shakey cam filming.
It really make you wonder if people like Craig don't get pissed because of this. They work for hours straight in order to get their body in shape and then literally put their bodies thru hell in order to get the stunts right.
However the end result is just a blur .
Hi,
I am but a mere punter. I stump up my cash, I go and see films, I buy the DVDs, and I then jabber on about them until my friends decide its time to go and find new friends instead. And I passionately believe that there are few relaxing pleasures in life quite like a good, rock-solid action movie.
Over the course of my lifetime, Ive been spoilt by an abundance of action-packed movies that I watch, re-watch and watch again. Die Hard, Aliens, Shoot Em Up, Con Air (my love for which is explained here), Armageddon (thats explained here), Crank, Starship Troopers, Bourne, Mission: Impossible, Casino Royale I could, quite literally, babble on forever, and keep the list going for some time yet. Ask my ex-friends.
However, in recent years, theres been an increasing trend towards, what seems to me, a bit of madness in the editing suite.
I first noticed it, or it was at its most obvious, in Michael Bays Transformers movie (and I say this as someone who likes many of his films). Thats perhaps the first film Ive seen thats ever made me feel old. Because while the effects were stunning, the build up was good and the idea of seeing big mechanical constructs whacking seven shades of **** out of each other was utterly endearing, I got to a point where I had absolutely no idea what was going on. Genuinely: none whatsoever.
So fast were the edits, and so tight were the shots, that for too much of the running time, I felt like I was watching flashes of colour going by, as if I was undergoing a glorified new and experimental eye test. I understand that film editing theory often remarks something along the lines of when was the last time you saw a film that was too quick?, but if anyone is asking that question, Id like to stick my hand up in the air right now.
Now dont get me wrong: film editing is a remarkable skill, and action movies have always relied on fast cuts to get across an energy and momentum. I have no issue with that whatsoever. Im not being a moaning fuddy-duddy either, who is about to reminisce about how things were in the good old days. Action cinema evolves and moves on, and weve felt some very big benefits of that in recent times.
I also understand that sometimes the effect of very, very fast cutting can get across, successfully, the idea of quick and brutal fighting, such as in Batman Begins or The Bourne Trilogy. Those films, for me, get across the notion that youre not supposed to see everything thats going on, because these are fast, borderline-ruthless fighters were talking about. But at least they give you a clue, and let you have an idea of whats going on. You can at least see the back of their proverbial shoes as they run off ahead of you, and they get the balance right between quick, close cuts and treating you fairly as an audience member.
But then I sit through something like Quantum of Solace (a film so aching to be a Bourne sequel its staggering, but perhaps thats a conversation for another time). The opening sequence of Quantum is cut so ridiculously fast, for no obvious such effect, that again, I didnt feel like I was supposed to or be allowed to know what was going on. Its not the only recent example: just this week, Stuarts review of Transporter 3 noted the decision to edit the fights down into an incomprehensible mess of flashing lights and sound effects. Ive not seen Transporter 3, but as a devotee of action cinema, I do understand where hes coming from.
So if this, then, is the latest trend in Hollywood action films, can I now please ask that it stops, in favour of giving the viewing audience a chance to see whats going on?
It really is okay not to be a Bourne movie, and its absolutely fine to believe that you dont have to bombard an audience repeatedly to get across the message that your film is fast and furious. I rewatched Die Hard recently, and while its certainly cut fast, the excitement of its action is right there in front of the lens of the camera, and the razor-sharp editing gives us ample opportunity to enjoy it. Thats without the film ever losing pace or energy.
I write this, as I said, as a huge fan of action cinema, and Ill continue to be so. Whats more, Ill continue to stump up my cash, Ill no doubt pick up another copy of many of my favourite action movies when they hit high definition, and Ill gleefully check out the trailers for the next action extravaganzas just around the corner.
I just ask, of the people making these films, that you do this one thing for me. And thats please give me a least a sporting chance of seeing whats going on.
Many thanks for your time.
Sincerely,
Simon Brew
Glad i'm not the only one who getting sick of shakey cam bourne action.
While QoS is nowhere near as bad as the nausea-inducing action of the bourne series , it does have it's fair shair of shakey cam filming.
It really make you wonder if people like Craig don't get pissed because of this. They work for hours straight in order to get their body in shape and then literally put their bodies thru hell in order to get the stunts right.
However the end result is just a blur .
