What would be the natural feelings or tone invoked if the perspective is often from behind a character's shoulder, looking at what's in front of the character? The shoulder itself will sometimes be in the shot.
Never mind the story, setting, genre, or set lighting, for now.
Also, are there any examples of movies that use this?
This is an extremely common camera angle, used in nearly every movie and television show. It’s basically a faux-first person perspective – you’re seeing exactly what a character sees without losing sight of them.
It’s used mostly for dialogue scenes between two characters and to that end, typically little thought is given to it’s “meaning” since it’s such a simple way to focus on an actor’s performance without losing track of either character’s “location” within the scene. Used in such a basic way, it’s a reliable but unremarkable camera angle. That being said, it CAN be used to great effect if you are consciously aware of how much a camera can affect a scene. It all depends on the scene as a whole and what is being shown.
If you want to see a movie that masters the use of the “point of view” camera angles to drive emotions of a scene, watch Silence of the Lambs. It uses a LOT of these “over the shoulder” angles as well as true “first-person” camera angles – so you are not just “standing behind” Clarice watching her react…you ARE Clarice. The way the camera plays with these two angles is an important part in creating the tension the film is known for.
Camera angles can and do have a HUGE impact on a film, it just all depends on how much thought and importance you put on it and knowing HOW and WHEN to use the right angle. Look at Kevin Smith’s Mallrats. The camera NEVER moves – the film is nothing but static wide shots to show all the characters at once – you don’t even think about the camera angle because it really does nothing other than let you watch people talk. The result is a “safe” image, almost oppressive in how static it is. Many people hate this about the film (and most of Kevin’s work), but I actually find it a great representation of the characters themselves being trapped within the confines of their stubborn nature and problems. It’s definitely not what Smith had in mind (he admittedly “didn’t care”
, but that’s how I look at it.
Now, look at the movie Children of Men. The camera work is a MASSIVELY important part of the film – the way it bobs and weaves within a scene, passing from one angle to another, running with a character through massive sets – the camera is every bit as important to the film’s emotion as the actors themselves. Had Alfonso Cuarón shot this movie in the same static way as Kevin Smith’s films, it would be a remarkably different (and less powerful) film.
