Videocamera movies- innovative or cheapskate?

[Graal]

I rented Quarantine Saturday night, and to my utter dismay saw that it was one of those 'videocamera movies'. You know what I'm talking about. The kind where the whole movie is seen through the perspective of a videocamera wielded by some poor sod. Now, the movie wasn't that bad and the way it was filmed gave it a much more personal touch, but I ended up not liking the movie enough to watch it again. One of the reasons was because the constant jerky movement of the camera soon gave me a headache and another being that at times I had no idea what was going on. What are your thoughts on this new film technique? Cheap or innovative?

[onona]

It doesn't really have anything to do with budget, so it can't really be labelled as cheap. It's an intentional stylistic choice taken to enhance drama and realism. Sometimes it works, sometimes not so much. Personally I find it a bit nauseating over a long period of time.

[Incognito]

I hate movies like that! The cameras in movies like these always shakes and swings around like it has parkisons and/or is drunk. I try my best to avoid movies like that.

[ioiiooio]

I quite like it because I like movies that are believable, gritty, and raw. In fact, I find that most of my favourite movies are those based on true stories. I do think it's a little overused though, and sometimes it doesn't work with a particular film.

[Bonezmann]

Wasn't the Blair witch project done with this style as well? That movie freaked the **** out of me. But yeah, I hate it. As the others said, the camera is too jerky and stuff. :)

[Cleric]

I like it when it's done well. Cloverfield would have been bland without it. It fit Blairwitch perfectly. And I can't think of any other serious films that have it. So yeah, far from overused.

[Miktar]

For all intent, District 9 is like that half the time. As onona said, it's a stylistic choice, and like all art, some people can use a brush right, and some people screw it up.

[pArkEr]

Well I personally feel much more 'connected', whether it's a good movie or not . Cloverfield is I think top of the pops, but I know many people that didn't like it at all, mainly because of the jerky camera.

btw me and my friend found Quarantine hilarious. The few scares were very predictable, and when the fireman went on his rampage chopping everything in sight we literally laughed our asses off.

[Aesir]

Quarantine was terrible, I found my mind wandering most of the time. I like the view out of the camera, but it must not be to realistic where you feel sick half way through the movie. Movies on planes are also guilty of this. I watched a movie based on a plane, the camera was so jerky to "imitate" the turbulance I felt sick the rest of the night.

Blair witch did it nicely, a lot of the movie is still in "normal" mode and some in first person mode.

[brazed]

Rachel getting married also used the approach. It worked very well imo.

[Shadow_Con]

I like 1st person movies by how they make it feel realistic and i liked how in cloverfield the video would sometimes jump back to the the previous recording for a few seconds at a time. Though they arnt movies i watch more than once of twice

[Graal]

That's also another thing I've noticed about these movies. Because it's done out of such a personal point of view, I can't bring myself to watch them another time.

[Sir PaniCore]

Well I enjoyed Cloverfield and it used the same camera work and I thought it worked very well.

[Flangenimblick]

I really dig movies done like that, feels more "realistic" somehow. That being said I always have headaches after I watch movies filmed like that, and watching them on a big screen almost makes me nauseous! But I still like 'em ^_^

[PersephoneX]

i saw a zombie movie that used the 1st person camera style the other day. Its a good idea, if the acting doesnt suck, and the plot isnt as gay as a meatball. And as much as i love Cloverfield, i sometimes have to pause halfway, i get motion sickness... *blushies*

[Cloud_Ratha]

I saw quarantine the other day. Then happened to watch the making of it. You'd be surprised as to how innovative the camera techniques are to produce the crappy cheap video look. The longest they could record per film reel was about 15 secs or so. A lot of cgi/matte painting is used to seemlessly tie them in. So you'll see the camera going into fully dark patches and coming out again. A lot. I personally thought is was a good idea for a movie, but the ending failed. I do not know why everyone loves cloverfield. I thought it was more average than having 2.4 babies.

[PersephoneX]

C'mon! Cloverfield had all those winning feautres...the annoying feeling of suspense And not getting a full glimpse of the creature til your arse is numb and your coke is warm. i think it was a nice idea, and besides the annoying "i'm on a never ending quest to save my girlfriend" thing, it kept my otherwise short attention span in one place til the end.

[Flangenimblick]

C'mon! Cloverfield had all those winning feautres...the annoying feeling of suspense And not getting a full glimpse of the creature til your arse is numb and your coke is warm. i think it was a nice idea, and besides the annoying "i'm on a never ending quest to save my girlfriend" thing, it kept my otherwise short attention span in one place til the end.

I love it. The moment it came out on DVD I bought myself a copy. Sweet head-ache-y bliss is mine!

What I love about this particular style is that it pops up in places and movies you least expect. I personally have never seen a zombie or monster film done like that before, so for me it was rather mind-blowing. And it defiantly adds to the suspense and immersion.

[Graal]

I must admit, the few scenes in District 9 where this was employed wasn't that bad really. Or maybe I was just so forgiving because I loved the rest of the movie so much :p

[FoX]

...nauseating...

But District 9 did it the best(aka no headache)
Cloverfield... I just had to close my eyes for a couple of minutes and just listen to the movie.