case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2014-05-17 04:05 pm

[ SECRET POST #2692 ]


⌈ Secret Post #2692 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.










Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 03 pages, 070 secrets from Secret Submission Post #385.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

(Anonymous) 2014-05-18 12:26 am (UTC)(link)
Right? Remember how everyone and their hamsters (rightfully) critisized the shaky cam in the the first Hunger Game movie... the second one didn't have that and everyone was relieved. (Just the most known example I could think of)

(Anonymous) 2014-05-18 01:50 am (UTC)(link)
Cloverfield. Oh God, Cloverfield. People were actually getting motion sickness and leaving the theatre because of that one.

(Anonymous) 2014-05-18 02:00 am (UTC)(link)
I still think its stupid. No film style or technique is inherently bad or good. Now they can all be used badly or well, but I don't think shaky cam is inherently bad. It may be hard to get right, but it is possible to do shaky cam well.

(Anonymous) 2014-05-18 04:22 am (UTC)(link)
They didn't say that the technique was inherently good or bad. They said that the technique ruined a movie and cited physically sick people as their illustration. Both points - that filming techniques can ruin a movie and the example provided - were in support of the thesis that "filming styles can ruin a movie (because movies are an inherently visual medium.)"

Again, you're the only person attributing "good" or "bad" to a technique. And, again, no one is obligated to like any given filming technique, they aren't obligated to keep quiet to avoid offending you, and they aren't obligated to agree with your opinions.