Jump to content

Adam Roades

Basic Member
  • Posts

    5
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Profile Information

  • Occupation
    Student
  1. I actually had the exact opposite reaction. The plot was serviceable but nothing spectacular. I thought the visceral element that the camera work and art direction added really made the film. The sound editing really added to it too.
  2. Well, I can't really speak for the people that it made sick, but I thought it was extremely watchable and well shot.
  3. I can definitely understand how someone could get motion sickness while watching, especially if they are prone to it. I just think it's crazy that people are belittling the film's technical complexity. They're jumping to the conclusion that the shaky camera equals laziness on the cinematographer's/director's/producer's part, which is absurd in this film's case. I mean, it's not like they just handed the camera to an actor and said, "go wild." The shots are well thought out, showing the viewer everything they need to see, while still feeling like chaotic documentary footage (which is pretty impressive in my eyes). Very reminiscent of the visceral WTC collapse street footage. I didn't mean to single you out before, it was just the first comment my eyes landed on that suggested judging before seeing. I didn't mean any offense by it.
  4. I'm really curious as to how many of the people here trashing the visual style have actually seen the film. For example, Daniel Sheehy made a clever quip about implementing a crane and if asked where it came, the producer should "tell him it comes from the same place the music does." The problem with that is the music in the film all comes from on location sources. Which of the point of the film. It's not trying to be shaky for the purpose of being shaky. It's being shaky to give the feeling of a documentary film. To put in cranes and dollies would essentially ruin the concept of the film. And that's what it essentially is, a concept film. Without the concept of it being an in-the-moment document of a monster ravaging a city, it's just Godzilla. Who needs another one of those. Cinematography doesn't have to be pretty. It is there primarily to serve the ideas behind the film.
×
×
  • Create New...