Personal and intimate or mechanical and voyeuristic?
topic of the day 036 & video of the day 032
How Fincher Hijacks your Eyes
Who? What?
A master of the crafts, David Fincher uses the position of the camera when filming the scenes and how it moves perpendicular with the actor in focus i.e. tilt, pan or tracking, whether by their movements or even where their eyes are located in each frame. If the movement is minute in one particular location, he would focus on the eyeline and must always have it on the upper section of the frame for example.
He achieved this visible visual perfection in matching both the camera and the actor/actress is by being known to have many takes to have that perfect shot, testing the patience of all involved to be in sync between the performer and the operator. That's not how he always do it though as the advancement in technology allowed him to "shoot his movies at super high resolutions so he has room to 'move' the camera in the editing room" (quote taken from reddit).
A master of the crafts, David Fincher uses the position of the camera when filming the scenes and how it moves perpendicular with the actor in focus i.e. tilt, pan or tracking, whether by their movements or even where their eyes are located in each frame. If the movement is minute in one particular location, he would focus on the eyeline and must always have it on the upper section of the frame for example.
How?
Why?
"Behaviour over time."
The way a person moves is a key part of who the characters are and what they want. To capture for example how a person reacts to a certain event, he put the camera in lock step with the body to capture that physicality, whether the character lunged out in desperation, raised up slowly in fear or float back in astonishment (altered quotes from the video to fit the narrative).
The way a person moves is a key part of who the characters are and what they want. To capture for example how a person reacts to a certain event, he put the camera in lock step with the body to capture that physicality, whether the character lunged out in desperation, raised up slowly in fear or float back in astonishment (altered quotes from the video to fit the narrative).
Then?
Which brings back to the title in question: do you think it is better to focus on the movements of the actors or their emotions instead? If you've notice other directors' approaches in capturing emotions, they might use the typical techniques of close ups of people's faces or look around when they're nervous or any of the sorts. Fincher presents it as it is from afar without much familiar closeness that we're used to. Rather than try to put you directly in the character's shoes, you see them from a distance and then reflect on your own experience if you're in the similar situation.
So?
It's always a nice pace to look on a particular director's approach to movies and how it affect how we perceive his works in return. The next time you watch a film, this should at least give you a little more knowledge and allowing you to notice how it is filmed and admire their handiwork hence appreciate the art even more.
Lesson Learned:
Even how a particular movie is recorded affect how you view the character in focus whether through their movements or their emotions. It depends on the skill of the director to tell it effectively.
No comments: