• ✅ Technical and creative solutions for your film.
    ✅ Screenplay formatting help, plot and story guidance.
    ✅ A respectful community of professionals and newbies.
    ✅ Network with composers, editors, cast, crew, and more!
    🎬 IndieTalk - Filmmaking and Screenwriting help site and community.
    By filmmakers, for filmmakers since 2003

Is directing shots this way really necessary?

H

harmonica44

I've noticed in a lot of movies that a director will be very reciprocal in how conversations are put together. If one person is talking from a side shot, they will have a side shot of the opposite talking character. If they cut to a more front shot of one of the characters, they will then cut to another more front shot of the opposite character. Here's an example:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06rpz6-5s_0

As you can see if the camera gets closer one on of them, it must get closer on the other. A lot of movies do that. Is this really a requirement for audiences perception, or is it just the preference of most directors? I can't think of any movies that have done back and forth, where the shots are at much different distances and angles.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
The camera placement depends on how intense u want the scene to be. If the director knows what he is doing he wouldnt zoom in onto the actors face just for the hell of it.

The camera placement is used to manipulate how To make audience feel: relax, caution, intense, etc.

My favorite book on this topic is master shots
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases.
Upvote 0 Downvote
In this scene the 'distance' seems to be related to emotional intensity.
After the first burst, the camera goes 'wider' again: she 'detaches' from the anger (putting the proffesional distance between them again) and opens the drawer.

And yes it's very common to not use all kind of (crazy) angles in a conversation, unless it's needed for emotional, action, enstrangement, whatever reasons.
Chaos never helps a conversation. ;)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Walt and Dima hit the nail on the head. It all depends on how you want the audience to feel. Closer=more intense/intimate/personal. Farther away=less connection with the character/more emotionally detached/lighter subject matter. Both of which should be used in the right time and place.

I recommend buying/borrowing the Hollywood Camera Works master class dvds. They'll teach you all about this (and then some.)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Oh I watched a part of the hollywood camera video once and damn! It was sooo boring haha that woman's voice was so monotonous. The DVD was giving an amazing amount of information but it was a bit too dry for my taste :(
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yeah, it is very dry, especially at the beginning where they are telling you the very basics. But if you move ahead to a later disc the information is amazing! I think it's called something like 'staging high-end scenes' and it really gives all the tricks that make a film look like a 'hollywood studio' production. No joke.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Just watching their demo videos was frustrating. It really is killer information, but their presentation has to be the worst in history haha.

It makes you earn the knowledge, that's for sure.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Ok, I can see complaining about the voice. They really are very dry.

But, I totally understand their reason for the 3D format and presentation. What they are trying to emphasize is how powerful the camera alone can be. If you have real actors or music or lighting you are being swayed by those things to feel a certain way. When you strip it down to just subjects without expression, dialog, music, etc. you can see how truly powerful camera placement/focal length/movement can be all on it's own.

I feel like I'm having a hard time phrasing that quite right. But do you know what I'm saying?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Dreadylocks said:
Ok, I can see complaining about the voice. They really are very dry.

But, I totally understand their reason for the 3D format and presentation. What they are trying to emphasize is how powerful the camera alone can be. If you have real actors or music or lighting you are being swayed by those things to feel a certain way. When you strip it down to just subjects without expression, dialog, music, etc. you can see how truly powerful camera placement/focal length/movement can be all on it's own.

I feel like I'm having a hard time phrasing that quite right. But do you know what I'm saying?
Click to expand...

Totally agree, it's the way it's voiced that kills it. I appreciate the 3D models too.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Well I can see moving in closer on the Leonardo DiCaprio character, but I saw no reason for why it had to move in on her, since his character, is more intense than she at the moment, and he is the focus. But a lot of directors will move in on both, even though the intensity is only about the one person a lot more.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
That's not entirely true (@H44 ! ). She gets drawn into that anger/intensity.
The moment she opens the drawer she disengages (camera shows more distance again) and gives him what he wants, but only after she strongly disagreed.
After a short break he gets angry again.

If the camera didn't move in on her, she would have to be cool and distant all the time.

The distance to the camera is not mathematicly connected to intensity.
There is no such formula: "We have to move back 15%, because she's 15% less angry than him."
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0 Downvote
Oh okay, I saw it differently. I thought that if the camera was close on him the whole time, and not on her, then it would be more intense for him, since it is to the plot. I was thinking of directing a few scenes that way, where it is close on, and not the other, but is that a true no no, even though there are no rules per say?
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Whenever I click on h44 topic this is what I see:

Topic: Question about this and that.

H44: i have a question why is it like that?
Forum Member 1 (FM): because of this and that.
FM2: and also that and this.

H44: so then why is that not like this ?
FM2: because it's different.

H44: but what about so and so?
FM3: dude, do and so this ad that are not the same. There are no formulas.

H44: no, you re wrong.
FM2: wrf? You ask, we answer. Why are you arguing.

H44: because Ive seen that one guy do it different.
FM3: it's differet because of blah blah..

H44: hm ok. Do how about this then?
Dima: hey man. Stop f**king annoying everyone. Go and make a damn movie and you lllearn.

H44: *ignore*

WEEK LATER

H44: so.. I saw that and this been done by so and so.. Why did he do that??

An entire indietalk forum facepalms.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
dlevanchuk said:
Whenever I click on h44 topic this is what I see:

Topic: Question about this and that.

H44: i have a question why is it like that?
Forum Member 1 (FM): because of this and that.
FM2: and also that and this.

H44: so then why is that not like this ?
FM2: because it's different.

H44: but what about so and so?
FM3: dude, do and so this ad that are not the same. There are no formulas.

H44: no, you re wrong.
FM2: wrf? You ask, we answer. Why are you arguing.

H44: because Ive seen that one guy do it different.
FM3: it's differet because of blah blah..

H44: hm ok. Do how about this then?
Dima: hey man. Stop f**king annoying everyone. Go and make a damn movie and you lllearn.

H44: *ignore*

WEEK LATER

H44: so.. I saw that and this been done by so and so.. Why did he do that??

An entire indietalk forum facepalms.
Click to expand...

Aaaaand scene.
bow.gif
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Nevermind.

Write a scene and shoot it both ways.
Edit it both ways and see what the differences are in intensity.

(There are grey areas between black and white: not everything is a yes or no situation.)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top