Dan Bradley, the stunt coordinator and second unit director (hee hee, "unit" director) of the two Bourne sequels has been brought on to handle the stunt work on Bond 22.
Now, I guarantee every other movie blogger on the web is going to be sporting boner-filled sweatpants over this news, but I'm not. And that's because I like the action sequences in Casino Royale infinitely more than the shakey cam crap in Bourne. Bourne seems to do what Batman Begins did (loved the movie, hated the way they shot the action sequences), and that's cut from blurry, shakey closeup to blurry, shakey closeup. Transformers did it too, especially so in the Optimus Prime fight. I don't get it. Why spend millions on character design and choreography if you're just going to show us eight split-second closeups of blurry shit in succession that we don't have time to process anyway? How many closeups of Bourne's hand shifting do we see in this scene? And I'm willing to bet that's just the same shot, repeated.
If a guy gets his head chopped off in a scene, I don't want to see a closeup of the guy's eyes, then a blur, then a closeup of a bead of sweat, then a blur of the guy's lapel, then a closeup of the sword blade, then the guy's head: I want to see the guy get his goddamned head chopped off. Quick-cut, shakey cam, blurry garbage cheats us out of experiencing the beauty of the actual fight choreography.
When you see a well-shot fight sequence – Kill Bill, some of the older Jackie Chan stuff, the advance clips from Shoot 'Em Up, Braveheart (I don't care if some of the guys are wearing watches and playing paddy cake in the background, that shit still looks better than Gladiator) – you immediately notice the difference. The directors have confidence in the way their scenes play out, so they can show it to you, without shaking the camera like a crying baby and using jarring cuts to create artificial tension.
Guh. < /rant >
![[avatar]](http://p.uproxxcdn.com/photo/257/thumb)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/latest-movie-trailer-for-elysium-starring-matt-damon-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2013/05/latest-movie-trailer-for-behind-the-candelabra-the-liberace-biopic-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/12/Promised-Land-Main-150x150.jpg)
![[image]](http://cdn.fd.uproxx.com/wp-content/thumbnails/130/110/2012/10/clooney-murray-150x150.jpg)
Amen. The action scenes in the Bourne films have been way to hard to follow. Too much quick cuts and shakey cameras to mask the physical shortcomings of the actors.
This will probably ruin the next Bond unless it's shot different.
other movie blogger on the web is going to be sporting boner-filled sweatpants
Amazing use of word imagery here. This was funny, I smiled but the thought wouldn't go away and then the thought started coming into a clearer focus… slowly clearer and more real and what was funny became acutely horrifying. Bravo sir, bravo.
Oh yes, and NO MORE nut torture please. Shit almost made me throw my DVD player out the window.
Unless you're one of those homos who gets a headache every time someone moves the camera, this is good news. The Bond movies are pretty much apeing the Bourne movies by this point anyway, might as well make it official.
Yes! I am so glad somebody finally agrees. Fight scenes are the best parts of an action movie, so if you can't see what's going on it ruins the whole thing. I had no idea who was hitting who or even where Bats was in Batman Begins.
You had me until the Gladiator diss. Gladiator has some of the best action ever filmed, my man.
Bradley sure is the trendy choice these days, huh? The problem is you can't blame the stunt coordinator for the way the scenes are shot. That's the director's decision. The stunts in Bourne Ultimatum are some of the best I've ever seen. He doesn't decide how those scenes are filmed.
Funny, as soon as I started reading about blurry, shaky closeups, Gladiator was what immediately came to mind (I'm glad to see you agree with me, Lance). The editing on that movie was absolute shit. Jump cuts every 1/80th of a second do not make for a good action scene. Likewise, when a guy is fighting a tiger, I don't want to see his emotional reaction via a close-up shot of his face. I want to see the fucking tiger.
Wrong. Everyone knows when it comes to Bond he takes his actions scenes like he takes his Martini – Shaken, not stirred.
Ya Boy – According to the stuff on the web about Bradley, it makes it sound like he's the 2nd Unit Director, and he actually directs a lot of the action sequences. As to whether he's just doing what the Director tells him to, that's anyone's guess.
Right, the 2nd Unit Director is also often the same thing as Action Director/Choreographer. He directs the action sequences as instructed by the film's director. The second unit director can't just go off and shoot any way he pleases, he's gotta keep the same tone as the rest of the film so that the action looks like it fits into the same movie. Bradley is making sure all the stuntmen are doing the right things, crashes are going off the way they're supposed to, etc. He films the scenes the way he's been instructed to.
Totally agree, I can't stand that shakey shit. There's no point in even having those scenes, you might as well have some dude just tell you, "..and here's where these characters fight." At least that way I wouldn't get a fucking headache.
AMEN !!!!!
A thousand times YES!
You have just become my favorite film critic of all time!
I can't agree with this enough. I've been rallying against the shakeycam for years!
Thank you so much for this. Never stop this crusade.
MrSnuggly, feel free to strap a camera to a weasel on crystal meth, then watch it and masturbate to the genius of great filmmaking. I know what "the inside of a fight looks like" from being in one. If I wanted that I'd get in one again. When I see a film I want to see what the hell is going on.
For those of us who don't see the world from the perspective of a drunk Parkinsons patient, hold the damn camera still.
Melvin, since saying you enjoyed Lady in the Water, you've totally redeemed yourself – and that's no easy task. I especially agree with the statement: I know what "the inside of a fight looks like" from being in one. If I wanted that I'd get in one again.
Thanks, Lance, I guess? I missed any earlier disagreement you may have had.
As to your comment above, Greengrass adores that Parkinsons patient camera work. You may be right that this guy was just doing what his deranged boss said.
Also, FD, for a great example to contrast the shakeycam, look to the youtube of the fights from the first Bourne and the second. Case closed.
[nomorequo.blogspot.com]
[www.youtube.com]