![]() A long, fluid dolly shot can be great to look at, but as soon as it occurs to you how much work and preparation must have gone into setting up the shot, the carefully rehearsed and choreographed nature of the proceedings is impossible to avoid.īy contrast, handheld cameras evoke a documentary authenticity that makes the viewer feel that the action could be unfolding in real life just as we see it, with some guy with a camera standing there and trying to stay out of the way. The effect is meant, first of all, to feel more authentic and less staged than traditionally choreographed and fluidly photographed action scenes. ![]() I did find it occasionally distracting during Supremacy and not during Ultimatum, but perhaps I’ve just gotten used to it. Whether The Bourne Ultimatum is a worse “offender” in this regard than its predecessor, I can’t say. The original Bourne Identity was directed by Paul Liman, not Greengrass, so it’s not surprising that you found the two sequels more annoying in this regard than the original film. The shaky hand-held camera is a trademark effect of director Paul Greengrass, who also uses it, to great effect in my opinion, in his stellar United 93. I was wondering what your thoughts were on that? Yet, it seems to be worse with every new movie. I personally loathe the super shaky hand-held camera work during action and chase sequences and everyone I talk to seems to agree. I also thought that the Julia Stiles subplot was not fully developed, though it seemed like maybe they left it open for possible future films.īut my reason for writing is actually mostly about a particular filming technique that is more and more prevalent. ![]() Incidentally, did you ever notice how similar the two names are? JAmeS BONd, JASon BOurNe. The Bourne films are substantially an affirmation of human values over against the anti-humanistic world of expedience that created Jason Bourne Casino Royale borders on celebrating Bond’s freedom from moral restraint. To its credit, Casino Royale takes moral issues more seriously than previous films troublingly, it no longer assumes traditional morality as an implicit foil for Bond’s outrageous behavior. What was usually an implicit misogynistic, antisocial and amoral dimension in past films is now explicit, and no longer papered over with a wink bordering on farce. It’s possible that the Bourne films, with their grim violence and chilly realism, had a role in pointing the Bond franchise in a new direction.Īs terrific a film as Casino Royale is, the new James Bond is as troubling a hero as the old, or more so. The Bond producers have been trying to revamp Bond for years, but they hadn’t been able to figure out how to do it. It represents a radical break with the Bond films of the past. The new Casino Royale is James Bond for grownups, for the post–Bourne era. ![]() I know you have never reviewed any of the Bond movies, but could you give your thoughts on that one, please? They also know that real characters and emotions are more engaging than casually detached womanizing and interchangeable playmates. The following paragraph, especially the last sentence, makes the entire franchise sound goofy, but the latest film makes sense of the character’s whole morality: Unlike the cartoon antics characterizing most of the James Bond franchise, the Bourne films know that keeping the action more or less human-scaled makes it more thrilling than pumping it up with over-the-top stunt sequences that could only exist in a movie fantasyland (despite a few scenes that cross the line). Reading your review of The Bourne Ultimatum made me wonder if you had yet seen the 2006 version of Casino Royale. Matthew, Ratatouille, The Matrix, Live Free or Die Hard, children’s books, video games and more. ![]() Mailbag #3 The Bourne Ultimatum, Casino Royale, Sunshine, The Gospel According to St. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |