Cinematographic Techniques

Tools    





as you red, in this topic it will be question of technique, terms\ definition or other knowledge related to movies. In this thread, you can share your knowledge and do not forget to describe what you just stated.
For example, one would talk about the 180 degree rule by describing what it is and when you can use it and exemple of moment where it is use and broken in movies
I don't know if it is clear



the 180 degree rule

it is the most well known rule. When 2 characters have a discussion, we draw an invisible line in the middle and the camera must stay in the same side for the shot- reverse shot.



the rule has been broken in mission impossible 1 when ethan realise that his superior is lying to him in the restaurant. The discussion is also made wit a dutch angle which is another technique and at each shot- reversed shot the camera cross that axis



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Some movies seem to break the 180 degree quite a lot, like High and Low (1963), if anyone noticed in that one?



diegesis

I could tell you the definition in the dictionary (the telling of a story by a narrator who summarizes events in the plot and comments on the conversations, thoughts, etc., of the characters) but it is too complicated. Basically, the diegesis is the world in which the characters are in.


In this example from Tim Burton's Big fish, the text A Tim Burton film is not really floating in the water. Only the viewers can see it and no characters can see it or interact with it since it does not exist in the diegesis of the movie.


This example on the other hand is the opposite. The scene is from paranormal activity and the camera we see in the glass is the camera used trough out the movie. So the camera in which we see the image exists in the diegesis of the film. This means that if Micah ( the character that operates the camera ) makes a close up on his wife's face she'll be aware of it since she can see the camera and interact with it.

Unlike Clint Eastwood here who can't see the camera. He can't be aware if Sergio Leone decides to make a close-up since it doesn't belong in the diegesis of the movie.

It seems really basic and it is, but knowing the difference and acknowledging it allows to make good transition like in fight club during the Who would you fight scene where Edward Norton character throws a pile of paper and we hear a splashing sound that does not exist in the diegesis and then it cut to our two protagonist in the bathroom in which the same sound now belongs in it because of the presence of Bradd Pitt in the bath.
Here is the scene:

Because of this simple yet necessary piece of knowledge, David Fincher has made one of the great transition in recent memory



Leitmotif editing

Leitmotif editing is very simple yet effective. It is the repetition of a musical theme to remind the apparition of something. The best example is in Star Wars. In fact, the apparition of Darth Vader is always accompanied by the same music.


The Leitmotif comes from the german Leitmotiv meaning leading motif. It has been popularized by Wagner's opera.

We also see these in Lord of the rings with the apparition of the ring on the screen.



The rubber band technique

For a lack of better words, let's call this the rubber band technique. If anyone knows the real name please let me know.
So the rubber band is a technique that consist in delaying an inevitable event. An amazing and famous example would be the Mexican standoff in the good, the bad and the ugly. (Mexican standoff is when more than 2 characters threat each other and the first one shooting isn't necessary going to win because he becomes a threat to the other one)


In this scene, we know they will shoot each others so the suspense is based on WHEN will they shoot and not if. The waiting period depends, it varies from 30 seconds to many minutes. My personal favorite use of the rubber band technique is in The Shining









!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!







!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!SPOILER!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!
In this scene, we know that Jack is in the room and has an axe. We also know that Jack has gone mad and will kill Dick but Dick doesn't know it. So the suspense in this scene is not if Jack will murder Dick but again WHEN will he murder him. The reason why I love this scene so much is also because of the long take that is not just there to show off but to distort time. After a couple of seconds, we expect a cut but it never comes and the more the scene last, the more anxious we get.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
One thing you don't see near as much of anymore on newer movies, compared to older is telephoto lenses. I feel that the compressed look they have looks great, but it seems that since the 90s, we have been seeing less and less of them compared to the 80s and before.



One thing you don't see near as much of anymore on newer movies, compared to older is telephoto lenses. I feel that the compressed look they have looks great, but it seems that since the 90s, we have been seeing less and less of them compared to the 80s and before.
intresting I never realised.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
My guess is because Hollywood is using the steadicam a lot more now, which is bad for telephoto, but they shouldn't have to use it so often if that there are less telephoto shots now, if that's the case.



indeed but also the problem when you zoom too much is that the micro movement makes the cam shaky. Take for example Barry Lyndon, the scene where the british soldier are attacking the french is shot with a long telefoto and they have a hard time making the camera steady.
also now with the very small focal lenght and huge depht of field I think they prefer shooting close to the subject
It can also just be a matter of trends and nowadays its just not as trendy as it ounce was?



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh okay, I haven't seen Barry Lyndon yet but it's definitely on my list. Yeah it's not as trendy now, but I don't see why the trend had to go away, cause it looked great, so they was no reason to loose it I don't think. However, there are other movies that make it look great without being shaky like The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Rambo: First Blood Part II, or Ben Hur, off the top of my head. So I don't think it's a problem for a lot of movies.



The movie Shane (1953) makes extensive use of telephoto lens for exterior shots. That was done so that mountain range in the background would appear much closer and much larger.



Chekhov' gun

This writing principle (also called the law of conservation of details) states that if an item or detail of any kind is specified in the first act it must have a use in the future. I might have explain it like an a** but with the example it will be flagrant. The name come from a quote by Anton Tchekhov (a Russian writer) who ounce said: "If in the first act you have hung a pistol on the wall, then in the following one it should be fired. Otherwise don't put it there.". This principle might be the bread and butter of screenwriting and every author should at least know it.

A great example of Chekhov gun is in Die Hard. If you have not seen Die Hard stop what you are doing now and watch it. It is perhaps one of the greatest action movie ever (I might make a topic on why and how is it SO GOOD). Anyway, in die hard, Bruce Willis's character is afraid of planes so he is being told to take off his shoes and make a fist out of his toes. Later, the bad guy realize that Bruce Willis have no shoes so during a shootout, he shoot the glass that surround Bruce's character so when he tries to run away he steps on it and bleed.

fist with your toes scene:

shootout where they break the glass:

Injuries he gets after running on glass



Oh okay, I haven't seen Barry Lyndon yet but it's definitely on my list. Yeah it's not as trendy now, but I don't see why the trend had to go away, cause it looked great, so they was no reason to loose it I don't think. However, there are other movies that make it look great without being shaky like The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, Rambo: First Blood Part II, or Ben Hur, off the top of my head. So I don't think it's a problem for a lot of movies.
if you are interested in the telephoto lens vs small lenses I suggest you to watch back 2 back A Swedish Love Story by Roy Andersonn shot in telephoto lenses and then Three of life by Terrence Malick who shot in extreme small lenses. I recommend you both these movies because they both talked about human contact but Mr Anderson give space to his actors by staying far from them and using telephoto lenses (his actors being kids it also make more sens) and Terrence Malick on the other hand is latterly on them giving his actors no space because of his 10 mm lenses.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh well 10mm sounds way too wide for my taste. That sounds like it would be a fisheye look and hate that look. I don't like anything TOO wide like that, but like telephoto shots for sure. Thanks for the recommendations.

Why did the telephoto lens seem to go out of style in new movies though, why is it considered more old school now?



Oh well 10mm sounds way too wide for my taste. That sounds like it would be a fisheye look and hate that look. I don't like anything TOO wide like that, but like telephoto shots for sure. Thanks for the recommendations.

Why did the telephoto lens seem to go out of style in new movies though, why is it considered more old school now?
I really have no clue sorry I could make a research on it and perhaps have enough answers to help you



That Chekhov's gun is something I've come to hate. I've been meaning to post it to movie cliches you hate thread but haven't yet bothered to check if it's already mentioned. All it usually does is spoiling the events of the film's finale early in the first act (I guess it gives an average viewer a feeling of accomplishment for being able to remember events from an hour earlier). I just hate that "law"
__________________



That Chekhov's gun is something I've come to hate. I've been meaning to post it to movie cliches you hate thread but haven't yet bothered to check if it's already mentioned. All it usually does is spoiling the events of the film's finale early in the first act (I guess it gives an average viewer a feeling of accomplishment for being able to remember events from an hour earlier). I just hate that "law"
I understand I added the term law because it is how it's called in french and since i'm french I simply translate into english. Indeed it is not a law but a tool and it is now becoming more and more of a cliché indeed because many directors make them obvious by showing a close-up of the object or the thing whatever it is. The modern use of the tchekhov remind me of the totally spies gadget that jerry gives. You know when they'll use it and it just seems like a huge wink to the stupid audience. But I personnaly like it when it is well used and discreet.