That blurry, sped up camera technique

[fgadmin]

Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Hannibal

---

Jimothy3 — 10 years ago(February 10, 2016 02:04 AM)

Don't know the exact technical term for it; it happens in a few scenes in this such as when Starling sees Lecter on the videotape for the first time, and straight after Lecter slices the neck of the guy in the auditorium. I've seen Scott use the technique in other films of his as well. Does anyone else not like it?
I've never been a fan of this technique. It doesn't particularly add anything or fit in among the normal live action scenes, especially in this film. It's as if Scott is adding it just to show his diversity, when it's not really necessary.

[fgadmin]

AFriendOfMrWhite — 10 years ago(February 14, 2016 06:49 AM)

It annoyed me too. Ridley Scott's brother Tony used it with a vengeance, too, so it must run in the family.

[fgadmin]

werecow2003 — 10 years ago(March 28, 2016 04:34 PM)

I didn't like it; it looked tacky. It reminded me of the use of a shaky cam in horror movies to hide cheap gore effects.

[fgadmin]

dawnantonis — 9 years ago(May 15, 2016 03:44 PM)

Fully agree. It's distracting and cheap looking.

[fgadmin]

TheMichael — 9 years ago(July 14, 2016 12:26 AM)

I wish I knew what to call it too. I personally love that kind of effect. But not in this movie. It doesn't fit when the movie uses it. It doesn't raise tension or drama, I agree, it just feels put in there.