Absolutely the worst camera work
-
Jigsaw737 — 11 years ago(April 10, 2014 03:08 AM)
It wasn't even as much the camera work as the editing. Usually editors pick an angle of a certain action that they like and stick with it. The editor of this flick, however, seemed to be hellbent on using every single shot that was available in order to not waste anything or to not hurt the cinematographer's feelings. The result is the messy 3-4 shot per second staccato that we now have in all the action scenes of Taken 2. Total amateur work.
The IMDb forums: You will never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.
-
TexasJohnBapster — 11 years ago(April 19, 2014 10:34 AM)
Verily I say unto theeI was put off seeing this movie because when it came out some reviewers said that the fight scenes were as bad as the truly deplorable ones in QUANTUM OF SOLACE. I eventually saw TAKEN 2 today and of course the fight scenes were nowhere near as bad as in that dreadful Bond film and I was able to follow them far better than I had expected to. Overall not as good as the first TAKEN but a good action film nonetheless and as for xenophobiaso what?
-
Skullomania — 11 years ago(April 19, 2014 04:29 PM)
Shaky cam, what a nightmare. I honestly don't think it was too bad in this film. Check out Alex Cross, final fight especially.
AC is a crap film btw.
I don't know what film we have to thank for the original shaky cam that all the drones decided they must copy in every film ever. Bourne?
Edit, actually 2nd half of the film on a rewatch, it's pretty bad. Rose tinted spec's I guess.
Joh
n Ha
nco
ck -
dgross-3 — 11 years ago(April 25, 2014 01:36 PM)
** Dudes ** The editing is to save money.
The quick cuts mean they do not have to do extended takes. Instead, they do a comic-book montage of impacts, and the "action" is all by inference. You get one SUV doing a turnover, and that's all. It's all to save money. -
hc22552002 — 11 years ago(July 25, 2014 08:38 PM)
Am watching it on HBO right now. You know why the camera work is so bad? Liam Neeson did not shoot the scenes with Famke Jansen nor the daughter. In the second scene when Neeson goes to the house you will see some strange camera angles and then you notice the over the shoulder shots where Jansen is talking to a stand-in, and then Neeson is talking to a stand-in. Then the scene at the boyfriend's house Neeson did not film this with the other actors, he did it with stand-ins! There was a lot of editing and stitching together in post-production. And once you notice it in the early scenes you can't help but notice it throughout the movie. It is kind of mesmerizing since you will kind of pierce the fourth wall when realizing this is just a movie, to them just a job. Watch it again!
-
HarpoSpoke — 11 years ago(November 12, 2014 11:29 PM)
I agree it was distracting and irritating.
But I kinda figured it was because Neeson is too old to do the fight scenes. So they had to do a lot of quick cutting to give the illusion of grace and speed when he was probably barely moving.
I give them a pass on it..they made it work as best they could.
~Sig~
Proud member of the Facebook Let Me In group, DoYouLikeMe.proboards, abbyandowen.webs.com -
Ellie8888 — 11 years ago(December 02, 2014 06:07 PM)
I agree. I had to pause the DVD a few times since it gave me a whiplash. Outright horrible camera work.
The images of Istanbul were crap too. I visited Turkey a few times and it's extremely pretty in Istanbul, but they took such horrible images. Even a 12 year old with an iPhone, taking shots for instagram can take better scenery shots than that. What the hell were they thinking?
Did they hire Turks to film the entire movie or something? It just felt..so off compared to the last one.