aGuiltySoul — 11 years ago(August 18, 2014 11:06 AM)

http://cinearchive.org/post/94846656495/originally-i-didnt-want-to-do- it-ive-enjoyed
I decided that the camera should never stop moving. It was arbitrary. We would just put the camera on a dolly and everything would move or pan, but it didnt match the action; usually it was counter to it. It gave me that feeling that when the audience see the film, theyre kind of a voyeur. Youre looking at something you shouldnt be looking at. Not that what youre seeing is off limits; just that youre not supposed to be there. You had to see over someones shoulder or peer round someones back. I just think that in so many films everythings so beautiful, the lighting is gorgeous and with each shot everything is relit. My method also means you dont have to light for close-ups; you only have to accommodate what may happen, so you just light the scene and it saves a lot of time. The rougher it looked, the better it served my purpose."
It's not what a movie is about, it's how it is about it.
RIP Roger Ebert