|
CzarChasm posted:What is meant when someone is referred to as a "character actor"? I mean, unless you only do bio-pics, all roles are "characters". And I don't think I've ever seen the title applied to women/actresses. I've always interpreted it as an actor well known for playing a "type" -- John Turturro as a neurotic, William Atherton as an rear end in a top hat, etc. It's a pretty fluid definition, though. A lot of people just use it to describe prominent actors that aren't traditional leading men and women.
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
This is a little more TV, but what is the reason behind the "multi camera" versus "single camera" distinction? "Single camera" movies/shows clearly have multiple cameras shooting different angles within each scene.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:25
|
|
|
Mustach posted:This is a little more TV, but what is the reason behind the "multi camera" versus "single camera" distinction? "Single camera" movies/shows clearly have multiple cameras shooting different angles within each scene. They don't though, that's the thing... Unless I'm misunderstanding what you're saying. Maybe you could give an example?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:33
|
|
|
Mustach posted:This is a little more TV, but what is the reason behind the "multi camera" versus "single camera" distinction? "Single camera" movies/shows clearly have multiple cameras shooting different angles within each scene. Multi-cam is like a stage show; it's called such because multiple cameras are filming simultaneously and they just cut what they want from there for broadcast. Single cam stuff usually has a fourth wall which is seen occasionally (eg, in Community the study room can be seen from all angles) where as with multi-cam stuff there's always a wall never shown.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:35
|
|
|
Mustach posted:This is a little more TV, but what is the reason behind the "multi camera" versus "single camera" distinction? "Single camera" movies/shows clearly have multiple cameras shooting different angles within each scene. Multi-camera means there's like a row of 3 or 4 cameras recording each take, so everything has that flat tableau sort of look (think Seinfeld). Single camera just uses, well, a single camera and they shoot each scene a few times from different angles like a regular movie. This is a multi-camera set: 
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:35
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:What is meant when someone is referred to as a "character actor"? I mean, unless you only do bio-pics, all roles are "characters". And I don't think I've ever seen the title applied to women/actresses. It used to mean people like Jonathan Banks, Lance Henrikson, Michael Ironside et al. It's rarely the lead, but always a supporting player. These days things work a little differently. I guess you could say Richard Jenkins is a character actor by the old definition of it, but he still gets leading roles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:41
|
|
|
DrVenkman posted:It used to mean people like Jonathan Banks, Lance Henrikson, Michael Ironside et al. It's rarely the lead, but always a supporting player. Lance Henrikson had a tv show for 3 seasons and two of them were amazing
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:45
|
|
|
Where did the current trend of the camera having a subtle handheld look and shake to it come from in modern comedies? The Office?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:46
|
|
|
OnlyJuanMon posted:Where did the current trend of the camera having a subtle handheld look and shake to it come from in modern comedies? All those shows are basically copping Rob Reiner's mockumentaries, it seems.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:56
|
|
|
I can understand it in the Office, but in shows like Modern Family, COugartown, etc. etc where it's just a straight comedy show, why have that shake?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 18:57
|
|
|
OnlyJuanMon posted:I can understand it in the Office, but in shows like Modern Family, COugartown, etc. etc where it's just a straight comedy show, why have that shake? It's just a style that reads as more "authentic" to viewers, and it's probably also an attempt to court younger viewers. Traditional multicam sitcoms can feel relatively flat and stagey in comparison. But yeah, The Office was a big success with the mockumentary format so now you see it awkwardly shoehorned into stuff.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:15
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Single camera just uses, well, a single camera and they shoot each scene a few times from different angles like a regular movie.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:17
|
|
|
OnlyJuanMon posted:I can understand it in the Office, but in shows like Modern Family, COugartown, etc. etc where it's just a straight comedy show, why have that shake? I've never seen Cougartown, but Modern Family is a mockumentary like The Office. It's not great at making that apparent, but that's why they do the same character interviews.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:18
|
|
|
I've been playing Dishonored recently and it's given me the craving to watch a good Steampunk flavoured film. Are there any good ones out there that you can recommend? The only Steampunk-esque films I can think of are: Wild Wild West, Van Helsing, Hellboy, The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen, and the only one of those I enjoyed was Hellboy.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:20
|
|
|
Criminal Minded posted:All those shows are basically copping Rob Reiner's mockumentaries, it seems. Christopher Guest, actually. Reiner directed This Is Spinal Tap, but Guest wrote/directed Waiting for Guffman, Best in Show, etc. He was clearly a big influence on Ricky Gervais/Stephen Merchant when they created "The Office," which became a huge hit in the States, and so it became a trend.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:23
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Lance Henrikson had a tv show for 3 seasons and two of them were amazing One of them really. Season 1 was alright, but Season 2 is one of my favourite seasons of anything ever. Still, that's where the line has started to blur. But certainly in the 80's those guys were character actors. They're usually "Hey it's that guy!" type of roles.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:28
|
|
|
24 started around the same time as the original run of the UK Office, and certainly had a higher profile at least in the US. In these cases the "shake" simply a side effect of a human operator holding a camera and walking around.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:31
|
|
|
Malcolm in the Middle is the show that introduced the term to the TV-going public in the US. I even remember it being cited as the reason it quickly became a critical hit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
Rake Arms posted:Christopher Guest, actually. Reiner directed This Is Spinal Tap, but Guest wrote/directed Waiting for Guffman, Best in Show, etc. He was clearly a big influence on Ricky Gervais/Stephen Merchant when they created "The Office," which became a huge hit in the States, and so it became a trend. D'oh, I knew that.  Good looking out.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:34
|
|
|
Yeah, the shaky camera thing is mostly just a trend that has become fashionable because it was used in certain important / influential shows. It makes 100% sense in faux-documentaries like The Office and kinda makes sense in stuff like Curb Your Enthusiasm where it adds to the blurring of reality and the "this is kinda improvised" feel. As an aside, the "found footage" shaky-cam gimmick in horror movies, while done-to-death, can have the often overlooked benefit of giving the perception that the camera itself (and to a certain extent, you the audience) is in as much peril as the characters because it's like, really there.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:37
|
|
|
HUNDU THE BEAST GOD posted:Malcolm in the Middle is the show that introduced the term to the TV-going public in the US. I even remember it being cited as the reason it quickly became a critical hit. Good call, I didn't even think about this one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:45
|
|
|
You could actually cite the Larry Sanders show too, but I get the feeling only network TV shows "count" in this conversation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 19:47
|
|
|
Mustach posted:OK, I see now. Seems like a waste to do different takes for every angle, but that ain't my problem. Well that's why most sitcoms don't go single-camera. BUT it results in a higher quality, more refined look. It's no indicator of quality, but it's sort of a "prestige" look for a sitcom in a way since it implies it wasn't just churned out from a studio set.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 20:16
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Well that's why most sitcoms don't go single-camera. BUT it results in a higher quality, more refined look. It's no indicator of quality, but it's sort of a "prestige" look for a sitcom in a way since it implies it wasn't just churned out from a studio set. Depending on a lot of factors, I think it can also be cheaper, since cameras are expensive. Obviously there's a trade-off with how long it takes to shoot a scene though. I could be wrong though, I don't remember where I heard that...
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 20:55
|
|
|
Snak posted:Depending on a lot of factors, I think it can also be cheaper, since cameras are expensive. Obviously there's a trade-off with how long it takes to shoot a scene though. I could be wrong though, I don't remember where I heard that... Plus you only have to pay one camera operator, and you aren't nearly as constrained on sets, there are a bunch of episodes of Community where they are never in the study room. Also I think it makes it easier to have dramatic heft, I don't think the 3 camera hour long drama exists. Scrubs, which came out a year after Malcolm in the Middle, used a single camera and while it was a comedy, it could get as maudlin as MASH at times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 21:43
|
|
|
Silas the Mariner posted:I've been playing Dishonored recently and it's given me the craving to watch a good Steampunk flavoured film. Are there any good ones out there that you can recommend? The City of Lost Children for sure, maybe The Adventures of Baron Munchausen?
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 22:15
|
|
|
Silas the Mariner posted:I've been playing Dishonored recently and it's given me the craving to watch a good Steampunk flavoured film. Are there any good ones out there that you can recommend? Brazil is also a good pick. You might have more luck in the Recommend Me thread, though.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 22:19
|
|
|
Fantastic, thanks both of you!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 22:47
|
|
|
Skwirl posted:I've never seen Cougartown, but Modern Family is a mockumentary like The Office. It's not great at making that apparent, but that's why they do the same character interviews. Modern Family is so weird. It's a very traditional, broad sitcom but the multi-camera and pseudo-documentary style run completely counter to the writing and acting. The juxtaposition ends up raising the artifice and making it very obvious you are watching *actors* on a *set* reading *lines*. It's very post-modern but I don't think that's their intent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 22:50
|
|
|
Tenterhooks posted:Yeah, the shaky camera thing is mostly just a trend that has become fashionable because it was used in certain important / influential shows. It makes 100% sense in faux-documentaries like The Office and kinda makes sense in stuff like Curb Your Enthusiasm where it adds to the blurring of reality and the "this is kinda improvised" feel. If you want to look at it historically from an american television standpoint, Hill Street Blues, NYPD Blue and Homicide: Life on the Streets, was huge steps in more active and subject camera use. Regarding the Multi vs. Single camera debate, generally single camera stuff is produced, and looks, more like movies. They are shot on location, more thoughts are put into the visuals, and the budget is almost always higher. Another difference is that the script is more or less followed verbatim, while on a multi-cam production shot on stage, you can have the writers sitting backstage and come up with major ad-hoc changes if stuff doesn't work. Also multi-cams are shot in a day, while single-cams can take a week or even more.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 23:29
|
|
|
Trump posted:If you want to look at it historically from an american television standpoint, Hill Street Blues, NYPD Blue and Homicide: Life on the Streets, was huge steps in more active and subject camera use. Kojak, too! though it was a bit ahead of the curve What's interesting about the TV look is that a lot of the 1950s and early '60s actually had a lot of really active and ambitious camerawork - aside from the Playhouse 90/Studio One stuff, you had things like The Defenders, Route 66, and Naked City which all had a sort of proto-Homicide authenticity to their location footage. The dull flatness really blossomed in the 70s and 80s for some reason.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2012 23:35
|
|
|
penismightier posted:Kojak, too! though it was a bit ahead of the curve I think All In the Family was that reason, Lear wanted to use videotape to create a certain look for the show but TV exec. immediately saw it as a way to save money on productions costs. Videotape was also used on earlier shows (Twilight Zone had 5 episodes taped) but AITF made it viable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2012 00:12
|
|
|
Island Nation posted:I think All In the Family was that reason, Lear wanted to use videotape to create a certain look for the show but TV exec. immediately saw it as a way to save money on productions costs. Videotape was also used on earlier shows (Twilight Zone had 5 episodes taped) but AITF made it viable. Huh, yeah, that makes a lot of sense. It's a good look for All In the Family, too. It gives it sort of an extra layer of dinginess.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2012 04:59
|
|
|
Snak posted:Depending on a lot of factors, I think it can also be cheaper, since cameras are expensive. Obviously there's a trade-off with how long it takes to shoot a scene though. I could be wrong though, I don't remember where I heard that... The cost of the camera is negligible since they're all rented. Multi-cam is way cheaper because they can blaze through a taping in 1-2 days.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2012 05:19
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:What is meant when someone is referred to as a "character actor"? I mean, unless you only do bio-pics, all roles are "characters". And I don't think I've ever seen the title applied to women/actresses.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2012 08:48
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:What is meant when someone is referred to as a "character actor"? I mean, unless you only do bio-pics, all roles are "characters". And I don't think I've ever seen the title applied to women/actresses. I just saw an interesting documentary today about this, called That Guy...Who Was In That Thing. It is currently running on Showtime here in the US.
|
|
#
?
Oct 15, 2012 01:12
|
|
|
I'm not sure why but I'm finding myself wondering what the first movie was to have a character suffer a nose bleed as an indication of psychological duress. Suggestions? Maybe if I fixate on this too hard my ears will start bleeding also.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 08:18
|
|
|
ynohtna posted:I'm not sure why but I'm finding myself wondering what the first movie was to have a character suffer a nose bleed as an indication of psychological duress. Suggestions? Unghk, as directed by Gronk, circa 50,000 BCE.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 08:25
|
|
|
Is there a "right" way to watch Inland Empire? I saw it in theaters in '06 and I've been meaning to rewatch it for a long time but it's obviously somewhat of an undertaking. I've got the DVD that includes 211 minutes of extra footage in "More Things That Happened." Is this worth it? I've got 6.5 hours to kill, but I don't know if my psyche can take it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 18:44
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 05:23 |
|
|
My technique is to watch it with all the lights off and take as few breaks as possible (preferably zero). I've never seen the extras disc, though. I almost can't believe he shot that much footage (editing must've been a nightmare) but then again a bunch of his other films have been edited down too - Wild At Heart was four hours and Blue Velvet was eight or something ridiculous like that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 17, 2012 22:25
|
|
