Movie motion sickness (I need one of those bags)

Recently I walked out of a Jon Cena movie…but not for the reasons you’d think. It only took about five minutes of the “12 Rounds” to make me sick (also not for reasons you’d think). The movie is part of a growing phenomenon in cinematography that I think is ruining movies. I can live with WWE superstars make movies; I can’t stand movies shot on hand cameras.

I don’t understand why more and more movies are shot this way. Instead of using a perfectly balance tripod, a great deal of movies today are shot by handheld cameras. I think directors do it to create a ‘gritty’ feel that puts the audience into the action (in reality, it puts me in the bathroom). This is a style that I’m not comfortable with. The quick pans and extreme close-ups make me queasier than an overeater at an all-you-can-eat buffet of week-old fish. I can’t stand it. Quick zoom. Quick cut. Extreme close-up. Pan left. Pan right. Hurl in the aisle–I’m telling you, it ain’t for me.

I’m not sure I get the appeal of it. Admittedly, I didn’t grow up watching music videos and I’m not a fan of rapid cuts–but I have a difficult time even understanding why anyone would like it. I go to the theater to see a professionally made movie–not something a ninth grader made with iMovie. I’m always blown away by long, continuous shots (two examples: the opening to “Boogie Nights” and the nightclub entrance scene in “Goodfellas”). Any schmuck can quickly edit together 20 bad shots into a sequence (damn: I should have saved my ninth grade with iMovie quip for here). I have a tremendously difficult time trying to follow along a movie that has multiple, quick, shaky shots. Call me stupid if you want, but my brain can’t process things that quick.

Maybe it’s because I didn’t grow up on the videos. Shaky cameras use to be to sign of bad camerawork. I remember way back (the 80s) when home video cameras use to come with features that prevented camera shaking. I remember taking a film class where the teacher criticized some students for not being able to hold the camera steady. Hell, even when I worked at the television station one of the editors preached to me, “If you can’t hold your freakin’ camera steady, use a freakin’ tripod.”

That was then; this is now…and all part of the movie experience. I really wish someone would put warnings on the movies so I know not to waste my time trying to watch a movie shot on hand cameras. Just like movies have warnings about sexual situations and simulated drug use, a movie should also say “may cause motion sickness to anyone over the age of 20.”

During my 300 seconds of “12 Rounds,” I realized a couple things. You would never see Scorsese or Hitchcock shooting a movie like that. Imagine if “The Departed” featured nothing but close-ups of Jack Nicholson’s rotting face. The reason good directors and good movies don’t employ these techniques is because they’re good movies. The movie “12 Rounds” uses close-ups, pans, cuts, and shaky shots to create a false sense of excitement. The director knows he’s directing a crappy movie. He uses fast cuts to build energy and hide from the audience that they’re watching a crappy movie. Just like music videos and television commercials, a quicker pace is used to make the product feel more exciting than it actually is.

I’m not ashamed I walked out of “12 rounds.” I’m embarrassed I bought a ticket in the first place–but I’m not embarrassed to say I walked out. It’s a shame because this technique feels like the future of movies and I really want nothing to do with it. “12 Rounds” might’ve been “Citizen Kane” and I would never know because the cinematography is more trippy than bad ‘shrooms (or so I heard).