So, not too long ago, I committed one of the worst sins known to mankind. I went and saw the new Transformers movie in cinemas. And, while I know that the series isn’t actually supposed to be taken seriously, there were a bunch of different things that made the movie almost unwatchable for me. (This post isn’t going to be five hundred words of me reviewing and nit-picking the film, because I know that it’s completely subjective). Now, I hadn’t actually seen a Transformers movie since the second one was in cinemas, but I had heard a lot of rumors about Bay’s stylistic choices. One rumor which I instantly noticed to be true was about his cinematography. He can’t hold a shot for longer than three seconds, and he obsesses over shaky cam. For example, there was one scene where a camera follows behind the two protagonists as they walk down a hall. It only took them about three seconds, but in those three seconds, there were three different shots, each camera angle about a meters distance from each other. It was as if they had three cameras following behind them, and the editor switched between these three angles once every second. On top of this, the cameras were constantly handheld. So the combination of the two made the whole thing distracting and sometimes kind of nauseating.

Now, a lot of people praise the long take for how the fluidity is aesthetically pleasing, and how it can make a scene so much more intense and all that stuff, but they probably haven’t seen Russian Ark. (Now again, this is completely my opinion, because apparently it was critically acclaimed). But for those who haven’t seen it, it’s the exact opposite of Transformers. It’s a 96 minute historical film, taken in one single steadicam shot. So basically, I found the whole movie to be kind of boring to be honest, because, even though it was all well choreographed, and very aesthetically pleasing, it was really slow.

I find that fast paced camera movements only work with long takes, because using short, three-second cuts with them makes it too distracting, and overall messy. However, the same thing goes for long takes with minimal camera movement. If you’re going to do a long take, something needs to happen, or be happening. Overall, what I’m saying is that the long shot is not necessarily better than the short, and vice versa. When filming and editing, there needs to be a balance between the length of the shot, and its content.

Some pretty good examples

1. Birdman (2014)
   • Like Russian Ark, Birdman is seamless, and appears to done in one take. The only difference is that Birdman’s cinematography is much more faster paced, and focuses more on what is happening to the characters instead of the choreography.
2. Oldboy (2003)
   • The corridor fight scene is a four minute long take, which follows the characters up and down the corridor. Even though the camera was slow, it was still exciting because how much was going on at once.
3. Metal Gear Solid V (2015)
   • Yeah, it’s not exactly a movie, but the cutscenes in the game are great examples. Even though not much happens in the scenes, the fast paced and shaky camera effect blends in well with the long takes.