So, when we were talking about camera movement and how long to run a shot, the first image that popped into my head was one from this scene of Fitzcarraldo. Myself, I usually find Werner Herzog’s films mildly boring until one specific camera shot, when suddenly I realize I’m weeping and the world is very beautiful. How does he do that.
I originally went back and found the scene after class for the last minute of this YouTube selection, which is one solid, static shot of a ship climbing a hill (for the entire minute…a little more than 3-10 seconds!). As a bit of background: the extras are actually pulling the ship up the hill. I don’t think you could get away with such a long clip if this were special effects, and I think the only reason it works is that the event we’re witnessing is Insane. Maybe it takes a minute for that to sink in.
The reason I’m posting this clip, though, is that once I went back I started noticing other camera-movement decisions. For the long shots you want the camera to be still–and you need the clip to be long–because the ship’s motion is almost imperceptible otherwise. But in the closeups there’s almost always some sort of unmotivated (or ultra-slightly motivated) camera movement. Also I have a question: at 2:20, do you think that’s 100% the ship moving, or is it emphasized by deliberately-shaky camera movement?
I think it may be emphasized with a slightly moving camera but I think the majority of it is real, especially considering we get to see that it’s on logs, and wide shots of the ship movement. How completely amazing!
I would say that it is mainly the ship moving itself. I can’t really see the camera movement, although I’m sure there is at least some camera movement but to me it’s negleable. What i am most impressed with is the sound, how every creak and crack of the ropes and logs is heard, you think that at any moment they are going to break and the ship is going to fall right back down the hill.