I remember when this new camera technique was first launched – it was crazy – super smooth and meant you could also go into place that were small tight corners, places a film camera has never been! I thought that “The Shinning” was the first time a stedicam was used – at least on a major production. Maybe it was just the first time Kubrick got to use it. And used it he did! Following little Danny around on his Big Wheel through all the rooms and hallways of the Overlook Hotel! It was amazing as to get that kind of shot so smooth and steady it would’ve taken several shots, several times when the dolly track had to be moved! Or be really shaky in attempting a hand held maneuver. It was revolutionary!

In the early 1990’s when a couple of television programs on MTV used hand held digital cameras and it caused a unique effect – some intended but most because the budget and schedule didn’t allow for anything better!

I don’t remember when I first saw Hollywood use the shaky camera effect – except that it was around the late 80’s, early 90’s – and that it was originally meant to capture that great 14-25 year old segment! At least that was the commentary going around from those in and out of the industry. Filmmakers found that it was a cheaper and quicker way to shoot some scenes and it became a predominate technique for action scenes, especially fighting scenes because the angle of the camera – to the stuntmen swinging their arms and kicking their legs did not have to be precise so that audiences could tell there was never any actual contact.

I can understand that for the most part. It is also supposed to give the audience the feel or rather the look as if you were in the room and moving really quickly or fighting yourself! But since then it is also used if the character is running or jogging or walking real fast for an OTS or POV shot. Any kind of activity nowadays seems to require the shaky camera effect. I cannot take it any more!!!! Let me say that again – louder I CANNOT TAKE IT ANYMORE!

A few months back I re-watched “48 Hrs.” as it is one of the pre-recorded VHS tape I still have and wanted to see it. Mind you this is an action flick and yet I never saw a shaky freakin’ camera shot throughout the movie. I cannot tell you how overall satisfied I was in watching that movie – aside from the great performances from Murphy and Nolte. Great storytelling, great action – guns firing, buses hijacked and run all over the road and all smooth non-shaky scenes! Sure you had to have more WS when  you're doing it without a ahndheld or forcing the camera to shake but I still loved it!

I am right now watching the “The Island” on HBO2 and this is what finally got me to writing this blog I have had on my mind for months and months. First I really love this movie – it is a storytelling action flick that makes you think – especially about cloning! (For the record it still does not keep me from my STRONG support of stem cell research! But that is for another blog!) Overall it thought it was also shot beautifully. The golden sun on that faces of Scarlett and Ewen as opposed to the white pale faces of those in the real world they encounter – although Steve Buscemi there isn’t much even a talented Make-up Artist and DP could do to change his pale skin type – no offense Steve, I love ya but I’m just saying! But a good contrast is when Lincoln and Tom – both played by Ewen, meet in Tom’s house. You can see it a lot.  Anyway besides all of that – getting back to the point and the one – if not only criticism of the way it was shot was the shaky camera. Now again there are some scenes I can agree with its use but I would prefer in small dosages. Even on the semi-truck speeding down the freeway in the futuristic Los Angeles. And what really got me on that scene was the fact that when you have the camera on Scarlett Johansson - DO NOT SHAKE the camera – even for effect, especially when it is a head shot and all the care taken to film her in the golden touch which to me did justice to her natural beauty. You’re messing it up seriously with a shaky camera.

Am I saying that you must sacrifice the action or the picture on the whole, the theme of it all just so that the frame is steady on Scarlett’s face? No. Yes, I mean no! And by the way – Scarlett I do not intend to demean or make your natural beauty a superficial thing – you are an incredible actor as well as being incredibly attractive and I hope to work with you one day or at least meet and hopefully become friends!

But what I am saying is that there is too much sh-sh-sh-sh-sh-shaky-shaky camera in movies today – and if I were to reduce the amount – I would surely make sure it was when the camera was on Scarlett! I have had many people agree with me on this. The shaky camera that is – EVERYBODY would agree with my comments on Scarlett!

One last example. I saw “The Bourne Ultimatum” opening weekend – and it was great – I loved it and Matt – you’re the every thinking man’s action spy hero! And this was an action flick and there was a lot of shaky camera – most of which did not bother me as much as usual. But two scenes I remember distinctly where it was really overboard. One was when the chase was on the roof tops and the camera followed behind those who were chasing Bourne. When they got to the roof they stopped – looked around for more then a few seconds and then resumed their chase but the camera NEVER stopped shaking! Whew! TOO, TOO MUCH! The second was inside the CIA offices – the characters were all in one room and the camera was shaky.

Alright lastly like I said before – there are times when there is going to be shaking. POV from inside a car, fighting scenes – although one more note on that even though it is off topic a bit – the two scenes that got very good reaction from the audience was when Bourne kicked ass in the hallway over three or four dudes and the last hit was not even on screen and people went “Oooooooo” as they know without actually seeing what happened! And second was when Bourne used a hardcover book off a shelf and placed it with the cover facing him to punch it, suddenly I cannot remember why – if it was to hit someone or to break something – but I made a mental note of the reaction from the audience that I interpreted as a good reaction! I mention this because not every action scene needs to be filled with blow them up, blood splattering everywhere and for economy sake using a shaky camera effect for it to be effective!

Let me finish by saying – I will not work with a DP that likes the shaky camera effect. Only when it is necessary because of the shooting circumstances – in a tight spot where a stedicam harness is out of the question – or just has to be shaky. The movies are not Shakee's Pizza or Shake ‘N Bake (unless you’re Ricky Bobby!) I get a headache from being in a theatre where the camera shots are shaky too often and unfortunately that happens in too many movies, so along with my vow to keep the shaking down in my movies – I plea with all DP and Directors to also keep it down! Thanks!