ST The cinematography of The Force Awakens - Based on the teaser trailer

At the very least, that article should give people pause and perhaps a little perspective. The average person loved the teaser--it's only hardcore fans who worry about "the visual language" of SW.

 

I'm more hardcore than the average person, and I loved the teaser.

 

Learned about this post from Cracked.

 

Yes, and i hated it. There are plot-holes in that movie you could sail a battleship through. I was really suprised that Nolan, who is usually smarter than that, allowed idiotic stuff like that into one of his usually smart films.

• Terrorists take over the stock market and sell off all of one guy's stock. So now he's broke. Um... No way would that ever be honored, and if Bane had half a brain he'd know it would lead to nothing. It's a problem that can be solved in a half an hour phone call.
• Terrorists basically conquer a major US city and the feds do nothing about it for months? Maybe Nolan has heard of a little scuffle in the middle east where the US is busy invading everyone. So, again, the feds sit on their hands. Absolutely insulting plot hole. Michael Bay would have actually handled that situation better, and more realistically. (I.E. M1-Abrams TANKS rolling down the street blowing everything up).
• ALL the cops go into the sewers, get stuck there for MONTHS, and emerge not only clean with pressed uniforms, but ready to fight off the inmates Bane freed? What were they eating? Did the NINJA TURTLES do their laundry? And what on earth is the entire police force doing going into the sewers, anyway?
• What was that little girl doing in prison, anyway?

This is a "smart" movie all right. Smart-alack, movie more like.

It was like the Nolans made it out of obligation after Ledger's death rendered the original plan for the third moot (Joker was supposed to come back), and Goyer said "I know! Let's cop Dark Knight Returns!"

I walked out of that movie feeling pretty ripped off.

 

Also, Bruce Wayne would not be so stupid as to have all his funds invested in securities. He would presumably hold funds in managed investments schemes, hedge funds, the odd venture capital, and oh you know... across multiple exchanges.

Dark Knight Rises was so stupid it hurts, but it did erase the stain of Casino Royale's bogus understanding of derivatives trading.

 

The reason I'm analyzing the cinematography of the trailer is because that's what this thread is all about. The title of the thread is: "the cinematography of the force awakens based on the teaser trailer." You can analyze the cinematography of a film, a tv show, a music video, an ad, or a trailer. That's what we're doing. Some like it. Some don't. I actually like most of the shots of the trailer. However, I think the camera movement is too over the top in this particular shot. I also don't think this camera shot matches with the camera shots used in the OT because the OT didn't flip around the camera in such a chaotic fashion. I'm not criticizing the physics of the shot at all. Star Wars has never cared about physics. AT-ATs look cool, but they would be ridiculous as real world fighting vehicles. So, I agree that Star Wars bends the laws of physics all the time. That's not my complaint about the Falcon shot.

I looked up the Immelman maneuver, and if you look at it from the fixed angle shot, then you can tell that the Falcon's not performing the Immelman maneuver. In the Immelman maneuver, you're going 1 direction (going North) then you rise and start to turn over, when you're upside-down you're going 90 degrees from the direction you were initially and 90 degree from the direction you end up going finally (going East), and by the time you're coming back down, you're going 180 degrees from your initial flight path (going South), as seen below in the 2nd half of this video of the Immelman maneuver:



If you watch this shot of the falcon from a fixed angle, you can tell that the falcon is not taking that flight trajectory. The shot starts with the Falcon at the height of its trajectory, and this point, it should be going at a 90 degree angle from its final final flight direction. However, as you can tell by watching this video, the Falcon is not at a 90 degree angle from its final path. Instead, if the Falcon is going North at the beginning of the shot, then it's still going North at the end of the shot. If it were following the path of the Immelman maneuver, the Falcon, when it's at its highest point, should be going West or East, depending on whether it is banking to the right or the left, and that would put it at a 90 degree angle from its final direction.



However, if you look at JJ's version of the shot, then you can't figure out if the Falcon is using the Immelman maneuver or any other clever maneuver because the camera flips over so much you can't make sense of where exactly the Falcon is going. That's my complaint about the shot. It takes something simple and makes it confusing. For instance, you seem to think the Immelman maneuver is a real thing of beauty. Well, with all the loop-d-loops the camera makes, nobody would be able to tell if it's making that beautiful arching tactic because the audience can't really tell what's going on. (And, yes, I mean loopdeloop when I typed loop-d-loop. I'm just using the kiddie spelling.)

Oh that author is clearly on Disney's payroll or he gets goodies from Disney or something like that! He'll probably get free tickets to some advance screening and an Ep. 7 coffee mug or some cool 12 inch action figures! If you read his article, you can tell the article is really about people analyzing the trailer way too deeply, but strangely enough, even though there are people who liked the trailer and also over-analyzed the hell out of it (Cool -- isn't that the sound of an Imperial probe droid in the first shot? OMG -- Isn't Daisy Ridley's helmet just like Leia's?), this guy only focuses on people who are critical of the trailer. (And, to be honest, I pretty much like the trailer. I just don't like 2 of the shots!) (BTW if he likes to mock people talking about SW minutiae, he should really like these posts about the Falcon using the Immelman maneuver!)

But Disney can't get the best of me! I've already taken down "The Avengers" a peg!!! Just check out the imdb viewer reviews page for that film! Nothing to see there. Just a few words from a film expert... Please move along!

 

You have really overanalysed a 5 second action shot and you're accusing the director of over-complicating something simple?
It's an action shot. It looked cool. You don't need to know exactly what direction is falcon is moving in, it's flying around that's it.

 

That's sort of the nature of analyzing something, isn't it? There are probably 10,000 pages of written material analyzing Star Wars. Analyzing, at its essence, is exploring the nitty-gritty. However, watching a film should be simple, and my points about the shot are really simple too:

1) I don't like excessive camera movement just for the sake of it. Some people (like yourself) may like that it's sort of like a roller-coaster. That's fine. But I don't like it. To me it just seems silly to see the ground at the top of frame and the Falcon upside down when in this computer-generated shot the camera could easily be right side up.

2) IMO, the OT didn't have shots that remotely resemble JJ's Falcon shot, and the OT was pretty great, and all the films used a similar cinematographic style IMO, so I think that the ST should stick more closely to the OT's style and not use shots where the camera flips all over the place. I'd rather an Ep. 7 that feels more like 1 - 6 than one that feels like most contemporary films.

I'd also point out that even if the ST has a lot of JJ's flippy camera shots, that doesn't mean I wouldn't like it. I simply think that filming style will detract from what will in all other ways, hopefully, be a great film experience.

 

Yes, I wonder if you've considered using your powers for good instead of evil?

 

I just mentioned this in the character names thread, but has anybody else here noticed that the color palette of the trading cards is very different from the trailer? Virtually none of the teal is present in the cards. I'm rather hoping they are closer to how the final film will look in that respect.

 

Same.

 

I'm wondering who specifically you are addressing here...

 

They're specifically graded for a "vintage" look, IMHO.

 

Probablly, but I like it a lot better than the look of the trailer, so I hope the film ends up being graded more like this.

 

I mean overanalysis of the trailers is... it takes more time to read your overanalysis than it does to watch the trailer.

That's not a good thing...

 

Well, yeah, but my initial points are very simple: 1) the shot doesn't match the continuity of the Saga 2) the shot make something simple confusing 3) the shot makes the viewer too aware of the camera. The problem comes when other posters aren't happy that I don't share their POV, and they try and show me that I'm "interpreting" the trailer incorrectly, and they make multiple points telling why I'm wrong ("It is like the Saga's cinematography because..." "The camera's movement does make sense because..."), and so I respond to them, and so by responding to each of their points, I end up saying a lot.

Also, in this case, I was describing and comparing what you see in 3 different videos -- telling people where to look, what to look at etc. The guy in the Cracked article leaves out all the videos that allow my post to actually make some sense, since I'm basically describing what you see in this vid vs that vid vs. this 3rd vid. I'm sure he edited that way just for added comedic effect because it makes what I said seem so wordy and unclear out of context. And hey, it's not like those who love the trailer haven't made some pretty lengthy defenses of why the trailer's so great.

But, anyhow, it's cool. I can take some ribbing. Despite its title, the article itself isn't that mean to the different examples it criticizes. The article's actually sort of pointless because all the comments under it are actually the same geekfest that it's mocking in the first place.

 

He's right, you're overanalyzing it, but that's what this thread is for, right? Lol

I don't think the shot is confusing or draws too much attention to the camera. If anything, it gives the impression the Falcon is doing crazy loads more of flips and turns than it really is. To me, it implies that some amateur is piloting it (maybe a new Saga character?).

And yes, it doesn't necessarily "rhyme like poetry" with the OT. It's not necessarily supposed to fit like a puzzle piece. It's a new trilogy with a new director for a new generation. Gotta switch things up a bit.

 

With the Falcon shot, we're only seeing half of it. I'm 100% certain that when we see the whole scene, it will make perfect sense. Here is an example of how I think the scene plays out:

-The Falcon is being pursued by the 2 TIEs (the TIEs are behind the Falcon)
-The entire shot will begin with the camera behind the falcon (POV of the TIEs), falcon still flying level to the ground
-The falcon then begins a loop-de-loop (imagine a rollercoaster that goes through a loop)
-The falcon starts the loop-de-loop, the camera keeps following from the butt of the Falcon, the ship goes toward the sky, starts to arc back (still just doing a "regular" loop)....this is where the shot in the trailer begins, and the camera is still behind the falcon, seeing the engines
-As the falcon's nose starts pointing at the ground (now the camera is upside down, so it looks like the nose of the falcon is pointing "up", but it's pointing at the ground), the ship rotates 180 degrees
-with noise pointing at the ground, it pulls up at the last second and is now facing the TIEs head on

Given the context of the whole scene, it will make sense, and simply have some exciting camera work.

 

Why so certain? If JJ sticks with this type of camera work, it guarantees that the longer the shot is, the more convoluted everything will become! To figure out what really happens, we'll have to wait till the blu-ray release when that other guy can translate the film's shot into a fixed shot that actually makes sense.

(I apologize for my sarcastic tone. I was reprimanded for my lengthy responses. Snark allows significant streamlining of a post's length!)

 

It's not really necessary to know every second what is happening. If my example is true, then only two things matter. That we know the falcon is being chased by TIEs, and at the end of the maneuver, he's playing chicken with them. The loop-de-loops in between are irrelevant, as long as we're aware of what he's accomplishing. But only seeing the second half of the shot doesn't help for now (ie-from the trailer, we don't see what he's doing prior, but I have my guesses).

Take Batman Begins, for example. In my opinion, I don't really like how the fight scenes were shot, but they weren't confusing, really. Bad guys enter scene...get scared from "The Bat!!", some confusing looking shots of getting beat up...and then bad guys are beaten up. We KNOW what happened in the scene, even though we couldn't interpret every move.

what it really boils down to is context. We don't have it right now, but we will. And it will make more sense, if not complete sense.

 

I thought the cinematography shown in the new trailer was absolutely beautiful. It felt like a midpoint between Peter Suschitzky's work on ESB and David Tattersalls work in TPM, with a bit of JJ's own flair mixed in as well, which is to be expected expected. The much discussed color grading issues were absent in this trailer. I thought the color palette here was spot on.



This was one of those shots (admittedly there have been multiple) where I immediately thought, "Yup. JJ gets it."

 

I agree with the OP, the teaser's cinematography looks like a fan made film. When I first watched it I was shocked how poor the camera work was and thought it was a fan made trailer at first, many other people have said the trailer looks amateurish at times. Now I need to put my flame proof suit on. Also in both trailers Finn is always painting with his mouth wide open with a panic expression.

 

Watch more real movies, and less fan films.