• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Steven Spielberg - the one-take ninja master.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Twelve Quick Examples (10:00)

Eight Lengthy Examples (13:51)

One Scene, One Shot (7:59)

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/focusing-spielbergs-use-long-take-oner-will/

I've long talked about this fact, but this guy cutting together these videos gives me cause to post a thread.

Spielberg is the fucking master of the one-take because it's usually never done in a way that eschews narrative engagement for showmanship. The one-take is never there for the sake of the challenge or accomplishment itself. It almost never draws attention to itself, but is instead always, always, always at the service of heightening the sense of verisimilitude for the audience.

Most of all, they show that Spielberg is pretty much unrivaled when it comes to his sense of mise en scene. How he visually conveys information is second to none. I posted this in the Movies thread a while back, but watch (even without sound) how Spielberg navigates our interest in one short movement to who or what is pertinent.

munichspielbergshotqtenc.gif


It's just short scene of three characters talking in a car while surveying a target and it's a thing of beauty.
 

MattKeil

BIGTIME TV MOGUL #2
Title made me think it was going to be a collection of stuff Spielberg only needed one (as in the first) take to get. But what it turned out to be was better. Definitely a modern master of the medium.

How much does Spielberg have to do with that kind of shot, compared to his DP?

Obviously the DP is instrumental in making it happen, but Spielberg has to identify when the appropriate times are to use these kinds of shots and orchestrate how he wants them to look and move.
 
This convinces me to watch Close Encounters again. Been so, so long and Edwards says it's the main influence on Godzilla. Doing a feature on that, so time to watch! Thanks Sculli.
 

Loxley

Member
Small world, I was just watching clips from Munich on YouTube earlier today for poops and giggles. I've always loved the long takes in that. But having also watched Jaws recently, I was reminded how great that long take on the ferry is - almost hypnotizingly so.
 
How much does Spielberg have to do with that kind of shot, compared to his DP?

Considering it had been part of his style since long before Schindler's List and Kaminsky, I would say it has a lot to do with Spielberg. You'll see all the same camera moves and flourishes watching Tintin - which he essentially shot entirely himself using the SimulCam.
 
Twelve Quick Examples (10:00)

Eight Lengthy Examples (13:51)

One Scene, One Shot (7:59)

http://www.ropeofsilicon.com/focusing-spielbergs-use-long-take-oner-will/

I've long talked about this fact, but this guy cutting together these videos gives me cause to post a thread.

Spielberg is the fucking master of the one-take because it's usually never done in a way that eschews narrative engagement for showmanship. The one-take is never there for the sake of the challenge or accomplishment itself. It almost never draws attention to itself, but is instead always, always, always at the service of heightening the sense of verisimilitude for the audience.

Most of all, they show that Spielberg is pretty much unrivaled when it comes to his sense of mise en scene. How he visually conveys information is second to none. I posted this in the Movies thread a while back, but watch (even without sound) how Spielberg navigates our interest in one short movement to who or what is pertinent.

munichspielbergshotqtenc.gif


It's just short scene of three characters talking in a car while surveying a target and it's a thing of beauty.

My favorite one takes:


This shit is impressive. For fassbinder to remember all this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAkBz9glJFo


Tom Yum Goong: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IM2atZfn87M


Children of Men: One shot during uprising: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YlTDUITiDcg
 
Obviously the DP is instrumental in making it happen, but Spielberg has to identify when the appropriate times are to use these kinds of shots and orchestrate how he wants them to look and move.

Eh, I think the DP is probably the one who designs the shot. Then if Steven likes it / thinks its appropriate they'll try it. If it works out, it goes in the movie. I'm sure these are collaborative but I would guess the DP has more to do with it than is being led on.
 
Eh, I think the DP is probably the one who designs the shot. Then if Steven likes it / thinks its appropriate they'll try it. If it works out, it goes in the movie. I'm sure these are collaborative but I would guess the DP has more to do with it than is being led on.

Read my post above. It's Spielberg's jam, baby. It's all him. He's said before that the thing that impresses him most is how much a director can convey to the audience with one take.
 

MattKeil

BIGTIME TV MOGUL #2
Eh, I think the DP is probably the one who designs the shot. Then if Steven likes it / thinks its appropriate they'll try it. If it works out, it goes in the movie. I'm sure these are collaborative but I would guess the DP has more to do with it than is being led on.

I really don't think that's accurate. Spielberg is the director, and more importantly, he's Spielberg. Long takes have been part of his style for his entire career.
 

Myansie

Member
I'd guve that title to Alfonso Cuaron and Scorsese. Goodfella's has some fantastic steady cam work. There's a really cool first person shot where he's walking around a restaurant saying hello to everyone and the voice over is giving you the thought bubbles on each character. It's not as famous as the other restaurant take, but it's just as cool.
 
Munich is so close to being a classic. Some really clumsy choices hold it back though.

Munich is the most restrained and accomplished film Spielberg has made. It's easily one of his top 2 for me. Often I hold it as his best film.

I don't see what's clumsy in it, but I'd be interested in seeing what you find clumsy.
 
Munich is the most restrained and accomplished film Spielberg has made. It's easily one of his top 2 for me. Often I hold it as his best film.

I don't see what's clumsy in it, but I'd be interested in seeing what you find clumsy.

The scene where the music swells and it cuts to each member laughing. It's such a trite "bonding" scene. Afterwards they're all buds. Blech.

Another is the scene where Bana dramatically turns to the plane window and views the flashback of the massacre held within. There is a couple of questionable things like that in the film . There is a giant chunk of film though where it is the best thing Spielberg has made. I could do without the beginning and ending however.
 
The scene where the music swells and it cuts to each member laughing. It's such a trite "bonding" scene. Afterwards they're all buds. Blech.

Another is the scene where Bana dramatically turns to the plane window and views the flashback of the massacre held within. There is a couple of questionable things like that in the film . There is a giant chunk of film though where it is the best thing Spielberg has made. I could do without the beginning and ending however.

Aww, I really love the Bonding scene. To me, it was about Bana's character realizing that each of these guys were just ordinary folk - not soldiers, whose lives were now entrusted to him in having to use them to assassinate people. That's when we see him looking at the rest of them bonding, removed from it. I really love it.

What beginning?

I am a fan of the end, however.
 
Aww, I really love the Bonding scene. To me, it was about Bana's character realizing that each of these guys were just ordinary folk - not soldiers, whose lives were now entrusted to him in having to use them to assassinate people. That's when we see him looking at the rest of them bonding, removed from it. I really love it.

What beginning?

I am a fan of the end, however.

By beginning I mean the scenes after the massacre but before the mission starts. Didn't quite care for this small stretch.

Also the sequence where Dreyfus dies in Always is really bitchin'. Felt totally out of place with the rest of the movie though.
 

Chichikov

Member
Spielberg is an absolute master of craft.
Yeah, he sometime pick shitty scripts which results in pretty bad movies, but if you measure a director by his ability to clearly tell a story and evoke the emotions he wants in his audience, it's hard to argue that Spielberg isn't the GOAT.
FILM CRITIC HULK made this argument much more eloquently (and verbosely) than me.

What I love about the shot you posted is that they all serve a purpose in the film, don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a cool shot for the sake of cool shot (and to a degree it apply to those scenes as most of them could have been done in a simpler fashion) but when form serve function, when direction serve the story or theme of the movie, that's always better.
 

NYR94

Member
I don't think any director is better at placing the camera in the best spot possible and coordinating the camera movement with the action in the scene. And the uninterrupted shots are a breath of fresh air in this age of quick cutting. Lots of times we see other directors use these long takes but they framing of the take often remains the same--it's a long shot, but it's a long wide shot the entire duration of the shot, like a character walking through a crowd or a battlefield. In Spielberg's long takes, he moves from composition to composition--a wide shot, to a medium shot, back to a wide shot, etc. This is why he says he likes to edit in camera and part of the reason why he is able to shoot quickly.

He's also great at using foreground, mid ground and background elements within the same frame.

spielberg-techniques-framing-foreground-objects-1.png


57LXrvc.png


"Foreground my ass."
01jaws_giving_it_scale.png
 

-griffy-

Banned
Eh, I think the DP is probably the one who designs the shot. Then if Steven likes it / thinks its appropriate they'll try it. If it works out, it goes in the movie. I'm sure these are collaborative but I would guess the DP has more to do with it than is being led on.

That's not really how it works. If anything they come up with shots together, but in many cases the director is telling the DP what he wants and the DP is executing on the director's vision.
 

lemmykoopa

Junior Member
^^Nice post.

On the subject of long takes: was the torture whip scene in 12 Years a Slave a true one shot take or did they do stealth cuts when the camera turns violently from Fassbender to the slave girl a couple of times?
 
Seriously though, Spielberg is firing on all fucking cylinders throughout Munich in this department. There are some absolutely amazing compositions all throughout that he just makes seem so goddamn effortless.

Just flashing in my mind right now for no reason at all is Avner catching up to Louis' car - which by the time it's left the previous frame, we now view in the intersecting street through the busy cafe window.
 
check out the scene in true detective e04 ... the final scene through the projects, iirc, is a 6 minute one take scene, incredible.
Yes!! That was a really good one take from TV. Didn't expect them to do such a great job at it.
Also no mention of Russian Arch here? It's a film in one take. Not saying that it's good, just that it's a whole film done in one take.
 
Spielberg is an absolute master of craft.
Yeah, he sometime pick shitty scripts which results in pretty bad movies, but if you measure a director by his ability to clearly tell a story and evoke the emotions he wants in his audience, it's hard to argue that Spielberg isn't the GOAT.
FILM CRITIC HULK made this argument much more eloquently (and verbosely) than me.

What I love about the shot you posted is that they all serve a purpose in the film, don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with a cool shot for the sake of cool shot (and to a degree it apply to those scenes as most of them could have been done in a simpler fashion) but when form serve function, when direction serve the story or theme of the movie, that's always better.

I remember that one, it was about how perhaps more than any other popular director to come out of the past 40 years, he is always able to show his exact intention in any scene. He's not much in the way of ambiguity, which is more effective in some places than others(I'd say the girl in the red coat from Schindler's List is making it OVERLY-clear), but its a huge component of why he's the most successful director of all-time. He has the uncanny ability to always get the audience to feel exactly how he wants them to feel about an image. He cheats space, time, geography all the time, and he gets away with it because he's mastered how to manage the tension and drama in a scene as far as possible. Its about the story logic, not the uh...logic logic. Function over form.

It also helps that he's pretty much tied John Williams to his hip, who so perfectly matches his sensibilities, its hard to see where one begins and the other ends. Popular anecdote about E.T., The film ends with a quarter-hour symphonic piece that was composed to a rough cut, after which Spielberg and editor Carol Littleton re-cut the movie around the music. The best action of the movie perfectly matches William's rousing adventurous melodies, and the big goodbye, well...I have yet to make it through without tearing up a little due to its wonderful marriage of sight and sound in sync.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom