I’ve been watching the 2010 World Cup lately. I’m a big fan of football/soccer and grew up playing it before physical injury and time ended my athletic career; watching the games, I can’t help but yell in support and outrage as players rush down the field in mad dashes to score and defend in the name of national pride. Odd, though, is that my experience as a broadcast viewer is both nostalgic and observatory – the result of multiple shots pieced together in a cohesive transmission.
There’s something unique when one experiences such athleticism as a television spectator: oftentimes the events are framed as establishing shots, encompassing the field/court and panning left and right; occasionally the broadcasts are interspersed with close ups of the players to detail athletic prowess, enlighten upon results of a called foul, or provide reactionary shots of the players themselves; and every once in awhile, there is the unusual crane or aeriel shot as additional angles and perspectives for replay and consideration post facto.
The result is that television spectating is both objectively aloof and personally engrossing – by seeing both the scale of the playing field and the expressions of players, television spectators are both overseeing judges of the teams’ abilities and sympathizers with intermittent glimpses into the players’ actions – in short, it’s both a very objective and subjective experience, and it’s the same basis for creating an effective action sequence in film.
When piecing together an action sequence, it is important to understand the technical and aesthetic components of framing; more important is knowing when, how and how much to use different shots in order to create an engrossing and cohesive sequence. Intents and styles differ, but the aim of creating a coherent and visually unique progression of fists, kicks and guns is what every filmmaker hopes to achieve when cinematic narratives require of such. Here are some types of shots, their corresponding examples, and notes on the effects of overuse:
Establishing shots put everything into context – the environment, the people involved, and the stakes at hand. It is probably one of the most important shots to incorporate in any action sequence since the viewer needs a sense of relativity in order to fully comprehend the scale of the action occurring. Overuse dulls the action sequence, maintaining too much of an objectivist’s lens and detachment from the power and emotion of the players and stakes at hand.
High-angle shots adds an objective feel to what is happening on screen, almost as if one were gazing directly downwards like a Greek muse. There is, in a sense, a level of detachment from the immediate action like an establishing shot except that this framing style is notably more clinical – imagine looking at bacteria on a petri dish under a microscope and (hopefully) this analogy may make more sense. Overuse becomes visually strenuous since the viewer cannot directly see the players facial expressions and thus have a harder time engaging and sympathizing with the action.
Full figure/medium/close up shots are oftentimes reactionary and engrossing in intent. These are the kinds of shots most viewers are very familiar with, as action sequences are most glorified or jarring with these types of framing. Multiple angles and cuts on the editors desk add additional movement to what is occurring, and what may look silly from afar could easily look exceptionally impressive or brutal up close.
Overuse becomes claustrophobic, messy and incomprehensible as to what is actually happening; worse is that the viewer becomes tired and desensitized to the action, ultimately resulting in disengagement and boredom.
Hand-held cameras add an additional intimacy to what is occurring, almost as if the viewer is in the immediate action alongside the players. They are often employed for medium/close ups, follow shots, or even long takes of any sequence.
Overuse can easily result in sloppiness, obscurity, and even nausea.
Long takes are probably one of the trickiest shots to pull off – the wire-walkers of filmmaking. It requires incredible planning, patience, and distinct vision as to how the action plays out, and a conscious effort to maintain the viewer’s fullest attention. It is particularly strenuous on the actors, director and cameramen involved; multi-takes are not uncommon, and though digital effects can stitch together separate sequences into a seamless take it is nonetheless one of the most technically demanding envisions possible.
However, if everything is planned and dictated accordingly, the long take can be one of the most aesthetically and narratively rewarding stylizations of action (even narrative) sequences, creating a feel of uninterrupted observation and engagement of the viewer.
These are just some basic ideas in constructing any action sequence. Of course they’re not absolute, but like all other things they’re important to consider when framing any choreography of punches and flips and pain. As the basis of stylizations and notable trademarks, different shots, frames, and angles are what make any action sequence unique in itself. Film, games, sports – whatever your cup of tea happens to be. And hell, what a sequence we could possibly see.