MovieChat Forums > Ellie Parker (2006) Discussion > Should have been shot on film

Should have been shot on film

posted 12 years ago by brockmeeks
3 replies | jump to latest

For this full length version anyway. I don't think it adds charm or makes it more interesting. It was actually a hindrance for me. I loved the story, and Naomi Watts is terrific, but this films downfall is the hand held cam. There are many shots that the filmmaker could have used a tripod, but no, most shots are shaky and at times out of focus. And what's with all the awkward close-ups?

I don't know how low the budget was, very low I'm sure. I did enjoy the movie, but this made it seem even cheaper and made it harder for me to get into.

I'm probably in the minority here.

[–] RedBluePurple 12 years ago

No I completely agree. I think this film was a very good concept but didn't really reach it's potential besides Naomi Watts performance.

CARRIE2013

[–] ibbi 10 years ago

It can not be handheld, and avoid the awkward closeups without being shot on film. Shooting digitally is much quicker, much easier, considering it was being shot over the course of 5 years beginning when Watts was a nobody I'd say this was easily the simplest way to do it.

He stole my Barbie.

[–] franzkabuki 10 years ago

Digital was practically created for the kind of semi-documentary, street level immediacy Ellie Parker is after. And it works pretty well, all in all.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan