MovieChat Forums > Cú và chim se se (2008) Discussion > Anyone else experience vertigo?

Anyone else experience vertigo?

posted 15 years ago by Anaheim92807
7 replies | jump to latest

I just saw the film and enjoyed it. However, about 20 mins. into the film I started feeling vertigo. I had just had lunch and thought perhaps it was something that I had eaten. I finally realized because the film was low-budgeted that it used hand-held cameras. Many of the scenes have characters bouncing up and down or left and right. I started to feel sea sick! My friend had the same sensation, but he got over it early in the film. I, on the other hand, felt sick throughout the entire film. I have never experienced this before at the movies! If you are prone to vertigo, you might want to take your Dramamine before seeing this film. That being said, it is really is worth seeing.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] kickyour 15 years ago

no, but skip a meal next time.

[–] bowtie-3 14 years ago

I have periodic vertigo and had no issues while watching this film.

[–] strangerer 14 years ago

Valid comment but no problem for me. I saw DVD so on my modest 22 inch tv so perhaps the experience was stronger on the big screen. Maybe sitting further back would help. I know that for some people once the sensation starts it is hard to get over it.

Early on I noticed the hand held aspect of the camera work but appreciated it for how it would put you deep inside the scene.

[–] TroyG1 14 years ago

I had no issues watching the DVD, and I didn't even notice it was hand-held camera work, so it must have been skillfully done. I have the movie for you, though, Anaheim92807. You should see Cloverfield.

[–] BeBeSee 13 years ago

Yeah, my mum has vertigo and got extremely dizzy when we watched this recently on DVD. She had to take moments for herself to look away from the screen every so often. We still thoroughly enjoyed the film though!

[–] emncaity 13 years ago

SO many films have this problem, and not always strictly because of low-techness. The first time I know of that this shaky-fake-amateur style became widely known was in that Nissan commercial somewhere around '87 or '88, and for some reason filmmakers and TV directors are still totally in love with it. Maybe the first hundred or so times it was used it gave the story a verite or documentary film--or maybe 80% of those times it was just a gimmick, just stylistic bandwagoning--but the next ten thousand have become really tiresome, to the point where it can be hard to get past it even in a low-budget film that couldn't help a certain amount of it. Once it's been done to death, and it certainly has, people are tired of it even where there's a good reason to do it storywise, or where the lack of a steadicam budget makes it hard to do any other way.

One prime example on TV is The Office, which has been dragging out its fake-documentary premise for what, six seasons now? Who makes a six-year documentary about an office? How would the show lose anything by losing that device and just playing it straight with the cams? Amateurish zoom-in, zoom-out, shakiness, quick pans...if it _were_ a six-year doc, you'd think the camera people would've gotten a lot better by now.