What's Up With "10.5" at DVinfo.net

Paul Tauger · May 2nd, 2004, 11:35 PM

I turned on the last hour of NBC's "10.5" tonight -- I hadn't watched any of it up until now. What's up with the camera work? I suppose the intent was to give it a "live" documentary look, but it's just plain shaky, with lots of abrupt zooms in and out. It doesn't look "live" -- only annoying.

Rich Lee · May 3rd, 2004, 12:11 AM

I guess cause its the big one...everything is supposed to be shaky/annoying, including the camera work. i just watched a trailer for it on the net...the zooms are realy funky, made me laugh a bit.

Luis Caffesse · May 3rd, 2004, 07:24 AM

It became a game with my girlfriend, we started counting the number of zooms. At one point we counted 7 within 10 seconds.

I had to change the channel after a few minutes worth of that.
If the spastic zoom doesn't nauseate you, the acting will.

Nothing short of unwatchable.

-Luis

Robert Knecht Schmidt · May 3rd, 2004, 07:46 AM

Dreadful stylization, obviously meant to distract and confine the viewer's focus from the low production value on the sets.

But let's not offend Rich--maybe he worked on this show!

Boyd Ostroff · May 3rd, 2004, 08:08 AM

Ha, ha!.... I was going to start a topic about this also, but then I thought that maybe I was just too much of an "old fart" and wasn't up on the latest trends in camerawork. And how about that corny split screen effect? Reminded me of a bad 60's movie. And then the plot (such that it was), right out of a soap opera where each character had a "relationship problem" with their wife, husband, father, etc. I guess they wanted to out-do Earthquake from the 70's, but they didn't have the all star cast to pull it off.

Bob Zimmerman · May 4th, 2004, 09:26 AM

I watched it only to see the earthquakes!!

But after about a hour a told wife whats the deal with the zooms? Ok maybe every now and them for some shock value. But like everytime they showed someone they zoomed in then zoomed back. It was just kind of weird.

Jim Shields · May 4th, 2004, 01:19 PM

they tried to copy the look of "24" on Fox, for some reason. They seem to forget, however, that the reason the split-screen works in 24 is the quasi-realtime aspect of the show. I still get a kick out of the split-screen phone conversations and multi-angle action shots.

I thought the worst part about 10.5, though, was the models. The bit where the train dissappeared into the ground? The toy H2 falling off the golden gate bridge? They might as well have used legos. They couldn't even use big models to add some sense of weight to things; you could tell all the vehicles weighed in under a pound.

Boyd Ostroff · May 5th, 2004, 09:42 AM

Hmm, there's also 8 1/2, 9 1/2 and 10. Do we really need a 10.5? ;-)

Mike Hanlon · May 5th, 2004, 12:16 PM

If there was ever a need for a great example of bad camera work, this certainly fills it.

I watched for about a half hour, but I found the constant zooming so distracting that it not only kept me from following the story, it also gave me a headache.

As others have said, perhaps the camera work was supposed to keep you from noticing how bad everything else was.

John Hudson · May 5th, 2004, 10:55 PM

Why do MADE FOR TV Movies just plain suck? It is so rare to see one that is good.

Robert Knecht Schmidt · May 6th, 2004, 12:23 AM

Well, that's really the definition of a made-for-TV movie. If it was good (usually this means something more than a bankable star and a passable script based on subject matter that has already in some way captured the public interest), it would have been released theatrically and budgeted as such...

Although, the Young Indiana Jones movies were fairly good, but they tended to be experiments in digital effects as much as anything else.

May 2nd, 2004, 11:35 PM	#1
Paul Tauger Wrangler Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Los Angeles (recently from San Francisco) Posts: 954	What's Up With "10.5" I turned on the last hour of NBC's "10.5" tonight -- I hadn't watched any of it up until now. What's up with the camera work? I suppose the intent was to give it a "live" documentary look, but it's just plain shaky, with lots of abrupt zooms in and out. It doesn't look "live" -- only annoying.

May 3rd, 2004, 12:11 AM	#2
Rich Lee Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Los Angeles Ca Posts: 126	I guess cause its the big one...everything is supposed to be shaky/annoying, including the camera work. i just watched a trailer for it on the net...the zooms are realy funky, made me laugh a bit. __________________ Rich Lee http://www.rich-lee.com

May 3rd, 2004, 07:46 AM	#4
Robert Knecht Schmidt Wrangler Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 1,933	Dreadful stylization, obviously meant to distract and confine the viewer's focus from the low production value on the sets. But let's not offend Rich--maybe he worked on this show! __________________ All the best, Robert K S Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

May 6th, 2004, 12:23 AM	#11
Robert Knecht Schmidt Wrangler Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: Cleveland, Ohio Posts: 1,933	Well, that's really the definition of a made-for-TV movie. If it was good (usually this means something more than a bankable star and a passable script based on subject matter that has already in some way captured the public interest), it would have been released theatrically and budgeted as such... Although, the Young Indiana Jones movies were fairly good, but they tended to be experiments in digital effects as much as anything else. __________________ All the best, Robert K S Search DVinfo.net for quick answers \| The best in the business: DVinfo.net sponsors

May 3rd, 2004, 07:24 AM	#3
Luis Caffesse Major Player Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Austin, Texas Posts: 704	It became a game with my girlfriend, we started counting the number of zooms. At one point we counted 7 within 10 seconds. I had to change the channel after a few minutes worth of that. If the spastic zoom doesn't nauseate you, the acting will. Nothing short of unwatchable. -Luis

May 3rd, 2004, 08:08 AM	#5
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	Ha, ha!.... I was going to start a topic about this also, but then I thought that maybe I was just too much of an "old fart" and wasn't up on the latest trends in camerawork. And how about that corny split screen effect? Reminded me of a bad 60's movie. And then the plot (such that it was), right out of a soap opera where each character had a "relationship problem" with their wife, husband, father, etc. I guess they wanted to out-do Earthquake from the 70's, but they didn't have the all star cast to pull it off.

May 4th, 2004, 09:26 AM	#6
Bob Zimmerman Major Player Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: Illinois Posts: 888	I watched it only to see the earthquakes!! But after about a hour a told wife whats the deal with the zooms? Ok maybe every now and them for some shock value. But like everytime they showed someone they zoomed in then zoomed back. It was just kind of weird.

May 4th, 2004, 01:19 PM	#7
Jim Shields New Boot Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: Austin Posts: 19	they tried to copy the look of "24" on Fox, for some reason. They seem to forget, however, that the reason the split-screen works in 24 is the quasi-realtime aspect of the show. I still get a kick out of the split-screen phone conversations and multi-angle action shots. I thought the worst part about 10.5, though, was the models. The bit where the train dissappeared into the ground? The toy H2 falling off the golden gate bridge? They might as well have used legos. They couldn't even use big models to add some sense of weight to things; you could tell all the vehicles weighed in under a pound.

May 5th, 2004, 09:42 AM	#8
Boyd Ostroff Wrangler Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: Mays Landing, NJ Posts: 11,787	Hmm, there's also 8 1/2, 9 1/2 and 10. Do we really need a 10.5? ;-)

May 5th, 2004, 12:16 PM	#9
Mike Hanlon Regular Crew Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: San Jose, CA Posts: 180	If there was ever a need for a great example of bad camera work, this certainly fills it. I watched for about a half hour, but I found the constant zooming so distracting that it not only kept me from following the story, it also gave me a headache. As others have said, perhaps the camera work was supposed to keep you from noticing how bad everything else was.

May 5th, 2004, 10:55 PM	#10
John Hudson Major Player Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: 32° 44' N 117° 10' W Posts: 820	Why do MADE FOR TV Movies just plain suck? It is so rare to see one that is good.