MovieChat Forums > Outlaw (2007) Discussion > Had to walk out of cinema

Had to walk out of cinema

posted 18 years ago by lofty-5
66 replies | jump to latest

Well I'm a massive Nick Love and Danny Dyer fan so I was eager to see this film. After 30 minutes though, me and the girlfriend had to walk out due to the camera work. The other people around us were also complaining about it and I imagine they would of followed soon after. The girlfriend was getting a headache and I felt like I was getting permanent cross eyes from going in and out of focus and the constant moving about. It was obviously exagerated due to the screen size so hopefully it won't look so bad on dvd.
The film from what I saw looked quite good so I will deffinately be attempting the dvd.
I feel quite let down by it and for wasting my money, all because of the camerawork or editing.

[–] dopesickkid 18 years ago

The camera work was horrible no doubt, but I still liked the movie.

[–] Hosai 17 years ago

Yea the camera won't bother you so much on dvd, sadly it is the same movie though.

[–] tjevs 17 years ago

Umm..... Does anyone actually have any reference to where the Camera work was shaky? I mean anyone can say, 'it's terrible' and 'Bad movie', but nobodies actually said why.

I loved the film, I thought it was great, and the camera was fine! I didn't get a headache, But the times when it did move irratically it suited the action. I never once got lost, or got confused.

I'll give you an example. If you want to see an example shaky camera check out the fightscene in 'the Bourne Supremecy' between Matt Damon and Karl Urban. I couldn't tell who was hitting who. That for me was very bad production.

This was a great film though!

*Don't stress. You'll live longer.* =D!

[–] 17 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tjevs 17 years ago

hmmm, thank you for that. Next time I watch it I will certainly take thise comments into consideration. And I did enjoy Bourne for the most of the time, it was just that one scene which annoyed me really.

And yes I am a big fan of 24. Good Call.

*Don't stress. You'll live longer.* =D!

[–] james-rae2 17 years ago

Just watched this (on DVD) the shaky, juddery camera work ruined what could have been a good movie.

[–] liamolf 17 years ago

The camera shake is a bit excessive at points, but it didn't affect me that much...

"I got one! I fackin' got one!"
"What do you want, a fackin' sweetie?! Keep shooting ya' *beep*

[–] Jakethemuss 17 years ago

I watched it on DVD last night, and yeah, the first thing that hit me was the constantly juddering camera. But once I adapted to it I just rolled with the movie, and a great movie it is.

Man on Fire is 10 times more shaky and disjointed than this, not even bothering with Domino if its even remotely like it.

"cook the man some eggs!"

[–] Raven1268 17 years ago

Apparently a lot of the people whining here are small children, and they shouldn't be watching movies like this anyway. The movie is great, and having watched it four times I never even realized the camerawork was shaky until I went back after reading you guys complaining about it. I found it natural, I guess, in that not all life is a perfect portrait taken from a 'beyond the fourth wall' perspective.

It's a great movie, although too many yobs are spared.

[–] Zeeeeeeee 17 years ago

Yup this movie is good, agreed with Raven, those arguing are heartless noobs or children and yeah they shouldn't be watching this type of real stuff!

[–] lambrettaguy200 17 years ago

The shuddering, grainy film in parts reminds me of the camerawork in Normandy battle sequences of Band of Brothers.

I bought the DVD, knowing nothing about the film. It didn't make me dizzy.

Are the police so corrupt ? Seemed a bit blatant in the portrayal.

We Are The Mods ! We Are The Mods ! We Are - We Are - We Are The Mods ! (Quadrophenia)

[–] ItsFullOfStars 16 years ago

I have to say they seemed to be trying to do something 'artsy' with the camera work that really wasn't all that necessary... it distracted from what was going on sometimes...

was nowhere near enough to make me sick though, thats just pathetic, you must get sick walking down the street in that case hahaha

I did get slightly dizzy in Blair Witch but that was some extreme shakey cam action!

It was far grittier than anything hollywood ever churned out... no sugar coating on that one which was really refreshing to see...

Some (not all) of the bashers on this thread are to indoctrinated by Hollywood, they think that all films should be like that... I feel sorry for those people...

[–] Hazzer_99 16 years ago

The camera work was horrendus and the editing was really shoddy, it's true. However, had you stayed for a little while longer you might well have found yourself walking out for an entirely different reason. The movie was absolute trash. The premise was excellent, the acting was fine - no problem there. But the script writing and overall plot development was perhaps the worst of any budgeted movie I have ever seen, and I don't say that lightly. It was such a shame because I bought it for my mate's birthday and talked him into giving up his evening so we could watch it (basically cause I really wanted to watch it!) and we were both so disappointed. What happens to Hoskins’s character is just so out-of-the-blue, unexplained and designed to "shock" I suppose, but ends up just pissing you off as a viewer as it. The ending is pathetic and unfinished and I seriously think that they may have run out of money or something because nobody in their right mind could sit back after watching it and feel completed. If you do get it on DVD, make sure you rent it because after watching it once I can’t imagine you’ll want to watch it again any time soon.
Oh, and the camera work doesn’t get any better.

Go to the loo, 'cause all the *beep*'s coming out your mouth instead of your a-hole...

[–] SergiPavl 16 years ago

Great film! Sean Bean is perfect! The plot is good too. Any different camerawork wouldn't do any good 2 the film. I enjoyed the whole picture till the very end. And yes, I would wanna watch it again.

Plot development? Well, It looks OK, the cited Blare witch is trash of a movie.

10 out of 10! It deserves it! I'll wait till any of bad reviewers get into this sort of mess and come here and tell me how it felt, and what the right way of expressing it should be and whether Love did it right. For now, go watch your Hollywood trash, morons.

from neighbouring thread>
<Well what if you was attacked and you ended up in hospital for around 6 months because of your injuries and the geezers who put you there got locked up for 3 months came back out for you.>

A VERY GOOD MOVIE. 10 STARS.

[–] deviates 16 years ago

I watched the film on DVD, and couldn't stad the shakey camera work though I did manage to watch the entire film. I wouldn't have had a problem if it was used in places that made sense but it seemed to just randomly have shakey scenes. For a moment I thought I'd bought a pirate copy of the film it was so annoying!

Forgetting the poor camera work a fairly average flim in my opinion.

[–] koan_72 16 years ago

It would have been a decent movie but the shaky camera work ruined it for me... and I usually don't mind as much. It's one thing to use it during action scenes, it's another when people are just sitting down and conversing. It has become a cheap trick.

[–] ryankent1984 16 years ago

Some of people praising this film seem to think they're in a Danny Dyer movie themselves, "Youre and your bird are muppets mate".

[–] dragonmaster0303 16 years ago

Spot on, the shaky camera work has become a cheap trick and it's absolutely horrible. It's being overused so much now it's pathetic.

[–] rabksaj 16 years ago

i agree. i found the camera work terribly unbelievable also.

[–] bentalk 16 years ago

I'm watching it on DVD now - and the 'shaky' camera effect is well over the top - I normally don't have much problem with this kind of stuff, but in this movie it's too much.

[–] CrazyCY 14 years ago

I'm watching this now on TV, and it is practically unwatchable. I don't mind shaky cam in films generally, but this is done so badly it looks like it was filmed quite steadily, then shaken up in post. Rubbish.

[–] jedimulder24 14 years ago

I just watched this on telly, & I really don't understand all the complaints on the last couple of pages!
This was a damn good film!!

The camerawork was more similar to that used in the latter half of the last Rambo film, than Man On Fire. It wasn't "shaky" or shoddy camerawork, it was simply the style they obviously went for.

It worked for me, & I am more than glad I didn't turn off after the footie!!!

"The way of paradoxes is the way of truth!" Oscar Wilde

[–] zak-831-973958 14 years ago

What shaky cam? I`ve just watched it also on 5 and hadnt read these comments beforehand. I cant say it was obvious. Maybe I`ve become immune as a lot of movies are shaky these days (or maybe I`ve developed a twitch in time with the camera) Anyway only the ending was bad, it didnt leave that "feel good" factor I used to get watching this type of film like the first 3 Deathwish, you know good verses injustice. Or maybe I`m getting too old for this style.

[–] jedimulder24 14 years ago

I agree Zak.

I just logged on here out of curiosity, after watching it, & I was quite surprised at many of the above comments.
Like you, I didn't totally enjoy the ending - despite them all having broken the law, I'd've still liked the last 3 characters to have survived, but at least it ended on Danny's cheeky smile as Manning goaded him - loved that final moment!!

"The way of paradoxes is the way of truth!" Oscar Wilde