Tom Reilly’s writing ‘What is a Shot, Anyway?’ provided me with some insight into what a shot is and how they’re considered on a film set. I already had some basic knowledge on this, I’ve used the word “shot” plenty of times since I started studying media in high school. I understand the different shot sizes and that the length of a shot can vary greatly. But reading this excerpt, I like how Reilly has clearly defined that a shot is what the camera captures between the words “action” and “cut”. It helps simplify it a bit more and I think I will use this definition from now on.
I find it interesting that he compares how shots can vary greatly, by defining two opposite ways they may be filmed. It is so fascinating that the way you capture shots and piece them together can have such an impact on the final film. How fast shots capturing different angles of the scene can be edited together to create action, while longer “moving master” shots can be useful for dramas, or more arthouse films. Personally I really enjoy watching both, but I am particularly impressed by films that contain “moving master” shots because it appears so real, as if I’m a character involved in the movie. I also ponder how they can keep the scene going for that long without any mistakes. It helps that Reilly defines how actors and crew have to perform perfectly or else this doesn’t work, and it truly impresses me that they’re capable of executing this flawlessly.
One thing I didn’t consider is that these two different kinds of shots use editing differently. The kind of shots used in an action film rely on editing to bring them to life, as the scene is not fully captured in a fraction of a second. It needs editing to piece the whole scene together to make sense. Reilly describes how “moving master” shots barely rely on editing, because the scene is already captured in the single shot. As I was reading this excerpt, I couldn’t help thinking of the film ‘1917’ directed by Sam Mendes that appears to use a single shot for the whole 1hr59min feature. It is clear that they couldn’t possibly have filmed this all in one take, as it would be physically impossible for the cast and crew to continue for 2 hours, amongst elaborate set designs where bombs are blasting and weapons are firing. I guess in this instance, the “moving master” bring it to life and create the illusion of a single shot.
References
Reilly, T 2009, The big picture : filmmaking lessons from a life on the set, Thomas Dunne Books: St. Martin’s Press, New York.