Key Framing v/s Montage Cinematography in 3D:

Hugo the movie, is a case study in how stereoscopic 3D can and should be used as a new medium of visual storytelling. I finally got a chance to see the movie, here in Dubai a few weeks later than its release date.

I went in, knowing it was going to be a good experience, but bias aside, it did not let me down. It can be comfortably stated that the premium paid for a 3d movie is well justified only in Avatar, Hugo,  HTTYD, Tron and Pirates IV. (in that particular order).

Other 3D movies thus far has been experiments in Hollywood coming up to speed in 3D movie-making.

What was good about Hugo 3D? Undoubtedly it had to be the lovely long key-framing camera work in many scenes. Whether by accident or actual planning, CGI wizardy, motivated edits and cuts, and/or other means… This was one visually well done masterpiece of Stereoscopic 3D Cinematography.

What is Keyframe versus montage style Camera work?

In typical film making it is easier to establish geography of a scene, or tell a story by assembling different shots of the same scene recorded by different camera positions and from different angles. On the other hand however, it would need much planning and scene blocking to do “keyframed” style camera movement.

As a simple example, if the scene is of a person walking into a room and moving into position in-between two other people in the room, it is much easier to shoot this scene by placing the camera at different locations around the room to capture the intended effect (montage), than it is to: plan, do scene blocking, lay track and then dolly the camera along with the person, swinging the camera around at the right moment so as to frame the actor as he gets into final end position.

3D Shot Planning:

It takes planning, rehearsal and skill, and we are still talking 2D movie scene! In 3D it’s a whole different ball game of Previz, correct camera interaxial, looking out for stereo window violations,  and yet keeping the camera work fluid and the scene itself interesting. But this what and why audiences are paying the extra dollar! (similar to a gourmet meal v/s fast food)

This is what was done right in much of Hugo, and in beautiful well crafted 3D. Granted today’s attempt at keyframed camera work is rarely what long takes were, back in the day when Hitchcock tried it out. But even he used the cleverly choreographed “10 minute” Long take (scroll down to the Long Take subheading in that article). In today’s film making, the use of CGI camera flight paths, motion control camera rigs and other tricks are allowed. As long as the end result is good dwell time,  and an audience immersing Stereoscopic 3D experience.

“In Hugo 3D even the Card Boarding was Motivated”

There is much talk among stereographers and 3D cinematographers on the subject of long lenses (zoom lenses) and the “cardboarding” effect it creates in 3D movies. In layman’s terms, cardboarding is noticeable when one shoots a scene with a telephoto or zoom lens. What happens is, longer lenses “compress” depth, so in a 3D movie the scene will look like several layers of cardboard cut-outs arranged in 3D space. The same effect is visible when watching the world via a pair of binoculars.

Did Hugo have Cardboarding? Yes, but even that was “motivated” I said to myself, in the Diorama scenes!

In the non-diorama scenes, there may have been a few shots where cardboarding was visible, but I would need to see the movie again to confirm, as were some possibly 2D to 3D converted shots I remember in the Library scene.

A well made 3D Film:

To round of this 3D Critique of Hugo, here are a few more observations.

1) Motivated Camera Placement and Editing: Throughout the movie I noticed a careful balance of camera move and timed cutting (edit) of a shot, so as not to give audiences any feeling of miniaturization (hyper stereo)

2) Use of Depth Budget and Negative Z-space: Hugo did not shy away from pulling characters right to the edge of the stereo window, and although I thought that some scenes with the Inspector General or Ben Kingsley were too in-your face for comfort, because the eyes were “converging” (going cross-eyed) rather than diverging (going wall eyed) it worked.

3) 3D movie with meaning: I liked the bit on preserving film history, and although it was a mini-documentary the lesson was well taught to younger audiences, because it was in 3D!. A couple of years ago, I’d written on how Hollywood could preserve and document real world architecture with 3D movies… Hugo makes a related point

I’d mentioned how the Digital Assets of “Pandora” could make for a real-time Climate Change lesson for kids in 3D, similarly, the preservation-of-old-films message could make for an interesting 3D mini-documentary. This shows how a 3D movie can cross-over to the education sector where attention spans are short, and Stereoscopic 3D content can help bridge that gap.

Verdict: This movie sets the bar a couple of notches higher in Z-space for 3D moviemaking!