0:00:01.310,0:00:03.699
Hi my name is Tony and[br]this is Every Frame a Painting
0:00:03.699,0:00:07.700
So this video was supposed to be done[br]for Mother's Day but that didn't happen
0:00:07.700,0:00:12.590
Sorry ma. Anyways today's film is[br]Wolf Children directed by Mamoru Hosoda.
0:00:12.590,0:00:15.929
This is a really lovely little film and
0:00:15.929,0:00:19.189
it won the Japanese Academy Award for[br]Best Animated Film two years ago.
0:00:19.189,0:00:23.380
If you haven't seen it, please do[br]but my video will provide no spoilers
0:00:23.380,0:00:26.840
so you can enjoy this without having[br]seen Wolf Children.
0:00:26.840,0:00:30.680
My subject today is a single shot from[br]the film right here.
0:00:30.680,0:00:32.810
It's a lateral tracking shot[br]lasting 57 seconds
0:00:32.810,0:00:35.350
and it follows the two[br]children, Ame and Yuki
0:00:35.350,0:00:38.340
from first grade the fourth grade[br]without any cuts.
0:00:38.340,0:00:41.760
We see Ame as a loner in first grade[br]while his sister Yuki
0:00:41.760,0:00:45.449
adjusts to life in school. We see[br]him bullied, we see her reaction,
0:00:45.449,0:00:49.360
we see her find a place in the classroom[br]while he starts to ditch class.
0:00:49.360,0:00:53.540
That's really it. So why do I think this[br]shot is actually kinda amazing?
0:00:53.540,0:00:56.940
This might sound like a weird thing to[br]say but I've never really understood how
0:00:56.940,0:00:59.680
to use the lateral tracking shot.
0:00:59.680,0:01:03.199
I've seen other directors use it,[br]sometimes beautifully, but I've never
0:01:03.199,0:01:05.199
figured out how to pull it off myself.
0:01:05.199,0:01:08.799
Because when you break it down, the[br]lateral tracking shot is kinda weird.
0:01:08.799,0:01:11.880
It's one of the least[br]subjective shots in cinema
0:01:11.880,0:01:15.670
It's actually one of most objective.[br]It doesn't suggest any character's POV
0:01:15.670,0:01:21.340
It suggests you're an omniscient God[br]and you're watching. It's very literal.
0:01:21.340,0:01:24.340
What you see is what you get,[br]so what do you use it for?
0:01:24.340,0:01:27.929
Most filmmakers use it as a quick[br]establishing move.
0:01:27.929,0:01:31.299
When you wanna start a scene and end in[br]your master, it's a simple way to go.
0:01:31.299,0:01:33.240
--Hey man, if I were to
0:01:33.240,0:01:35.300
shave off a nipple, would it be[br]covered by workmen's comp?
0:01:35.300,0:01:39.130
Sadly in the last five years,[br]this type of shot has just been beaten
0:01:39.130,0:01:43.810
into the ground by DSLRs and sliders.[br]Even good movies shot on DSLR
0:01:43.810,0:01:49.280
have slider overkill. So yeah,[br]we can find a better way to use it.
0:01:49.280,0:01:52.710
Well, what else is there? Another place[br]you see the shot is in war movies.
0:01:52.710,0:01:55.990
When you wanna show the vastness[br]of an army, the lateral tracking shot[br]will do the trick
0:01:55.990,0:02:00.280
It's really the go-to shot[br]for establishing a camp.
0:02:00.280,0:02:04.050
--This whole goddamn war[br]--Like finding a needle[br]in a stack of needles
0:02:04.050,0:02:07.119
It's also great for running whether it's[br]people running towards destiny
0:02:07.119,0:02:10.119
or towards the woman they love,[br]even just running to run.
0:02:10.119,0:02:12.890
Hell, why not slow-motion?[br]Or Tom Cruise?
0:02:12.890,0:02:16.620
And I don't know why but it also
0:02:16.620,0:02:20.580
really popular for supermarkets, maybe[br]because they're soulless and terrible
0:02:20.580,0:02:23.160
like the Safeway near my house.
0:02:23.160,0:02:27.750
Godard seems to have done the definitive[br]"I hate supermarkets" shot in cinema.
0:02:27.750,0:02:31.210
And there's a bunch of other one-off[br]uses by certain filmmakers.
0:02:31.210,0:02:34.230
Peter Greenaway uses it to make the[br]frame feel like a moving painting.
0:02:34.230,0:02:38.930
I've seen Park Chan-wook use it for[br]an amazing fight scene.
0:02:38.930,0:02:43.510
I've seen Buster Keaton use it[br]for physical comedy.
0:02:43.510,0:02:47.660
I've seen Scorsese use it for a mass[br]execution and I also really like this
0:02:47.660,0:02:49.120
one-off gag from Toy Story.
0:02:53.980,0:02:57.170
Some filmmakers make it[br]a personal statement.[br]Stanley Kubrick loved it
0:02:57.170,0:03:00.750
because it showed things the way[br]they were and now how we imagine[br]them to be.
0:03:00.750,0:03:05.760
He used it brilliantly in Paths of Glory[br]to show the extent of the trenches.
0:03:05.760,0:03:09.349
And in The Shining, it's everywhere,[br]one of the ongoing ways[br]he builds a sense of dread.
0:03:09.349,0:03:13.569
The environment just feels oppressive[br]when you look at it like this.
0:03:13.569,0:03:16.930
Another person who uses it a lot[br]is Wes Anderson
0:03:16.930,0:03:21.390
because it conveys that kinda[br]dollhouse, flat storybook look he loves.
0:03:21.390,0:03:23.549
It's also kinda inherently funny[br]when you have
0:03:23.549,0:03:27.379
bright colors and people moving in[br]straight lines like this.
0:03:27.379,0:03:32.010
But the one thing I rarely see the[br]lateral tracking shot used for
0:03:32.010,0:03:35.040
is intimacy.[br]It's not really an intimate shot.
0:03:35.040,0:03:40.629
No matter what you always seem to end up[br]at a distance from the characters
0:03:40.629,0:03:46.099
and even the greatest filmmakers[br]know this. So how can you make this shot
0:03:46.099,0:03:51.620
which isn't really intimate... intimate.[br]--Did you get my flowers?
0:03:51.620,0:03:56.379
Here's one way by Martin Scorsese[br]--you didn't get them, I sent them
0:03:57.379,0:04:00.079
Track away from the character
0:04:00.079,0:04:04.230
--Can I call you again?[br]It's weird because it's unmotivated
0:04:04.230,0:04:05.410
and it's the opposite of what you're[br]taught to do
0:04:05.410,0:04:09.870
but it really works. It feels empty[br]and sad and lonely, and it makes you
0:04:09.870,0:04:13.579
feel bad for Travis Bickle by[br]removing him from your field of view.
0:04:13.579,0:04:17.940
--I tried several times to call her[br]but after the first call, she wouldn't
0:04:17.940,0:04:19.099
come to the phone any longer.
0:04:19.099,0:04:22.250
Or here's another.[br]This is widely considered
0:04:22.250,0:04:24.699
one of the greatest shots[br]in the history of cinema.
0:04:24.699,0:04:29.039
The fascinating thing about this shot is[br]sheer length. It's nine minutes long
0:04:29.039,0:04:32.460
of the main character trying to take[br]this candle from one end to the other.
0:04:32.460,0:04:36.310
But since the shot has only one visual[br]focus and one dramatic goal,
0:04:36.310,0:04:39.310
Tarkovsky can let the moment unfold.[br]We see every step
0:04:39.310,0:04:43.260
the character takes, every[br]failure, every retry.
0:04:43.260,0:04:46.080
The shot's length puts you[br]in a weird meditative trance.
0:04:46.080,0:04:48.620
Because it's so simple you can read it[br]as a symbol or metaphor for
0:04:48.620,0:04:52.870
any struggle you could possibly want.[br]It's a model of simplicity and purity
0:04:52.870,0:04:58.470
and then there's this:
0:05:05.160,0:05:08.310
I actually think this is the most[br]emotional use of this camera move
0:05:08.310,0:05:09.949
in the last five or ten years.
0:05:09.949,0:05:13.750
And to prove it, watch how the [br]moment plays if I take out the track
0:05:13.750,0:05:17.220
and just do a straight cut[br]or a dissolve
0:05:17.220,0:05:23.009
or a push in.[br]This is a perfect example[br]where the lateral move
0:05:23.009,0:05:26.690
is exactly right. Being further away[br]from the characters makes this moment
0:05:26.690,0:05:30.800
sadder because we can't help them.[br]Moving left to right implies that time
0:05:30.800,0:05:32.410
has passed and we can never go back.
0:05:32.410,0:05:35.680
So all that brings us back to[br]Wolf Children.
0:05:35.680,0:05:38.220
Like a few shots on this list,[br]it's actually a really intimate
0:05:38.220,0:05:41.380
little piece. It shows kids growing up[br]right before your eyes.
0:05:41.380,0:05:46.240
But unlike every other shot on this list[br]it's actually physically impossible.
0:05:46.240,0:05:48.490
This isn't a literal shot,[br]it's figurative
0:05:48.490,0:05:51.210
It's really only possible[br]through the magic of movies
0:05:51.210,0:05:55.720
and specifically animation.[br]It moves back and forth
0:05:55.720,0:05:58.259
through time and space[br]and all it does is
0:05:58.259,0:06:00.789
tell the story these kids growing up.[br]So even if you're like me and
0:06:00.789,0:06:03.349
you don't really understand how to use a[br]lateral tracking shot,
0:06:03.349,0:06:06.360
it's great to see that someone out there[br]clearly does get it
0:06:06.360,0:06:09.360
and is pushing forward the visual[br]grammar in some small concrete way.
0:06:09.360,0:06:13.380
By the way, the rest of this film[br]is really lovely and beautiful and will
0:06:13.380,0:06:18.169
probably make you cry at the end.[br]And call your mom right afterwards.
0:06:18.169,0:06:20.530
So go watch it. Happy Mother's Day.