Talk:Long take/Archive 1

Further examples
The Battlestar Galactica miniseries which was a pilot for the recent TV show started with a long take that moved through various sets on the ship. I noticed it only after I had seen the first camera cut, so I rewound it and watched it again; it was indeed a long shot. --205.201.141.146 17:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

- I'm surprised that nobody has mentioned the film Children of Men as an example. One of its defining features is the long single-shot sequences  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.12.100.112 (talk) 04:08, 25 January 2008 (UTC)


 * The fact that Soy Cuba and Breaking News are not represented indicates that the folks responsible for this article are not film scholars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:6AE5:2510:0:0:0:46 (talk) 17:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

Star Wars III
Should a CGI long take really count? If so, what about animation? Nothing against either CGI or animation, but it just seems to be two different worlds to me. - Kyle543 08:13, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

More discriminating criteria needed?
Perhaps we need to tighten these lists up. Potentially, I really see the need for two major lists. One would be for films with the longest ASL (average shot length). You can see http://www.cinemetrics.lv/ for more on this topic. The other one would be for particularly long shots which can individually be singled out. Some films do not have exceptionally long takes individually, but may average several minutes each. Others may only have one long shot which is particularly exceptional. So these need to be distinguished.

Also of note is that it is probably better, if possible, to use NTSC copies for timing. Most PAL films transfer from 24 to 25 fps without any pulldown, which makes them something like 4% faster. Girolamo Savonarola 05:17, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Mass deletions
Given that the lists seemed to be endlessly growing, and there were no citations for almost all of the entries, even after the addition of several unreferenced templates months ago, I've deleted all unsourced lists, and most of the films listed in the lead. They were essentially well-grown cruft at this point, and if anything, the great number of entries proves that the technique is ubiquitous and probably not worth enumerating any but the most exceptional cases (providing they can be cited). Girolamo Savonarola 18:53, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Great- I've been wanting to do that for a while, but was too timid. Staecker 19:06, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

In the Company of Men's long takes?
How long were the shots in In the Company of Men? I recall the film being composed of lengthy, unbroken shots. Same with Your Friends & Neighbors. Do either qualify for the list? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.254.114.147 (talk) 18:42, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
 * That depends - do you have a reference for the ASL? Girolamo Savonarola (talk) 23:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)

Difficulties with long takes
I think some of the practical problems with long tapes need to be mentioned in the article, perhaps in their own section. There are quite a few logistical and technical problems associated with long takes - The players need to act for several minutes straight without making mistakes or missing their marks, if the shot is somehow in motion (like characters walking down a long street for example) then significant amounts of set may need to be built, lit, populated with extras and be prepared to allow a camera to move through them without things like the edges of the set, tracks for the cameras or anything else that may shatter the illusion being in shot, the cameras, sound capture equipment and other equipment all needs to function flawlessly for the length of the shot, the cameraman must maintain focus and depth of field correctly for the duration of the take, and the camera may not be able to hold enough film to support takes long enough to meet the director's needs. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.18.30.114 (talk) 16:24, 13 April 2008 (UTC)

Another example of long takes
I kinda hate to bring it up, but it appears that another common use of long takes is in...well...porn. Granted, I'm not a pornography expert, but there appear to be a substantial use of long takes in the genre and even some titles that are an hour or more of just one take. Now of course any fool can keep a camera running until it's out of tape and most examples probably don't even qualify as filmmaking, any more so than the Clinton testimony video, a videotaped lecture, home movie, or a webcam video. But I'm sure some maybe do. So, the question is, just what criteria would prevent a pornographic video from being considered an example or possibly included in the article? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 4.254.114.6 (talk) 02:22, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
 * This is not Pokémon; we don't have to list every little bit of inconsequential trivia someone happens to find interesting. ~ Jafet Speaker of many words 08:42, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

That's censorship, you a_ssmunch!