1st person Persective Film

July 14, 2006 8:00 PM

Remember that MASH episode that was entirely filmed from the perspective of the wounded soldier? He couldn't talk, but he could nod, and when he nodded the camera would nod, like you were looking out his eyes. I'm wondering if there have been any films created from a 1st person perspective.

As a bonus question, how hard would it be to create this effect? I can see the tip of my nose, blurily - would one put that in digitally? how about perepheral vision?

posted by Dag Maggot to media & arts (29 comments total)

Russian Ark -- 90 minutes of a single POV shot, in ONE TAKE. One of the best movies I've ever seen,
posted by intermod at 8:09 PM on July 14, 2006

Dark Passage.
posted by paulsc at 8:12 PM on July 14, 2006

Parts of The Message are filmed from the perspective of the prophet Muhammad to avoid showing his image.
posted by leapingsheep at 8:12 PM on July 14, 2006

Lady in the Lake, starring Robert Montgomery. Since you're looking through his eyes, you only see Montgomery when he looks in a mirror. It's a hokey, fun movie. "You" get to kiss the girl, but "you" aso have to take a few punches.
posted by grumblebee at 8:13 PM on July 14, 2006

It's been a while but isn't much of "Being John Malkovich" shot from the 1st person perspective?
posted by Mitheral at 8:19 PM on July 14, 2006

Orson Welles apparently considered filming a 1st-person version of Heart of Darkness before opting to make Citizen Kane instead.
posted by argybarg at 8:27 PM on July 14, 2006

Previously: 2nd person perspective narratives

The M*A*S*H episode is what I came up with as well.
posted by apple scruff at 8:28 PM on July 14, 2006

Wasn't there an early version of the Dave Letterman show filmed from Dave's perspective?
posted by LarryC at 8:43 PM on July 14, 2006

I also was wondering this recently about movies, but also if there are any movies that are really like looking through someone else's eyes and not just "shot" from that perspective. Meaning it would include the movement back in forth as the person walks that our brain naturally cancels out for us, difference in movement regarding body movement, head movement and eye movement, etc.
posted by chrisroberts at 8:46 PM on July 14, 2006

There was also a Tales from the Crypt episode "starring" Humphrey Bogart filmed that way.
posted by Pryde at 8:55 PM on July 14, 2006

Every scene in Alfred Hitchcock's 'Rear Window' is filmed from the protagonist's apartment. We feel just as trapped and helpless as he is.
posted by thenormshow at 9:06 PM on July 14, 2006

Not a movie, but the music video for "Smack My B*tch Up" is from the 1st person perspective... Quite an interesting video.
posted by inigo2 at 9:12 PM on July 14, 2006

Some thoughts on a "how to."

First, I'd get every one of the above mentioned films and watch them. What worked? What failed?

The stereoptic vision would be a bit difficult. Your nose would be a distraction...but it'd be pretty easy to do a gradient blurry filter to represent the 'edges' of your vision.

I'd only think about it (nose + peripheral vision), if I could use it as a plot device. Otherwise, the audience will have to work hard (and you will to as a filmmaker) to justify any lapses in vision. You won't be able to cut XCU for someone's emotional reaction.
posted by filmgeek at 9:13 PM on July 14, 2006

Portions of the movie Doom (the one with the Rock) were shot in first person in order to echo the feeling of the game, a first-person shooter.
posted by frogan at 9:29 PM on July 14, 2006

Oh, and the opening sequence to the movie Halloween was shot from the perspective of a young Michael Myers, mostly with him looking through the eye holes of a Halloween mask, naturally.
posted by frogan at 9:30 PM on July 14, 2006

There's a scene in "Slaughterhouse Five" like this, when Billy wakes up in the hospital and his mother's talking with Mr. Rosewater. I bet there's lot's more movies with first-person segments as it's a method to force the viewer to share the character's POV (but I can't think of any more just now).

Another method is not providing subtitles, when the character doesn't understand the language being spoken at/around him. I really hate that (unless the other language is one I know).
posted by Rash at 9:37 PM on July 14, 2006

There are a number of first person sequences in Strange Days. The plot revolves around recorded human memories, which are displayed to the viewer from the perspective of the character who experienced them. If you like cyberpunk or neo-noir at any level, you might enjoy that film.
posted by scoria at 10:13 PM on July 14, 2006

The first person camera is a staple of horror films, as the killer (and, by default, we) stalks the next victim. Of course, some horror films use unmotivated first person: it seems like we're seeing someone's POV, but there's nobody there.
posted by goatdog at 10:13 PM on July 14, 2006

As a bonus question, how hard would it be to create this effect? I can see the tip of my nose, blurily - would one put that in digitally? how about perepheral vision?

It's usually done with a shoulder mounted camera and no real concern for any of this stuff.

(The episode of ER guest-starring Miranda Sex-and-the-City is much like the MASH episode you mentioned)
posted by cillit bang at 10:28 PM on July 14, 2006

A film in the first-person perspective would be any film in which a character in the movie is also the one "filming" it, as in The Blair Witch Project and many doc- and mockumentaries. (Filming is in quotes, of course, because you can have a first-person story even if the character in question doesn't actually exist.)

Given your example, I think what you're interested in here is better termed second-person perspective, which is mostly what people have been talking about. I can't think of an instance off the top of my head where the entire film (or even a television episode) was entirely in second-person, but there are plenty of instances where it's used to good effect. Looking at my DVD shelf, Kill Bill springs to mind.
posted by BackwardsCity at 10:58 PM on July 14, 2006

I think the British series Peep Show is filmed almost entirely in this mode.
posted by Gyan at 1:23 AM on July 15, 2006

As a bonus question, how hard would it be to create this effect? I can see the tip of my nose, blurily - would one put that in digitally? how about perepheral vision?

I too have been pondering this for a while now. First, I think you need to forget the nose thing, since you are trying to reflect actual 1st person perception. How often are you aware of your nose? Similarly, if the character wears glasses, or has floppy hair, it seems very unlikely you would want a pair of lenses in front of the camera, and hair all over the show. So the important thing is not to show 'objective' vision, but the mind's filtration of vision. In the same vein, you would not want to over-emphasise things like natural head movement, and the bobbing that occurs when walking - because you are vary rarely actually aware of it.

To reflect peripheral vision, I would consider using a reasonablly wide-angle lens (perhaps with vertical flattening or masking) so that the side edges become somewhat distorted, perhaps with a gradient filter as filmgeek suggests. Some careful post-processing could also be experimented with.

You could use a very wide aspect ratio. I believe ratios above 1.33:1 were created specifically to mimic actual vision, therefore creating a more immersive experience. But there is probably a lot more to be considered. For example, when you are focusing on another person talking, they will seem to fill your vision, but when sitting idly at a cafe, you will be far more aware of peripheral objects and movement. Trying to reflect subjective human vision appropriately would probably require a long process of experimentation and research, in choosing angles, lens focal-length, masking, post-processing techniques, and so on, appropriate to the mood and intention of each shot and scene.

I think this is an area with room for innovation. While 1st persion stuff crops up occasionally, it's usually done in a fairly standardized manner (i.e. horror film/tv-episode style). I think the idea could be taken some way further with some bold experimentation.
posted by MetaMonkey at 1:56 AM on July 15, 2006 [1 favorite]

The Body Works ride at Disney World (Epcot) is (or was) like this. A day in the life of an adolescent boy, hormones racing everywhere. And some sort of animatronic brain conductor next to the screen.

/all IIRC, of course
posted by Gnatcho at 7:21 AM on July 15, 2006

The reason it usually isn't done is that it's frustrating, like the terrible dream in which you want to run but your body is paralyzed.

If you're forced to adopt the camera's movements as your own head movements, then you're liable to fight the camera -- you want to look over there, the camera wants to look the other way. Hence the number of times that this technique is done for, say, a bedridden patient, who doesn't have a lot of choices anyway. But for a whole movie? Yikes.
posted by argybarg at 7:44 AM on July 15, 2006

It's not in the whole movie, but there's one scene filmed in that perspective near the end of Star Wars: Episode III---the scene where they but Vader's mask on for the first time. It's very effective (and probably my only favorite scene in the entire movie).
posted by hooray at 7:54 AM on July 15, 2006

The climactic scene in Silence of the Lambs, where that psycho killer is about to kill Jodie Foster, was a pretty good use of the first (second?) person perspective.

What I like about the first person perspective bits in Being John Malkovich is the way they muted the sound so that when John talked, it sounds like the way your own voice sounds when you plug your ears shut. I think that particular sound would be more convincing than a slight blur in the middle supposedly representing your nose.
posted by alidarbac at 10:12 AM on July 15, 2006

"Requiem pour un beau sans-coeur"

posted by amusem at 11:37 AM on July 15, 2006

One of the writers of that episode, Ken Levine, recently blogged about that episode. I recommend reading the whole thing, but here was my favorite part:

We heard of a 1947 movie that used this first-person device called LADY IN THE LAKE. It was a Raymond Chandler mystery with Robert Montgomery as detective Philip Marlowe. Or, more accurately, Robert Montgomery’s voice. So we screened the movie. Holy shit! What we found was that when someone talked to Marlowe it was fine, but when Marlowe spoke the other actors had nothing to do but stare uncomfortably into the camera and try to react (this was not Jayne Meadow’s best work). It was sooooo dicey. Not to mention static, boring, and…well, downright creepy.

It seemed to us the key to making this device work was not having the soldier talk. And that sparked our story. What if the patient is hit in the throat? He can’t speak. He must undergo a series of tricky operations (the suspense) until finally he is able to utter the only two words –

“Thank…you”.
posted by llamateur at 6:26 PM on July 16, 2006

84 Charlie Mopic
posted by SpacemanRed at 5:36 AM on July 17, 2006