> The camera moved at the same speed as Affleck, gliding with unvarying smoothness, which is exactly how Fincher likes his shots to behave. I appreciate this so much. There’s a lot of shaky cam out there and it often gives me motion sickness or confuses my understanding of the scene. It also feels like a cheap trick directors use to create faux excitement, or to cover up sloppy filmmaking. Fincher movies are easy to watch and understand visually. He does a lot of wide shots and long shots without sloppy cuts. In Panic Room he did a single shot (although CGI) that lasted several minutes and showed the viewer around the entire set in a single uninterrupted view. It was glorious. I wish this approach was more common. Although I expect it’s not because it’s hard to accomplish. Here are two of the worst abuses of fast cut, shaky cam scenes out there: [this video] [link]
Your comment reminds me of the classic example: Taken 3 where they used 15 cuts in 6 seconds[1] to show Liam Neeson jumping over a fence. You can barely hold people's attention for 400 milliseconds. 1: [this video]
:( "Our model encounters challenges when processing >200 frame videos" :) "Our model is proven production-ready using real-world footage from Taken 3" [this video]
Video list and Hacker News comment labels from HackerTube (prompted by @karpathy), released under ODC-By 1.0, built on the open-index/hacker-news archive. Hacker News data is provided by Y Combinator; comments remain the work of their authors. Video titles, channel names and thumbnails belong to their creators and are shown via YouTube. HackerTube Watch is an unofficial edition. Data export of 2026-10-31.
3 Hacker News comments
From the HN archive; up to 20 kept per video, favoring different commenters. Recommendations first.
Read more