 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
76.1.163.157
In Reply to: RE: I'm not surprised you didn't like Cloverfield but am surprised that you posted by sjb on January 27, 2008 at 10:17:45
innovative and not gimmicky: it wasn't a planned marketing approach but rather generated by genuine enthusiasm.
Have you camped much (I know you do)?
It was believably terrifying, with the kids doing believable things as the horror increased. Unlike most commercial American horror films, Blair relied on clever plot twists which incrementally ratcheted up the fear factor. The actors were believable kids, stoners/slacker video guys.
I'd say it's up there with "Night of the Living Dead," though it may be better because it didn't depend on ANY gore or sensationalism: you only heard and imagined the scary stuff.
A camera, some twigs, and intelligence: I can see why Hollywood types hate Blair Witch. With gazillion dollar FX budgets, mega productions, and casts filled with TV personality-types, they can't compete.
Follow Ups:
.
Complicit Constapo Talibangelical since MMIII
I am not sure what an "entertainment fraud" is, but if the audience is entertained, well, then, it is hardly entertainment fraud. Entertainment seems to be in the eye of the beholder, and since BWP did a lot of word of mouth business, more often than not coming from the people who had seen it, I suspect they did not feel they were frauded.
I'd say that the makers were something of a one hit wonder, but, let's face it, their one hit was rather commercially brilliant. BWP certainly is not the first in which the marketing, both planned and unplanned, generate success.
As for the film itself, I thought it a brilliant idea wrapped around a mildly interesting plot. It took a pedestrian plot - kids in the forest which disappear one by one, making the camera one of the characters, rather than simply a passive observer. I do not think the concept had legs, after all, how many other films tried the same thing, but, then, the horror genre has been pretty much recycling itself, since, well, probably the first horror film. I think if you get around the hype, you can enjoy the film for what it is, and on its own terms.
;^D
Seriously, from start to finish it looked like a college film project to me. Yes, it was innovative and somewhat influential, and for that Blair Witch should be credited, but overall it was a rather boring film that didn't hold my interest through suspending disbelief; OTOH, Cloverfield was 180 degrees it's opposite in that respect.
Cheers,
AuPh
featured Fx of the act.
...but doesn't a live action 'pope' have to be part of the on-camera smear and cover-up to achieve classic XXX status? ;0)Seriously, in my not-so-humble opinion Cloverfield was a thousand times more accomplished & entertaining than the ludicrous student film known as The Blair Witch Project. In fact, BWP should've been retitled "How I Spent My Summer Film Internship" or "Camping Out With Scary Friends"!
Granted, Blair Witch was innovative (pointing the way for better budgeted, more sophisticated films like Cloverfield), but BW succeeded in spite of its obvious limitations (cheesy acting and dialog, and an abysmally cheap, unfinished appearance); facts which shouldn't be ignored retrospectively. IOW, I'm of the opinion that The Blair Witch Project was a fluke.
As I believe I've stated on several occasions, special effects which serve a well constructed plot shouldn't be a distraction unless the CGI draws too much attention to itself (I think that the pope and a couple of nuns might actually do that, but if so, we're talking about a live action plot! -grin).
The bottom line: properly incorporated FX should increase the realism of live action footage and enhance the suspension of disbelief. For me, Cloverfield accomplished this 100%.
Cheers,
AuPhPS: No offense tin, but you should try to get past the personal effect that this film is having on you before your blood boils and an explosion ensues! (~;^D)
PPS: You really should come to grips with the fact that we just see this film differently. :O)
this case, a stinking, putrid example of one only appreciated by brain-dead, alien creatures! ":-O)
With a 76% fresh rating from critics across the board at Rotten Tomatoes and $64 million Box Office at the start of it's second week I think you're advocating the minority viewpoint, tin. BTW, don't you think it's about time for you to scrape those "Ron Paul for President" and "I've Been To Area 51" stickers off of your bumper? ;^>
Cheers,
AuPh
Um, most those word of mouthers were hired by the studio. It was one of the most succesful, if not THE most successful planned marketing approach to a film release.
The phenomenon of BW was the unique and successful marketing... through to the point where, obviously, some people still don't know about it.
I saw the movie at home long after the phenomenon was over... and knowing that said phenomenon was mostly marketing may well have colored my viewing experience but neither I nor my girlfriend at the time (who both loved being scared by a good spooky movie) had a single genuine fright.
"You can safely assume you have created God in your own image when he hates all the same people you do."
| FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
