Whether you are a fan, or among the increasing crowd in opposition, the sub-genre of film referred to as “found footage” is surprising in its enduring popularity. Once regarded as a novelty in recent years this segment has been cropping up with more regularity. This week sees the release of
Grave Encounters 2 on DVD, a continuation of the methodology in shaky-cam, micro-budget offerings.
While thought of as a relatively new convention, found footage has been said to begin as far back as 1980 with
Cannibal Holocaust. That film centered on a documentary crew, seeking out underdeveloped tribes, which goes missing and supposedly their footage reveals trouble.
The Blair Witch Project became a breakout surprise and inspired imitators, and following the initial
[Rec] studios began making , larger budget titles. But as this category endures it also is showing signs of wear.
It turns out there are a number of conventions to this genre that deliver a paradox; just as these elements are almost required for execution they ultimately are serving as a death knell at the same time. Here are some of those problematic elements
THE POSTERS There is familiarity among many of the one-sheets touting these films.
The Need – In delivering their pitch to prospective audiences these films sell the content with artwork seemingly culled from the footage contained therein. A grainy, sometimes night-vision-green, screen-cap of the action is becoming the required key art for these titles.
The Problem – This instantly casts the film into the found footage category, and depending on your experience the title will draw an instant comparison. As likely as this is to excite a viewer the more common reaction these days may be, “Oh, not another one!”
BUILDING A MYTH There is the need to sell the concept that the film is comprised of genuine, discovered content.
The Need – In order to properly immerse the audience in this technique great effort is made to sell this as a real-life occurrence. Often there is a story wrapped around the premise. Maybe it is a long-running urban myth or a string of related stories built into a modern legend; the footage discovered is told to be connected to this legend.
The Problem – It becomes obvious that if indeed there was a real event tied to these releases that specific information would have already gotten exposed. Local awareness, the 24-hour news cycle and of course, the internet, would compel
somebody with knowledge of these stories to come forward. In fact, if there was a real life connection to hype the story, the studios would actually blast that detail loudly in their promotions well ahead of the release.
DEATH OF A CAMERAMAN It is a common result that the person filming is going to snuff it.
The Need – The content we are viewing is always discovered and cobbled together by outside sources. We understand this is because the originators of the video have been killed, gone missing, or met some other demise.
The Problem – By this point we have come to expect that the person behind the lens in these titles is doomed. What was once a shocking resolution now is a rote occurrence. Some of the tension dissipates when we have already mentally checked that character off our list.
INSPIRED TO FILM There has to be an explanation given as to why anyone was compelled to record the raw content being created.
The Need -- When presenting this footage to audiences there are generally two motivators behind filming: it is either being shot by a cameraman/film crew, or it is the work of an audio-visual geek. The first example involves an investigation taking place by professionals; the second example often involves an amateur, usually to the annoyance of those close to him.
The Problem -- These details become cliché and actually detract from some of the suspense. If it is a film crew we watch them go through the motions of their work before the strange occurrences kick in. If it is the amateur we’ll have to endure a long stretch of pedantic action before things unravel. By now we have become used to these rhythms.
CONTENT-FREE FIRST ACT The opening segment of these films normally is light in substantive activity.
The Need -- Commonly these movies have a rather ponderous opening. This is largely because you do not have the luxury of a conventional three act dramatic setup. You are presenting the film as something discovered, so the participants are not granted the usual backstory and the narrative is straight forward. This lack of scripted plot also means you have to show candid activity to sell the realism; quotidian activities are presented because that “proves” the reality.
The Problem – These banal segments undermine the central premise that this is discovered footage. If authorities vetted these recordings those experts who analyzed and edited the content felt these were required for us to see. As gripping as much of
The Blair Witch Project was for example, which “expert” felt the segment of Heather taking a piss in the woods was essential?
TENSION ON A MICROSCOPIC BUDGET One of the main appeals for studios is the low overhead for this brand of film making.
The Need -- In order to sell things as genuine it actually helps when a production is created on a shoestring -- handheld cameras save money and lend gritty integrity to the action. Additionally it is tough to sell people on the real nature of things if characters are adorned in high fashion and expensive makeup.
The Problem – This ability to shoot on the cheap unfortunately attracts those with little funding. As a result you are often given a full length movie taking place in a stark wooded locale, or staged entirely inside of a town home.
UNKNOWNS IN THE CAST These titles always star no-name actors in the lead roles.
The Problem -- There is difficulty in attracting audiences without star talent, and you often are left at the mercy of lesser talents in front of the camera. This can be especially challenging during improvisational segments, which are so common in these naturally shot films.
The Need -- When you are trying to sell audiences on the concept that the film is an actual recording recently discovered and presented in raw form, it just won’t do to have James Franco investigating your mysterious entity.
THE EXPERT TESTIMONY At some point an outside player is brought in with empirical knowledge of the occurrences.
The Need – As mentioned, since the setup for these films is video footage having been discovered, it means there will be a narrative gap in the plot. Thus expository details need to come from an outsider. In the case of a film crew scenario usually this involvement is in the form of an interview, conducted as research ahead of the action. If it is an amateur situation then the players have to seek out either a learned individual (a psychic or a priest will do fine) or someone with intimate knowledge of the activity. This interrogation is always filmed by the amateur sleuth, of course.
The Problem -- Similarity in these arrivals detracts from the supposed originality of the true story. The delivery of plot details, especially unheeded warnings, is all too uniform for viewers to buy as real life depictions.
REVEALING THE PRESENCE Whatever the nefarious catalyst there is a spartan manner in which it gets shown to the audience.
The Need – When you have a limited budget the driving force behind your success as a film is how you build the tension and deliver the horror. This means your primary technique is using devices and techniques which allude to, more than expose, your evil force.
The Problem – As a viewer you can determine whether or not you will even get a glimpse of the entity in question, based on the budget of the film. If it is a studio-funded production you will eventually get shown what is so scary (such as in
Cloverfield), but if it is a micro-budget affair you likely will only be manipulated with moody presentations and jump-scare methods (like a
Paranormal Activity entry.)