Tag: Faux Documentary

THEY’RE WATCHING Review

tw_image

Be honest. We’ve all done it. Some of us willingly and with no apologies, while others of us are closet fans, but those reality real estate shows are popular and addictive. Perhaps it’s because they tap into a core element of the American dream, but whatever the reason, they’ve made an impact on what television looks like these days. With that said, it only seems logical that some creative soul would take this phenomenon and mash it up with another modern cultural trend.

The graphic novelists and animators Jay Lender and Micah Wright have done just that, they wrote and directed this melding of reality-based home shopping shows with found footage, faux-documentary style horror-comedy. That’s right. No, I didn’t stutter or lose my mind. This is a thing. A real thing. I know, your reaction right now is probably quite similar to mine when I first heard of this film, but after reading a bit more about the plot and then watching the trailer, I saw an intriguing level of potential just under the surface.

THEY’RE WATCHING, despite our most instinctual better judgment, is actually a fun, smart and entertaining romp. Blending a filmmaking influence from the Raimi brothers with tongue-in-cheek humor and a subtle knack for the breaking of the fourth wall, the film makes fun of it’s multi-faceted genre base, makes fun of itself and makes for a good time. The story takes place in Moldova, which provides a setting and a backdrop combined with it’s sense of humor that will please any fan of Bruce Campbell’s THE MAN WITH THE SCREAMING BRAIN. I realize that’s a double-edged sword, but take you’ve got to take this film with a grain of salt and appreciate it for what it is, by design.

Stereotypes abound. Akin to Sasha Baron Coen’s BORAT, but less extreme, the Moldovan town folk in the film are simple, creepy and primitive in comparison to the western crew. The town’s constable is a stern, dictatorial man resembling Stalin and the town’s one and only real estate agent, aka “broker,” is an Eastern European mix of Johnny Bravo and Cousin Eddie from National Lampoon’s VACATION films. All the town folk are heavy drinkers and are afraid of the cameras, but in the end, they are merely play as pawns and fodder, as the plot slowly unveils their secret about a witch that must never be mentioned.

Becky (played by Brigid Brannagh) is the latest client on a popular real estate reality show, an artist who wishes to settle down to a simpler, slower life in Eastern Europe. Six months after Becky decided to buy a fixer-upper deep in the backwoods of a small, rural town in Moldova, the production crew of the show returns to shoot the second half of the episode and see what improvements Becky has made to the property. Fully expecting disaster, the crew arrives to find she’s pulled out a miracle and the property looks great. Seems like it’s going to be an outstanding episode after all…

That’s about the time things start getting weird. THEY’RE WATCHING is a title that has a duel meaning, referring both to the Moldovan town folk, and [of course] acknowledging the meta element of the film, about a reality TV show, that has an audience separate from those of us watching this film. Follow that? Anyway, Lender and Wright make no effort to be taken seriously. That’s not the goal. The entire film feels like an inside joke, and for the most part we get it. And it’s funny. The production looks like hi-definition digital video because it’s supposed to, and most likely is as it’s not a big budget film. On the other hand, it looks good, as good as any well-made respectable TV movie. This is higher caliber production than the Syfy Channel but not quite prime time. For the most part, the acting follows this same scale.

As the plot thickens and the tension increases — for the characters, not quite so much for the audience — THEY’RE WATCHING prepares for the money shots… or, shots, as the film’s final act is the cherry on top. Whatever minor flaws and discrepencies may exist are easily forgotten once the rib-jabbing jokes and cliche horror movie tendencies segway into the big showdown with the witch at the end.

If you thought witches were boring 17th century borefests or cheesy kids’ fare, beware. The film ends on a high note with a bloody, goretastic, over-the-top splatterfest that will make genre lovers proud, or sad, depending on what expectations you had going int the film. For those who enjoyed TUCKER & DALE VS EVIL and CABIN FEVER, you should most likely find THEY’RE WATCHING to be a satisfying, lower-calorie samplng of cinematic junk food.

THEY’RE WATCHING  — In Theaters and On Demand — March 25th, 2016

Overall Rating: 3 out of 5 stars

tw_poster

HAPPY CAMP – The Review

happycamp_image

I am reminded of growing up in the late-80s, watching Unsolved Mysteries on prime-time television. Intrigued by commercials for Time Life’s Mysteries of the Unknown, an encyclopedic series of books about everything supernatural, extraterrestrial and any other unproven or unexplained phenomena, I recall begging my parents to buy me the books about alien abductions, Stonehenge, and mythical creatures that live in our backyards. Sadly, they never did, but I did manage to find the random torn and battered volume available at the local library.

HAPPY CAMP, directed by first-timer Josh Anthony, stirs these nostalgic memories of an era defined by the weird, abstract and unusual. The film is about a man named Michael, played by Michael Barbuto, who returns to his small home town 20 years after his brother went missing as a child. Michael is accompanied by his girlfriend Anne, played by Anne Taylor, and two friends named Teddy (Teddy Gilmore) and Josh, played by writer-director Josh Anthony). Anne wants to shoot a documentary about Michael and the mysterious disappearance of his brother twenty years ago, so the four of them hop into a massive old RV and road trip into the remote wilderness town of Happy Camp, California.

This group of relatively happy young adults quickly discover they are about as welcome in Happy Camp by the locals as they are aware of what they are soon to discover about the disappearance of Michael’s brother. In fact, Michael’s brother is only one of over 600 people who have gone missing from Happy Camp, many of them “flat landers” visiting from out-of-town. Anne and her rag-tag crew of documentary filmmakers set out with their handheld camera, asking colorful backwoods local characters about the disappearances, getting colorful backwoods responses, all of which are either typically vague or embarrassingly obvious in their exposition.

Herein lies the primary flaw and underlying reason for the film’s failure to succeed. Writing. HAPPY CAMP is constructed on the premise of being an actual documentary being shot, but never finished by the original filmmakers. Rather, this is the footage they did obtain, compiled after the fact by someone who happened to find the footage left behind by the filmmakers. In other words, this is yet another entry into the “found footage” genre of horror/thriller filmmaking that has become so popular since the stellar box office success of THE BLAIR WITH PROJECT (1999) opened this fickle can of worms for movie audiences.

I have nothing against the found footage genre. There are many creatively successful films that have experimented with this style of storytelling, such as the REC (2007) franchise, and a few have even been major box office hits, such as CLOVERFIELD (2008). However, just like any genre, there needs to be a compelling story behind the film for it to engage its audience and, unfortunately, HAPPY CAMP does not deliver. The concept is there, in its essence, and the film even has a fairly commendable production value for what appears to be a relatively low-budget endeavor, but the writers make two fundamental errors. First, the film is beyond predictable. I would argue that anyone who hasn’t figured out the entire premise of HAPPY CAMP within the first 15-20 minutes should avoid recommendations to refill the blinker fluid in their car. Everything is laid on the table, all the cards are shown and nothing — I do mean nothing — is left to the viewer’s imagination. There is an effort to disguise the mystery and protect the film’s secret, but the veil is left so thin by the characters’ dialogue that it might as well be made of plastic wrap.

HAPPY CAMP, roughly broken down into its simplest parts, is 33% setup, 33% pointless arguing and excessive use of the F-bomb while aimlessly chasing one another or running from and/or towards strange noises, and 33% actual story progression and conclusion, in that order. The remaining 1% got lost somewhere on the cutting room floor. Surprisingly, the third act of the film (being the ending) is the best and most promising part of the film. Despite so much being given away in the film’s dialogue, the filmmakers manage to hold back and not reveal too much of the [fill in the blank] that is the cause for all the missing people. What? Just because the film gives away its own ending, doesn’t mean I’m going to do the same. With that said, the special effects are, by far, not the worst I’ve ever seen on film.

Overall, the film is worth a good time late night viewing with friends of a similar sense of humor and a few beers. Laughter will ensue, not by intention, but the film does have its merit. HAPPY CAMP is not a painful movie to watch. I can see the film possibly garnering a cult following, like Tommy Wiseau’s THE ROOM (2003) or James Nguyen’s BIRDEMIC (2010), but with a decidedly higher production value. I would not hesitate to compare the film to those of Uwe Boll, in that it strives to accomplish something bigger then itself, but just doesn’t have the inherent substance to reach its intended goal.

Overall Rating: 2 out of 5 stars

Available nationwide On Demand and on iTunes, Time Warner, ComCast and DirecTV, among other platforms on Tuesday, March 25th, 2014.

happycamp_poster

THE CONSPIRACY – Fantastic Fest Review

How do you react when you walk past a strange man or woman shouting seemingly absurd statements about politics, aliens or the end of the world? Do you stop and listen intently? Do you retaliate with your own brand of biased retorts, or do you simply pass them by, putting every ounce of your being into convincing yourself they do not exist? Now, consider this… what if everything coming out of their loud, obnoxious mouths were true.

Writer and director Christopher MacBride invites the audience to consider this while viewing his film THE CONSPIRACY, which is a faux documentary of sorts, but doesn’t attempt to fool the audience that it’s a real documentary. Intentional or not, there are signs that the film is a fictional production, from the way the documentary filmmakers are presented to the way in which the film is shot and structured. The opening scenes are very much designed to convey the feel of a riveting documentary, but this feeling rapidly tapers off as the story progresses and the heart of the film begins to take form.

THE CONSPIRACY begins with interview segments and on-the-street clips inter-cut with various bits of archival footage as documentary filmmakers Aaron (Aaron Poole) and Jim (James Gilbert) build a profile of an outspoken conspiracy theorist. As their exploration evolves, the man who at first appears mentally unbalanced begins to actually start making sense… and then, he disappears. His apartment ransacked, the filmmakers’ footage is all that remains to prove the man had ever existed.

Left with an unfinished film and a mess of the missing conspiracy theorist’s collected documents, Aaron and Jim choose to explore his theories further in hopes of either finding the man, or what happened to him. This marks the point at which a rift begins to form between Aaron and Jim, but also where the film itself begins to morph into something completely different from what was initially presented to viewers. This is also the point at which it becomes unquestionably apparent that the filmmakers were not out to fool audiences that this is an authentic documentary.

THE CONSPIRACY shifts from feeling like a documentary expose to a film that actually draws the audience in and makes them feel a part of the conspiracy, challenges the viewer to ask themselves about the validity of the “facts” and “theories” they are being exposed to on screen. MacBride clearly took great care in his research and in constructing the this film. MacBride wants us to question the truth as we know it, not to suggest that what we understand is false, but instead encourages us to questions the sources from which we receive our information.

As the stakes in THE CONSPIRACY increase and we inch closer to the truth, the film is already in the process of shifting into thriller mode. While there is a point where the film’s outcome becomes something predictable, it doesn’t draw too much from the experience. There are some logistical arguments to be made regarding the production, such as a flawed attempt to convincingly present a portion of the film as shot by a tiny, hidden tie pin camera. Then again, most viewers probably won’t even bat an eye, but for some viewers this will nag at you after the fact.

THE CONSPIRACY is engaging, entertaining, even a little bit educational. While the ending does get chalked up to being a fairly typical genre conclusion, it’s the journey to reach that outcome, the experience of the film that makes THE CONSPIRACY worth seeing. Allow yourself to be taken for a ride. Follow the filmmakers down the rabbit hole of the conspiracy theories and the mystery inherent to revealing the identity of who is pulling the strings.

Overall Rating: 3.5 out of 5 stars