10 Reasons Why The Found Footage Film Genre Sucks
1. It Hurts More Films Than It Helps
Advertisement
Probably the worst thing that can be said about many found footage films is that theyd be better movies without the found footage setup. The found footage model simply sets too many limits, and in many cases, it ruins or weakens films that wouldve been much better as straightforward narratives. Consider The Last Exorcism, a movie that starts off with great promise. The set up follows a documentary crew hired by a phony minister whos ready to expose his own deceitful practices of driving out fake demons. Of course, the case they document turns out to be a bit more real than they expected. This is a fine set up for a mock-documentary, but as the film goes on and the ideas and situations get bigger and bigger, the found footage angle feels more and more like a distraction, as if the writing is taking certain directions to keep up the illusion instead of going in a more natural direction. This is especially evident in the films rushed, anticlimactic ending. Some found footage films would be wise to only incorporate the style to a certain degree. Take District 9, for example. Much of the films opening act was comprised of mock-interviews and security footage, but as the plot got bigger and bigger the film switched from strictly found footage to a combination of regular hand held cinematography along with selected areas of found footage. The transition was relatively smooth, and the film was, in most regards, a success. Movies like The Last Exorcism would do well to understand that just because you use some found footage, it doesnt mean you cant use regular filmmaking techniques. The all or nothing mentality hurts more than it helps.