THN Friday Face Off: Luke on Found Footage

This is the second debate of our new monthly feature, entitled ‘THN Friday Face Off’. One Friday every month will see two THN titans of film knowledge duke it out over a pressing issue relating to our most beloved art form. Each film fanatic will argue from a different viewpoint on a particular subject, in a bid to persuade our exceptionally attractive readers, as well as his or her colleague, they should be deemed the winner.

Of course, there are no definitive right or wrong answers. However, we would love for you to get involved by sharing your opinion, and voting for whoever you think has argued their case in a more effective way. You can do this by commenting below, tweeting us via @thncom, or commenting on our Facebook page. Before doing so, we ask that you read the opposition’s stance on the matter here.

This month we ask whether the found footage genre has run its course, or is it just getting started?

The world of found footage films is very personal and fascinating to me. In 1999 we saw the release of THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT which followed a summer that saw the releases of STAR WARS EPISODE I: THE PHANTOM MENACE, THE MUMMY, and THE MATRIX. Cinema was on a special effects high that has continued to this very day. THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT arrived with a fanfare that celebrated its simplicity and barebones approach to filmmaking. At the time there was still a lot of debate as to whether the film was real or not as directors Eduardo Sanchez and Daniel Myrick utilised the internet to form an impressive advertising campaign, in a time before social media had claimed the web. Fast forward 14 years and we find that found footage has become as common an occurrence as a Rob Schneider cameo in an Adam Sandler effort. But is it the fault of the genre itself? Has found footage run its course? Of course not!

The Form Of Found Footage

Found footage is often labelled as a gimmick, which is a cruel disservice. Surely found footage is similar to a story being told in first person. It allows the filmmaker to apply self-imposed restrictions which can often benefit the story. We all saw what happened to George Lucas, a filmmaker who faced no restrictions. His prequel trilogy (which I do love) was simply overstuffed and faced very few challenges. Found footage is a way for people with little filmmaking experience or money, but still have an engrossing story to tell, to make themselves noticed in a way that can easily be related to.

Seeing through the eyes of a camera, which the characters can interact with, presents a doorway into the characters’ souls. It can at times be uncomfortable, terrifying, and emotionally draining. How would Heather Donahue have delivered her classic monologue without a camera to confess to? Even standard narrative films will include their own variations on found footage when necessary. The revelation of the creatures in THE DESCENT via night-vision on a video camera is a shocking moment which I doubt would have had the same effect if delivered any other way.

As stated previously, the format of the genre results in the filmmakers having to become more creative. There isn’t (or at least shouldn’t be) manipulative music, nor should the audience be shown all the gritty details. There will of course be narrative black holes, but that’s part of the fun of a found footage film; seeing how the filmmaker will further explore the story. The genre can also give us unmatchable results in terms of performance, THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT really did stick the actors into the middle of the woods and kept them from knowing the majority of the plot. More recent found footage films have become more structured, but they still allow for those moments which would easily end up on the cutting room floor in traditional films, despite the fact they can often add character, humility, and humour. The existence of the camera in the plot of CHRONICLE means the characters have a natural and understandable reason to be playing up and exploring their powers. They’re teenagers, they’re showing off, and in front of a camera, it’s kind of okay.

The Abuse Of Found Footage

So why has found footage faced such a strong backlash? I think there are a number of reasons, with one of the main ones being a flooding of the market. If we’re being honest, there aren’t that many found footage films, but whenever one comes around it does stick out like a sore thumb. But I don’t think we should attack the genre for facing a massive boom. The truth is that technology has allowed found footage films to escalate in quantity. Digital cameras offer a cheap and cheerful alternative, and with cameras on our phones, MP3 players, webcams, and CCTV, found footage just became a comment on our time. There was a time when found footage wouldn’t have been as economically feasible.

Found footage is also a victim of its own success. Film producers often see projects in terms of dollar signs and nothing else, and when you have a way of compiling a film cheaply and quickly, with an almost guaranteed profit, the medium is bound to be exploited. There are many examples of absolutely terrible found footage films, some of the main offenders being THE DINOSAUR PROJECT and THE DEVIL INSIDE. Those are films that fail to even stick to the found footage concept, as they manipulate sound effects and contain shots that would be impossible to capture. Other films such as APOLLO 18, commit the cardinal sin of using found footage as an excuse to have nothing happen.

Despite this, found footage is a genre in its infancy. Yes, there were examples leading back to the 1980s, but since 1998, we’ve had nearly 80 examples. That isn’t many, and given the amount of hits there have been, it seems as though there is still plenty of life left. Found footage has allowed us to explore genres in completely new ways. We’ve seen superheroes in CHRONICLE, a monster attack movie in CLOVERFIELD, and dark comedy and fantasy in TROLL HUNTER. The prejudice towards found footage has also prevented people from discovering hidden classics, which are probably the best example of the genre’s power. NOROI: THE CURSE is an intricately crafted Japanese investigatory horror film, and the criminally under-seen British drama EXHIBIT A, shows a teenage girl documenting her family’s downfall as her father slips into madness.

Where To For The Genre?

There’s no doubt found footage isn’t for everyone. It’s an acquired taste, but one that has the decency to always announce itself. If you have a problem with found footage films, then simply ignore them. I’m no fan of 3D, but I certainly wouldn’t suggest it needs to be completely eradicated. Like books written in a diary format, or first person shooters, found footage can drop us into the mind of its characters. Found footage is merely an extension of storytelling, one that can sometimes be used to brilliant effect and one that can sometimes be taken advantage of.

After the tragic events at The Boston Marathon, one thing that has become clear on the news is that we are now constantly being filmed. Footage showed the blast from the perspective of the runners, news crews, CCTV cameras, and spectators. The footage was shocking and disturbing, not just because the events were real, but also because of the way they were filmed. Seeing some of the POV shots of the event are downright horrific, as there is no foreshadowing of what is about to happen. The sound is filled with cheering, but once the bomb goes off (despite it not always being visible) panic erupts and chaos ensues, with the unfocused shaky cam going some way to translating the terror. Real life events are now captured in ways we could have only imagined in the past, and art will constantly mimic our current social and technological trends.

Perhaps it’s too much to ask of some people to fully invest in the format. I’ve always been a more active than passive viewer. I love stop-motion animation and men in suits, because I believe I am expected to use my imagination and not just sit there as images are thrown at me. Found footage is the same in many ways. One scene in V/H/S will forever stick with me as being how horror should be done. It involves a creature crawling slowly towards the camera. There are no cutaways, no close-ups of the creature in detail, the lighting isn’t great, and there is no music. It just slowly comes towards the screen, and in that instance I am the camera. This is exactly how this event would unfold in real life, and that is what is most chilling of all. So chilling in fact, I could barely edit the image above.

Please do tell us what you think, but first, be sure to read the counter-argument, which can be found here.