Yes, but SOME of these "documentary/real footage films", actually use real footage to base their story, then ADD some dramatic scenes or in the like of "Paranormal Activity", they "act like a documentary" but never "claim to be 100% true" like Fourth Kind does.
Yeah, it was one of the main reasons I saw the film too, but unfortunately all she does is sit in chairs and cry alot the entire movie.
As a work of fiction, it isn't half bad. I was just annoyed with the blatant, in your face, lying they do from the get go and throughout the entire film.
#4
Espy
I heard that despite the annoying in your face ITS REAL OMG! crap it wasn't a bad film. Not worth it though huh?
#5
Shegokigo
Again, as a work of pure fiction? It's not bad. Nothing really original, but not bad.
I was just annoyed at how HARD they were selling the "This is real, it's 100% real footage" angle. Just for it to be completely falseifid. They didn't even film it in Nome, Alaska. Fuck, they didn't even film it in ALASKA period.
#6
Null
Nothing can be filmed in Alaska, cameras freeze solid.
#7
Shegokigo
Are you telling me that 30days of Night wasn't real?!
That isn't really what the thread is saying at all.
#13
Shegokigo
Spoony does a nice spoiler review on alot of my feelings about the movie, though he doesn't mention how none of the footage being "claimed to be real" is fake.
Oh and Gurpel, I wasn't complaining that a bunch of supposed alien footage wasn't real. I mean, NOTHING was real, not even the supposed real interviews with the real people affected by their encounters was real. Again, they blatantly claimed the entire footage was real and they were making some "fake stuff" to make it seem dramatic. I didn't go in expecting real footage of aliens, but if they're going to claim that an actor is doing a dramatic reinactment of a real person, but the real person footage is fake too, then wtf?
That isn't really what the thread is saying at all.[/QUOTE]
"i went to see a movie about aliens that claimed to be real, but wasn't and i am disappointed."?
no, really i dont get it.[/QUOTE]
I think Shego's complaint is that the film's marketing (including fake newspapers purporting to be real articles from existing Alaska publications) makes explicit claims that it's actually a documentary about unexplained disappearances in Alaska.
And not only is it not a real documentary, the events it talks about never happened, and the articles in question were never published. They deliberately exploit the suspension of disbelief.
Now, as to whether that affects your decision to see the film or not, who knows, but I can see why folks could be annoyed by that. Bait-and-switch marketing is a poor tactic, IMO, because it goes out of its way to trick a consumer.
That isn't really what the thread is saying at all.[/QUOTE]
"i went to see a movie about aliens that claimed to be real, but wasn't and i am disappointed."?
no, really i dont get it.[/QUOTE]
more like "I went to see a movie about aliens, and I was disappointed that it claimed to be real."[/QUOTE]
This. Or, maybe it should say "I was annoyed that it claimed to be real." It's not hard to understand.[/QUOTE]
But then I wouldn't be cleverly rearranging words from his own sentence, good sir.[/QUOTE]
Sorry. I didn't even notice, and my brain is fried due to a school project.
#20
Kitty Sinatra
Dubya lied about Iraq's involvement in 9/11. Bill said he didn't have sexual relations with that woman. Dick denied the charges. Abe hid an interracial relationship. Your presidents aren't honest, why would your advertisers be?
In fact, on the way out, i said to wifey: if they would have cut out ALL of the "real documentary" footage, it would have been a much better movie. The story and the suspense, while nothing new, could very well hold up on their own. The intrigue and drama are there...but the "footage" was SOOO overly dramatized that it took me right out of it.