Are you high? edge-of-your-seat moments? rec-3 was just like a thousand other "horror" movies that have flooded the genre for the past 10 years.
I get it you don't like shaky cam, whatever, different strokes. But rec-3 traded everything that was good about the first two, not for something MORE captivating. But for something that has been done time and time again and is only captivating with an inhuman level of suspended disbelief.
Saying that rec-3 broke the mold by not being
handheld cam is like graduating from the bottle back to the tit.
Sure there have been plenty of found-footage movies kicking around the film fests over the past couple years, but goddamn, it's more edgy than every freakin thing you mentioned as a "merit" for rec-3. And you know what, rec-1 and 2, did the found-footage cam RIGHT.
It broke away from it's roots and joined the ranks of mediocre horror movies the likes of which only have fans at pop-culture conventions. Rec-3 was as conventional and predictable as they come. I can't stress this enough.
the only thing "different" about rec-3 is that it wasn't like rec-1 or 2. Other then that, it goes back to the very formulas that your so called "rabid fans" have been giving their money to for the past 10 years. Which is sad because what made rec 1 and 2 great was that they were different than every horror movie that wasn't a found-footage movie, which is 80% of them.
reply
share
venusboys3
12 years ago
I don't dislike the handheld camera look at all. Blair Witch is one of my favorite horror films... as is the first REC. I just don't think there is any need to be constrained to just that style. The Paranormal activity movies pretty much prove that by getting increasingly ridiculous as they grasp at new ways to shoe-horn in their 'security cam' gimmick.
The hand-held thing is great when it works, and when there is some point to it. But is never going to be anything but a variant style... it is too limiting. Opting into it for the entire movie does constrain the story telling to a certain degree. Dropping it, as REC3 did, frees them up to tell other sorts of stories.
REC3 certainly isn't as balls-out scary as the first one, it isn't meant to be... but there is a good deal of tension. Those 'edge-of-your-seat' moments I mentioned.
Meanwhile, conventional camera work exists for a reason... it is a visual language that has been built up over many years. Most all viewers understand it even if they can't list all its rules. Sure... keep pushing the medium, but don't think you're doing that by just tossing out all that came before.
reply
share