That's not really an apt comparison, the content of the story and the world is still in the same vein, it's just the shooting style which has changed. The sequel to the American remake, Quarantine 2: Terminal also mostly jettisoned the found footage format and told a tale set in the same universe in a more traditional horror filming style. It's kinda like the difference between Alien and Aliens, one is suspense horror and the other is a war movie, but just because the styles change doesn't mean the universe, characters, and monsters aren't the same.
By your logic:
It'd be like the Night of the Living Dead series suddenly changing to found footage style. Oh wait, that already happened, it was called Diary of the Dead, and no one complained that George Romero changed filming styles, they complained because the story and characters were *beep*
It'd be like if Friday the 13th stopped being a thriller, and became a supernatural slasher film. Oh wait, that already happened, it was called Friday the 13th Part 2 through infinity.
It'd be like if the Nightmare on Elm Street series changed from straight horror suspense to pure black comedy, I think you can tell where I am going with this...
Found footage is an editing and shooting style, not really a genre. It has just been mostly paired with horror because it is a great way to keep the budget down and increase the sense of suspense. In more recent times it has been paired with the monster movie, a la Cloverfield and Troll Hunter, and the super hero film, a la Chronicle.
reply
share
DeusExKatrina
12 years ago
The film is called [REC] for a reason. So yes, saying that it would be like Night of the Living Dead without the Living Dead is an exceptionally apt comparison.
Romero didn't try his hand at found footage until almost 40 years after the film series began, the fan reaction there isn't comparable. If a [REC] movie in 2046 dropped the found footage format, I doubt fans would mind at that point. But with the series still building its legacy, fans of the first two were expecting a lot from [REC] 3 and it never even attempted to deliver, it was a complete and utter departure. It's an awful lot less like the progression of Nightmare on Elm Street and a good bit more like if Scream 2 had abandoned the horror and mystery aspects in favor of straight-up ham-handed third-tier parody ala Scary Movie.
---
"Pride is not the opposite of shame, but its source. True humility is the antidote to shame."
reply
share
C.S.Wood
12 years ago
That's not really an apt comparison, the content of the story and the world is still in the same vein, it's just the shooting style which has changed. The sequel to the American remake, Quarantine 2: Terminal also mostly jettisoned the found footage format and told a tale set in the same universe in a more traditional horror filming style. It's kinda like the difference between Alien and Aliens, one is suspense horror and the other is a war movie, but just because the styles change doesn't mean the universe, characters, and monsters aren't the same.
Nailed. It.
Yes, the title is shorthand for "record" and there isn't some idiot constantly recording, but it's still the same world. Personally I was starting to tune out and ready to fast forward until they dropped the found footage crap, then I could just back and watch and actually be involved in what's happening.
I get that there are a group of horror fans that love found footage, but I personally hate them (mostly because of the "shaky cam" element). I think found footage is a cheap gimmick that's way past its prime. Having someone film an apocalypse instead of trying to be useful makes the characters look like idiots and makes me not care about them (but that's just me).
I think I liked Rec 3 way more than the first two for the simple fact that it was a movie and not entirely built around a stupid gimmick.
Don't try to cash in love, that check will always bounce.
reply
share