Editorials
[Special Feature] small budget GONE BIG
The first few weeks of August have come and gone and the summer of 2011 has had its share of big budget, summer blockbusters to deepen pockets and hustle children with promises of action figures and printed t-shirts. Super 8, Transformers: Dark of the Moon, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II, X-Men: First Class, and the well-received Rise of the Planet of the Apes read out like a bank statement, each one worth millions and bringing in profits to ease studio woes. It’s a typical summer in the entertainment realm- tons of action with high returns.
But it’s the smaller films that are usually forgotten during this time of year- the films that have a high impact but cost a fraction of what the explosive-prone, star-studded box office beauties do. Those of us living in the bloody, paranormal kingdom of Hollywood horror are often reminded that those low cost flicks can be just as worthy as the ones that break the bank. Just this year, Insidious once again proved that small budgets can go big- conjuring up memories of past horror sensations that have accomplished the same magic trick- turning a few bucks into a few million.
The Blair Witch Project (1999) is a crystal clear example of low budget, high impact filmmaking at its finest. The project, with its amateur-footage style approach, was filmed on a staggeringly low budget (estimates range from $20,000 up to $750,000) and ended up grossing over $240 million worldwide. Not bad for a tale of three film students venturing into the Maryland woods searching for a real-life urban legend. “Both Ed Sanchez (co-writer/co-director) and I felt that we had a compelling concept, but it was impossible for anyone to gauge just how big Blair would become,” recalled Dan Myrick, one half of the director/writer duo behind the famed lost footage flick. “That’s what makes this business frustrating and exciting at the same time, no one really knows anything.”
Blair Witch’s simplistic plot is a turn on- an adventure in investigative filmmaking gone wrong. The movie takes viewers on a several day long ride into the world of the Blair Witch, a local legend about a hermit who kidnapped seven children and brought them to his home where they were then tortured and murdered. After turning himself into the police, he claimed that the ghost of an 18th century witch had been terrorizing him and forced him to commit the murders- thus, giving birth to the tale. Simple plot with a small group of characters; talk about an easy formula.
The best part about The Blair Witch Project though had nothing to do with the actual film- it was the ‘based on true events’ marketing campaign that forced the audience to question whether or not what they were seeing was real, which was a huge draw for potential audience members. Influenced by programs such as the 70’s pseudo-documentary series “In Search Of” and “Ancient Astronauts”, Myrick and Sanchez were able to create a worldwide phenomena on a well calculated budget. “What struck me about these programs was the telling of these compelling narratives (fictional in most cases) through the lens of a documentary style. It was very compelling at the time and I felt it would be cool to take the same kind of approach with Blair.”
And that they did. The film’s realistic nature is the bulk of what makes the movie so intriguing- and why the budget was such a small factor when it came to completion. “We would like to say we employed a “method filmmaking” approach to Blair. By this, I mean, we took great strides to portray our narrative and our actors as completely authentic. We shot using a detailed outline, that allowed the actors to improv their dialogue. We used GPS positioning technology to allow for specific route and campsite locations rather than having a crew surrounding the actors, thus allowing them to wander, seemingly alone, through the woods. These techniques, among others, we theorized at the time, would allow the actors to remain deeper in character, for a longer period of time, and since it was supposed to be “their film” by design, letting them shoot as they went along only added to the realism.”
Blair Witch, even with mixed reviews (some going so far as to call it one of the greatest horror movies of the 90’s, while the Razzies felt it appropriate to nominate it for Worst Picture back in 1999), is arguably one of the most effective horror flicks of our generation. Let’s face it- the minute that camera drops, so did our stomachs- no big explosions necessary.
Shortly after Blair Witch, the horror community, and the world, were after the next big thing. The genre was clearly taking a turn toward slasher flicks and, with The Splat Pack slowly coming into being, several films took the spotlight. Eli Roth’s Hostel. Alex Aja’s High Tension. Neil Marshall’s The Descent. But it was 2004’s SAW, directed by James Wan and penned by Leigh Whannell, that certainly earned its place with a light budget and heavy content. Filmed on a $1.2 million budget, the film went on to earn over $100 million worldwide and opened the gateway to an entire franchise, ending with last year’s seventh installment, which, alone, brought in over $130 million.
Not too shabby for something that came off of an initial short-film pitch by a couple of film students out of Australia.
The films center around Jigsaw, the serial killer who uses puzzles to murder his victims. (Milton Bradley, take note). But the murders aren’t senseless, nor are they part of some elaborate revenge plot or the work of a paranormal feat. They are the creation of a mastermind who was pushed to the edge by society and their frivolous ways. It was certainly an original concept and one that would open the gateway to smart-plot horror- something a bit deeper than some half naked girl running up the stairs being chased by a guy in an oversized sport coat paired with a super-sized knife. Horror fans were hungry for something different, and Wan delivered the goods.
The plot of the original SAW film was perfectly structured for a low budget. Aside from the scenes where the outcome is being pieced together, the film is basically about two guys in a room with a dead body trying to figure out how in the hell they got there in the first place. The best part about the original SAW film is that it was one of the first in a decade long span of teenage friendly slasher flicks to introduce an effectively scary plot and a brand new murderer to latch onto- after all, who didn’t fall in love with the tricycle riding puppet master?
Wan should pat himself on the back for a masterpiece that has now spanned nearly a decade by itself. With the right formula, he created not only one of the single most influential films of the Splat Pack era, but enough momentum for an entire, blood-filled institution- all on a minuscule budget. The people behind Clash of the Titans should be ashamed of themselves.
I remember ‘voting’ to see Paranormal Activity. The film had been creating quite the stir and I wanted to see it so damn bad I spent three days on its website voting for it to arrive in my city. And low and behold, about two weeks later, the film finally got a national release- and it was worth the wait. The theater was packed and the reactions were priceless; over the course of two hours I saw everything from a girl crying her eyes out to a man running out of the auditorium. It was almost better than watching one of those bad teen episodes of “The Maury Show”- the only thing it lacked was the screaming army guy.
Director Oren Peli did an amazing thing with Paranormal Activity. On a budget of only $15,000, he made an effectively scary ghost movie, minus CGI, makeup and costly special effects. He did what many before him had failed to do- actually make an audience feel as if there was ghostly activity inside a fictional house and that it could really happen, using only a couple of actors and a few cameras.
The movie introduces us to Katie and Micah, a seemingly happy couple co-habitating amidst Paranormal Activity. Katie has had this sort of thing happen before during her childhood years, but Micah isn’t convinced- so he buys a camera to set up at night in an effort to ‘capture’ the activity in their home. As one night progresses into the next, the camera proves that Katie might be right- and that it isn’t the house that’s haunted. “Our goal with [Paranormal Activity] was to create a movie that would get audiences imaginations rolling, get under their skin and stick with them- scaring them not only the theater but hopefully later on that night when they got home,” said Katie Featherston, Paranormal‘s leading lady. “We were dedicated to creating the highest quality film that we could with what we had. We didn’t take short cuts, we talked through plot holes, and tried to create characters people could relate to and tried to make it as believable as possible. To Oren’s credit, thought, it was clearly his vision.”
Paranormal Activity went on to gross over $180 million and led to a sequel in 2010; another low budget flick that was filmed at under $3 million and came back with a similar return. This Halloween audiences will be treated to the third installment, which continues the story of Katie, her sister, and the demon-ghosts that follow them.
“I am humbled by the effect that Paranormal Activity has had on horror fans and the movie industry,” continued Katie. “I think it’s a great reminder that creativity, ingenuity, and collaboration can sometimes be more effective than a big budget. I also hope that it encourages young filmmakers to keep making their films and putting their own stuff out there.”
I know one thing- it’s made me wonder if putting powder down on my bedroom floor would be an effective ghost trap. And that says a lot.
I’m starting to think that Wan and Whannell must have one hell of a savings account- they know how to stretch a budget and make themselves a pretty penny in the process. When Insidious hit theaters, many had their doubts- but after the film’s release and the support of even the most critical of reviewers, the film has become one of the most successful of 2011. Originally filmed on a $1.5 million budget, the film has since earned well over $50 million domestically.
Talk about deja vu.
With the success of SAW behind them, both Wan and Whannell had worked on several projects since the Jigsaw phenomena had begun. Whannell worked with the SAW franchise briefly and reunited with Wan on Dead Silence, only to hit a brick wall with the film’s box office failure. That’s why, prior to the release of Insidious, skeptics were concerned that this was another attempt at puppetry- when, in fact, the duo was about to strike gold.
Insidious tells the story of a family that moves into a home and one of their children succumbs to a mysterious coma. After the mother experiences ghostly activity inside the home, she forces her family to up and move, all while the child sleeps. It’s not until later that the family discovers their son is not in a coma- he’s actually in a sleep induced state brought on by the child’s ability to disappear into a realm called The Further. But it doesn’t end there- evil spirits, a red-faced demon in particular, are after the child- and it’s up to his family, specifically his father, to save him.
Really great concept. Really scary visuals. In all, Insidious is just a really good movie- period. And it was yet another success story of a little bit of money going a long way.
When it comes to horror- it’s never about the budget. Sure, an inflated budget could add a bit more gore, maybe a couple of extra actors, a larger set and a few more stunts- but what then? Does the movie gain something more? The answer: no. It’s the concept- it’s the idea that the filmmakers take from the script to the screen and turn it into a phenomena that frightens audiences, that turns stomachs and pulls out reactions that those of us watching might not have known existed. It’s the intensity that horror brings to us- the fear of the unknown, those images that conjure up our inner most fears, bringing them to the surface for the world to see. It’s about the talent behind the movie that makes a film good. Just because it wasn’t made on a Michael Bay budget doesn’t mean that the quality is sacrificed- it just means that the audience is going to have to deal without a few explosions and a couple of known actors. I’d say that’s a good price to pay for a film that leaves you breathless- or scared of the dark.
READ MORE FROM ANDREA ON HER BLOG, THE ALBIN WAY
In this day and age, the word “troll” is often used to describe various online nuisances. Yet as abundant and irksome as the modern troll can be, they aren’t usually as fearsome as their mythological counterparts. I’m not talking about the small and gentler versions that have become more common to see in media. No, there are much bigger and scarier trolls out there—and André Øvredal’s movie Troll Hunter is one of the best places to find them.
It doesn’t take long for Troll Hunter (or Trolljegeren) to dump the Blair Witch Project-esque setup and aim for something a lot fresher. The trajectory of the story is augmented by Otto Jespersen’s character Hans, the titular Troll Hunter. The second he comes barreling out of the deep, dark woods and shouts “troll” at the camera, this movie takes a turn into what feels like uncharted territory. Not only subject-wise, but also conceptually.
For fantastical and made-up subject matter in cinema, found footage is a fast way to add a guise of believability. After all, what we accept to be the most crucial aspect of documentaries—the truth—rubs off on pseudo-documentaries, despite our understanding of the pretense involved. That is what Øvredal delivered with Troll Hunter: a movie so convincing that some viewers wondered if trolls really do exist. So, had this been straightforwardly made, it likely wouldn’t have been as effective. Conventional narratives would be more inclined to treat something like trolls as flat out unreal, and never try to convince the audience to think otherwise.
Hans petrifies the three-headed Tusseladd troll.
The viewers, like the characters trailing Hans, are quickly thrown into the deeper end of that extraordinary story. They have to process all this new information while staying on the go. So, although there is no significant amount of meandering, narratively or physically, there is still a good amount of atmosphere, not to mention tension building. It’s never anything frightful, but then again, Troll Hunter isn’t your standard offering of horror; it’s more on the low end of the dark fantasy spectrum. We aren’t ever spirited away to a faraway world—we stay in rather familiar surroundings, as well as dip into those less so. The outcome is a movie where you’re constantly more in awe than in terror.
As fantasy fiction might do, Troll Hunter prefers not to deal with incredulity. There is no time to waste on doubt, as interviewer Thomas (Glenn Erland Tosterud), soundperson Johanna (Johanna Mørck), and cameraman Kalle (Tomas Alf Larsen) all follow Hans around, recording whatever this character is willing to reveal about his bizarre job. Of course, the Troll Hunter himself is not an open book; in that respect, the diegetic documentary fails to fully capture and unpack the more interesting of its two subjects. Yes, all those giant, monstrous trolls are indeed incredible, but understandably, your mind wanders to their pursuer. What kind of person signs up for this gig and then chooses to stick with it for so long?
Reviews have called out Troll Hunter for its lack of character development. In regard to Thomas and his fellow documentarians, that criticism is valid, but bear in mind, they aren’t the focus of the story, either. Meanwhile, Hans is a well-crafted character. At least better than first realized. Before he was introduced, Hans had already grown tired of the troll grind. Fed up with that low compensation for his services, resentful of the bureaucracy, and wanting to expose his employer on a large scale, Hans’ discontent is glaring.
Then there are those finer details about the Troll Hunter, such as that indifference to both the natural splendor of his everyday surroundings and the affections of an obviously smitten colleague, that also suggest some level of despondency. So it is fair to say this movie doesn’t feature any sizable growth for its characters; however, the namesake isn’t underwritten. No doubt, putting a real-life character like Otto Jespersen in that role is partly why Hans is so fascinating—maybe even relatable.
Otto Jespersen as Hans the Troll Hunter.
There is always a small risk whenever using the term “mockumentary” to describe a found-footage movie, as the word could imply humor where there is none. In the case of Troll Hunter, the term’s usage is appropriate. Some folks have claimed the English-dubbed version has the more comedic tone, however, the Norwegian cut isn’t exactly humorless. Apart from the trolls’ absurd appearances, this is a movie where the characters nearly choke on the monsters’ farts, and Christians are like walking targets. Hans’ complete apathy towards everything is another cause of laughter. Overall, the comedy is intentionally dry and inconsistent. Unfunny, though? Absolutely not.
In a movie where endemic creatures are maltreated, as well as disavowed from living freely and peacefully, it’s hard not to notice the ecological message buried beneath the story. In addition to that is the unmistakable political satire. There is this whole business about intrusive and unsightly power lines—like trolls, they’re big blemishes on the land—that leads to what is perhaps the movie’s funniest moment. The scene in question is that one where certain electric lines, the ones secretly being used to keep the trolls at bay, go in a loop and don’t actually send power to any residents. Yet the monitors of said lines don’t find this at all weird. So it stands to reason that Øvredal was having a go at those who accept the government’s doings without question.
Looking past the fact that trolls aren’t actually real, this movie is an enlightening source of information. And not just for international audiences; Norwegians, too, get schooled about their homeland’s own mythology. It’s also evident from everything on screen that Øvredal and his crew were enthusiastic about the topic. The creature designs are the most indicative of that zeal; those imaginative yet myth-accurate manifestations are equally amusing and grotesque. One second you’re laughing at their phallic noses, the next you’re white-knuckling during a hairy sequence. Most surprisingly is how well the trolls’ visual effects hold up after fifteen years. It’s not all spotless, but on the whole, they remain impressive.
Vouching for a mockumentary about trolls isn’t easy, but those who do come around and give it a shot will more than likely be grateful for the recommendation. For Troll Hunter is a real find in that vast and varied genre we call “found footage“.
A bridge troll reaches up for food and finds Hans decked out in armor.
You must be logged in to post a comment.