Connect with us

Editorials

Looking Back on the Controversial Monster Mockumentaries That Came Along in the Wake of ‘Blair Witch’

Published

on

When The Blair Witch Project was released back in 1999, many critics questioned the ethics involved in presenting the film as a true story in order to generate box office buzz. Of course, humanity has been embellishing real life through storytelling since the dawn of time, so this wasn’t the first or last time that genre media would attempt to mislead audiences for fun and profit. Nevertheless, the movie sparked a conversation about how much reality we can really expect from our entertainment, though we never really found an answer.

These discussions would resurface a few years later with the rise of several popular TV specials speculating about the existence of mythical creatures, all presented in the style of legitimate nature documentaries. Tackling everything from dragons to mermaids and even colossal sharks, these specials became notorious for blurring the line between fact and fiction on networks traditionally associated with educational programming. However, putting ethical concerns aside, I actually think that these strange productions tapped into a primal fascination with monstrous mythology, and they’re still worth revisiting today, provided that you take their sensationalism with a grain of salt.

Of course, fake/misleading documentaries have been a thing since the format was first invented, with memorable incidents including the BBC’s infamous Spaghetti Tree special in the 50s and Fox’s Alien Autopsy investigation in the 90s. With the rise of Found-Footage movies and speculative nature docs like The Future is Wild and Alien Planet, plus an entire pantheon of shows based on Cryptozoology and Parapsychology, it’s only natural that networks would eventually attempt to use this format to explore classic myths and legends.

That brings us to Animal Planet’s 2004 special Dragons: A Fantasy Made Real (also known as The Last Dragon in its Channel 4 release), a blockbuster mockumentary that opens with an absurd battle between a T-Rex and a wyvern during the Cretaceous period. While Dragons feels a lot a natural evolution of the paleontology docs that were all the rage at the time, cutting between state-of-the-art CGI re-enactments and the supposed paleontological discoveries that inspired them, the show also boasted impressive visuals and sultry narration by either Patrick Stewart or Ian Holmes, depending on the region.

Not your average nature show.

Even as a child, I was aware that the program was trying to entertain more than it was trying to teach, but much like the X-Files, wanting to believe made it much more fun. Even with bizarre theories like positing that dragons survived the extinction event that killed the dinosaurs by evolving into mythical sea-serpents, Dragons still managed to be a genuinely informative special. By exploring the far reaches of the dragon myth throughout several cultures and presenting a more-or-less scientific revision of classic mythology, the special works as a clever thought experiment, even if some of its leaps in logic don’t quite hold up to scrutiny.

In 2011, we’d see a similar show that would double down on the sensationalist elements with Animal Planet/Discovery Channel’s Mermaids: The Body Found. While it’s the most ethically dubious of these productions, with only a few easy-to-miss disclaimers explaining that it’s a work of fiction, it’s also the most entertaining. Structured like a genuine investigation of evidence suggesting that a race of intelligent humanoids is thriving under the sea while also dealing with some real world conspiracy theories, it’s no wonder that this special scared the crap out of people when it first came out.

Mermaids might not be the first thing that come to mind when thinking of horrific monsters, but The Body Found gives off some serious Lovecraftian vibes as “real scientists” discuss the implications of sharing the planet with sentient underwater creatures. There are also a few Found-Footage segments that went viral around the time the special was released, with folks claiming to have caught glimpses of these illusive aquatic beings. While most of the footage has clearly been altered with CGI, it was believable enough to stir up quite a bit of controversy, convincing many viewers (especially younger ones) that these findings were legit.

Despite being criticized for its misleading presentation, The Body Found was a ratings juggernaut, breaking several records and eventually earning a sequel with 2013’s Mermaids: The New Evidence. While this second doc is mostly more of the same, with “experts” doing their best to justify the existence of mermaids based on recovered amateur footage and supposed physical evidence, it was another massive success for the channel. The sequel did a better job of making sure that viewers understood this was a piece of fiction, but it was still a bit too convincing for some folks. Regardless, the Mermaids specials are still some of my favorite TV oddities, even though they probably shouldn’t have been broadcast on channels known for informative nature shows.

Spooky.

Of course, you can’t discuss nature documentaries (speculative or otherwise) without touching on the worldwide phenomena of Shark Week. And in 2013’s edition of Discovery Channel’s Shark-based programming, the network released the least fantastical of these mockumentaries with Megalodon: The Monster Shark Lives. Another pseudo-journalistic endeavor where scientists discuss phony evidence suggesting that these monstrous creatures somehow escaped extinction, Megalodon shattered all Shark Week ratings records with its premiere, proving that audiences were ravenous for speculative content.

As gigantic sharks are a bit closer to reality than mermaids or dragons, The Monster Shark Lives sparked the ire of several scientists and NGOs who accused the special of being irresponsible. While the show makes an effort to provide at least some scientific basis for its outlandish theories, there’s no denying that it feels a lot more like an entertaining prelude to a monster movie than genuinely educational programming.

Being such a huge success, it’s only natural that this one also earned a couple of sequels with 2014’s Megalodon: The New Evidence and 2018’s Megalodon: Fact Vs. Fiction. While the former dives even deeper into speculative territory, offering more Found-Footage evidence and outrageous testimonies, the latter is actually a re-edit of the original special with added segments debunking most of the phony pseudo-science. The added scientific context may get in the way of having fun with the original show’s premise, but I applaud Discovery Channel for attempting to inform viewers through speculative storytelling.

At the end of the day, these strange pieces of Docufiction might not be everyone’s cup of tea, but with the recent rise of Fake News scandals and a generalized distrust of authority, it’s funny to look back on this weird moment in television history when huge networks were willing to combine fact and fiction in order to spark a conversation. They might have been a little irresponsible at times, but I think there’s a lot of entertainment to be had in revisiting these shows in a new context. Much like the best speculative fiction, these specials suggested that maybe the important question isn’t “do monsters exist?” but rather “what if they did?”, and that’s enough for me to recommend them to monster aficionados everywhere.

Born Brazilian, raised Canadian, Luiz is a writer and Film student that spends most of his time watching movies and subsequently complaining about them.

Editorials

‘Amityville Karen’ Is a Weak Update on ‘Serial Mom’ [Amityville IP]

Published

on

Amityville Karen horror

Twice a month Joe Lipsett will dissect a new Amityville Horror film to explore how the “franchise” has evolved in increasingly ludicrous directions. This is “The Amityville IP.”

A bizarre recurring issue with the Amityville “franchise” is that the films tend to be needlessly complicated. Back in the day, the first sequels moved away from the original film’s religious-themed haunted house storyline in favor of streamlined, easily digestible concepts such as “haunted lamp” or “haunted mirror.”

As the budgets plummeted and indie filmmakers capitalized on the brand’s notoriety, it seems the wrong lessons were learned. Runtimes have ballooned past the 90-minute mark and the narratives are often saggy and unfocused.

Both issues are clearly on display in Amityville Karen (2022), a film that starts off rough, but promising, and ends with a confused whimper.

The promise is embodied by the tinge of self-awareness in Julie Anne Prescott (The Amityville Harvest)’s screenplay, namely the nods to John Waters’ classic 1994 satire, Serial Mom. In that film, Beverly Sutphin (an iconic Kathleen Turner) is a bored, white suburban woman who punished individuals who didn’t adhere to her rigid definition of social norms. What is “Karen” but a contemporary equivalent?

In director/actor Shawn C. Phillips’ film, Karen (Lauren Francesca) is perpetually outraged. In her introductory scenes, she makes derogatory comments about immigrants, calls a female neighbor a whore, and nearly runs over a family blocking her driveway. She’s a broad, albeit familiar persona; in many ways, she’s less of a character than a caricature (the living embodiment of the name/meme).

These early scenes also establish a fairly straightforward plot. Karen is a code enforcement officer with plans to shut down a local winery she has deemed disgusting. They’re preparing for a big wine tasting event, which Karen plans to ruin, but when she steals a bottle of cursed Amityville wine, it activates her murderous rage and goes on a killing spree.

Simple enough, right?

Unfortunately, Amityville Karen spins out of control almost immediately. At nearly every opportunity, Prescott’s screenplay eschews narrative cohesion and simplicity in favour of overly complicated developments and extraneous characters.

Take, for example, the wine tasting event. The film spends an entire day at the winery: first during the day as a band plays, then at a beer tasting (???) that night. Neither of these events are the much touted wine-tasting, however; that is actually a private party happening later at server Troy (James Duval)’s house.

Weirdly though, following Troy’s death, the party’s location is inexplicably moved to Karen’s house for the climax of the film, but the whole event plays like an afterthought and features a litany of characters we have never met before.

This is a recurring issue throughout Amityville Karen, which frequently introduces random characters for a scene or two. Karen is typically absent from these scenes, which makes them feel superfluous and unimportant. When the actress is on screen, the film has an anchor and a narrative drive. The scenes without her, on the other hand, feel bloated and directionless (blame editor Will Collazo Jr., who allows these moments to play out interminably).

Compounding the issue is that the majority of the actors are non-professionals and these scenes play like poorly performed improv. The result is long, dull stretches that features bad actors talking over each other, repeating the same dialogue, and generally doing nothing to advance the narrative or develop the characters.

While Karen is one-note and histrionic throughout the film, at least there’s a game willingness to Francesca’s performance. It feels appropriately campy, though as the film progresses, it becomes less and less clear if Amityville Karen is actually in on the joke.

Like Amityville Cop before it, there are legit moments of self-awareness (the Serial Mom references), but it’s never certain how much of this is intentional. Take, for example, Karen’s glaringly obvious wig: it unconvincingly fails to conceal Francesca’s dark hair in the back, but is that on purpose or is it a technical error?

Ultimately there’s very little to recommend about Amityville Karen. Despite the game performance by its lead and the gentle homages to Serial Mom’s prank call and white shoes after Labor Day jokes, the never-ending improv scenes by non-professional actors, the bloated screenplay, and the jittery direction by Phillips doom the production.

Clocking in at an insufferable 100 minutes, Amityville Karen ranks among the worst of the “franchise,” coming in just above Phillips’ other entry, Amityville Hex.

Amityville Karen

The Amityville IP Awards go to…

  • Favorite Subplot: In the afternoon event, there’s a self-proclaimed “hot boy summer” band consisting of burly, bare-chested men who play instruments that don’t make sound (for real, there’s no audio of their music). There’s also a scheming manager who is skimming money off the top, but that’s not as funny.
  • Least Favorite Subplot: For reasons that don’t make any sense, the winery is also hosting a beer tasting which means there are multiple scenes of bartender Alex (Phillips) hoping to bring in women, mistakenly conflating a pint of beer with a “flight,” and goading never before seen characters to chug. One of them describes the beer as such: “It looks like a vampire menstruating in a cup” (it’s a gold-colored IPA for the record, so…no).
  • Amityville Connection: The rationale for Karen’s killing spree is attributed to Amityville wine, whose crop was planted on cursed land. This is explained by vino groupie Annie (Jennifer Nangle) to band groupie Bianca (Lilith Stabs). It’s a lot of nonsense, but it is kind of fun when Annie claims to “taste the damnation in every sip.”
  • Neverending Story: The film ends with an exhaustive FIVE MINUTE montage of Phillips’ friends posing as reporters in front of terrible green screen discussing the “killer Karen” story. My kingdom for Amityville’s regular reporter Peter Sommers (John R. Walker) to return!
  • Best Line 1: Winery owner Dallas (Derek K. Long), describing Karen: “She’s like a walking constipation with a hemorrhoid”
  • Best Line 2: Karen, when a half-naked, bleeding woman emerges from her closet: “Is this a dream? This dream is offensive! Stop being naked!”
  • Best Line 3: Troy, upset that Karen may cancel the wine tasting at his house: “I sanded that deck for days. You don’t just sand a deck for days and then let someone shit on it!”
  • Worst Death: Karen kills a Pool Boy (Dustin Clingan) after pushing his head under water for literally 1 second, then screeches “This is for putting leaves on my plants!”
  • Least Clear Death(s): The bodies of a phone salesman and a barista are seen in Karen’s closet and bathroom, though how she killed them are completely unclear
  • Best Death: Troy is stabbed in the back of the neck with a bottle opener, which Karen proceeds to crank
  • Wannabe Lynch: After drinking the wine, Karen is confronted in her home by Barnaby (Carl Solomon) who makes her sign a crude, hand drawn blood contract and informs her that her belly is “pregnant from the juices of his grapes.” Phillips films Barnaby like a cross between the unhoused man in Mulholland Drive and the Mystery Man in Lost Highway. It’s interesting, even if the character makes absolutely no sense.
  • Single Image Summary: At one point, a random man emerges from the shower in a towel and excitedly poops himself. This sequence perfectly encapsulates the experience of watching Amityville Karen.
  • Pray for Joe: Many of these folks will be back in Amityville Shark House and Amityville Webcam, so we’re not out of the woods yet…

Next time: let’s hope Christmas comes early with 2022’s Amityville Christmas Vacation. It was the winner of Fangoria’s Best Amityville award, after all!

Amityville Karen movie

Continue Reading