Chronicle (Josh Trank)

[Watashi]

IMDb

[Watashi]

I had zero interest in seeing this, but the reviews have been positive and Keith Uhlich's rave changed my interest level from "not seeing" to "I'll check it out".

[Ezee E]

The director of this is tapped to do a Fantastic Four remake now...

[TGM]

Yeah, this was pretty good.

[Watashi]

This is a really great movie.

We can debate if the found footage angle is necessary (it gets pretty distracting and silly, yet the floating camera as an omnipotent being is a cool touch), but at the film's core, it does where most superheroes fail: it tells a complete story. Much like the X-Men comics and movies, Chronicle uses superpowers as metaphors for the transition from adolescence into adulthood and shows how everyday teenagers would act if they stumbled upon powers (it wouldn't be protecting and saving humanity). The characters shouldn't be this likable, but they are. They feel real and they are developed enough where I actually give a damn about them when shit hits the fan in the third act. This film actually has a big spectacle of a third act that delivers unlike most comic book movies.

The film has one weird subplot featuring a forced relationship with a girl with another camera that never really goes anywhere, but when focused on the main kid, Andrew (who's terrific), it transcends a tired overdone genre.

[B-side]

I had zero interest in seeing this, but the reviews have been positive and Keith Uhlich's rave changed my interest level from "not seeing" to "I'll check it out".

Is he always such a poor writer?

[BuffaloWilder]

I just got back from this. Wow - this was really great.

I love that for most of the third act, Andrew flies around and wrecks shit with his mind in a hospital gown and torn bandages. If that's not a reference to AKIRA, I don't know what is.

I wonder if they're trying to set up for a sequel where Matt decides to become a full-fledged superhero, though. And, if they are, they've managed to do it in a way that doesn't feel forced or hackneyed. This film, while being a complete story on its own, could conceivably act as a well-orchestrated origin story to a completely new character.

[Adam]

Ya, this was pretty enjoyable. Felt a little creaky in the early going, but I agree it wasn't as awkward as it could've been and yeah there were a lot of genuine moments. It's also nice that Trank tried to flesh out the Andrew character as much as he did, even if his motivations towards the end aren't all that credible imo. Final fight is great with automatic bonus points added for tearing the shit out of a city not named New York or Los Angeles

And where Wallace at, String?

[Winston*]

Liked this, though it feels padded out even at 85 minutes. The switching camera stuff in the action climax is pretty stupid but at least they establish early on that this isn't technically a found footage movie. Some pretty creative ways of using the format, in contrast to Cloverfield or Paranomal Activity.

The lead looks distractingly like young Leonardo DiCaprio.

[TGM]

Some pretty creative ways of using the format, in contrast to Cloverfield or Paranomal Activity.

Yeah, I was thinking about how the guys who did Cloverfield were talking about doing sequels based from other people's perspectives, since they weren't the only one's running around the city with a camera during the movie. This movie sort of jumped the gun on that idea by giving us multiple perspectives in the first go.

[Winston*]

There was a trailer for this Todd Phillips found footage movie that looks like a new low in this genre. Narrative Girls Gone Wild.

[Spinal]

I don't really understand the positive buzz on this one. It's pretty dopey.

[Watashi]

I don't really understand the positive buzz on this one. It's pretty dopey.

Yeah, it's dopey. But it's dopey in ways all superhero films are dopey.

I like how the film shows a world where the bullied nerd-turned-superhero doesn't get the girl or save the day. The film works best at showing the inner turmoil of humiliation and self-depravity of a teenager without teetering towards cliche. As someone whose been in the main character;s position all throughout high school, I immediately sympathized.

[Dukefrukem]

I like it better how it shows how high school kids would react to getting super powers. The film fails in the scope of how it is filmed. Because of this, it lacks some of the WOW shots it should have considered. I'd still like to see a live action Akira film.

[Kurosawa Fan]

Okay, I apologize for seeming like I'm going to eviscerate this film, but I went with my little sister, who really liked it, and I had to pretend it wasn't bad so that I didn't hurt her feelings. This thread was all I could think about on the drive home. I need to vent.

I'm astounded that you guys are receiving this so well. First of all, this is the most poorly conceived use of found-footage/hand-held style I can remember seeing. Not only does it seem like a giant stretch that they would continue filming many of the moments, and that they created an entire character just to be able to have multiple angles, but it makes them emotionally hollow, as if the recording is only for the benefit of a potential viewer and not because there's genuine feeling behind their actions.

[

Show Spoiler

Case in point, Andrew's recorded apology at Steve's grave. Or how about Andrew somehow setting up a camera in the hospital room after being arrested and handcuffed to the bed. Sure was convenient.

]

Beyond that, it's just silly. The movie plays out exactly how one would expect, Andrew's descent isn't well-realized (I mean, really? That's his breaking point?), the thought that they could use their powers in public like they were without anyone noticing is absurd, the strength of the characters is inconsistent, and the movie has zero lasting power. In fact, even though I wanted to come in here and tear it to pieces, I'm already struggling to remember it.

Seriously, in all probability I'm waking up tomorrow and changing my rating to one star.

[Watashi]

KF's little sister > KF

[Spinal]

Thank you, KF. Now watch The Turin Horse. :lol:

[Kurosawa Fan]

Thank you, KF. Now watch The Turin Horse. :lol:

I've actually never seen a Tarr film because I'm afraid I'll hate them. I don't think I'll start with The Turin Horse.

[BuffaloWilder]

I'm astounded that you guys are receiving this so well. First of all, this is the most poorly conceived use of found-footage/hand-held style I can remember seeing.

If by worst, you mean best, then yes.

Not only does it seem like a giant stretch that they would continue filming many of the moments, and that they created an entire character just to be able to have multiple angles

Uh, I think Andrew was kind of the main character of the film, and the film's use of multiple angles with the cameras is a proxy of his character's evolution - how it gradually gets less stiff as he learns to control it and the rest of his powers better, and it's origin as a whole as something he was going to show to CPS to demonstrate his father's abuses.

but it makes them emotionally hollow, as if the recording is only for the benefit of a potential viewer and not because there's genuine feeling behind their actions.

Well, this is kind of commented on in the film - how both Andrew's cousin and the football star tell him that it seems like he's using the camera as a way to distance himself from the world around him.

[

Show Spoiler

Case in point, Andrew's recorded apology at Steve's grave. [/quote]

Something again commented on by the characters in the scene preceding it - how it seems that Andrew hasn't turned the camera off since they realized what they could do, who exactly it is that he's recording it for, and that he seems to be using it as a contextual barrier through which he can view everything as a game.

[quote]Or how about Andrew somehow setting up a camera in the hospital room after being arrested and handcuffed to the bed. Sure was convenient.

]

Actually, its said that the hospital did that - it's a relatively minor contrivance, especially considering how they use it's jump from being stationary to moving and zooming in and acting of its own accord to hip us to the slow return of Andrew's consciousness.

Beyond that, it's just silly. The movie plays out exactly how one would expect, Andrew's descent isn't well-realized (I mean, really? That's his breaking point?)

Well, he didn't really have a set breaking point in the film, that I could see - his callousness towards other people gradually builds and escalates, and it's hard to say where exactly it becomes something dangerous.

[B-side]

I've actually never seen a Tarr film because I'm afraid I'll hate them. I don't think I'll start with The Turin Horse.

Yeah, that'd be a bad idea. Start with Almanac of Fall, then progress from there.

[Kiusagi]

It did bother me that they had to keep finding excuses for everything to be filmed. The whole found footage angle was probably just a way to keep the budget down.

In regards to Andrew's descent and breaking point, I thought it was believable. Storing that much anger for so long is enough to make anyone go mad.

[Kurosawa Fan]

If by worst, you mean best, then yes.



Uh, I think Andrew was kind of the main character of the film, and the film's use of multiple angles with the cameras is a proxy of his character's evolution - how it gradually gets less stiff as he learns to control it and the rest of his powers better, and it's origin as a whole as something he was going to show to CPS to demonstrate his father's abuses.

I think you're giving the conceit more credit than it deserves. First off, I don't think an 18 year old needs to show CPS anything. He can wait a few months and leave. I think if you want to give the camera purpose, it seemed to me it was to document how awful his life was. I got the feeling it was something of a suicide note. That works fine. I had no complaints, aside from the fact that many people would have noticed the cavalier way they were using their powers, with the camera use in the first half of the film. The second half is where it goes to shit. The girl whose sole purpose in the film was to provide perspective for when Andrew wasn't taping, obviously by the way I'm describing her, was pathetically developed and just as easily discarded when she was of no use anymore. As for what you mention below...

Well, this is kind of commented on in the film - how both Andrew's cousin and the football star tell him that it seems like he's using the camera as a way to distance himself from the world around him.

Something again commented on by the characters in the scene preceding it - how it seems that Andrew hasn't turned the camera off since they realized what they could do, who exactly it is that he's recording it for, and that he seems to be using it as a contextual barrier through which he can view everything as a game.

...I get using the camera as a filter, and even if I didn't, they made a point to smash me over the head with that message, but to say he doesn't turn the camera off is just categorically wrong. He turns it off constantly throughout the film, which only magnifies the moments he doesn't turn it off. The sole reason he isn't turning it off in some of these moments, like the moment I spoilered in my original post, is because the filmmakers want to display a leve of conscience in him even while he loses his grip, and because they've chosen to film in this way, they have no other option but to show him filming it himself, which hampers the legitimacy of the moments (the same goes for his actions after he can't afford his mother's medication; I don't see a distraught son, I only see a narcissistic teenager). Now, that's fine if they want him to be a true villain, but as a conflicted, bullied teenager, I lost sympathy for him, which makes the conclusion of the film just as emotionally hollow as those moments.

Actually, its said that the hospital did that - it's a relatively minor contrivance, especially considering how they use it's jump from being stationary to moving and zooming in and acting of its own accord to hip us to the slow return of Andrew's consciousness.

Yep, it's a neat little trick, but contrivance is the key word. Like most of the use of first-person camera in the film, it tries to be clever at the expense of logic. The hospital room had a security camera in the hallway outside the room, as well as inside the room. Placing an expensive camera on a tripod in front of Andrew's bed is a disingenuous move done solely to allow the moment with his father to make it into the movie, much like giving Matt a "girlfriend" who also happens to film everything in her life.

Well, he didn't really have a set breaking point in the film, that I could see - his callousness towards other people gradually builds and escalates, and it's hard to say where exactly it becomes something dangerous.

No, it's nailed down pretty securely to him vomiting on the pink-haired girl at the party. He had found acceptance and was controlling his anger until that moment, and then he withdrew, and shortly after

[

Show Spoiler

he kills Steve.

]

I'd say that's a well-defined breaking point. And it's a silly one, just like the rest of this movie.

[Dukefrukem]

How can this be the worst use of found footage and Cloverfield be acceptable? If anything, Cloverfield doesnt mention any of the points Buff brings up other than I remember one of the characters saying "I have to record this!"

I loved the way Andrew used the camera to breakaway from the shakycam and turn it into a second perspective of his life. Loved the shots with him lying in bed practicing.

[Kurosawa Fan]

How can this be the worst use of found footage and Cloverfield be acceptable?

Cloverfield's is logical. It's a document of one continuous evening, and the event is so surreal and terrifying that the desire to capture it on film makes sense (much like the first half of Chronicle). It's not great by any means, don't get me wrong, and there are plenty of moments where logic would have dictated you stop worrying about the camera, but there isn't a conscious decision happening to start and stop recording in that movie, the camera just keeps rolling. And there aren't multiple angles with flimsy explanation.

[number8]

I've always assumed that with all found footage movies, the conceit is that someone actually edited the footage down into a presentable 90 minute reel.