To see or not to see....
#24fanforlife
this was a FICTIONAL story. Now I'm not sure if I even want to go see it or
not. My best friend went a couple of nights ago and it scared her to death,
but she didn't know it wasn't real. She still doesn't...I'm gonna have to
tell her tomorrow....Anyway, should I see the film or not, knowing it's
fake...Any and all advice welcome.
Kevin Karstens
>Geez Louise, man...
DOES IT HAVE TO BE REAL TO BE COOL and SCARY?????
Its damn original, creepy as hell, and WELL DONE, if you have a creative mind...
Go see it and enjoy the thing, already!!!!
(make sure to post your thoughts on it here afterwards...Im curios as to what ya will think, now....;)
Thanks!
Kevin
Visit the Karstens Creations website...Wicked Adult Art!
Screensavers, Freebies....
www.primenet.com/~karcreat/
Email karc...@primenet.com
ICQ# 13424733
*********************
"The Religious Right is actually NEITHER..."
Dennis Miller
"I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous..."
Crow T Robot, MST3K
#24fanforlife
questions for ya now (although they've probably already been covered 100s of
times by now). Here we go.
1) Why didn't Heather tell Mike about what she found in the bundle of
sticks? Was she just trying to spare her friend from a major freak-out, or
was there something else going on?
2) Even though she didn't tell him in the beginning, when they heard Josh
calling out in the forest after he disappeared, why didn't she mention it
then? Frankly, if I had found what I assumed to be a missing friend's teeth
and tongue or jawbone or whatever, I would assume that person wasn't capable
of clear speech. I sure as heck wouldn't be following that voice around in
the dark and calling out to it..much less follow it into a weird old
house...
3) Why was Josh the "chosen one"? Was it because, as some have theorized,
that when he knocked over one of the 7 piles of stone, he released the
spirit of one of the children and damned himself? Other opinions more than
welcome.
4) When Mike was standing in the corner of the basement, he was bound to
have heard Heather calling for him and knew she was on her way to the
basement as well. Why didn't he try to warn her off? Is it possible that
by the time she reached the basement, Mike had lost his tongue and some
teeth as well? Was he just so in shock that he COULD"T say anything? Was
he of the opinion that if he kept quiet, he might be freed like the one boy
in the legend of Mr. Parr? Or was he dead and just propped up there? I
don't know..tell me please!!
5) Any theories on why the compass lead them in circles...or was it Heather
that lead them in circles...
6) A little off-topic but indulge me. If the average every day Joe were to
see this movie without having viewed all the information on the website
first, and NOT knowing whether this was reality-based or fictional, would
some of the symbolism be as significant to that person as it was to some of
us? Would the effect by as strong?
7) What was the deal with Mike throwing out the map? Was he genuinely THAT
frustrated and honestly thought it was getting them nowhere, or was he being
influenced by something (or someone)(or something) else...
8) Was it just MY TOWN, or did anyone else have this experience...at the
end of the final scene, when the credits start rolling, no one stood up to
leave, like they were expecting more...
BTW, I did get rather nauseous, but I didn't hurl thank goodness...
As I said before, all of these questions have probably been covered numbers
of times, but honestly, I didn't want to search through all of these posts
to find my answers. So call me shallow.
Kevin Karstens <karc...@primenet.com> wrote in message
news:37b07833...@news.primenet.com...
Knight...@webtv.net
is a very good movie and while the story is fake, the reactions of the
characters are not. I knew it wasn't real when I saw it and it didn't
spoil it one bit for me. In an age of an old and decaying genre based
film industry, it's very refreshing to see something like this come
along. The only bad thing now is the filmmakers who are going to be
trying the same thing in order to make a few bucks.....that's the really
scary part.
Micheal Knight
Tom Holtzclaw
no end and extremely substandard cinematography. There is no music in the
background and what few scenes are watchable due to a steadily held camera are
difficult to see due to a lack of decent lighting. All these problems ruined a
good movie idea. That's what happens with a $30,000 movie. The question I have
is this; what did they spend thirty thousand dollars on? My guess is that
$20,000 went up their noses.
Nuclear Kraft Dinner
the sounds of nature much more creepy. Also, I found that the lack of
lighting made the movie much more realistic (what forests have floodlights
in them?). This movie is a refreshing change from the Hollywood
Blockbusters and definetely worth seeing.
Tom Holtzclaw <ter...@swbell.net> wrote in message
news:37B70E6C...@swbell.net...
Dan & Lori Key
that it is very close to reality supercedes any kind of back ground music.
It sure beats the Thin Red Line!
Cliff Evans
>
> This is a poorly made movie that suffers from an incoherent scipt, no beginning,
> no end and extremely substandard cinematography. There is no music in the
> background and what few scenes are watchable due to a steadily held camera are
> difficult to see due to a lack of decent lighting.
Uh...you *did* realize that the conceit of this movie was that it was
the raw footage of a student film crew, didn't you?
--
Cliff Evans
<boz...@earthlink.net>
--------------------------------------------------
"Son of God or son of man...you can't fuck your
sister and expect much good to come of it."
-Garth Ennis, "Preacher."
--------------------------------------------------
She's Lost Control Again
>This is a poorly made movie that suffers from an incoherent scipt,
There was no script...are you saying that *real dialogue* didn't work for you?
>no beginning,
They gathered their gear, met up, went to the woods and started filming.
>no end
They all either died or something else equally horrible happened to them. So
they kinda had to end the film there, y'know?
>and extremely substandard cinematography.
Are you aware that the filming was done by the actors themselves while they
were hiking and camping in the woods? While I think that some tripods could
have been employed (at least for the parts that were actually supposed to go
into their "film"), I thought the cinematography was chillingly appropriate to
the context.
What did you expect, The Matrix? A choreographed dance number? A Stanley
Kubrick film? The Blair Witch Project: The Musical, complete with flattering,
soft-focus close-ups of Barbra Streisand?
>There is no music in the background
Last time I was in the woods, there was no background music. Except Britney
Spears coming from someone's car. And she's awful. So the Blair Witch killed
the driver.
>and what few scenes are watchable due to a steadily held camera are
>difficult to see due to a lack of decent lighting.
Again, they were in the woods. The only lighting they had was the lights on
the cameras, which they were obviously using when they could. And what you
*couldn't* see was just as frightening as what you *could* see.
Perhaps they should have had spotlights on them as they walked? It would have
made for quite the ethereal ambiance...
>All these problems ruined a good movie idea.
I'm confused as to what you were expecting, exactly. You did know what the
premise was when you went to it, right? It was incredibly realistic, and yet
it seems that you were expecting some kind of flashy Hollywood production.
> That's what happens with a $30,000 movie.
What do you mean? That only big-budget movies are decent?
Jen
(a huge fan of Clerks, made for $27,000)