Found Footage Movies

They're cheap, they're almost always horror films, and they usually suck.  They're Found Footage movies.

Movies.  Never films.

The Found Footage boom got its start when 1999's sleeper hit The Blair Witch Project (which, for the record, is a movie I enjoy) grossed $248 million in the box office after only costing $25,000 to make.  Movie studios quickly realized they could slap together these cheap cash cows in a few months every winter and brunch with Mr. Moneybags all summer long.

The reason most found footage movies stink is no mystery.  They're about 90% horror films, and horror films don't need to be good to make money.  Like explosions in an action movie or a shirtless Matthew McConaughey in a rom com, as long as horror movies supply a few jump scares they'll get in the black.  Why spend the money on Mercedes when people are willing to drive a Honda?

Still, just because a town might not have a law requiring you to clean up after your dog doesn't mean its cool for you to leave's your dogs poops on everyone else's lawn.

Not every found footage movie has been a cynical crappy cash grab. When the genre is used as a necessity rather than as a gimick it can be endearing.

Low budget gem Chronicle is one of the best super hero movies of the last 15 years.

It's a genre that, when used correctly, is a really nice touch to a low budget film.  Unfortunately, it almost never is.

Found Footage Movies: Overrated.

Stop It: Filming Concerts on Your Phone

Last summer I went to an outdoor concert in Central Park, She&Him with Camera Obscura.  I had never been to a show in Central Park before, I remember being surprised by how intimate it was, how smart I felt for being one of the only people to bring an umbrella when it poured, and how you weren't allowed to take pictures or video with your phone.

The ban on photography did not only extend to capturing a vine vid of Zoe Deschanel, but literally taking a picture of anything with your phone at any moment.  One overzealous security guard threatened to throw me out of the venue for taking a picture of my friend between acts.

No photos allowed

That security guard and that concert was off the mark, but the spirit behind the rule is right at the center of an issue that is ruining concert experiences:  People filming shows on their phone.

First, lets just get this out there in the open to avoid an ambiguity (or, just in case you missed the title of this post):  Filming performances at concerts on your phone needs to stop.  If you've done it in the past, don't do it again.  If you're thinking about doing it, don't.

The fact of the matter is, you rarely can even see what your filming and even if the video quality comes out okay (which it won't) the sound is likely to be crap.

It blocks the view of people behind you and it distracts and annoys the performer.  It's not exactly the greatest inspiration to be on stage and see people attempting to shoot video of you like some paparazzo.

It's also contagious.  One person pulls out their phone and tries to get a vid and suddenly three people next to him/her want to capture that same moment for all eternity.

This is been a growing epidemic for years that reached a fever pitch last week when Iggy Azelea performed on Jimmy Kimmel Live and this happened:

Everyone in the audience trying to film a performance on their phone when it was already being professionally filmed for television.  Dear Lord.

Now granted there are a few factors that make this situation worse.  One, it is in LA, where the monkey see, monkey do factor is higher than normal.  Two, it is in LA, where most of the people anywhere are only there to network and try and get a few more followers on Twitter or Instagram.

This truly is a terrifying new trend that not only makes going to concerts that much worse but also is leading to a blanket ban that prevents you from even taking pictures at concerts.

C'mon people, put down the phone, real life is happening all around you.

Five Reasons Why Buzzfeed Sucks

Don’t Click the Link!

I know I’m not the first to talk about this.  In fact, there was a pretty popular internet video released all the way back in October by Best Show in the Universe that broke it down pretty extensively.  So why talk about it now?

Well, two reasons.

First, the Best Show in the Universe video featuring Maddox is very informative and interesting but it is also on the technical side and focuses a lot on intellectual property.  Complaining about people using the internet to steal intellectual property is kind of like complaining that water makes you wet.  Yeah, it does that.  Plus, the whole thing is kind of nerdy and joyless.  (Unlike this.  Bursting with Joy!)

Then, the real reason:

Buzzfeed seemed to peak in popularity late last summer.  It was nearly impossible to go on any social media site without being bombarded by list after list of mildly amusing GIF filled nonsense, and being the mindless slaves to laptop based procrastination that we all are, many a link was clicked.  Then towards mid-October the links started to become less and less, it became cool to hate it and it went away.  But something really scary started happening in the early morning hours of 2014… Buzzfeed started to make a comeback.  I, the lover of the free spirit of humanity that I am, could not sit idly by while Buzzfeed continued to crush it with lazy humor and bad writing. 

Thus, I give you the five reasons why Buzzfeed Sucks.

1. Random Numeric Values

You know what is nice about The Five Reasons why Buzzfeed Sucks?  It is centered around a milestone number, a number that has a roman numeral, its own dollar bill, a divisible of 100. 

You know what numbers aren’t divisible by 100?  28 and 17 and 31.

 

When you parse down a list to include only five or ten of something you improve the quality of said list and article.  You cut out all the fat so only the best remain.  When you leave in every single thing that enters your mongoloid brain you end up with the next problem on our list…

2. Vague Connections and References

On every single Buzzfeed list, without fail, there is no less than one or two articles within the list that either don’t match the title’s qualifier (I.E. someone who isn’t famous in New York City being on the list of “31 Celebrities Who are Only Famous to People Who Live in New York) or something that outright makes no sense.

Okay, two things. One, New Yorkers don't care about celebrities. We're above that. It's like a thing here. Two, Even if we did, we wouldn't give a shit about Funkmaster Flex.

It is ironic that this always happens since we’ve already covered that Buzzfeed has absolutely no parameters for how long a given list needs to be.

3. That GIF doesn’t really fit that 

A close cousin of reason #2.  Buzzfeed loves shoehorning in a random GIF that has nothing to do with the subject matter just because it will make the reader laugh (because the reader is a dumbass and is easily distracted by moving

 Woah, cool! Haha!

4. It belongs to the Evil part of the Internet

A lesser evil, to be sure, but evil nonetheless.  This is a lot of what Maddox was talking about in his video.  They steal intellectual property.  They’re unoriginal, lazy, uninformative and unimaginative.  When you read Buzzfeed you embrace all of these things.  It is that part of the internet that encourages you to stuff your face with string cheeze and play Farmville for eight hours.  Buzzfeed is the Michael Bay movie of the internet.  It exists for the sole purpose of feeding off of people’s horrible urge for instant gratification and a feeling of false community.  It is a manipulative, self-serving, soulless monster, not so unlike my ex-girlfriend.

Read about 28 things you probably already knew if you read the Harry Potter books, then discover the definitive rankings of Martin Freeman's middle fingers. You know, because that's worth your time.

5. You’re not that clever and no one really gives a fuck

Really only needed this one, probably.