Xixax Film Forum

Film Discussion => The Vault => Topic started by: Neil on April 10, 2013, 03:03:46 PM

Title: The Bay
Post by: Neil on April 10, 2013, 03:03:46 PM
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fupload.wikimedia.org%2Fwikipedia%2Fen%2F2%2F28%2FThe_Bay_%2528film%2529.jpg&hash=92cd16c2ecfd946f59a48014d7a78865ff648886)



Directed by: Barry Levinson

I was completely unaware of this films existence, but I rented it from the redbox last night and I quite enjoyed it. I'm sure it was shrugged off based on the sentence at the top of the poster, and it really does a good job as far as making good use of the found film genre goes. 

Has anyone else came across this?  I don't really have any strong feelings towards Levinson's works currently in my life, but this film really worked for me and I enjoyed it a great deal.  I thought it was extremely well put together.
Title: Re: The Bay
Post by: polkablues on April 10, 2013, 04:29:04 PM
I watched this not too long ago. Levinson nails the aesthetic but flounders on the pacing. A handful of great moments sprinkled in amidst a lot of overly repetitive exposition. Some nice dark humor throughout. The lead actress was bad, which is especially a shame since the rest of the cast was very believable.
Title: Re: The Bay
Post by: Neil on April 12, 2013, 02:14:30 PM
The more I think about it, it seems like the found footage genre relies on something that you've touched on here polka with the post above this one. 

No doubt can it be considered a flaw, but any found footage film i can think of flounders on the pacing.  What i mean is, between the Paranormal activities and even Chronicle (which i really enjoyed) there is too much energy spent on portraying the idea that there's this normal atmosphere (1st/beginning of 2nd act usually) that leads the narrative to the exciting stuff, or the stuff that really drives the plot.  Like i said, I don't think this excuses this film or any others in this genre, but I guess I'm trying to say that i didn't mind it in this film and I felt like all the footage was necessary in propelling the story ahead.  This film is almost entirely exposition, so even though i do agree with you in that regard, I'd be interested to know what you thought they could have left out.  The reason I ask because they throw in sound bites that aren't originally shown later in the film sort of as flashbacks, do you know what I'm talking about?  The guy who has the night vision section at the chicken farm is one that comes to mind.

I do agree that the lead has some problems with giving a testimonial performance, but I was able to quickly get over that.

Anyhow, it had a very journalistic feel to it, which I liked also.

Sorry for the sloppy post, I tried quickly to post this in between jobs.
Title: Re: The Bay
Post by: jenkins on April 12, 2013, 02:24:35 PM
this is my fav recent convo, tbh. related but not recent -- insidious wasn't found footage, right, just movie madness right?
Title: Re: The Bay
Post by: polkablues on April 12, 2013, 04:01:54 PM
Neil, have you seen Lake Mungo?  I feel like that film and The Bay are a good comparison in that they're not "found footage" films in the sense of Paranormal Activity or Blair Witch or Grave Encounters, they're more horror-mock-documentaries.  They're both more beholden to the rhythms and aesthetics of actual documentary filmmaking, as opposed to being traditional narrative features that happen to be shot by the characters.  The difference between The Bay and Lake Mungo is that Lake Mungo is far more convincing as an actual documentary.  As well-made as The Bay was, it always had that sheen of artifice to it.

I feel like it sounds like I disliked The Bay more than I actually did.  I certainly think it's a worthwhile film.  See Lake Mungo too, I guess is the point I'm trying to get at.

Quote from: trashculturemutantjunkie on April 12, 2013, 02:24:35 PM
insidious wasn't found footage, right, just movie madness right?

Correct.  Insidious was traditionally shot, just with a central conceit revolving around some footage... that they found.  Hm.

EDIT: Wait, I just confused Insidious with Sinister.  Yeah, Insidious was just a straight-up normally-shot movie.
Title: Re: The Bay
Post by: Neil on April 12, 2013, 09:18:39 PM
I've never heard of Lake Mungo, thanks for the recommendation.

I think it's a valid nice distinction you made between that of a found footage film, and these documentary inspired narratives too.  I feel like this film really plays with this idea very well and I definitely recommend it.

I think it's a worthwhile film too.  Look forward to hearing what the rest of you folks think about it.