If the fond footage success Project X was the kind of film that inspired exactly the kind of response you’d have expected long before its release, Chronicle was a similar sort of film that seemed to shock everyone. An excellently constructed exercise in pacing and escalation, it also featured compelling characters and just enough scale to transcend its budget and genre.
For those reason I’m happy to see Max Landis has (like Project X writer Michael Bacall) been asked to begin scripting a sequel to the film, even though the last one definitely took its story to a pretty definitive conclusion. We’re dealing with superheroes though, so there’s always a way to keep things going. What will be harder (and is a challenge most found footage movies face) is justifying the filmmaking conceit a second time around. The alternative (and this is an idea I though of and loved immediately as I walked out of the theater) is to just make the sequel like a traditional narrative superhero movie, with the found footage left behind at the origin story.
Unlikely, but that would be a fun way to start a franchise.
There’s no word on the return of Actors or other principles at this point, but that info will start to come if and when this gets a greenlight. If you haven’t yet caught Chronicle, consider this your last push to do so- it’s a great little movie.
Twitter
Comment Below
Message Board
Source | Deadline (via A/V Club)
9 comments
I’m very fond of footage myself. It cuts so well.
As a conceit, the found footage was unnecessary and should’ve been dumped before the shooting stage.
I can’t shake my feeling that the above promotional pic looks like an ad for a shitty NBC show. Wonder why that is.
I would like to see more of Chronicle, but they absolutely should drop the found footage conceit. It was never necessary. That’s pretty much the make or break of whether or not I will see the sequel in theaters.
It’s probably the result of the same marketing process. The filmmakers likely had nothing to do with it and the actors were called in months after they finished shooting.
Chronicle was a shit stain of a found footage movie (for one thing, there were shots thrown in where it was narratively impossible for the protagonist with the camcorder to be. It’s like the film makers decided “Gee this would be a good shot even though IT MAKES NO SENSE WHATSOEVER having it there).
He never reads the comments and fixes his ridiculous articles. But i say that to say, damn you, you got here first…
If you’re one of those people that see found footage movies BECAUSE they’re found footage movies, and not because of the idea behind them… I just… I really pity the fool.
Anyway, I just reread your comment, and I really don’t think you know what you’re talking about. Either that, or the basics of constructing a readable sentence have eluded you. I vote for the latter.
I just reread your comment, and rational thought seems to elude you. What, pray tell, is the point of using the found footage conceit if the basic rules of that particular narrative are blatantly disregarded? Or maybe you didn’t notice because Chronicle is the cool little movie that all nerds are meant to love and “go along” with, because the “idea” was just soooo cool and original, right?
Comments are shown as archived from the original site; new comments are closed.