MovieChat Forums > KatieBird *Certifiable Crazy Person Discussion > Almost Impossible to watch, and not in a...

Almost Impossible to watch, and not in a good way.

posted 18 years ago by triefy
12 replies | jump to latest

I caught this last weekend at Texas Frightmare, and if it wasn't for the constant split screens, maybe I would have liked it. The acting was pretty good. Mr. Perkins had a quality and approach that I liked. But, unfortunately..having the film split up into sections, not only gave me a headache, but made the film seem semi-amateurish. It is like the director, who I know will comment on this, saw the Kill Bill Vol 2 "Buried Alive" segment and thought that was cool. There is a reason split screen isn't used throughout a whole film (unless it is for a proper use - ie: Timecode), it is too disorienting.

Yes, I understand the guy was trying to associate this editing technique with the way things were falling apart, but acting would suffice.

[–] movies_not_excuses 18 years ago

while the message board is still light I will try to comment where I can...regarding the multi-panels, Kill Bill 2 is far from the first film to make use of Split Screen edit techniques - there are examples going as far back as PAINT YOUR WAGON and probably even further...not everyone likes everything...did you know that when BONNIE & CLYDE was initially released the critics and the public absolutely slammed it for the "distracting" and overly stimulating "JUMP CUTS" that were employed during the big shoot out sequences? but these days you'd be hard pressed to find an action sequence that doesn't use them...oh well...not everything is for everyone...I'm glad you enjoyed Lee Perkins' performance...he is an exceptionally deep actor and gave 110% whenever possible...see you next time around ;)

...wishing the best...from the void...justin.paul.ritter...

[–] triefy 18 years ago

I know it goes past that sequence and it be found in alot of 70's exploitation films as well.

Jump cuts are for the ADD riddled. I dig them though.

I will keep a look out for your next feature, you have talent and can produce a good story, just tone down on the tricks in post-production. Almost every review has mentioned that this hasn't been the best part of the movie.

[–] RandomNoiseProds 18 years ago

Hey...thanks for the complement on the acting. Trust me, it's always great to hear what people like and don't. Thanks also for being so honest about "KatieBird". That's the thing I dig about horror fans. They'll tell you what they love and don't. I'm glad you said you'll give Justin's next pic (which is in the works) a look. He's the real deal. Thanks again. Lee

[–] movies_not_excuses 18 years ago

actually, most reviewers seem to think the multi-panel is an extremely powerful tool that really brought them deeper into the movie (see a few links below)...but like I said before, not everything is for everyone...

http://www.einsiders.com/reviews/dvd/show_dvd.php?review_dvd=626

http://www.joehorror.com/0000096.html

http://www.severed-cinema.com/reviews/ijkl/katiebird.php

[–] bmkz 18 years ago

Just in time for its release, here's an additional review of KatieBird that I've reposted on my movie review blog.

http://intlwalnut.blogspot.com/2006/02/katiebird-certifiable-crazy-person.html

[–] yellow-b 18 years ago

I liked the split screens, they really add to the madness, but found the screenplay repetitive and slightly verbose (started to loose interest after 30 minutes) Still a good effort.

[–] Newski_the_Hippie 18 years ago

I'm going to say the same thing I told the director- The style was pretentious as all hell. But it worked.

The problem was not the style, which helped the movie at many times, was the fact that it was overdone. there are alot of scenes that would have had more effect with just a standard frame. It seemed like the split screens were added here because stopping would probably interrupt the flow of the movie.

Unfortunately, I don't know.

I showed this film to my brother, who said it "hurt his eyes." When I saw it (fangoria con Chicago) a friend left for the same reason.

[–] dstancey 18 years ago

Hurt his eyes? Was he trying to look at one frame with his left eye, and one with his right or something? I can see it being distracting.... I can see it giving someone a headache... I can see it being something people just don't like - but hurting their eyes is really really strange.

[–] Newski_the_Hippie 18 years ago

Really?

I mean, trying to stay focused on everything at once might be a bit stressful.

[–] dstancey 18 years ago

I didn't find I had to stay focused on everything all the at once. There are plenty of times when the picture panels are the same image. Plenty of times when nothing is happening in the other panels - or the other panels are simply on differing people in the conversation and you can pick what or who to watch primarily and dodge or move over to the others as you wish or as the action directs you to. There are plenty of moments when the two panels are just one profile shot cut into two. Its not a strain unless you frantically try to keep focused on everything at once and make more work for yourself than necissary.

[–] lazarillo 16 years ago

If you REALLY go back to the use of split-screen in movies, there was a French silent film director who used it a lot in his movies, perhaps most famously in his three-hour masterpiece "Napoleon". The technique was revived and used a lot in the early 70's, most notably by Brian DePalma in several of his films and in the ill-advised sequel "More American Grafitti".

The problem with the technique is not that it's used, but that people who use often tend to overuse. Trying to watch some of this for too long will give you a splitting headache more than anything.

[–] johnwills3 11 years ago

I remember a movie that called the technique "Anamorphic Duovision"
I think its called Wicked Wicked

www.soundcloud.com/professorwobbleswerth