MovieChat Forums > The Fourth Kind (2009) Discussion > the opening monologue makes hollywood ev...

the opening monologue makes hollywood even more untrustworthy

posted 12 years ago by frankduxvandamme
13 replies | jump to latest

Sure, lots of movies make the claim "based on actual events", but usually the overall story is still true and it's just bits and pieces that are tinkered with, and perhaps the timeline is condensed and maybe multiple characters are combined into one or two characters so that the story can be told in 2 hours etc. Still, there is usually some truth in there somewhere.

But how can a movie get away with claiming right off the bat, and not just in an opening text of "based on actual events", but instead to have the main actress speak directly to the audience and tell everyone that this is based on actual events AND real footage from the actual events have been included AND etc... and then absolutely NONE of it is true. it is entirely fictional from start to finish.

Just how dishonest can filmmakers be and still get away with it? I was furious when i found out this was fake after watching it. Why did the filmmakers feel it was necessary to deceive its audience in such a way and how can hollywood be trusted at all from now on?

[–] choco_sergent 12 years ago

I just see this as the natural evolution of the found footage genre, movies like cannibal holocaust and the blair witch project scared the *beep* out of people when they first came out because people couldn't differentiate them from reality (the guys on cannibal holocaust even got into a lot of legal trouble over what they filmed), but your average filmgoer today his wised up and can usually see through the *beep* and a lot of the suspense and potential thrills are lost as a result.

To combat this problem, the director/writers on the fourth kind instead created a false reality to contrast with movie reality to lend false credibility to what they were portraying and to better immerse the audience into the film.

Is it dishonest? Yes.

Does it make for a scarrier/more thrilling experience if you had no idea it was faked beforehand? Hell yes!

Rather than bashing the filmmakers for decieving you, you should be applauding them on how good of a job they did, because evidently, you had no idea it was faked while you were watching it.

Fry made of honey: why am i all sticky and naked? did i miss something fun?

[–] wlee08 12 years ago

SPOILER SPOILER SPOILER
It does seem a little desperate - and definitely dishonest - to say "based on a true story" when something is not based on a true story. If we are allowing complete dishonesty in films, then why should filmmakers have to say "Based on a true story". This line may cease to exist in the future because it doesn't mean anything. And then anyone using it will immediately be seen for a bluffer.
But how much different is this than a radio host saying "I love so-and-so product, my whole family uses it"? Do we expect higher standards in our movies than infomercials?
The other issue that I found disturbing is that we are told we are witnessing real scenes of homicide. I believe that when we make the choice to see a movie there is an implicit understanding that what we are witnessing is fiction unless told otherwise. We have not consented to witnessing anything real and disturbing. So although the scene was actually fiction, the viewer is misled into believing it is real and this could be psychologically damaging for some people. Even some newsstories carry a disclaimer for "real" graphic images.
Finally, as a supposedly serious actress, all you have is your face and your name. If you're willing to go out there and say "My name is Milla jovovich, and I'm ok with lying", I think you may lose some face. But if the movie is solid it shouldn't matter too much.

[–] brendanfoy 12 years ago

Never trust the "true story" flicks, ever.

Based on a true story usually means certain characters are present and a key event is used as a plot device in the film, but the actual story is butchered beyond recognition.

Inspired by true events is the worst - stay far away. The true events could be anything, you have no way to prove what they were, it's nothing more than a marketing gimmick.

The only credibility Hollywood has is when they straight out say that the film is based after a real life person and a real life event with some creative license taken. These movies are about as close as you can get to getting a glimpse, just a glimpse, of what might have been.

[–] peyespy007 12 years ago

yep, like erin brockovich :p

[–] vita4420 12 years ago

When the Blair Witch project came out they did the same thing. The film makers even had a supposed documentary about the Blair Witch mythology showing on TV at some point before the movie was released, and tons of people were fooled into thinking it was all true. All it was was really successful marketing. And I don't recall fans getting mad after finding out they were fooling them - if anything, most people thought that meant they did a good job.

[–] marlondean 12 years ago

No one said, NONE of it was true. What Milla said at the beginning is the real deal.

[–] FuzzleMail 12 years ago

It took you to the end of the movie AND research to figure out this wasn't real? A guy floated up in the air and belted out a dead language during severe camera distortion. It's supremely fake. See, I'll never understand how we live in a world where we don't believe in God yet a Mila Jovovich movie showing people float in the air and imitate the exorcist is real till proven otherwise.

[–] henrimaine 11 years ago

"I was furious when i found out this was fake after watching it."

What, you really watched the whole film believing that the "video recordings" shown in the film were actual videos obtained from psychologists and police? Wow, wow! It seems this film wasn't so bad after all, because there are actually people who took it to be the real thing. Good job, filmmakers.

[–] ChiStyleSports 11 years ago

It's fiction! This happens all the time in movies and books, just maybe not as direct as it did as this. You must be pissed off when movies claim to be the scariest of all-time, when that's clearly subjective.

A Fire Will Rise

[–] LeperMessiah117 11 years ago

I knew it was fake, but not in the way it actually was. Watching the fake real footage, I knew SOMEBODY was making *beep* up, I just wasn't sure it was actually the filmmakers. I thought maybe it was supposed real footage that lots of people thought were real (i.e. the filmmakers), but anybody with a brain could smell the *beep* God, that pissed me off, it made the entire film POINTLESS.

"This is what happens when an unstoppable force meets an immovable object". - The Joker

[–] ezzy666 10 years ago

but instead to have the main actress speak directly to the audience and tell everyone that this is based on actual events AND real footage from the actual events have been included AND etc... and then absolutely NONE of it is true. it is entirely fictional from start to finish.

Because she an actress and is acting. I can't understand how so many people thought "well if she is saying it than it must be true"

I trust Hollywood to entertain me, if you expect education from movies I really don't know what to say about that.

Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt.