MovieChat Forums > Downstream (2010) Discussion > This is an unfinished version of the fil...

This is an unfinished version of the film

posted 14 years ago by philkim2004
16 replies | jump to latest

Just to be clear, this version was an incomplete version of the film where we were testing to see if we should even bother with a reveal of the city by placing an incomplete CGI just to get a feel. We opted not to spend the $$$ to show any city or its inhabitants. So to those who are so passionate about how bad the ending is...well that is not the ending.

As for the serious praise or criticism about the plot or the theme? The writer does not believe we will end up here no more than Stephen King thinks pets come alive in cemeteries so please relax. It was an exercise in a "What if?". Like a Twilight Zone episode. Whether we believe the problem is oil or Climate Change or GMO's, our world is changing dramatically and not for the better. Even examining the comments on this board I can conclude the human race has lost its warmth. Whether you liked the movie or not the writers point was proven about human nature. Not all parts of the world will end up this bad and ones that do will not last too long. It was just a snap shot in time between the end and the new beginning. As for the comparisons made between Downstream and the Book of Eli, one was made for less then a million and the other had a budget of $80 Million. So we appreciate all the opinions on this board, including the not too complimentary ones. Cheers!

[–] shaffer2112 14 years ago

If it means anything, I think it was a good movie for what it was. And for only $1 million? I can't believe Eli costs $80 million. They should have got you guys to handle their budget. Talk about over spending. Defintly not 80 times better

[–] Tronic2 14 years ago

Blowing up houses costs money, that would explain why Eli was so expensive. On the other hand, one can do a lot (including great CG) with far less than $1M, for example see Star Wreck ( http://isohunt.com/torrent_details/27015434/star+wreck?tab=summary ) which had a budget of around 10000 € (for equipment, wardrobe, etc) and a rather small production team of amateurs. While everyone worked for free, one could easily include a decent salary and still stay within a reasonable budget. Even though free downloads are permitted, they have made a lot of money from DVD sales as well.

And then there is District 9, a $30M budget movie with a lot of everything. Plenty of good actors, complex masks, explosions, heavy vehicles, helicopters, alien tech, CG and a good story. But comparing a miracle like that to other movies wouldn't really be fair.

[–] Stageact 14 years ago

well, when I watched The book of Eli I thought 'well....it's ... ok', but I thought the characters were pale. Downstream captured me with its story and the very strong characters. And I don't mean only the main protagonists, but the supporting characters as well. Of course one can see that it's a low budget film, but there are some things you can't buy with money...and that's a good story and great characters. I already pre-ordered my DVD copy. Thanks for the good work.
I heard that there should be a sequel to Downstream in the future. Is that true?

[–] Tronic2 14 years ago

*spoilers*

For the record, by going all the way (in my review) I meant using the girl as fuel for the car instead of simply burying her. Later the guy could chop off his own body parts to keep going... Think of Saw or Cube.

Oh, and for the suspension of disbelief, it would be far better if the devices ran on body fat rather than blood. Also, trying a fuel pump on the gas station is really bad as one would expect every gas station to be pumped dry a long time ago and the pumps wouldn't work without electricity in any case.

However, if you really are going to make a better final version, it would be better to invent some storyline for the last 60 minutes. Simply getting to the city alive won't really change the fact that most of the time the movie felt really boring. In case you cannot do extra shoots and thus cannot change the story, at least consider editing the movie into something much shorter, removing useless filler.

As I said in my review, the movie was not entirely crap (I wouldn't have watched it or bothered to write a review if it was). The sad thing here is that the first half an hour or so was really interesting, but then the quality simply declined. All that wasted potential makes me sad.

Unlike those NWO-propagandists, I do not really see this as a political movie, but the title sequence simply works as a highly efficient lead story into this post-apocalyptic world. Some room for thought is left by not telling what ultimately led to the apocalypse.

[–] Stageact 14 years ago

Everybody's got an opinion. If I want to see Saw or Cube...I watch Saw or Cube. I watched both and both were great. Just the first movies of course. Saw had this surprising twist and Cube left one clueless. All the follow ups were boring.
Anyway...We're talking about a postapocalyptic scenery. For some Downstream had too less Gore, others complain that women were raped and abused. Oh, yeah...and a dog was eaten. Nobody mentioned the people in that case.
Everybody compares Downstream to Book of Eli (i'm not talking about the Road, cause that is one hell of a movie), so i wanna say what bugs me with that one.
The Book of Eli has tons of special effects and lots of action, nice to watch. The main protagonist is wondering on earth for years, dressed in rags and he rarely finds something to eat. But there's got to be a dentist on every second corner, cause his teeth are shining bright. Apart from that he's fit as a marine. That's so typical Hollywood blockbuster. Ever realized that the main characters in big Hollywood movies always have a wonderful smile while the bad guys don't? It's a little detail, but it bugs me like hell. As if anybody would care about his teeth when it comes to surviving. And the story of The Book of Eli? The bible will save the world. Hallelujah. i watched that movie just because of Denzel and Gary and their performance was great. But there was nothing they could work with. The writer has the duty to create the form of a character, the actor takes it and breathes life into it. If we stay in metaphors, in Book of Eli the writer gave the actors a lump of mud.
In Downstream we get to know the characters. We know where they come from, we know their motivations and their dreams and which decisions they make to reach them. And it leaves one with questions "What would you do, if you were in a hopeless situation like this? How far would you go? Could you keep a little humanity, although it might mean that you risk your own life?" Downstream is not an action movie and I don't think that it was ever supposed to be one. It has a political undertone, but never was supposed to be politcal either. Take it for what it is, a character study in a could be soon situation. And ask yourself: What would you do?

[–] Vermicious_Knid 14 years ago

A boy and his dog was a great post-apocalyptic movie, one of the best in my opinion. It's a great example of what you can do on a shoe-string budget, providing you have a good story.

Then at the other end of the spectrum we have Book of Eli, with a massive budget and great actors, but a story that made look the writer up on IMDB so I could avoid watching anything else they have written.

I think my biggest issue with Downstream was that there was nothing new. I felt like I'd seen everything before in better movies.
If it's low-budget then keep it innovative; imaginative and make the story as good as it can be.

[–] sixteensixty4 14 years ago

I enjoyed myself, but when i watched it i wasnt expecting the next "book of eli" or whatever as id already seen the comments here, i grew up in the 80's and this kinda reminded me of films i watched back then, had a kind of cheesyness to it, but i dont mean that in a bad way, it was a good cheesyness! For what it was and bearing the budget in mind id give it a 7/10

****SPOILERS*****

*****************

*****************

regarding the ending, im glad we see a bit of the city and think that was enough, i would have been disapointed if we didnt get at least a glance but see no reason to see it all. the running of engines\turbines on blood seemed a bit odd as the concept hadnt been mentioned untill near the end of film, unless it was and i missed it? the first i heard about it was at the dinner, but wes had mentioned his motor run on anything before that, but had that been the thing from the start it would have gave a little more suspense when they came across strangers, like were they after there blood or just wanting to trade etc anyways for what it was i thought it was alright :-)

[–] Stageact 14 years ago

****SPOILERS*****

*****************

*****************

well, Wes had still a conscience. Remember how shocked he was when he realized that Tobias had human flesh in his pantry. He might be aware that his machine runs on everything, but never would have thought about blood. That it actually works he found out at the diner. And he cried when he sacrificed the dog. If he had used blood all along in the film, chasing people to get it, he would have been a complete different character. I'm not so sure if I had liked it then.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] philkim2004 14 years ago

I loved the dog also. I am a huge dog fan. When that scene was written in it was to address the last resort. What would you do in the middle of the desert. No food, no water and help anywhere? It was a desperate situation. If we are not responsible with our world we only have bad choices to choose from.

[–] bb_bryson 13 years ago

The movie itself was good, it was a well done imagining of a dystopic future, Book of Eli can suck it.
The ending was where it came apart. During the whole restaurant scene I was on the edge of my seat wanting to know if the dog was okay. Then I didn't know what happened to the chef, he was naked and covered with blood...it was just confusing. Following that, I never got the desperate nature of them that he NEEDED to kill the dog. Nor did we see him struggle with the decision. I lost all love for the main guy character when the dog died, in fact the dog, not him, was the creature I cared about the most in the movie. Killing the dog, although really sad, could be understood IF I felt there was no other choice. I didn't feel that from the character-perhaps shots of an empty fuel tank or shots of the vast desert and how limited their food was, I don't know, but I needed more.

Finally with the shot of the city and the *ahem* robot. You may have been testing something, but with a limited budget there is a very simple answer here----DON'T show the city. All the ending needed was for the main character to collapse on the ground with some enigmatic facial expression, like the slightest smile and the audience can fill in the rest. If you show the city, nix the robot and have a mirage-y type look, so that we can guess if it is real or not.

[–] Stageact 14 years ago

That's exactly what i meant, when I asked 'what would YOU do in a situation like that?' I have to confess I've cried with Wes. But it's always like that when pets get hurt. Anyway...I think it was a perfect scene to show how desperate Wes was. and that everyone's complaining about it proves it right. Cause everybody would rather kill everybody else than the beloved Lugosi. And all know that they might do the same in that very same situation, when you don't have much choices left. Mission accomplished:)

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Stageact 14 years ago

It seems quickly. They had some stuff, but lost it all out of the trunk on the road hunt. i don't think that the villains drove food around. so maybe they got weapons and 'juice', but definitely no food or water. So there was nothing left. We don't know how long they were driving already. And still they had nothing to eat. They came to the diner and ate a bit of meat. How much can you possibly eat when your stomach's empty? not much. And then they drove with a full tank until it was emptied. So they drove hours at least. And then they were stuck in the middle of nowhere...no food, no water, no 'juice' and as Wes mentionend 'no one to steal from'. Sara was obviously sick and wasn't able to go anywhere. It might came quickly in the movie, but from the logical aspect and time-line it fits. They could have lasted maybe a day longer without water. Would that have made a difference? The logical thing to do was getting some juice for the car and drive. I must give credits to your thoughts, though... i most probably would have sacrificed Sara as she would have given more blood:) The only excuse is that love makes dumb and blind:D And maybe everybody would complain then that it's too much of a Boy with his dog ending;)

[–] sixteensixty4 14 years ago

**********spoliers be here**************

I think my posts been taken the wrong way, or iv wrote it wrong lol knowing me iv wrote it wrong but when i read it back i still know what i mean, yea thats probably more confuseing than my first post :-)

anyways, yea i get that wes had a concience and i didnt expect wes to be driving around useing blood for petrol, as i agree that wasnt his character and shouldnt have been.

i meant that, the concept of useing blood hadnt turned up till right near the end of the film, (if it was mentioned earlier and i missed it then my post is pointless lol) and id liked it more if maybe the bad dudes were running there cars on blood.....

like i just think it should have been mentioned earlier that some dudes were doing that

as it just kinda felt chucked in at the end

as for the dog, i dont think i would have ate mine if it was just me, but maybe if i had g/f or family member about than i probably would have, i didnt see anything wrong with that although obviously felt a little sorry for wes and dog lol

[–] MixerBOS 12 years ago

Well if they applied A Boy and his dog ending it would have been a classic rip-off. This way it's not a classic one :)