MovieChat Forums > Sparks (2014) Discussion > Anachronisms are everywhere!

Anachronisms are everywhere!


One expects some artistic license to be taken in a movie derived from a graphic novel. But there is a limit. When the news film of the "meteor" destruction in 1920 showed a wrecked mid-fifties car I sort of knew we were in trouble. Important plot points involve a battery-powered tape recorder and a 16mm movie camera and projector. The tape recorder is obviously a 60's or later model and uses plastic reels and tape at a time when no battery models had yet been manufactured and tape was paper based and reels were metal. The movie camera is a Bell & Howell Filmo 70 but a model made much later than 1946. A spring wound camera, it held 2 1/2 minutes of film and could film for about 50 seconds before it had to be wound again. To make his snuff movies our villain would have been doing a lot of reloading and winding. Most importantly, it was NOT able to record sound! Nor could the silent B&H projectors shown play back sound. And that's important because the dialog played back figures in the plot. Additionally, the reels on the projector change in design from shot to shot as does the amount of film on the reels. In one scene the projector is running backward! Yes, the film is being wound to the top reel, not the bottom. The car that the juvenile Sparks parents are killed by is a 46-48 Plymouth. 20 years later when Sparks is an adult he seems to be driving the same car! And that would put the final portion of his story in the mid-sixties! Does he drive an antique car or did the producers have only one classic car at their disposal and so used it whenever an "old" car was needed. More sloppy work; watch as the red Plymouth approaches the Sparks family at the railroad crossing. Its license plates change color several times. This indifference to continuity reduced my enjoyment of the movie and I assume the constant reappearance of the car over the decades confused a few other viewers.

reply

This indifference to continuity reduced my enjoyment of the movie

A few details prevented you from seeing the big picture. You must have a very sad life but hey I'm sure you feel good about yourself for being so anal, good for you.

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco

reply

In OP's defence, each time a viewer spots a discrepancy, it jolts him out of the "suspension of disbelief" and back into "I'm watching a film".

Which is why, on every set, every where, even on shorts, people have tried to pay attention to continuity, because films are all about that "make believe" magic. Whether it's making you believe you're sharing the life of people next door, making you believe you're witnessing the exploration of an unknown galaxy, or the freeing of the holy land from those pesky crusaders. If something suddenly jolts you out of the illusion, then there's something wrong and it's the film maker's fault.

Now, good for you for not noticing it. There's often stuff I don't spot either, so theoretically it shouldn't bother me. But when it's that obvious, it's just the authors being sloppy. That's bad for everyone.

reply

You must have a very sad life but hey I'm sure you feel good about yourself for being so anal, good for you.


What kind of moronic reply is that?

OP is right about it, the movie was just amateurish in every way possible.

reply

[deleted]

Portable radios (walkie-talkies). Duh.

reply

the grave stones were shown vandalised by graffiti. canned spray paint wasn't invented til 1949. I guess the vandals must have took an air compressor and a generator with them

reply

Normally, I'm not nitpicking over small details - my pet peeves are more in the direction of unoriginal script, lame twists, overly moral message, etc.

But, I must say: Having the hero run around in a hoodie for a good part of the movie completely ruined every illusion of it playing in the 1940s for me. From then on, I couldn't see it as more than a half-assed student movie with the colors tuned down.

There's low budget and there's cheap. There's indie and there's unprofessional. There's gritty and there's boring. Spark hits option B in all counts, earning it the verdict: lower B-Movie.

"I am NaN, I am a free man!"

reply