PARANORMAL ACTIVITY - Get the word out!

Originally posted by moviewizguy That's funny since a lot of people are calling this the next "Blair Witch."

That may be precisely the problem with this film. Instead of blazing a new trail out there, the people who made this movie are simply trying to cash in on something that worked once but got tired pretty quick. I've already noted that this film might be worth a look, but I've got a feeling that going into it with high expectations is only going to lead to severe disappointment.

Sorry, MWG, but once again saturnwatcher makes a better point. By saying it's the "next Blair Witch", it just shows it's not trying to be original, like being the "first Paranormal Activity", it's just trying to cash in on a format that was proven successful once before. The format of "hey, this is a video tape of something that really happened" was already used TWICE last year, and again to a lesser extent this year with "District 9", so this movie isn't breaking any new ground.

As for the whole make a movie for under a million dollars and show it around film festivals, heck, thousands of indie horror movies are made that way each and every year, but only one or two end up in threaters, most go straight to DVD, IF they are lucky.

Not that it really matters, considering it's a decade later, but chances are no one was saying "Blair Witch ripped that movie off" because no one remembered "Cannibal Holocaust" (of course you're probably come back to say "no, it's considered a cult classic").

"Up" isn't the first Pixar movie, nor is "Dark Knight" the first comic book movie, but people praise them both because they are the best movies of their kind, ie. Pixar and comic book movies. So your argument is that this movie will be the best movie to use the "Blair Witch" style of shakey-cam-o-vision?

But the real argument we are all trying to make is that for some reason you don't seem to understand the point of these forums. We are a group of people who have made an award show to counter the Oscars that showcases the WORST movies of the year, the kind Hollywood studio heads wish everyone would forget. As such, these forums are made to MOCK bad movies, NOT to promote movies of questionable quality (hey, if this movie can stay above 70% at RT after 100 reviews, we might consider it to be "good").

When a video like "Mecha Geisha" is post here, we laugh and have a good time because it's a bad movie, thus we make light-hearted fun of it. When someone posts a thread about promoting a "good" movie here, we're taken aback, because why, oh why would expect a forum devoted to mocking bad movies to promote a good movie? IT MAKES NO SENSE. That is like writing an e-mail to the Coca-Cola Company asking them to help promote the newest Pepsi soda flavor. Think about it, is anyone going to take this movie seriously if it's being promoted by the same organization that does sproof award shows?

So as great as this movie might (key word: MIGHT) be, what we can't understand is what is it doing here? Posting it in IMDb makes sense because they discuss all kinds of movies, good and bad alike. Posting it here makes no sense since we focus on poking fun at bad movies. But for some reason, you just keep bringing this onto yourself.

If someone happens to stumble across an indie that isn't getting a lot of attention and might be worth seeing, I certainly don't have a problem with them bringing it to our attention here, especially with all the junk that parades it's way through the major theaters. BUT...we don't have much to go on here...7 critical opinions, even if they are good ones represent sort of a red flag. When something really good comes along, the top critics have a way of finding it and beating the drum for it. The total lack of attention this film is getting from critics suggests to me that it's probably a relatively insignificant work.

Originally posted by Michaels Not that it really matters, considering it's a decade later, but chances are no one was saying "Blair Witch ripped that movie off" because no one remembered "Cannibal Holocaust" (of course you're probably come back to say "no, it's considered a cult classic").

What are you talking about? You say (blissfully) as if Cannibal Holocaust is a horrible, forgotten film. I'm sorry but the reason I found out about the film is because of the WORD OF MOUTH, spoken over 25 years from today. You're so ignorant. I haven't seen the film but I know it's one of the most controversial films ever to be released. It's like saying Salo is a forgotten film. You can't just say that because YOU haven't heard it. I'm sure there's a fair share of people on here who HAS heard of it but doesn't want to bring it into the discussion because they favor you over me. It's not surprising.

"Up" isn't the first Pixar movie, nor is "Dark Knight" the first comic book movie, but people praise them both because they are the best movies of their kind, ie. Pixar and comic book movies. So your argument is that this movie will be the best movie to use the "Blair Witch" style of shakey-cam-o-vision?

Again, you're distorting and changing what I'm trying to say. I'm saying this film doesn't have to be the first of its kind to be a masterpiece. And what's with you against the shakey cam movies? In fact, every shakey-cam film that has been made has been on at least a borderline 60% or HIGHER on RT. Quarantine, Cloverfield, Blair Witch, Paranormal Activity, Rec, Cannibal Holocaust, and Diary of the Dead are all at least 60% and higher on RT.

But the real argument we are all trying to make is that for some reason you don't seem to understand the point of these forums. We are a group of people who have made an award show to counter the Oscars that showcases the WORST movies of the year, the kind Hollywood studio heads wish everyone would forget. As such, these forums are made to MOCK bad movies, NOT to promote movies of questionable quality (hey, if this movie can stay above 70% at RT after 100 reviews, we might consider it to be "good").

And for some reason, you don't seem to be getting that you AREN'T the boss around here. You DON'T have a say on what goes, whether you like it or not. I'm sorry you don't like diverse discussions. Oh, wait. You like diverse discussions but since this forum is to poke fun at bad movies, you don't like diverse discussions on this site. Riiight. 

When someone posts a thread about promoting a "good" movie here, we're taken aback, because why, oh why would expect a forum devoted to mocking bad movies to promote a good movie? IT MAKES NO SENSE.

You're making me sick. If you're too lazy to just look up the number or so threads that promote good movies, here, I'll just list it for you:

http://razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3575&PN=1

http://razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3069&PN=2

http://razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3797&PN=2

http://razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3796&PN=2

http://razzies.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=3494&PN=3

And that's JUST from the first 3 pages. And if you're so incapable of reading, I read that the "Talk Amongst Yourselves" section is "OPEN for discussion."

But for some reason, you just keep bringing this onto yourself.

Oh, the irony.

Originally posted by moviewizguy And for some reason, you don't seem to be getting that you AREN'T the boss around here. You DON'T have a say on what goes, whether you like it or not. I'm sorry you don't like diverse discussions. Oh, wait. You like diverse discussions but since this forum is to poke fun at bad movies, you don't like diverse discussions on this site. Riiight.

Yes, I know I'm not the boss here, because if I was, you would be banned for being a troll. But again, I'm not the boss, just a PAYING and VOTING member of the awards.

You're making me sick. If you're too lazy to just look up the number or so threads that promote good movies, here, I'll just list it for you: And that's JUST from the first 3 pages. And if you're so incapable of reading, I read that the "Talk Amongst Yourselves" section is "OPEN for discussion."

That's great, except those were discussions (in which you promoted more movies that were listed in these forums), not begging for us to help a little known movie become more successful. Oh, and with the "you're so incapable of reading" comment, yeah, stuff like that makes you seem very immature, which is another reason why we don't take your opinions seriously. The same goes with such comments as "It's called word of mouth, look it up".

Originally posted by dEd Grimley Ya know what I'm thinkin right now? I wanna see Michaels and MWG just box each other, ala Uwe Boll. Just get all the aggression out. Who cares who wins, it's all in good fun, and it ups the ante for movie nerd toughness, although I have no idea as to where to even speculate at either's physical proportions.

No thank you. Because as you said, boxing over one's opinions of a movie being bad or good would make me no better than Uwe Boll. I like having a soul.

I don't know if you guys care but the film made under $80,000 in just 12 theaters with only a budget of $11,000. With that, the Paramount Studios has made a list of 20 (TWENTY) MORE CITIES that will be showing the film this week! I guess our cries (or my cry) was heard! It's now showing in my city! Click on the below links to find out what the cities are:

http://www.paranormalmovie.com/director.html

Oh. I also learned that Steven Spielberg saw the film and loved it, although suggesting a new ending, which was reshot. So, I mean, the evidence is here, people.