There is a saying in the real estate world that it is all
about “location, location, location.”
This statement is one of the truest statements in all of business. If you’re trying to sell a house, you want it
to be in a good neighborhood. It needs
to be safe, have respectable schools, and be near enough to shopping and
entertainment that people can buy groceries and entertain themselves. If you’re opening a business, you want it to
be somewhere that people will notice it and want to stop to visit your
establishment. You don’t want it to be
out of the way and make people look for it.
They probably won’t and your business will fail. Location is important for sales. It can make the difference between success
and failure.
Location is also an important quality for the movie
industry. It is a visual medium, so a
location is necessary in order to have something for the audience to look
at. I don’t mean a theater for them to
watch the movie in. That’s important,
but the location in which the movie is shot is the image that the audience will
see. A filmmaker wants to find the best
location for the viewers to look at.
They want to find a location that will keep audiences invested in the
movie. They also want a location that is
cheap to film in. The two factors get
debated and compared, fluctuating in how persuasive they are upon the
movie. If a movie has a large budget
(for example, a James Bond film), the filmmaker might utilize exotic locations
to film on site, or have elaborate sets created for the action. When a movie has a lower budget, as do many
of the bad movies I watch, the filmmaker tends to resort to cheaper locations
in which they can shoot the movie. The
director might use a buddy’s house, or even his own. The crew might find an empty street and
quickly assemble a shoot. Or, in many
cases, they will opt to film large chunks of the movie in the woods.
There are more reasons than money that someone might choose
to film their movie in the woods. But
let’s first take a look at why it is an inexpensive location choice. The number one reason is that a filmmaker
tends to not need permits to film in the woods.
There is no paperwork, no payment, and no outsiders supervising the
shoot. You are free to film for as long
as you want without having to pay extra for being there longer, or pay people
who are displaced from their workplace while you shoot. That’s the basic nature of shooting in the
woods. It’s free.
Another thing about filming in the woods is that, depending
on the size and the natural features of the area, it could end up working as
multiple sub-locations. Different areas
of the woods have the ability of providing different visuals. The various types of trees that grow there
would look different from one another.
There may be hills, streams, rocks, clearings, caves, and other things
that could make for interesting backdrops to the action occurring
onscreen. The location could even factor
into the action itself, becoming as important as the characters in what is
happening. There is enough variation in
the different areas of the woods to keep a movie visually interesting even when
it is primarily set in the woods.
The final reason, and one that I have been privy to
throughout the many low-budget and many bad movies that I have seen is that the
woods can give a spooky or eerie tone to the movie. As much as a wooded area can be a beautiful
place to visit and explore, it can also be a fairly easy place to get lost. Many people have an itching feeling that they
will lose themselves in the woods and not be able to find their way out.
(Sidenote: I believe that this fear may come from the story of Hansel and
Gretel, in which the two children get lost in the woods because the breadcrumb
trail they leave behind gets eaten. It
gets told to children, so from a young age, we have that little bit of fear
about never finding a way out of the woods and the potential dangers of what
may be in there. The witch. Anyway, that’s another topic for another
time.) I said before that there are many
parts of the woods that can look different.
I still stand by that assessment.
However, trees are still trees.
The rocks, streams, and other things are still surrounded by trees. When all you see is trees for as far as you
can see in any direction, how similar or different they look does not
matter. You want a way out, but you
cannot see one. Just that sense of being
forever lost can give a movie a sense of dread.
And that’s before there’s a villain chasing the protagonist through the
woods. If someone or something is
chasing after you through the woods, and you can’t see them or a way out
because of all of the foliage, you’ll be more scared than simply being lost in
the woods. That’s why lower budget
movies, namely horror, commonly resort to the woods and cabins in the woods.
Blackwoods is a
2001 Uwe Boll movie that takes the woods concept and runs with it. The title comes from the nickname that the
characters in the movie give to the woods that are a primary feature. Because there are so many trees, it becomes
impossible to see through the woods in the dark. It ends up being pitch black. (This is a
false statement perpetuated by the characters) Hence the name Blackwoods. The movie adds the various tropes that could
be associated with the woods in movies.
There ends up being a lone house in the woods (cabin in the woods) with
a backwoods family that ends up chasing after the protagonist (villain chase
for tension). There are rocks and trees
that change the look of the location, but the main character runs through
endless trees seeking help and finding despair.
Add in that any road he sees is surrounded by trees as far as the eye
can see and you have the perfect elements for a movie set in the woods. The editing kills any of the suspense brought
on by the setting. It also neuters any
of the interesting twists and turns. The
setting was still the right choice; however, the filmmaking talents of Uwe Boll
took away from the potential the setting provided.
This week’s Sunday “Bad” Movie isn’t the only movie I have
covered that has been set in the woods. Blackwoods is one of many. The most notable of the other movies would be
the Anaconda franchise. The first two are actually set in the jungle,
sure, but that’s only a minor difference.
The jungle is still a place full of trees that shares the same general
features with the woods. The villain in
this case tends to be twofold. There
will be a human antagonist who doesn’t take advantage of the wooded
surroundings. He or she instead tags
along with the main group, only to turn on them in the end. The villain that chases the main characters
through the woods is actually the anaconda(s) that the titles reference. They are able to hide well by blending into
their surroundings such as the trees and shrubbery, as well as any other
debris. The main group of characters
have trouble escaping from the snakes because of trees that span for miles in
every direction. The franchise is
another classic example of why wooded areas make a great choice for a horror
setting. The endless trees and the
unknown whereabouts of the snake around them build up the tension. This is a big plus for a series of movies
that don’t tend to do so well on the writing side of things.
There are other locations like houses and warehouses that
can be useful and cheap for filmmakers with lower budgets but many people tend
to come back to the woods for their inspiration. Between the cheap cost, the look, and the
mood that it brings, the woods can provide the perfect backdrop for a movie. Plus, it gets you back into the great
outdoors. That’s good too. The woods are a location with many uses and
functions (though uses and functions might be the same thing). They can make for beautiful scenery or
provide some necessary tension. It’s a
location that can give great results if utilized properly. As is any location, really. If a location is used well, it can make for
great cinema. If it is not used well, it
can make for a bad movie. Many times the
result is in between. And that’s just
movies for you.
Now it’s time for some notes:
- Blackwoods was one of the many suggested movies for the Sunday “Bad” Movies. It was suggested by @SebastianNebel.
- As I said in the post, Uwe Boll was the director. He was previously featured in the Sunday “Bad” Movies as the director of House of the Dead. That movie also featured four actors from Blackwoods: Michael Eklund, Clint Howard, Ben Derrick, and Will Sanderson.
- Another actor in Blackwoods who was in a different Sunday “Bad” Movie is Matthew Walker, who was in New Year’s Eve.
- I mentioned Anaconda in this week’s post.
- I mentioned the story of Hansel and Gretel. I have covered a movie called Hansel and Gretel Get Baked.
- Other movies I’ve covered with wooded settings include Backwoods Bloodbath, Friday the 13th Part V, and A Talking Cat!?!.
- What are some movies set in the woods that you like? What movies used the woods properly? Have you seen Blackwoods? Did you like Blackwoods? Have you seen anything from Uwe Boll? There’s a comments section so that you can talk about any of this stuff that you want.
- Do you have any movies you would like to suggest for the Sunday “Bad” Movies? There are three ways to suggest them. One, you can put the suggestion in the comments. Two, you could email it to sundaybadmovies@gmail.com. Third, you can tell me on Twitter.
- Next week’s movie is a movie called 7 Deadly Sins. I don’t know much about it. I’m about to watch it. You’ll hear about my thoughts next week. Come back for those. See you then.
No comments:
Post a Comment