I was lucky enough to see this movie during its midnight premiere at a festival in Montreal called Fantasia. Although all expectations were for a really gory movie, it turned out to be a funny comedy not unlike Bowfinger, but with a documentary feel to it! There is a dose of fear in this (which builds up especially near the end) but it's all in good fun. See it with the idea of watching a fake documentary with great improv by the cast and you'll have fun.
2 Reviews
Highly enjoyable-Intriguing in its construction...
pathenaude_v4 October 2003
Warning: Spoilers
***SPOILERS*** ***SPOILERS*** I just rented this film and I must say it is very enjoyable! One thing that intrigues me is that is it labeled a "director's cut". Now, I have not seen Die Alive before, but according to the special features section, some scenes were deleted from it after it played in theaters. Usually, a director re-inserts material into his movie (often unnecessary footage that turns the original cut into a prized item for collectors). It would seem in this case that the director's intent were more bent on tightening the pace of the film (and I must admit the editing is very good and imaginative in its use of parallel and direct cutting).
To put things simply, this film is a cross between a mockumentary comedy a la "This is Spinal Tap" and a Fellini's 8 1/2 (with a dose of fantasy). Like the Italian masterpiece this is a movie about a director wanting to make a science fiction film and failing, and it was apparently shot after they could not make what became the film within the film (again, like 8 1/2). But this is not a remake of 8 1/2 at all (in fact, it bears no other resemblance to it). What makes this film unique is the form it uses. I'm currently studying cinema and I was intrigued by it ( and it's probably what made me comment on it).
The film opens with a fake trailer: Die Alive's. Then, we are told by narration over a making of montage sequence that the director wanted to make the film we were just shown in the trailer but couldn't. We further learn that what follows is the improvised film they ended up making (SECTION A). The film proper then begins (SECTION B) and we follow the crew as they try to make a film called Die Alive. **SPOILERS** The film ends with the director telling his assistant that what they should instead do is use the footage they have (basically, what we saw) and make a film about them trying to make Die Alive and failing (which brings us back full circle to SECTION A). It is a unique use of multiple realities in storytelling point of view and an intriguing form I've never seen in another movie. We're reading Eisenstein's FILM FORM book, and this movie is a unique case study I might end up using in class!
To put things simply, this film is a cross between a mockumentary comedy a la "This is Spinal Tap" and a Fellini's 8 1/2 (with a dose of fantasy). Like the Italian masterpiece this is a movie about a director wanting to make a science fiction film and failing, and it was apparently shot after they could not make what became the film within the film (again, like 8 1/2). But this is not a remake of 8 1/2 at all (in fact, it bears no other resemblance to it). What makes this film unique is the form it uses. I'm currently studying cinema and I was intrigued by it ( and it's probably what made me comment on it).
The film opens with a fake trailer: Die Alive's. Then, we are told by narration over a making of montage sequence that the director wanted to make the film we were just shown in the trailer but couldn't. We further learn that what follows is the improvised film they ended up making (SECTION A). The film proper then begins (SECTION B) and we follow the crew as they try to make a film called Die Alive. **SPOILERS** The film ends with the director telling his assistant that what they should instead do is use the footage they have (basically, what we saw) and make a film about them trying to make Die Alive and failing (which brings us back full circle to SECTION A). It is a unique use of multiple realities in storytelling point of view and an intriguing form I've never seen in another movie. We're reading Eisenstein's FILM FORM book, and this movie is a unique case study I might end up using in class!
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews