Review #56: The Dark Tapes (2016)

This review was originally written in October 2019.

October Horror Movie Review #4: The Dark Tapes

Oh boy.

Oh boy oh boy. This is going to be a long one, so I apologize.

I just spent about ten minutes searching the internet just to make sure that this movie was not, in fact, a satire of found-footage movies, intended to be the worst possible example of one so as to show people why found-footage movies are bad. So far, I have not been able to find adequate evidence. So I have to assume that this is just a bad, bad, bad movie.

I spoke last time about my disdain for found-footage and I figured I'd bring up more of the reasons as the month went on. I had no clue that the immediate next movie would prove to be the poster child for every single thing I hate about found-footage movies. Since this review is guaranteed to be almost exclusively negative let me assure you, I'm trying to give all of this month's movies (even the found-footage ones) their fair shake. I know that I openly dislike this type of movie but I promise, when a good one comes along, I will call it out as such. This is not a good one.

The framing device is quite possibly the only good part of this movie. A couple show up to an empty stage (dressed up to look like a lab) expecting to find their friends, but instead find a camera with several videos recorded on it for some reason. Between each of the following short films we learn that the friends in question were attempting an experiment to prove that ghosts or shadow people are actually on a different temporal plane than us; in the process they trap themselves in a time dilation and also get attacked by a person in a halloween costume. The actual execution of this bit is terrible but the concept was surprisingly interesting.

But let me get into why this movie is so bad.

I said last time that in my experience, found-footage is usually an excuse to put less time, money, and effort into every facet of the filmmaking process, and this holds entirely true for this film. The writing (where it exists at all) is terrible. The acting (where it exists at all) is equally terrible. The only editing (where it exists at all) consists of random cuts at random times and occasionally applying a grainy static filter or digital artifact effect to hide a sloppy jump cut. (I say "occasionally" but that actually happens, like, every few seconds, for the whole film.)

We have scenes that were so clearly improvised and not even rehearsed, where the characters have completely different reactions to the same things because the director didn't tell them what they were reacting to. This movie's "special effects" consist of shaking the camera or having someone in the next room stomp on the floor, and having the actors act terrified. There is one point where the cameraman turns to the left, and then uses his right hand to knock something over and then the characters act like a ghost did it. Top each of these stories off by having the characters stand in front of the camera and exposit the entire plot, straight-faced, in full. (Seriously. Every one of the short films has a to-the-camera explanation of the story right before the end.) Never have I seen one film, let alone several short films strung together, that has so little faith in itself or its audience.

Now, as I was watching this movie (originally intending to nitpick each and every little inconsistency, or lapse in logic, or example of bad acting, or whatever) it occurred to me that maybe I was being overly critical. After all, I said myself that I don't like this type of film. But here's how I justify being so critical: This is a found-footage movie. If I turn on Harry Potter or Terminator I'm not going to start picking on everything that's unrealistic; I won't even call out jump cuts or repeating extras or whatever. Because I know I'm watching a film- and the artifice is part of the experience.

Imagine, though, if the movie claims to be based on a true story. If a based-on-a-true-story film involves Superman flying in the window, sorry, you lost me.

Found-footage is one step beyond that. The movie is casting aside your suspension of disbelief as part of the experience. Though you know this movie isn't real, the unspoken claim that it IS real is inherent to the medium. It's not a documentary, but you're expected to act like it IS a documentary.

That's why I'm so critical of found-footage. That's why I hate how so many people use it as an excuse to be low-budget and low-effort. I'll put this in all caps: YOU CANNOT MAKE A LOW-EFFORT FOUND-FOOTAGE MOVIE. Every found-footage movie that was actually successful (such as the Blair Witch Project, or Paranormal Activity) took GREAT MEASURES to plan out and execute their craft. The Blair Witch director tricked the actors into thinking the legend was real and played mind games to pit the actors against each other to increase on-screen drama. While that movie was being filmed, the three principle actors had no direct interaction with anyone, instead relying on pre-determined drop points and a rough outline of what was to be filmed on a given day. They saved money, sure- but the money they saved making the movie was made up for by incredible amounts of work and effort. When real, successful found-footage movies use special effects, they MUST be PERFECT, or it ruins the entire point of found-footage- and as a result, they tend to either use them incredibly sparingly (if at all), or they put their entire budget into one effect because they understand it needs to be perfect.

This film doesn't do that. The special effects are basically an afterthought, and my assumption (possibly unfounded) is that the directors thought it wouldn't matter- after all, this is just a movie, right? We know we're just watching a dumb movie, so why does it matter?

But that, fellow viewer, is the entire point. You cannot have your cake and eat it too. If you're going to use the style of film that needs the viewer to feel like they're watching something real, then you cannot also ask them to suspend their disbelief. They shouldn't need to suspend their disbelief in the first place. That's the whole reason people go see found-footage- because something inside them believes that it's more real than a traditional film.

If you make a found-footage film, you are deliberately inviting the same scrutiny someone would use to a cellphone recording sent by someone you know. If it looks fake, if it looks like they just applied a snapchat filter, then you have failed at using the medium.

And the creators of The Dark Tapes have failed at using the medium. Many times over. This movie is uninteresting, poorly made, sloppy, stupid, and disrespectful to both the people who helped make it and the people who have watched it.

Overall rating: 1/10

Silliest moment in the whole thing: The dumb-looking alien at the end that gets some "sulfuric acid" casually splashed on it at timestamp 1:29:30