Regarding IWTB...

[Guest Moriarty]

Hi all.

Found this on another site regarding IWTB:

"The initial response to the trailer was positive. There was some enthusiastic response, but I guess the low budget approach just didn't appeal to fans. An equivalent investment and result in today's dollars might have produced a film that yielded close to $100 million in today dollars. Instead they produced what amounted to a TV movie budget and an extended TV episode. The first film was ten years ago, but the series on TV was around more recently. They do have a fan base, but not one that will accept just anything. When people saw the actual film and did reviews, people were disappointed. They put out a half hearted effort and paid for it. The response to the trailers as well as the theater managers willingness to commit screens at 3185 theaters gave the impression that they expected a much much bigger result. People are willing to pay for quality, but this film wasn't quality in a positive sense. Worldwide the film has generated over $53 million, but there has to be more just to break even. The third X-Files film is going directly to DVD."

This is pretty much how I feel about the movie. Now don't get me wrong, I am a big XF fan, just wanted to post this because I found it rather interesting. What do other people on the boards think about the above post?

Take care all.

[Guest ZeusFaber]

Personally, I disagree with an awful lot in that extract.

First of all, I'm not sure who exactly the author is trying to blame. When this person says "they produced what amounted to a TV movie budget ," to whom are they referring? I hope they realize that Ten Thirteen Productions didn't get to set their own budget, they got what 20th Century Fox would give them. The producers had to make it work with what the studio gave them. In my opinion, from an expenses perspective, they did that. It looks very good on screen for $30m. The cinematography in the snow is excellent, and there is clearly nothing wasted on lavish effects or indulgent talent salaries (word was that Duchovny and Anderson both worked for as little as $250,000 each). So virtually every penny of the budget is up there on screen.

I also very much question this person's assertion that a greater investment would have yielded a $100m gross. That's a huge assumption and a rather wild one. This year, Speed Racer had $120m thrown at its budget, and has only made $92m -- significantly worse by percentage than IWTB. That's just one example. If IWTB had a higher budget, it could even have faired worse in terms of how much it recouped.

I also dispute the suggestion that "They put out a half hearted effort". Again, to whom does "they" refer? The studio? The production company? If it's the latter, then I just can't agree. Maybe this author didn't like the plot or the story, or wasn't captivated by the movie in general, fair enough. I don't agree, but fair enough. But I don't think they can say it was "half hearted" on the part of Chris Carter, Frank Spotnitz and associates. It seems they put a lot of passion into it and worked extremely hard over a very short period, under tight pressures from the WGA strike, an incredibly short schedule, and a summer release mandate to meet. So one cannot really question their effort.

Two final points of correction for the record. The movie has made over $64m worldwide to date. A third film is definitely not going straight to DVD.

[Guest Moriarty]

Thanks for the reply Zeus. I knew you would have a great comment on this :-)

But really, did you find the movie that great? I mean, with all the secrecy around the plot and so. I just expected something scarier. Also, the action scenes where not so good. Especially the scene were Mulder and Dakota are chasing the bad guy. That was confusionly shot.

I agree on the landscapes however but it takes more than nice shots to make a good movie. I had the impression that the writers did put a lot of effort in the characters of Mulder and Scully, no doubt about that. But the X-file itself was so lame. Put Squeeze and Tooms on the big screen and you 'll have a better X-file than the one of IWTB. That's just one example.

Also, the characters of Peet and xzibit are underwritten and the thing with Scully and the sick kid goes nowhere. And let's not forget Skinner who seems to come from nowhere for the last ten minutes. I mean, there are alot of flaws in this movie.

Nah, although I am a big fan I was not to much impressed with IWTB.

Just my opinion.

[Guest betweenthelines]

Heh, I quite liked the Mulder/Whitney/villain chase scene. One of my favorites in the movie, actually :). I do agree that at times the editing is awkward. There were too many abrupt cuts, especially the scene where Scully's driving home at the start of the film. That stood out as being really weird in terms of editing and direction.

I definitely agree that the two new agents were underwritten. Amanda Peet and Xzibit did well with what they were given, but I think more could have been done with the characters. Xzibit's character seemed to have randomly disappeared after a certain point in the picture. Father Joe, OTOH, was a fascinating character. No complaints on that front.

[Guest Laurent.]

Put Squeeze and Tooms on the big screen and you 'll have a better X-file than the one of IWTB. That's just one example.

Also, the characters of Peet and xzibit are underwritten and the thing with Scully and the sick kid goes nowhere. And let's not forget Skinner who seems to come from nowhere for the last ten minutes. I mean, there are alot of flaws in this movie.

I hate to do a point by point reply... but that's how I feel I should do it (sorry Moriarty, I understand your points and it's not directed toward you... but I have a different opinion)

#1 Squeeze or Tooms would not have made better big screen adaptation than IWTB! For a feature length movie, you need more substance than just some creepy scenes! I love to be scared when I watch movies or tv, but from real movies who take themselves seriously: I want some sort of resonance in the story. I feel most X-Files episode that people consider would have been movies (squeeze, home, etc) are mostly "skin deep" if you will. Great episodes, but that doesn't mean it would have made a great movie. Ice would be a better choice than those mentioned, because of how it plays with the paranoia of the characters I think. Then again, it is a direct homage to a classic movie (The Thing) so that rules Ice out.

#2 I do agree that Peet's and Xzibit's characters were underwritten. But with Mulder, Scully, Father Joe (and to an other extent the bad guys, which were developed mostly off-screen if you will), that doesn't leave that much time for other great characterization. Furthermore, I do feel it maybe have more to do with how the FBI are depicted in the film and the series in general, than with actual characterization (at least for Xzibit's character: he's meant to be paper thin I think). But it is still one of the movie's weak point.

#3 The sick kid's side story does not go nowhere for me: it hits pretty hard I think. It plays with Scully's crisis of faith, just as much as seeing Mulder's willingness to believe a pedophile priest does. And it then comes into play with the main plot, with connections that force Scully to go back to the darkness to help Mulder. This side story also asks the same question as the main plot in a much lighter tone: how far can you go to save a human life? Just like Father Joe's personal story mirrors another element of the main plot: redemption.

#4 It does feel like Skinner was a last addition to the script, because they maybe should have included him in the first sequences at the FBI. But his inclusion is still a great move. It's fun for the fans to see him back and bring some answers and closure to the character (see this element of my IWTB analysis for more on this).

Anyway, I think all those elements prove that their was more thoughts and efforts put into this movie by the powers that be than the writer of the quoted comment seems to believe! I know this won't change your disappointment of the movie, and I'm sorry that so much fans didn't like it, but I do think you can't blame the 1013 team. They released a great effort, it just isn't the kind of movie that appeals to everyone; but it's not a let down!

Oh and 1013 would never bring XF back in a direct-to-DVD movie; Spotnitz made it quite clear.

[Guest ZeusFaber]

Thanks for the reply Zeus. I knew you would have a great comment on this :-)

But really, did you find the movie that great?

I think it's imperfect, but very enjoyable. I think they did a solid job under the constraints they were forced to operate. So, while I disagree with your view of the film, I respect that it's your opinion which of course you have every right to. The thing about the first post you quoted is that it's far less about opinion and more about generalizations towards what the author thinks went wrong in the production process. Your post is much better, talking about your views on the story and characters, where the quoted extract is quite different, making me wonder where you found it.

Putting that aside and focusing on the movie itself, I'm with laran. I think it's subtle and effective. I very much disagree that "Squeeze" or "Tooms" on the big screen would have been better. One only has to look at last week's episode of Fringe to see how tired, stale and formulaic that kind of thing has become. The X-Files itself has done several spins on that story over the course of the series ("2Shy", "Teliko", "Leonard Betts" et al), while IWTB felt fresher and more unpredictable.

As for Agents Whitney and Drummy, I think you have to look at them in light of the fact that they're very much "third tier" characters in the movie. It's Mulder and Scully in the lead, Father Joe supporting, and the likes of Whitney and Drummy in background roles. Whitney gives us an FBI character with reason to bring Mulder back into the frey with her own beliefs and instincts, while Drummy serves as a representative of the rank-and-file of the FBI, the kind of person that real FBI Agents would be like, thus demonstrating that there are normal professionals within the organisation who wouldn't jump to the tune of a disgraced former agent, thereby grounding the film's representation of the FBI in reality. They serve their purpose as peripheral characters, and to look to them to provide something more in the context of the film would be to reach too far, the way I see it.

Skinner does come out of nowhere at the end, that's true, but in a way that's the point. It's meant to be a surprise for the loyal audience, a bonus, and to seed his character earlier in the movie would be to undermine that. Scully could just as easily have gone in search of Mulder with Drummy, or indeed alone, and not change the narrative, but would that have been as fun or exciting for fans? I don't think so.

Like I said though, the movie is imperfect, and I would say it's not without its flaws. But in my opinion, it's a worthwhile entry on balance, and sorely underrated by the media. I can more than respect your differing views, as is the case with all things, but the author of the quoted post seems to make some rather more objectionable points regarding finance and effort.

[Guest Moriarty]

I get you points but I just cannot agree on most of them. I certainly disagree with the movie being subtle and effective. For me it was just an average double parter that could have its place in one of the latter seasons. I missed the refreshing touch what made the series so original in the first place.

Mulder and Scully are well written, I agree with that. Also, I liked the character of Father Joe. But like I said before, the x-file itself was so lame. Did they have so much secrecy around a plot that was so boring and predictable? I just expeted more. Also, there is no real climax to the movie. Scully suddenly rescuing Mulder, Skinner who pops up out of nowhere and then letting Scully say "I have some work to do here", or something like that, and that's it. It was a long time since I saw such an anti-climax.

But the biggest thing that bothers me was the editing and the directing of Carter. The scene where the girl gets kidnapped at the beginning of the movie is just not tense due to all the intercutting. And then there's the chase scene. That was just bad directing. You can hardly follow the action. Compare that with the actions scenes in The Dark knight and you can't do anything else than conclude that Carter is a bad action director. Now I know that TDK was shot with lots more money but really, that has nothing to do with it. Nolan knows how to shoot action scenes so the audience doesn't think: "what is happening know?". Carter just does not have that ability. He is a writer and a good one but with IWTB, he and Spotnitz just dropped the ball.

I even won't begin about the boring subplot with the sick kid. How many times have we seen such a thing before in some TV-show about medicine, hospital, doctors etc...? Far too many according to me.

So I guess IWTB just did not work for me. The only notable things were the characters of Mulder and Scully. And also a good performance from Connolly but that's about it. You know what french actor Jean Gabin said? "To make a good movie you need 3 things: a good story, a good story and a good story". And IWTB just fails in that departement.

I wanted to believe in IWTB but, helas, it did not work for me.

Just my opinion.

Edited September 24, 2008 by Moriarty

[Guest ZeusFaber]

I have to disagree with you here, I'm afraid, on several points. For me, the tone of the film is more in line with seasons 2, 4 and 8 from the show, rather than 7, 8 and 9. It's more serious, darker, and less flashy in that sense. I also don't see anything lame about the central X-File plot with a psychic bond between an abuser and his victim, alongside the bizarre surgery of multiple body parts. That's much fresher than the standard mutant-killer story of the likes of "Tooms" which has been all but exhausted by the series, in my opinion.

But where I disagree most strongly of all is with your criticism of the directing and editing. To me, that was one of the movie's greatest strengths. Intercutting the opening scene was a very fresh tactic, and helped things feels more cinematic, where a TV episode would have just shown the the first kidnapping as a teaser before rolling the main titles. And the chase you mention has nothing wrong with it from my perspective. I think you can follow the action just fine, but regardless of that, bare in mind that the main intension of directing such a sequence is not necessarily to make everything perfectly clear as to where everyone is oriented. On the contrary, the point is to create an effect for the audience, and that effect can be a deliberate one of confusion or to put you ill at ease. We're supposed to be put in the position of Mulder and Whitney, rushing into unfamiliar surroundings, unsure of where the antagonist may be lurking, and thus surprised when he leaps out. I'd look to chase sequences in such movies as Se7en rather than The Dark Knight for comparisons. I think Chris Carter did an excellent job of directing IWTB, and I think his past body of work would support how capable he is.

As for the subplot involving Christian, I don't think the facts about his medical situation are really the point -- hence why we don't see the outcome at the end. That's not what's important. What's important is the way it tests Scully's faith and pushes her not to give up. If you take it as a medical story, I agree that it's fairly routine, but if you take it as a mirror for Scully's character, it's more affecting.

I can see that we clearly have very different opinions about IWTB, which is fine. Still, we seem to have unwittingly veered off topic somewhat, as the points of the quoted post are really quite different to our subjective viewpoints on the general quality of the film.

[Guest Laurent.]

Well said! Although I'm pretty sure you meant 6 instead of that second 8.

[Guest Moriarty]

I can see that we clearly have very different opinions about IWTB, which is fine. Still, we seem to have unwittingly veered off topic somewhat, as the points of the quoted post are really quite different to our subjective viewpoints on the general quality of the film.

Yes indeed, we have very different opinions about the movie. And that's also fine for me. No fun if everyone has the same opinion right? And although I did not like it I'll still buy the DVD when it comes out. Speaking of the DVD, does anyone know when that will be released? Is there already a date?

Take care.