I think people's awareness and fondness of Youtube probably has something to do with the influx of found footage films. That, and they're cheap to make (and can quite obviously make a boat load of coin on occasion). Personally, I'm finishing up my own found footage spec script. I chose this genre as I felt it would at least give me a chance to get it filmed myself, should I so wish. Also, it's in the thriller mold, so I'm hoping it will distinguish itself from crowd by not being a horror.

Re writing a script within certain confines to allow you to film it yourself: I heard the same thing from Chris Sparling re "Buried" and John Swetnam re "Evidence," the former a contained thriller, the latter a found footage script. Both wrote their respective scripts using the story conceit because they were planning on shooting the thing themselves, if they couldn't sell it. BTW the "cheap to make" comment is something Lorenzo di Bonaventura, one of the producers of "The Devil Inside," echoed in the LAT article linked in the OP. That is a selling point to studios who are always looking for cheap ways to make a buck.

What's the appeal of Found Footage Films? I'll take a stab at it. --They involve a mystery. People love trying to put together the puzzle pieces. --The mystery is usually about some type of disaster. So the stakes are inherently high right from the outset... because whatever killed these people could happen again. --Verisimilitude. Found Footage makes the movie seem more real. Easier to suspend your disbelief, especially if it involves a supernatural element. --In the Era of Reality TV, Webcams & Podcasts, Found Footage is a natural fit. I'm sure there are a few other reasons, but that's all I got right now.

Clearly I'm just awkward, because I feel found footage films have very low stakes. If the footage has been found without explanation, then the people who filmed it are already dead (or worse). The end of what we're about to see is pre-ordained. So where are the stakes? Yes, it could happen again, but that's not the same as *seeing* it happen again to likeable characters...

I think if a found footage film can present a credible scenario and a set of likable characters - then the lack of obvious Hollywood style production techniques leaves the audience more vulnerable to being sucked in to the story. In the horror genre this can be very useful - that demon could have been filmed with my camera! That spookiness could be happening in my bedroom - Yikes! The whole thing feels a lot more close to home - and that can be really SCARY!

I'm going to cut/paste my response to the post on Worst January Openings. "I’m glad you mentioned Devil Inside. I went to see War Horse Saturday night, 10 pm showing and the last showing of Devil Inside had a big ‘Sold Out’ sign a good 30 minutes prior to showtime. I’m in central Ohio, a suburb of a larger city. I can’t imagine what the teenagers do on a weekend there but go to the movies. That’s the social hangout and this was the first weekend back to school. The only thoughts that went through my head as to why it was sold out was there was nothing else that really opened. I believe all the big draw movies, they probably already seen over the holiday break with nothing to do — Sherlock Holmes, MI4, War Horse, even Girl with the Dragon Tattoo. In addition, Devil Inside is a found footage movie, so with this generation of “Youtube-ites” with their constant scour of reality tv stuff and the appeal that is the voyeur in all of us, I think it may have been the perfect storm. I liked War Horse btw, except for the oversaturated colors at the end."

Christopher, thanks for that report from the 'field.' I think your point about the voyeur dynamic is a pretty important one re found footage. Plus scary movies are good date films. And psychologically speaking, adolescents are deep into figuring out who they are. So with exorcism movies, where characters display disparate personalities, that probably has some subconscious reference.

I don't mind the genre and they are easy and cheap to shoot from a film maker's pov. Perhaps it also gives a point of view to the audience like they are the one viewing the events as they unfold. I saw the movie this week with 4 other people in the theater(it was early on Friday) and I already knew the text ending. The last seen was pretty abrupt and just left you hanging in a way. Not always bad, but the text made it sting a little. I asked out loud "Do you feel burned?" The other 4 people were shaking their heads saying "no kidding". There was an odd silence when the movie was over. Two were at least 25 and the other two were 40's. The movie had faults as pointed out in the article, but some things you just let go. It wasn't bad, but I was bored in a couple spots. The ending was the killer though. I knew what to expect so I wasn't upset. How many people won't go because of the ending being passed around?