Fuji reviews Incident at Loch Ness

[Fuji Vice]

Incident at Loch Ness


​

Acclaimed cinematographer and documentary filmmaker John Bailey is currently filming the famous director Werner Herzog for a project called “Herzog in Wonderlandâ€. At the same time, Herzog is beginning a new project with producer Zak Penn, writer of films such as Last Action Hero, Behind Enemy Lines and X-Men 2. The two plan to head to Loch Ness in search of the elusive “Nessieâ€, hoping to capture it on film and discover the difference between fact and truth. However, once they get to Scotland a myriad of problems plague the film, not the least of which is a very real and very terrifying monster.

​

Werner Herzog is undoubtedly a master of cinema and one of my favourite directors of all-time. While I’ve been compiling a list for my eventual top 250 countdown, I’ve realized that many of his works will feature prominently in it. There’s just something incredible about the man and his projects, from the brilliant remake of Nosferatu to his haunting documentary Grizzly Man. At the same time there’s also an air of mystery to him, almost like he exists on a different plane than everyone else; capable of seeing things no one else can. So, when I discovered that there was a film featuring Werner Herzog as himself searching for the Loch Ness monster I was immediately intrigued. What I didn’t realize is that this film is a mockumentary, a staged series of events designed to create a horror/comedy “eventâ€. Or is it? To be honest, like Herzog, Incident at Loch Ness is very mysterious and at times very difficult to nail down. We as viewers are challenged to determine whether what we’re seeing is all a Hollywood production or whether it may be lost footage from a failed film attempt. However, regardless of what Incident at Loch Ness really is, one thing I know is that it’s among the better found footage films I’ve seen in recent memory.

"Relax, it's only a model."
​

The film is written and directed by Zak Penn, who along with the movies I mentioned earlier can also be credited with the story for The Avengers and creating the television series Alphas. Penn is a writer first and foremost and this was the first film he directed, so the fact that it turned out so well is definitely a surprise. Or is it? Perhaps Herzog was doing a little more work behind the camera than either of them let on, though if that was the case I’m certainly not complaining. Sure it’s a found footage movie on the surface, but once you get into the fact that it’s really a movie within a movie (and possibly within another movie that we’re only vaguely aware of) you realize just how good Penn (or Herzog and Penn’s) work is. Even the sense of pacing is bang on, something that I find is a major problem with a lot of found footage films. The beginning sets everything up nicely, with Herzog hosting a dinner party for the Loch Ness crew and some friends (including Jeff Goldblum, Crispin Glover and Ricky Jay) before moving to Scotland for the second and third acts. This dinner party seems more “real†than a lot of other things in the film, thereby serving to further confuse the audience as to what’s real and what’s imagined. In a way, Penn and Herzog have come up with the thesis statement for their (fictional) Loch Ness movie in their (real) Loch Ness movie; that which is truth may not necessarily be fact.

"Our intrepid adventurers looking for some intrepid adventure."
​

Werner Herzog is the star here and is featured prominently, appearing in nearly every shot. As I mentioned earlier, he’s got this air of mystique and wonder to him that cannot be understated and it comes across so well here. Speaking slowly, like a man wise beyond his years, he commands your attention at every turn. He could be talking about cooking, Loch Ness, true crime stories from the early 90’s or even beards and you just can’t stop listening; he’s just that charismatic. While it seems that he’s “playing†a character-version of himself, you can never be sure that he’s not just being Werner Herzog the entire time and that is part of the fun. Meanwhile, Zak Penn also appears in front of the camera, playing the producer of the Loch Ness project that they’re working on. Penn seems to be more of a comic-relief type character, showing his production inexperience by insisting the crew wear jumpsuits (misspelled for good measure), changing names (and motors) of a boat and hiring actors to play “expertsâ€, including a smoking hot Playboy model, Kitana Baker. He also enlists the services of Michael Karnow, an actor brought in to play a crypto-zoologist in order to give the film some “authenticityâ€. Karnow and Baker are real people, although in this film they’re playing actors playing real people. Does any of that make sense? It doesn’t to Herzog, who finally loses it on Penn in a brilliant scene towards the end of the third act. Once again, as with the filmmaking itself, the acting gives no hints as to whether what we’re seeing is real, purposely fictionalized or just simply imagined.

"10/10 would bang."
​

In the past, Werner Herzog has been known to create fictional documentaries in order to challenge the thought process of others. Some of these include tales of the “Jesus men of Russia†who have whole flocks of disciples, or a community where people believe a city exists under a frozen lake. While neither of these stories have a smidgen of truth to them, Herzog was capable of convincing people they did, which is also what he and Penn do here. Even though I knew Incident at Loch Ness was just a movie I found myself becoming more and more convinced that it was not. Unfortunately there are several moments in the film where you become aware that it actually is, including a staged shot through a doorway that gives the entire thing away. However, that doesn’t diminish the idea of what Herzog and Penn created here, a true piece of thought-provoking material cleverly disguised as a standard found footage horror film. By the end of it all, you have no more answers than you did at the beginning even though you know deep down inside that the entire thing was fiction. Or was it? The main idea brought forth by the film is that there is a difference between fact and truth; just because something exists in front of our eyes doesn’t mean that it should be taken at face value. That’s pretty high concept stuff for a simple horror film, so I guess that means it’s not that simple at all. Like Herzog, it is an enigma; but one that simply must be seen to be truly appreciated. 7/10.

"Next time...she's having a baby...sort of."
​