The Last Broadcast (1998)

The Last Broadcast

The Last Broadcast Poster

Filmmaker David Leigh is putting together a documentary covering the story of the ‘Jersey Devil Murders’, a case in which two local cable access hosts and their two-man crew ventured into the Pine Barrens to film a segment on the Jersey Devil for their show “Fact or Fiction”, and only one of them walked out alive. The lone survivor, Jim Suerd, was eventually charged and convicted of the murders of the other three. But as time goes by and more people scrutinize the case and new information comes to light, Leigh reveals how Suerd’s presumed guilt has become more and more hazy.

Jim looking unwell

You know, when I started The Last Broadcast, I wasn’t intending to finish out the month with yet another “I’m a filmmaker making a documentary” type of found-footage horror film. Going by the film’s (very) general description that’s listed, I thought Broadcast was simply going to be another film where a bunch of schmo-zoes wander around in the woods looking for a creepy cryptid. Because, in my meager defense, based on the movie’s one sentence summary of “A film crew ventures into the forest in search of the mythical ‘Jersey Devil’”, that’s really all that the summary ever suggested.

The weird producer
And instead I got to see scenes featuring this creepy Phil Spector looking guy. Yay…

And while the movie does have those scenes (at least a little bit), Broadcast is also yet another found-footage film presented (mostly) as a straight-up ‘documentary’. You know, with a narrator, establishing shots, interviews, archival footage, all that jazz. In fact, it may very well be the first presented as such. Except in this case it’s even more low-budget than one might expect, often looking like a documentary that was made on the extra cheap for some sort of local cable access channel (do they have many of those around any more?) So, kind of like a documentary made by someone who’s probably never made a documentary before and maybe only watched one or two of them themselves. Which makes sense, since it looks like Broadcast was one of the first (if not THE first) films either the director/writer (and actor!) team of Stefan Avalos and Lance Weiler ever worked on. It also holds the distinction of being one of the first films shot, edited and screened entirely digitally, making it slightly historically relevant.

Oh, and it also gets compared to The Blair Witch Project quite a lot, even though Broadcast beat them to the metaphorical found-footage punch at the box office by several months. Though honestly, I’m not sure if that comparison is altogether fair, because despite both films falling into the found-footage category they both feel radically different from one another.

A newspaper article about the 'incident'

For starters, The Blair Witch Project actually feels like it has a decent plot. I’ll grant you, it’s quite often a very slow plot, but at least it’s something that has an identifiable beginning, middle and end. Which isn’t to say Broadcast doesn’t have a plot, per se, it’s just that the way in which it’s presented makes it feel unpolished and even often unfocused. And considering the film is supposed to be a ‘documentary’ that is indeed a BAD thing.

Jim's neighbor...or whatever

It starts off fine in the first half, as they establish the story, and the characters and their background, and the general ‘case’ it’s covering, as it were, and how everything (presumably) happened. But even that decent start gets bogged down by the film becoming overly repetitive, often doing things like re-using certain footage too many times, or re-playing audio recordings, or even having the narrator harp on the same ideas multiple times. I get the impression that the Leigh character is probably working on the documentary all by himself and all, but goodness, could that dude have used an editor.

The film had a web designer, but not an editor

But it’s really only when you get to the second half when things start to go wonky. Because that’s the point when our narrator friend not only starts to question the findings by the police, which is fine, but then he also starts getting sorta philosophical and repeatedly questions the role of the media in our perception of reality. And much like earlier questioning the police, this is also not necessarily a bad thing. In fact, in today’s increasing age of computer AI photos and deep fake video that can oftentimes look shockingly real, questioning media is probably more relevant and necessary today than it was in 1998. But again, the way it’s presented, and the fact that the points are repeated over and over, much like elements in the first half of the film, not only starts to get annoying, but makes the film feel more amateurish than it needs to be.

A highlight in a newspaper article talking about Jim

Then you get to the ending which is just…bizarre. And I get that the whole thing ties into the very “you should question what you watch” angle that they were just going on about only a few minutes earlier. But the way they did it and the whole pulling out into standard 1st person view after we’ve spent the rest of the movie in ‘found-footage’ mode in order to show it, just feels… odd, not to mention very jarring. And based on some comments I’ve read from the filmmakers, I suspect that was a very intentional choice on their part. But I’m not really sure it’s a choice that works, and I’m sure it’s going to be something very polarizing for a lot of viewers who probably go into the film expecting something wildly different.

The movie's director trying to get 'arty'

Other than that, my only other major complaint is some very…. shall we say ‘questionable’ camera work choices. And I’m not just talking about the standard ‘shaky-cam’ stuff that’s really become expected for these types of films. That’s in here too, and is as annoying as ever. But what’s really annoying is some of the other camera work. Turns out our “Fact or Fiction” guys are really, REALLY bad at simple things like basic framing, which makes me wonder A) how they managed to get popular enough to stay on air, and B) how they also managed to secure enough funds to buy all the high tech equipment needed to produce a LIVE internet feed back in 1998. But I suppose since they’re a cable access show that their absolute ineptitude with a camera can at least be mildly understandable.

The Fact or Fiction guys looking very lame
I have to assume that the stories they covered were just really, REALLY good to make up for this.

What isn’t though, is Leigh’s camera work, which winds up being frustratingly annoying in some parts. When he’s doing interviews and (seemingly) has a tripod, it’s fine. But there are a couple of instances where he goes ‘out into the field’ and for some unfathomable reason he is rotating himself back and forth while he’s got the camera pointed on him. And I’m not talking about the usual subtle movement that everyone displays when holding a camera without a tripod, because the human body can’t hold completely still like that. I do photography, I know that which I speak. No, I mean this dude is literally slowly spinning himself left and right close to 180 degrees while he’s talking. Just…why? Was he trying to get an establishing shot and just forgot to stop? Were they trying to mimic the shaky-cam effect without implementing an actual shaky-cam? I don’t know, but I find it to be a VERY frustrating visual.

The cameraman having a spaz attack
Argh! Would you PLEASE hold still!

So, The Last Broadcast was very different from what I expected. Did I like it? Ehhh… it was all right. Certainly not the worst found-footage film I’ve seen, but not the best either. But I do appreciate that it had something to say about madness and media, and that it tried to do something different for the time. And I also liked that it likely set the tone for a lot of other, more polished found-footage films to come out down the line. So for that alone, I thank it. But I imagine that a lot of modern viewers will be turned off by, if not the presentation, then by its intentional twist ending. So if you watch found-footage films for the potential for shaky-cams, scares and a glimpse of fictional monsters, then I suspect you may not like this one. But if you’re curious about the film from a historical perspective, or just want something a bit different for the genre, then it’s likely worth one watch. You’ll still probably be disappointed, but at least you’ll get to see some nice shots of the woods.

The Last Broadcast is available on a variety of streaming services.

The Last Broadcast is also available on DVD and Bluray.

Helpful Links:

The Last Broadcast Watch Link

The Last Broadcast DVD Link

The Last Broadcast Bluray Link

Michi's avatar
Michi

6 thoughts on “The Last Broadcast (1998)

  1. Hmmm – I feel like I need to go read about this and see what the end is all about so I don’t have to watch that guy film himself. He looks like he’s going to bust into the Friends theme and start clapping or something.

    A+ for your gif as always.

    Liked by 1 person

    1. I both loved and hated making that gif! Cause on the one hand, ‘who the hell holds a camera that way? Everyone has to see this nonsense.’ But on the other hand, having to watch it so many times almost forced me to take a Dramamime. *sway sway sway sway….*

      Like

    1. It’s decidedly okay. It is interesting to watch knowing that they made it while trying to do something new and different. But when you compare it to Blair Witch it’s easy to see why BW ended up being the one most chose to emulate, because it simply ends up being the more fun and engaging film experience.

      Like

Leave a comment