Cliche Sells

[Chessie]

Hi.

The recent thread about why we read and write fantasy, as well as some other discussions on this forum lately, it's put something on my mind. Cliche. I used to hate it, but have now come to terms with the fact that it sells and this is a good thing for me to have realized.

Hear me out. Pretty much my entire life, I've been writing the stories that come from my heart. Most readers that have invested time into reading my works haven't liked it. My guess is that either I've been a real shitty writer (which yea, this is truth) and/or also that I write niche stuff. But this has burned me immensely on the beginnings of my Indie publishing journey.

Much of my time outside of writing goes towards learning about marketing, editing, crafting book covers, running a business in general including how to hire good editors and cover artists, and most importantly connecting with other Indies. I've learned a lot from the private group as well as from lurking on the Kboards forums. All of this pertaining mostly to publishing, not so much craft because I get great discussions on that here at Mythic Scribes.

My realization is this: IF I ever want to have the chance at selling books for a living, then I need to write more marketable stuff. You know, the stuff that I wish there was less of like cliche farm boys and princesses that need rescuing. However, even though I've been writing whatever I want and crafting it to the best of my ability, the fact is that no one gives a crap. Why? Because it's not exciting. It's not what sells.

So I went on Amazon and read through some of the blurbs on the best seller lists. Now, I realize that the best-seller tag is a debatable one given this all depends on subjectivity, but those authors are selling thousands of books in order to earn those titles. What are they doing right? WHAT ARE THEY WRITING?!?!?!

I've studied these and read a couple of the books. Basically, I'm doing it all freaking wrong. Yes...I should be writing what speaks to my heart but that's fantasy in general. If I ever want to make a good living at this not only do I have to be prolific, but I also need to write material that readers are familiar with. So maybe no more stupid stories about giant birds in the woods? And maybe something more epic like the cliche of "oh, my land is being taken over".

And part of reading/studying these books is seeing how they use cliches/tropes to the advantage of the story. How tropes can deliver benefits to the reader.

I have given into it. I need to write outside of my comfort zone. Writing to market seems to be the way to go and I see many other Indies doing that and eating. I can't pay the phone bill for the life of me. At least right now. So I wonder how others here see it because I've come to the realization that this is the way to go for me. There has to be a balance between my comfort zone and what readers want and expect. This can only push my limits and make me a better writer.

Anyway, I hope this post helps someone experience something similar.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Yes cliche sells. So does originality. The trick is to find the right balance between the two. Too much cliche and people call it derivative and feel cheated or else get bored. Too much freshness and it becomes uncomfortable for readers and they'll call it edgy but not gripping. And there is no formula to say how much cliche and how much freshness will work. So write what you want to write and what you know and love - you'll have a better chance of writing something good that other s will appreciate.

And always remember that what will work best is cover and blurb. These should attract readers, and tell them what they're going to get in the book - because the last thing you want as a writer is for readers to feel as though they got cheated and sold a different book - because then they complain and complaints, especially early on, kill sales.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[psychotick]

Hi,

Just had a thought - it may not be good, I'm ninety plus pages into the first edit back from my publishers and going slowly crazy. But maybe what this site needs is a specific subforum where people can post covers and blurbs for feedback (no links / no promotion and strict moderation of that). Also some standard templates for responces. Questions like - what genre does this cover suggest to you? Does it make you want to pick up the book etc?

Sometimes I put covers out for comment - mostly on Facebook. And I've only once put out a blurb for coment - over on Creative Writers. (And thinking about it on my latest blog post too!) But for those thinking about taking the plunge it could be useful.

Cheers, Greg.

 

[Heliotrope]

Oh man Chesterama I want to talk about this sooooooo bad! I don't have a lot of time right now, but I will likely come back to this post later when I have more time.

First off.... yes, yes, yes, yes and yes to everything you are saying. My only critique is that I don't believe that cliches and tropes are the same thing. I think that tropes sell. I think that tropes are there for a reason, and readers expect tropes. I think cliches can be an issue, but tropes are good.

Farm boy becomes hero = trope

I hate the villian because he killed my family and burned my village = trope

Cliches are so old and tired that they illicit eye rolls every time they are seen: "A single tear slid down her cheek."

Anyways, that is just semantics and has nothing to do with your post. Other than that I am so with you I wish I could thank you ten thousand times.

Blake Snyder sums this up so well in his book "Save the Cat" I wish I could quote the whole chapter. Buy the book people! Buy the book!

The chapter is called Give me the same thing: Only Different and it is about genre. NOT the genre we think of when we think of fantasy, science fiction, romance, western etc... no, he has different story genres that are so genius it changed my world.

He asks you to look at your story and think "What is it most like?" Is it kid goes to special training school, like Harry Potter, X-Men, Divergent, The Magicians, Name of the Wind... etc? Is it person must find and stop a monster like Jaws, Tremors, Alien, The Exorcist, Fatal Attraction or Panic Room?

Readers have expectations. When readers choose a specific genre or read a blurb on the back of a book they have expectations about what that book is going to deliver. They know they like romance or sci-fi or western because they have read the genre before and they have expectations about the type of experience they will get from that genre. If you go too far away from those expectations your story will not work for the reader.

However, if you deliver the exact same thing that has been delivered before they will also get bored. You have to give the same, only different.

He gives examples of his ten types of stories, I will give one as an example. If you want to read about the other nine, google them or get the book.

Golden Fleece

This is the catagory or genre best exemplified by Star Wars, The Wizard of Oz, Planes Trains and Automobiles, Back to the Future, and most heist movies.

Basically it is the quest myth, or the "road movie".

A hero goes on the road in search of one thing and ends up discovering something else: Himself.

Thus, Wizard of Oz, Planes Trains and Automobiles, Star Wars, Road Trip, Vacation, and Back to the Future are all basically the same story.

The theme of every Golden Fleece is internal growth.

This genre is also where all heist movies are found. Any quest, mission, or 'treasure locked in a castle' story have the same rules. Very often the mission becomes secondary to other, more personal discoveries; the twists and turns of the plot are suddenly less important than the meaning derived from the heist.

So, for example, I wanted to write a time travelling pirate story where my main character, a thirteen year old girl has to steal an ancient Aztec treasure from the Museum of Natural History in New York in order to stop a two hundred year old curse.

I have always LOVED the heist genre because of the tropes that come with it, so when it came time to start my own heist story I had to research what exactly is it that makes a heist story so great? What do readers expect when picking up a heist story?

They expect certain tropes:

The team (usually a tech person, a get-a-way person, a con artist, etc)

The Mastermind

The challenges to overcome (like security systems, lazer grids, security guards, the harder and more intricate the better)

The actual treasure must be secondary to the character growth... basically, the reader EXPECTS the character not to keep the treasure at the end, instead discovering and choosing something even more important (like making up with her father).

As I learned more about what makes a great heist story I realized that if I tried to be too different I would take away from what readers love about the genre. I had to keep the 'cliches' or 'tropes', but give them a slight twist.

Blake Snyder suggests having a bit of a movie marathon, or reading marathon in your 'genre' before writing. So yes, I'm writing an urban fantasy, but reading urban fantasy was not going to help me. In my case I'm writing an urban fantasy that is a HEIST story, so what I really needed to research was heist stories. I watched Ocean's 11, 12, and 13, The Italian Job, the Bank Job among many others and made notes about all the things I found in common, all the things that were new or fresh, and what made them so great and engaging... twists etc so I could utilize those same tropes in my story.

Then I gave it a twist.

Pirates from 200 years ago have time travelled to modern day New York in search of this treasure, but have no clue how to get through modern day life let alone break into modern day electronic security systems. So, they enlist the help of modern teenagers in order to save New York from a terrible ancient curse.

It is the same old heist story, with a twist.

 

[Heliotrope]

I just want to add one other thing... think about your story if it was posted on Amazon... you know how at the bottom it says:

"Others who liked this book also liked...."

Think about what else your book is like.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

There is a really really fine line between all things. I won't use the words "cliche sells" so much as: familiarity and meeting expectations sell.

All stories have been told, all stories have not been told in all possible ways.

One of the interesting balancing acts with this is the movie Avatar. Awesome visuals give you a world completely alien to most folks not big on sci-fi (although there are some cliches that made me groan) BUT the basic story is old, tired, and worked to death... or more kindly put, familiar. And expectations? Yawn, hero wins, gets the girl, gets a new set of legs, duh. Familiar story and expectations met in a fanciful sci-fi/fantasy world = big friggin money.

As to your own work, I can't say what you should do. There must be a balancing act between the new and the familiar.

 

[skip.knox]

There are so many exceptions to the observation, I'm not sure how useful it truly is. The argument isn't so much a bowl as it is a colander.

Yes, one can go to the top sellers and see common elements. If that's what one looks for. If one looks for the exceptional, one finds that as well, and in those very same books. We humans are adept at spotting patterns, so it's no surprise that we can find common tropes among the top sellers. It's because we abstract the stories to such a degree that they can fit neatly into our pre-selected boxes.

This is not to say that the observation is irrelevant; only that it is not sufficient to explain either great sales or poor sales. There are too many other variables involved.

If, however, one feels that one has been ramming one's head into a wall repeatedly, choosing another direction is not all that bad an idea. Go ahead and write a trope! We are all doomed to write anyway, so there's no harm in writing something purely for the exercise and in the sincere hope it will find a readership. I just don't think bibliotropism (a very serviceable word I just made up) is the only factor in success.

 

[Svrtnsse]

I'd like to chime in on the idea/perception of cliches.

When I was at uni, I used to DJ regularly at the campus club - a few times a month. My university was a small town, in a small countryside town, and it didn't have much of a musics scene. "Everyone" came to the campus club where I was spinning. There was cheap booze, friends, and music - just what you need for a good night out at the end of the week.

My main musical preference at the time was harsh electronic dance music (EBM/Industrial etc). When I started out DJ:ing, that was the stuff I wanted to play and the stuff I wanted people to dance to. Unfortunately, most everyone else had other ideas.

They didn't like my music.

I know I played good stuff: quality music made by the best in the scene, but it just didn't work on the dance floor at the campus club. People didn't recognize it, didn't understand it, and didn't like it. It wasn't what they wanted at all.

I had three options:
1. I could adapt and play what people wanted to hear. People would dance and have a good time.
2. I could keep playing what I wanted to play. People would complain and leave the dance floor.
3. I could stop DJ:ing and go home and listen to my own music on my stereo.

The third option went right out the window, and I went for the first one.

I played the crappy chart hits and the cheesy rock classics and all the other garbage that drunk economy students like to sing along to on a Saturday night. It wasn't something that my proud artsy underground sensibilities was particularly proud of, but it was also kind of fun.

Getting people to dance and have a good time was quite a kick. Keeping a dancefloor packed and having people wave their hands in the air at your whim is an amazing feeling even if the music isn't the one you'd ideally play. I still got to pick the songs, and that too is an art form.

Gauging the mood of the crowd and picking the right song to follow up the current one with isn't always easy. There are plenty of amazingly good tunes that will completely kill a dance floor if played at the wrong time, and there are others that can have unexpectedly great impact.

So I played music I wouldn't normally listen to, but I still managed to have a great time because I played to the crowd, and that too takes skill. It's also an art form, but a less obvious one. Also, I managed to sneak in one or two of my own favorite tracks now and then. Not all the time, but enough to make me happy.

What I'm trying to say with this rant is that dealing with cliches is a lot about how you perceive them. Sure, it may feel like you're joining the grey masses of conformity, but a lot of that is in your head. You may not be able to take much pride in the originality of your plot, but surely there will be other aspects of the story you can cherish.

There may be characters with unexpected depths and twists, there may be quirks in the storytelling that no one else does quite like you do, there may be sub-surface tensions that won't be more than hinted at until the 14th book in the series - and so on and so forth.

Cliches can be done well too.

 

[Chessie]

There is a really really fine line between all things. I won't use the words "cliche sells" so much as: familiarity and meeting expectations sell.

All stories have been told, all stories have not been told in all possible ways.

One of the interesting balancing acts with this is the movie Avatar. Awesome visuals give you a world completely alien to most folks not big on sci-fi (although there are some cliches that made me groan) BUT the basic story is old, tired, and worked to death... or more kindly put, familiar. And expectations? Yawn, hero wins, gets the girl, gets a new set of legs, duh. Familiar story and expectations met in a fanciful sci-fi/fantasy world = big friggin money.

As to your own work, I can't say what you should do. There must be a balancing act between the new and the familiar.

This pretty much sums it up for me. And I love the example you used because it is specifically what I'm talking about.

Okay...so I really have been studying these blurbs and currently have like 5 fantasy books on my TBR list that I want to be finished with by the end of next month (the kid is out of school so let's see how many of these I can get through!) I'm noticing familiar patterns in these blurbs and stories. They use fantasy tropes to their advantage and are killing it in sales because let's be honest, I have a family to help support so I have to change something drastic. Others here may have different goals but at this point in my writing life, I have to seriously figure out my strategy and stick with it.

@Psychotik: We do have a section here to post blurbs and covers but it doesn't seem to get regularly used. But I do agree that we could help each other refine our marketing packages because holy wow are they important for catching eyeballs.

Which leads me to Skip's point: absolutely there are many variables involved in all of this. Packaging isn't the only one. However, it seems to be the most important when it comes to grabbing readers. A genre appropriate cover, catchy blurb, the right pricing and maybe some promotions, a nice look inside with a story written to the best of your ability...these are all things that will get a reader's attention so they can take the first step and buy the book. Everything else that happens after that we have no control over.

Basically, I'm prepared to struggle through this for a few years. I told my husband that in 5 years, I want to be making a full time income from my writing. I have no idea how it'll happen, but I'll get there. In the meantime, I want to be giving my work the best chance possible to succeed.

@Svrt: awesome example! You totally hit the nail on the head for me. I think that popping in a song you like every now and then helped to keep you artistically connected to the service you were providing. And should we look at writing books as a service? We come into this writing thing to fulfill ourselves emotionally and intellectually but at some point that shifts for us and then readers become an important part of the equation. Just like you compromised and gave party goers what they wanted, I believe that we as authors should do the same for our readers. I'm learning that this means I still get to write fantasy but that I need to include a lot of familiar ideas, too.

And Helio, I agree that cliche and trope are two different things (hadn't thought of that in my OP). Cliche IS a single tear rolling down a person's cheek and btw...LOL...last night my husband and I were watching a movie and the lead female character had an emotional moment towards the end when a single tear rolled down her cheek. One tear. In a movie. It was a good flick though: I Wish You Were Here, an Aussie film currently on Netflix for those of you who like suspenseful movies with a heartbreaking twist.

But yes, tropes are that good wins over bad and that there is always a dark lord (which is my favorite trope of all time because I always seem to like the bad guys).

 

[Russ]

I think of this not in terms of cliche, but in terms of writing being a partnership between the reader and the writer in commercial fiction. It strikes me that it would be very, very hard to make a living writing only to please oneself without keeping the audience in mind.

I was listening to a panel of NYT bestsellers who have between them sold hundreds of millions of books, and the one thing they all really agreed to was that you have to keep your audience in mind when you write if you want to be commercially successful.

Your audience, once identified, will have certain expectations, and you have to find the point where you are comfortable meeting most of those expectations while ignoring a few, or adding surprising twists and originality. If you can find that razor thin spot where you can meet most of their expectations while creating something original, then you have it made.

It also reminds me of a story about Jack Higgins being on a panel at a conference with an old friend who was a literary writer. Jack talked about the importance of keeping your audience in mind when you write. His literary friend said that was bunk and that he only wrote to his own standards and wrote effectively for himself. To which Jack replied:

"That is why you are a very good writer, and I am very rich."

 

[Penpilot]

I used to worry about being original and avoiding what I considered cliche. I worried about it to the point of not writing at all because every idea I thought had been done before.

It wasn't until I said screw it and just wrote that I started to make progress. If the story wanted to head in the direction of "cliche" or trope, I let the story go there and made adjustments as necessary to make the story good.

I came to realize there's really nothing limiting or bad about cliche or trope. And that there's an infinite amount of creativity to be had within these things.

To me it's like someone asking me to pick a number between 1 and 2. If you just look at it as a choice between whole numbers, it's limiting, but if you look at the choice as real numbers, you can see there are a infinite amount of numbers between. You just have to open your eyes and think a bit differently to see them.

Generally I tend to think of things in terms of accessibility. Most people are familiar with cliche, understand it, and know what to expect from it. As mentioned the movie Avatar, it's tremendously accessibly. We step into the story on firm footing.

When we're faced with something that's outside the box, it tends to be less accessible. We don't know what to expect, and we step into the story on wobbly footing. Some people are fine with this, others don't like that at all.

I think we can look at the stories of Neil Gaiman as good examples of how to make out of the box stories accessible. From what I observe in the stories I've read, he starts stories inside the box then slowly builds a ladder out of it.

For example, in American Gods, he starts the story with a guy getting out of jail. His wife died while he was inside, and because he's a big guy, he gets offered a job as a bodyguard.

You could say there's a bit of trope and cliche in that, and that's the access point that leads you out of the box into the wackiness of rest of the story.

In Anansi Boys, the story starts with the main character's preparing unenthusiastically for his wedding when he learns his flamboyant father died, and that he has a long lost brother.

Again, a bit of trope and cliche that leads us out of the box.

my 2 cents

 

[Heliotrope]

Generally I tend to think of things in terms of accessibility. Most people are familiar with cliche, understand it, and know what to expect from it. As mentioned the movie Avatar, it's tremendously accessibly. We step into the story on firm footing.

When we're faced with something that's outside the box, it tends to be less accessible. We don't know what to expect, and we step into the story on wobbly footing. Some people are fine with this, others don't like that at all.

I think we can look at the stories of Neil Gaiman as good examples of how to make out of the box stories accessible. From what I observe in the stories I've read, he starts stories inside the box then slowly builds a ladder out of it.

^^ Is what Blake Snyder talks about in his book. This is why Transformers made 225 Million and Momento made 25 million.

There is nothing really wrong with Momento. I actually loved the film because I'm a nerd like that. And that ties into what Russ was saying. If you want to make art, great! But don't expect to make a ton of money from it.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Transformers vs Memento is comparing apples to oranges, it doesn't fit well. Movie comparisons are extremely difficult... even Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (232m US box office) vs James Bond: Spectre (880m US box office) which is a better comparison, is still tricky, because of the franchise that is Bond. But at least they are geared more or less at the same market.

There are probably a hundred or more movies out there more comparable to Memento, which followed the tropes of their market, that absolutely bombed. Studying what succeeds vs bombs in the same market would be more valuable than two (financial) successes in two different markets.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

This is really right on, except of course really good writers can also be really rich, LOL. I'd be good with well off, heh heh.

But anyhow, in this vein, when I got to the end of my book (part of a trilogy) I fully intended for a tragic hero is lost, everything's just a shit pile, but at least some people are alive to forge forward ending... but when I wrote it, I flipped the love story's ending, showing a light of hope at the end of the tunnel, instead of pure black. Utterly bleak didn't fit the character, nor the story, he would see hope so I put it in there which I suspect will play better with readers... even if all through books 2 and 3 this hope fades to forgotten, until the ending, and its satisfying but bittersweet end... hopefully, LOL.

Always keep readers in mind, but don't necessarily pander.

I think of this not in terms of cliche, but in terms of writing being a partnership between the reader and the writer in commercial fiction. It strikes me that it would be very, very hard to make a living writing only to please oneself without keeping the audience in mind.

I was listening to a panel of NYT bestsellers who have between them sold hundreds of millions of books, and the one thing they all really agreed to was that you have to keep your audience in mind when you write if you want to be commercially successful.

Your audience, once identified, will have certain expectations, and you have to find the point where you are comfortable meeting most of those expectations while ignoring a few, or adding surprising twists and originality. If you can find that razor thin spot where you can meet most of their expectations while creating something original, then you have it made.

It also reminds me of a story about Jack Higgins being on a panel at a conference with an old friend who was a literary writer. Jack talked about the importance of keeping your audience in mind when you write. His literary friend said that was bunk and that he only wrote to his own standards and wrote effectively for himself. To which Jack replied:

"That is why you are a very good writer, and I am very rich."

 

[Heliotrope]

Transformers vs Memento is comparing apples to oranges, it doesn't fit well. Movie comparisons are extremely difficult... even Girl with the Dragon Tattoo (232m US box office) vs James Bond: Spectre (880m US box office) which is a better comparison, is still tricky, because of the franchise that is Bond. But at least they are geared more or less at the same market.

There are probably a hundred or more movies out there more comparable to Memento, which followed the tropes of their market, that absolutely bombed. Studying what succeeds vs bombs in the same market would be more valuable than two (financial) successes in two different markets.

Though I would argue that the entire Bond franchise is based on tropes, and even cliches. Look at the "Bond girl" who has become an icon within herself. If they tried to give the Bond girls more depth (a child perhaps? A skill other than being sexy and suave like perhaps being an architect?) forget it.

The entire franchise thrives on car chases, exploding helicopters, boobs, martinis, baddy bad guys with no depth (almost always soviets), and like you said... It has become a franchise no one can touch.

I think people (not all people... Most consumers) want the familiarity of tropes and cliches, presented in a new way.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

Bond became it's own set of tropes, for sure, which is the point. Dragon Tattoo v Bond. Not exactly orange v orange, but maybe navel v mandarin, LOL.

Bond girls are more than sexy, particularly the later we get. The later Bonds even take advantage of playing against its own cliche/tropes it created. And you've overly simplified the Bond series by a long, long shot. All those things mentioned are easy, any movie can do those... nobody else does Bond quite like Bond. There's a reason for that. Daniel Craig's Bonds (although I haven't seen Spectre) have been setting a new bar. Of course I love Judy Dench, and she is an awesome M... but Skyfall was flat out a well told story. If I had ever gotten to write a Bond, that's what I hope I'd do, LOL.

 

[Heliotrope]

And you've overly simplified the Bond series by a long, long shot. All those things mentioned are easy, any movie can do those... nobody else does Bond quite like Bond. There's a reason for that. .

Yes!!!! Exactly. The Same, only different.

I over simplified a bit to prove a point.

Arguably under the surface, at the very core, Bond, Mission Impossible, Jack Reacher, and Get Smart are all the same. The same story. The same tropes. Different spins on the same basic kind of idea.

Same as how Ocean's 11, 12, 13, The Italian Job, The Bank Job and The Heist are all the same, but different.

Or how every epic farm boy saving the world is the same, but different.

It is the different that sets them apart, and I believe that is the knife edge. How can you give your audience exactly what they are looking for, by giving them something slightly different than what they are looking for?

If you can do that then you can hit pay dirt. But I think it's a pretty sharp knife edge.

Damn you Lee Child.

*Edit: I just realized you will cringe with every italicised word. Cue maniacal laughter.

 

[Demesnedenoir]

So cringe worthy but worth it, heh heh.

It really is pulling off the satisfying ending that is different which sets the stage for being the most fun. Although sometimes satisfying = exactly what the audience doesn't want but knows must happen... Titanic. Nobody except sickos like me want to see Leo D drown, but it simply had to be. The endings of book 1 & 3 in my trilogy I'm swinging for some fences on, if I pull them off-- I'll be strutting around the bases, or I could whiff, LOL. Bittersweets are awesome when they work but are dangerous. And of course I can't judge, they're written, but until lots of someones read them in entirety... no way to know.

Yes!!!! Exactly. The Same, only different.

I over simplified a bit to prove a point.

Arguably under the surface, at the very core, Bond, Mission Impossible, Jack Reacher, and Get Smart are all the same. The same story. The same tropes. Different spins on the same basic kind of idea.

Same as how Ocean's 11, 12, 13, The Italian Job, The Bank Job and The Heist are all the same, but different.

Or how every epic farm boy saving the world is the same, but different.

It is the different that sets them apart, and I believe that is the knife edge. How can you give your audience exactly what they are looking for, by giving them something slightly different than what they are looking for?

If you can do that then you can hit pay dirt. But I think it's a pretty sharp knife edge.

Damn you Lee Child.

*Edit: I just realized you will cringe with every italicised word. Cue maniacal laughter.

 

[Penpilot]

I think if you want to look at the same but different comparison, maybe Bond vs Bourne. Bourne revolutionized that genre, and since then, everyone has copied it, even Bond.

Now if you take a look at box office comparing Brosnan's Bond to Damon's Bourne, Brosnan's numbers are way better. but when you look at critical praise, it's the other way around. And as the Bourne franchise kept going its numbers grew, maybe because people began to understand more of what to expect from it and they liked it.

But then Craig comes along and takes what Bourne did and applies it to Bond and gets box office and critical reception, while Renner took Bourne and I don't know what he did with it, probably nothing new (Edit: actually the did change something. They made him some sort of genetically enhanced super person), but it took a step back in box office and critical reception.

 

[ThinkerX]

Watched a You-Tube flick a few months ago. think it went straight to video upon release.

At first it seemed like a psychological thriller: four people spending a year in an underground mock space ship to test small group psychology over the long term. One guy has hallucinations. Other people develop issues. Then weird things start happening. There's a quake - or is it part of the simulation. A guy climbs into the simulation through a vent shaft, then vanishes. Hallucination? Real? The team pulls themselves together enough to break protocol and exit the mockup. What they find is a devastated world - dark all the time, a small town populated by real scary people, and worse.

I liked the 'twist' from 'psychological thriller' to 'post apocalyptic setting.' Most of the people who commented hated it. That shift, for them, destroyed the movie.