This film has maybe been one of the most hated 100 million dollar grosses in history. Before seeing this movie one should know absolutely nothing about it. Not even what the critics have said. It is a very creepy film. I for one loved it. I love the fact that it had virtually no-budget and it has made tons of money. It deserves it. It provides more atmosphere and creepiness than any horror film released this decade. The way it is presented, as the footage taken by 3 missing film-makers, is so simple yet pure genius. I've heard people complain that anyone with a video camera could have made this. This is true, but those people didn't and these people did. They had the idea and those who criticize it are just displaying their jealousy that they didn't think of it first. An instant classic whether you like it or not.
Add a Review
-
TechnicallyTwisted12 September 1999
-
nitzanhavoc21 November 2020Not being that in touch with Horror hype I haven't heard about the third Blair Witch installment until rather recently, so I've decided to watch the first films again (it has literally been over a decade). So after watching this title again I checked some of the trivia details and some web articles, a process which has lead me to the unfortunate conclusion that I can't recommend TBWP to any new spectators.
The story is quite simple (which is part of why it works). Three film students travel to an old city surrounded by woodlands in pursuit of information about "The Blair Witch", something between local folklore, an urban legend and a myth. The videotape some sites, interview some locals, and head for the woods for a night of camping before heading back to civilization. That's when things start to get wrong, as the trio gets hopelessly lost, tensions become high and someone (or something) obviously tries to make them feel unwelcome.
I know, thinking of that setting almost makes you able to visualize some of the scenes, and most chances are you wouldn't be far from what's actually shown in the film. That's because most Horror fans (and even certain fans of mainstream cinema) have by now seen titles exemplifying how the "Found Footage" sub-genre has improved and matured over the years (and I'd say it has become boring and tedious, but that's just my own thoughts and isn't relevant). No, in order to appreciate the Blair Witch you had to have been there, way back at the turning point of the millennium, when there still hadn't been a "Found Footage" sub-genre and perhaps two films (UFO Abduction of 1989 and its remake Alien Abduction of 1998) have ever used the "documentary" shooting style in a thriller or Horror film. I was too young to take part in the hype, but from I've collected - a website came up telling of a videotape found in a deserted camera in the woods near what used to be the town of "Blair". With no reason not to - people believed it. With no information to contradict this intuitive conclusion - people thought they were actually going to watch an authentic found footage. The producers handed out "Missing" flyers of the students (actually a cast of two actors and an actress) during the debut screening in the festival, the cast itself was forbidden by contract to make any public appearances, and most spectators simply didn't know any better.
Think about it. The web page. The characters' names being identical to the cast's names. Missing person flyers. A footage which in all standards looks precisely like a real documentary. Who could have known? Who would have guessed but the cynics and nay-sayers (who have an annoying habit of being right)? Watching the film under the impression the events were real would indeed justify the film being unofficially dubbed "the scariest movie of all times". And as much as it might today seem average at best both as a Horror title in general and as a "Found Footage" film specifically - numbers don't lie: 40k budget, near 300m earnings. That is how you make a legend.
If any of the anecdotes (true as far as I've been able to track) mentioned here have made you curious and you wish to experience the thrill over two decades after - go right ahead and watch this, just don't expect to have your mind blown. Remember, this is the film which officially gave birth to the Found Footage sub-genre, it was a cinematic and creative breakthrough, but s was the light bulb (and you're reading this on a computer or portable device). If you'd rather enjoy the legacy - go watch any other Found Footage Horror out there (any Paranormal Activity title comes to mind, of course) and know that it wouldn't be here without the pioneering genius of the Blair Witch Project. -
I saw this film last night, LONG after all the hype and reviews were made about it. I settled in with the right mood for any film: no expectations. If you expect too much, you may be let down (take note for any Kubrick film). I watched the entire film without interruption and came out with a great feeling. "The Blair Witch Project" is one darn good movie.
Many critics and moviegoers complained about the film for its length, its amateurish photography/editing, and its lack of adequate acting. I feel these things MADE THE MOVIE. First, the film has to be at most ninety minutes long: any more, and it would be too long and boring. Second, the amateur video take gives the audience the feel that they are actually in the woods, listening to the rippling water of the creek, snapping branches under their boots, and hearing things go bump in the night. I greatly admire the use of two video cameras (one black-and-white, the other color) to denote which character is shooting the film. Lastly, the incessant screaming of whiny Heather, the constant complaining of average-joe Mike, and the Dudley-Do-Rightness of Josh make for great acting. Yes, these are regular people and up-and-coming actors from your local community theater, but YOU KNOW THEM. You've met people like them.
The biggest complaint, however, comes from the film's supposed "lack" of scary moments. This film reminds me of the classic horror film "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre," and though not as gory and as shocking as that film, "The Blair Witch Project" shows just enough fright in the group's search for a way out of the woods, stalked by people and/or things they may never understand. In the older film, the long interval between opening credits and first gory act of violence is about thirty minutes long; it is even longer here, but the suspense/fright (just as in the older film) begins right from the opening credits: you just don't see it until the film's over. These are three people out to make a documentary in the woods with handheld camcorders--these are REAL PEOPLE. And GREAT ACTORS. Heather whines a lot and screams and reminds you of the girl you hate so much you fall in love with her. Her screams sound real, her cries are genuine, and she is DEEPLY DEEPLY sorry for bringing the others into the woods in order to film her documentary.
I really dig the beginning. It seems so real to me I may delve into my old home movies for nostalgia. Heather and Josh pick up Mike, then go to the store for supplies. This opening sequence really packs a punch. These are three Generation Xers out for a camping trip. We all know what happens to them, but we're glued to the screen, intent to know what actually happens.
The interviews give us some detail into the Blair Witch legend, but most of the audience is too busy thinking about the actual trek into the woods that they don't listen. This is wrong. Listening is good. The interviews, which also sound real and not rehearsed in any way, are like movie reviews: the critics tell you what they saw, but mostly they don't want to ruin it for you...unless they hated it.
And that's what I'll do. I won't ruin it for you. 8/10. -
Lloyd-233 November 1999This film is not a feature film. For a start, it is not feature length, also, it is not shot on film. More importantly, it does not have what feature films have these days: star actors, special effects, exotic locations, explosions. Instead, seeing B.W.P. is seeing something else that a cinema can be: a place where people can share an intimate experience created by a few people on a tight budget. I would be glad of its success if only for that reason.
The first section of the film appears at first to be amateurish and slow. In fact, it is very deft, and very efficient at what it does. It tells the audience everything it needs to know about the characters and situation, and nothing more. Also, it gets the audience into the habit of viewing the film's format: alternating between black and white (very grainy and poorly focussed) film, and the washed out colours of shaky pixilated video. The film makers managed to set up a rationale for why the film is so cheaply made. Three people hike into the woods for a few days to shoot a documentary, with borrowed equipment, and are in the habit of videoing everything for the hell of it. They cannot carry tripods, steadicams, dollies, large lighting rigs, or the like, so everything we see is lit either by raw daylight, or by a single light fixed to the camera, which illuminates just what is within a few feet of the lens. The film creates its own excuse to be cheap. This is intelligent.
The acting and script are both excellent. The well-cast actors are presumably playing pretty-much themselves, and are convincingly naturalistic, and neither too likeable or too dislikeable. The slow route into hysteria is well documented. Rather than simply having a character say "We're lost!", we see many scenes which show the trio getting more and more hopelessly lost, and more annoyed with each other for this. By the time they are thoroughly lost, the audience shares the despair.
My friend and I, after seeing it, both felt a little sick. I put this down to my having been tense for a hour, he put it down more to motion sickness. The jerky, badly-framed camerawork is hard on the eye and stomach, but I applaud the director for its uncompromising use. Similarly, no compromise is made with the dialogue. Some of it is very quiet and must be listened for, some is technical jargon, which is left realisticly unexplained.
One of the great strengths and weaknesses of the film is the editing. It is good in that it does much to heighten the tension, with many key moments lasting just a little too long for comfort. Each time the characters find something nasty, the viewer is made to want the editor to cut soon to the next scene, and the fact that he doesn't adds to the sense of being trapped, as the characters are. The problem with this, though, is that one is left wondering about the motives of the fictional editor. In truth, of course, the film is edited to create these effects, and to entertain, but the film's rationale is that these are the rushes of a documentary put together posthumously by someone other than the film's original creator. Why, then, would an editor piecing together such footage, edit for dramatic effect rather than for clarity? Why would he keep cutting back and forth from the video footage to the film footage, when neither shows any more information than the other?
The film is stark. After one simple caption at the start, all that follows is the "rushes". I wonder if the film might not have been improved with an introductory section which documented how the rushes were found and edited. A programme was made for television which did this. Perhaps a portion of this might have been added to the film, making it more complete, and more believable (and proper feature length).
While I applaud the fact that young original film-makers have managed to create a mainstream hit out of a simple idea, well-handled. I dread the possible avalanche of inferior copies which may come.
Most horror films these days are created not for the audience, but for the makers. The departments of special effects, make-up, model-making, animation and so forth all try hard to show potential future employers what they can do. The result is that nothing is left for the audience to do, since everything can be seen and heard, and the viewer's imagination can be switched off. Today, it is possible to see pigs fly on the screen, and so film-makers show off and show us a formation of Tamworths, which is something which will look impressive in the trailer. To show us less is to make our minds fill in the gaps. This way, we create our own terrors, perfectly fitted to ourselves. The ghastly face I see in my head, is the ghastly head which I find scary. The ghastly face I am shown may be one I can cope with quite easily. If I see a believable character screaming in hysterical fear at something I cannot see, my own brain creates demons for my night's dreams, demons far more mighty than anything CGI graphics or a latex mask could portray.
This film will stay in your thoughts for some while. -
AlsExGal19 December 2009It seems many people dislike this film because they think the entirety of its reputation lay in the confusion/publicity campaign generated at the time of its release as to whether it was a real film found in the woods of Maryland that documented the disappearance of three college students or whether it was just a movie. What made this film scary in 1999 and scary now is what you don't see and what you think you hear as well as the growing paranoia and fright of the college kids lost in the woods over a period of days that find - as they run out of food and supplies - that they are just wandering in circles.
The very last scene is particularly chilling, and if you already know how it ends it will kill some of the fright factor for you. However, this film just proved in 1999, as it still does, that you don't have to fill a horror film with wall-to-wall state-of-the-art CGI visual effects and shocking violence in order to be scary. I personally think the horror genre has been much worse off since Jason and his ilk first invaded the movies back in 1980 with graphic violence that is predictable and, quite frankly, boring. Although I like this movie, the sequel, "Book of Shadows", is just awful. Its makers Hollywoodized the original concept and thus made it completely incoherent and unwatchable. Avoid it at all costs. -
parkerposeytso4 December 2021If you were not able to go see this movie in 1999 in the theaters when it first came out you cannot understand the HYPE for this movie, they had released "documentaries" about this prior to everyone seeing this film, so when I went and saw this for the first time it was made to believe this was actually found film footage, I know now it's fake now but back then when the internet was young people believed this was found footage, I could not get anyone back then to go with me (too scared) so I went by myself, I will never forget how scared I was and still makes me love this film because of that fact.
-
kylopod26 October 2005One time as I entered a theater the usher was handing out 3D glasses for a short demonstration before the main film. After the previews finished and we were instructed to put the glasses on, there was a brief shot of a virtual theater in 3D, then it ended! Several members of the audience, including me, said in unison, "That was it?"
That more or less describes my feelings about "The Blair Witch Project." When it first came out in the summer of '99, a fellow told me that it was the scariest film he'd ever seen. That's what many critics had indicated as well. Since I love being scared, I eagerly went to the theater, thinking I was in for the experience of a lifetime.
The movie tells the story of three college kids who do a research assignment, go on a long camping trip into the woods, and ultimately lose their way. As I watched the kids grow increasingly panicky and finally get separated, my interest began to perk...and then the movie just ended! I sat there in confusion. That was it? Where was the fear that everyone spoke about?
My complaint is not that the film lacked violence. On the contrary, I'm genuinely tired of the sort of horror film where explicit gore substitutes for true terror. I believe that the most effective horror movies leave a lot to the imagination. Shortly after seeing "The Blair Witch Project," I saw "The Sixth Sense," which scared the pants off me without containing much explicit violence. A movie does not need violence in order to be scary, and, indeed, too much violence can detract from a movie's suspense. But one thing a good horror movie absolutely must do is establish a real threat, something that "The Blair Witch Project" does not do.
In the early scenes, I was unable to make sense out of the local legends the kids were investigating. The stories that the residents tell are unconvincing and contradictory. One resident talks about seeing a "white misty thing," another describes what he saw as "an old woman whose feet never touched the ground." This is the kind of naiveté associated with popular folklore like the Loch Ness Monster, and I could not connect any of it with the movie's later events.
While we are told that the kids were never found, the footage presents no clear-cut evidence that anything actually happens in the woods, other than that the kids get lost. In one scene, Heather begins screaming frantically at something she finds in a pile of leaves. I later found out that she was supposed to have seen severed human parts, but that was far from clear to me. Fans somehow piece together the various sections of the film and concoct a coherent story of supernatural murder, but to me it looked more like a case of hysteria than an encounter with a Blair Witch.
Despite my criticisms, this isn't a bad film. As a fake documentary, it is well-made. The kids look, talk, and act like real college students. While not scary, the film is far from boring. I enjoyed watching the story progress while giving the appearance of being something spontaneous.
Curiously, the Razzie awards nominated both this film and Heather Donahue's performance as the worst of 1999, one of the few times I've disagreed with their selections. We tend to overlook how hard it is for actors to act like they're not acting. People who argue that Donahue's performance was over-the-top have never, I suspect, seen someone panic. There was not a moment in the film that felt wrong or fake to me. Perhaps the reason I didn't get scared is that I felt smarter than these characters, who behave in ways that I do not think I would have behaved in the same situation. But I still found their reactions plausible.
If I was disappointed, it was only because the hype surrounding this film gave me a certain set of expectations, which failed to solidify. This movie was an early demonstration of the power of the Internet, a cheap $20,000 production that never would have attained so much popularity if not for a website that helped propagate the legend to the public as something real. It was more than just a film: it was an act of showmanship. This all amounted to an interesting demonstration, but not the sort of film I expect will endure. -
EJK-311 December 2000well i hated this movie the first time. so one year lated i rented it again to see "what was i missing???"
well i am missing a brain for thinking that it might improve with age or a second time around
it doesn't ==== as a matter of fact it gets worse.
i don't get the big deal -=------ it is NOT scary, NOT entertaining, does NOT hold your interest, it does NOT have good characters, it does NOT make you think. it isn't even mindless fun.
it is just stupid and annoying and a complete waste of time. i guess one can never underestimate the taste of the public at large. this movie deserved to make $0.
i still think the entire budget of the movie went to beer and pizza. and twigs and rocks.
made me save money by NOT going to see Blair Witch 2. -
steves9721 June 2000Like most movies, whether or not someone likes TBWP will usually depend on what they're looking for. Many people enjoy horror movies because of the special effects, gore, shocks, and, in some cases, the high production value. Since TBWP came from a small independent film company that cost less than a hundred grand to make, can a moviegoer really expect all that and have a good time? I honestly don't think so.
Myrick and Sanchez had a terrific idea for a film: make a frightening mock documentary that was supposed to look like it was done by some amateur college students. Some people seem to be under the impression that the movie was about the witch, when what it really was about the mental and emotional breakdown of the three film students. I feel that once viewers could accept the low production values and the improvised script, only then could they deal with Heather, Josh, and Mike. Until they do that, the film would never work for them.
I just put myself in their position: I'm lost in the woods, I'm tired, I'm hungry, and I've got the added stress of returning borrowed equipment. The weather is getting colder, it rains just enough to make life miserable, and something is waking me up each and every night. Now, I'm exhausted, grouchy, scared, and I having troubles thinking clearly.
People might have hated Heather because they she was bitchy and annoying, but all three of them had their moments, good and bad. Many people might have also hated the fact that not everything was explained to them, and that they never got to see the Blair Witch. Many other people may have resented Artisan Entertainment's marketing campaign, although they can't deny just how effective it was. All the filmmakers and actors asked was that filmgoers understand the spirit that was intended; without it, they knew the film couldn't work for anybody.
As you might already tell, I thoroughly enjoyed this film. What Haxan Films managed to do with what they had is not only revolutionary, but is also inspirational to independent filmmakers everywhere. I found the backstory interesting, the plotline well thought out, and the characters extremely developed, considering the lack of structure and guidelines within the film. If you do decide to see this film, I think you'll enjoy it if you see it for what it simply is, nothing more; it might even scare the hell out of you! -
suckerpunchreviews25 August 2022This kept me a nervous wreck throughout. Considering the reviews I've seen, looks like you'll either love it or hate it. I personally love it, and think it's better than a lot of films I've seen with an all star cast, and a much higher budget.
-
trumpman3017 April 2002I spent about an hour and a half sitting around in my living room on halloween waiting for something...anything to happen. Just when I thought it was coming to the big climax at the end in the house, nothing happens....big surprise.
This movie is a complete waste of time..there is nothing scary about it unless you find filming shots of the woods, watching swearing teens, listening to a high pitched annoying girl voice (that was pretty scary), watching film from inside a tent with cheap sound effects playing outside, or watching a wobbly camera run through the woods at night (cant see anything), then you should skip this movie. If I was out in the middle of the woods, I too would decide to throw away my only way of finding my way around..my map. This movie had a weak, if any plot. This movie was one of the biggest let downs I have ever seen, and I've seen "Batman and Robin."
I've never seen BWP 2, but it's anything like this movie, it will be equally bad if not worse, because I would have to waste another 90 minutes of my life. -
I think I know why Blair Witch has generated as much negative as positive responses. It FORCES YOU TO BECOME INVOLVED IN THE MOVIE GOING EXPERIENCE!
Wow. What a concept. Instead of sitting there like the passive sponges most of us become when going to the movies we are actually expected be become involved. Take a leap of faith/belief or whatever and delve into this movie. Without the overpowering F/X and music score most movies rely on to 'scare' you, if you still have an imagination left what is implied becomes a hundred times scarier than anything offered up by Hollywood in the last 30 years. The hardest thing in movies is to scare you. Not make you jump out of your seat with 5000 watts of sound blasting at 400 decibels (ever seen the 1999 version of the Haunting? Event Horizon? - every potentially tense scene is preceeded by dead silence then the Blast). Wake up people! Blair Witch is the horror movies we have been needing for a long time and I'm glad someone finally had the guts to make it. -
arated-9662929 May 2022It is easy to dismiss this film as not scary. Sure, I never jumped watching this film but I sure as hell was on edge on my first viewing.
The sound design really sells this film, it really does sound like something is out there watching them. Add on top some amazing improv from the actors and suddenly you are effortlessly drawn into the world.
These characters are scared, hungry and lost. The horror comes from there. You feel bad for them as you see their arguments. I genuinely get chills every time I see that famous scene where heather talks to the camera near the end. You can see all the hope in here eyes has gone. That, for me Atleast, is very scary.
I love this film, it was original for its time and I do think everyone should give it a go! Its more a story of people coming to terms with their inevitable deaths than the death itself. -
psycholemming13 January 2001Is there? Because if there is, I want to see it. I went to see this movie because all my friends told me that it would scare me. I've never been even remotely frightened by a movie before. This movie didn't even come close to scaring me. It was so unbelievably asinine and stupid that I can't believe it even got picked up for distribution, much less called "great". I can't believe it made the amount of money it did. I should have demanded a refund. Let's put it this way -- if I took a few of my friends into the woods, with a video camera, and made scary noises at them so that they could pretend to scream, it would undoubtedly be scarier and superior to this movie. I'm sorry, but those "blair witch" noises sounded exactly like someone playing a prank on them. A waste of my $7.
-
Roo1i12 February 2000This movie scared me in a way that no other has done before. I remember going to camp as a child, and hearing things outside at night. That was scary enough. This movie recreated that entire scenario and then added some to it. The fact that those things that go bump in the night outside your campsite were REAL in this movie makes it more nerve-inducing and frightening. As anyone, the first time I set foot in the ocean after seeing JAWS for the first time, I was nervous. Let me tell you in order to get from the movie theater to my house, I have to drive through the woods. After seeing this movie, that drive got SIGNIFICANTLY longer, more eerie, and scared the heck out of me. I went about 90 mph all the way home in order to get out of the woods! This is one SCARY movie.
-
nikolasttoner1 November 2022First time watching this film and I'm pleasantly surprised. I've grown up hearing about it and I always thought it couldn't really be as creepy or impactful. Surely it was actually obviously fake. But I was wrong. The acting is so good and everything that happens and their reactions are realistic. It's not over the top but just right.
I would watch this once a year. I wanted a behind the scenes video after to get less scared but they don't exist because they were so dedicated to it being real.
If I was a movie seeing person at the time it came out I would have never left my house again. But alas. I have to leave my house. -
Leofwine_draca21 December 2015On a Sunday morning in 1999 I made a rare venture to a multiplex cinema, which is 17 or so miles away from my house. I don't usually make a habit of travelling that sort of distance to see a mere film, but I felt that this one in particular was special. I mean, nobody on the face of this planet can fail to have heard of THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, a low budget independent production which took Hollywood by storm and became the most profitable film of all time. My expectations were high, based on the hype. Then it began...
I remembered hearing that the dizzying camera work could induce nausea, but happily I was not afflicted in this way. The shaky hand-held camera didn't annoy me in the least, and in fact within just a few minutes I was settled into the film, engrossed. As time went on, my nerves began to fray along with those of the guys on screen, and my heart beat faster. By the end of the film I might have well as been a nervous wreck. Because, more than any other film I've seen in my life, this film scared me. Yes, it was creepy and extremely disturbing too, but mainly it was just scary.
Now I've read all the negative comments about the film simply not being scary. I can understand this, because for one to be truly affected by the film then you have to make an effort to engross yourself in the events, to believe that they are real, to not get distracted by the person sitting next to you. It's easy to sit back and laugh, but it's hard to actually get into a film and be there with the characters. Thankfully I did this and I had one of the scariest experiences of my life, an experience which left me scared to go to sleep that night in case I dreamt about it (I didn't, though, thankfully).
The inventive use of the hand-held cameras really makes the viewer feel as if he/she is there in the film. Well, not totally perhaps, but halfway between reality and the celluloid strip. While the film may not be totally original (take, for example, the previous year's THE LAST BROADCAST), in the light of contemporary dull 'post-modern' horror films like SCREAM 2, HALLOWEEN H20 and THE FACULTY, this is a breath of fresh air. I've heard people moan and complain that nothing happens and you don't get to see anything. Well, that's the point...it's left up to your imagination, and I suppose that if you don't have one, then the film just won't scare you. It's the viewer who's lacking, not the film.
The acting is surprisingly brilliant and realistic. You really get to feel for the actors by the end of the film, and each of the three is a solid, well-drawn person who could be a neighbour. Michael Williams is the most likable of the three, he loses his cool first but then regains it at the end. Joshua Leonard is the most tragic of the three as he sits and cries, and you really feel sorry for his character. Many people have said they didn't like Heather Donahue, but I thought she was amazing. The best bit has to be when she holds the camera up to her face and apologises to the trio's parents. Heather is believable, sympathetic, and her performance really tugs at the heart. The film may have a high level of swearing, but then again I'm sure if I was in that situation I wouldn't mind my language. The trio are simply superb and their acting creates believable characters to sympathise with and understand throughout.
The woods are a perfect setting to conjure up fear (see THE EVIL DEAD and many others) and this film makes full use of them. Behind every tree lurks an unseen menace. I've been in the woods myself at night, and the atmosphere is just right. I don't know if I'll be able to venture into them again in the dark, though. There are also some surprisingly intense moments when the students fight amongst each other, some say that these are funny but they actually brought tears to my eyes...not because I was sad, but just because of the ferocity and violence and because I felt so sorry for the three.
The actual horror elements in the film are outstanding, subtle and all the more effective for it. The piles of stones and stick men hanging in the trees are very disturbing, as is the slime covering the backpack. The worst of all has to be the teeth and things wrapped in the cloth, a moment which is hard to watch. The night time scenes are the most chilling, with the unknown noises and even the - shudder - sound of cackling and a baby crying. So creepy, and so frightening. The bit where the tent is violently attacked from the outside comes out of nowhere, and made me jump out of my seat in terror, it's that horrible. And of course the finale in the ruined house is just totally eerie with the laughing and the jolting, disorientating cameras spinning around in a last desperate rush. The final frames of the film are the most inexplicable and unnatural and leave the viewer pondering events well after the film is over to draw their own conclusions.
As you might just be able to tell, I loved THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT which easily lived up to the hype in my opinion. I'll be sure to buy the video when it comes out. Unmissable, a classic, I can't praise this film enough. The scariest thing I have ever seen! -
SnoopyStyle4 October 2014In October 1994, three film students Heather Donahue, Josh Leonard and Mike Williams (their real names) disappeared in the woods near Burkittsville, Maryland. A year later, their cameras are found. There is a local legend of The Blair Witch and missing children. They were there to do a documentary.
This is the granddaddy of the found footage movies. This could be scary if the audience buys into the film as real. I didn't and it's not scary for me. It's a little too shaky and rambling. I am reminded of Michael Moore talking about what a revelation the tripod is. Also the start is excruciatingly slow. It's an interesting idea that birthed a whole new genre. That's no easy task. However, it achieves very little more than that for me. It is more dizzying than frightening. -
If you are looking for something to scare you, look somewhere else, this is the worst excuse I have seen for a horror film. The style of shooting was as expected, shaky hand held camera, which fitted the premise of the film, but you felt like you were watching an amateur film by school kids rather than actual footage of a real event which it was supposed to depict.
Normally I expect a horror to get my heart racing a few times, and have some surprises, but the plot was too obvious, there were no surprises, nothing that would make you jump.
I would not recommend this to any film buff, ignore the hype and skip this film. -
Privileged to see a preview of this fantastically terrifying film, I found myself actually feeling the pain and mind-numbing anguish of the characters. At times in the movie, I would find myself trying to peer through the darkness with them, fully realizing that there was absolutely no chance of knowing what was out there. I think that is the most effective aspect of this, the fear of the unknown. I really can't think of anything more frightening than something that has no identity, and so you don't know how to relate or react, and you are forced to suffer through the unknown. A key component also included in this film was the steady decline of human spirit that you witness first-hand. You watch as the characters are broken down to small, scared, hunted animals, and you find yourself shaking your head at how pitiful and helpless they have become, yet you don't feel sorry for them, only agonizing hope that they will escape the fear with at least their lives. Wonderfully created film that, at least for me, an outdoor enthusiast who used to enjoy wandering alone through familiar woods, will always haunt me to the core of my soul when I look around and see nothing but endless woods, unknown sounds, and things that are never seen.
-
Hitchcoc24 January 2000Well, here we are in this woods (which doesn't seem to have a lot of trees; it looks more like a city park). But we have wandered in far enough to get ourselves turned around. That's cool. We are already spooked by the legends and our minds are playing games with us. One of our problems is that we are all so self centered (nineties kinds of people) that we don't listen. We whine, we complain, we don't think. We film everything creatively but we also have a really stupid streak. I thought the actors were very good. It's what they portrayed that bothered me. Wouldn't it be good to have a look at what was going on outside the tent at night. It could have been a fringe group of the Girl Scouts. Why was it categorically accepted that a fire should not be set. If the witch is out there, then wouldn't you want to see it, or at least let it get itself singed. Hey, you're in a tent. What could be more unprotected (we all know the stories about grizzley bears that treat small tents as doggy bags). Hey, maybe we could put someone at the door and let the others sleep!!! Why do we start running? Where are we going? There's nothing chasing us. The power of suggestion takes over a little quickly here. Why go into that house? Why try to find that guy? I mean, your first order of business is to find a way back. I felt for them and I thought the frantic camera work was interesting. I just couldn't get past the stupidity of the people and their lack of survival instincts and self protectiveness. I agree that experimental cinema is wonderful and I'm glad that this has done well. Hollywood gets pretty tiresome. But this movie didn't click with me.
-
donm-224 March 2001This one is like the fable about the Emperor and his new clothes. He didn't have any, and the Blair Witch doesn't have any. This thing was awful, I wanted to like it, I expected to like it, I tried to like it, I came away hating it. I saw this thing three times, and while it's got a great idea, and it's not terrible for a student film say, it's far far too long and boring for the one trick it's got to pull, I simply am at a loss as to how so many people can allegedly have loved this thing.
-
Okay so I've watched this movie over and over and over again over the past 23 years, everytime it gives me the chill factor and no other 'found footage' movie has beaten it. The sequel 'book of shadows' was absolutely mortifyingly bad, 'Blair witch' meh, better but nowhere near as good. This is literally one of the best horror movies of all time in my opinion. The less you see, the better your imagination makes up for.
-
I know the swearing is part of the whole "experience" but it detracts from the rest of the production being simple, disturbing and totally believable. Something about uppity females swearing is very unattractive. However, this effort goes to the heart of human fear, that which they cannot see, that which they do not understand and that which they cannot explain in simple and logical ways. Much like the power of religion, fear is baseless yet all pervasive, the very things modern people scorn as hocus pocus or fantasy (god, ghosts, evil spirits) are the same things that will give a well adjusted person the fear this film evokes, it is elemental, the caveman type of fear of the dark, strange noises and"things that go bump in the night". This is why it works, I watched with a background in emergency medicine, funeral direction and other forensic science experience but it still made me jumpy. That is what a good horror movie is all about, not gore and blood and chainsaws every 5 minutes. Spoiler alert is purely to cover my butt, lol.
-
If you thought that "Star Wars Episode 1" was the most over-hyped letdown of the year, get ready. "The Blair Witch Project" is so shockingly bad it could have been made by your ninth grade brother's friends on their first camping trip this summer. Shot primarily with a poor quality video (which appears to pre-date steadyshot), "Blair Witch" should have had a hard time getting into student film and video festivals based on the poor visual and sound quality alone. Instead, it has won prizes and accolades at both Cannes and Sundance, and has become the new indie darling of film critics most everywhere. But, "Blair Witch" is far scarier than many of the critics have even begun to hint at. It's basically 80 minutes of watching amateurs stuck in flat woods, running in circles, with no concept of shot composition, no script, no performance talent, and absolutely no idea of what the hell they are doing. This is the movie that puts the 'horror' in horrible.
"Blair Witch" is supposed to be about the making of a documentary. Is this supposed to represent a documentary film crew? A girl who is a complete bitch, and two dweebs who act like whiny versions of Beavis and Butt-head. The interminable fits of yelling and screaming will have you bored stiff. Do stick figures made of wood, and the sounds of nearby "filmmakers" making funny noises in the woods give you the creeps?...if so, you might actually find this frightening.
Well, as audiences everywhere are finding out (as Cinemascore is indicating), "The Blair Witch Project" is not a good film, and certainly not what they were told it would be. Shame on critics making comparisons to horror classics like "The Exorcist" and "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". Those were bold masterpieces of terror in which the scripts were solid before production began. Jeez, even "I Still Know What You Did Last Summer" was scarier than "Blair Witch" (if Jennifer Love's breasts get any bigger...) Any dolt can do what the makers of "Blair Witch" have done, just look at the worst home videos your neighbor Larry has in his collection (but Larry knows how to use that tripod his wife bought him last Xmas).
To quote Bart Simpson from that great Halloween episode with Poe's "The Raven"; "Do you know what would have been scarier than nothing?.....................ANYTHING!!"