Blair Witch Project

Clerk

You Look Plump Today
Joined
Dec 25, 2002
Messages
14,481
Reaction score
5
Points
56
Ok so it took me around 7 years to check this one out, and damn was it a disappointment. Seriously why the **** did this warrant the "SCARY AS HELL" tagline that lured me into borrowing my friends VHS tape?
The ending wasn't even worth it, when we finally get some gore that stupid Heather refuses to put the camera directly on the shot. I wanted some teeth! Also what happened to the other guy at the end? Did the Blair Witch put his nose in the corner for trespassing
? It just was lame........ did anyone else hate this flick or am I alone?
 
Clerk said:
Ok so it took me around 7 years to check this one out, and damn was it a disappointment. Seriously why the **** did this warrant the "SCARY AS HELL" tagline that lured me into borrowing my friends VHS tape?
The ending wasn't even worth it, when we finally get some gore that stupid Heather refuses to put the camera directly on the shot. I wanted some teeth! Also what happened to the other guy at the end? Did the Blair Witch put his nose in the corner for trespassing
? It just was lame........ did anyone else hate this flick or am I alone?
It was a terrible movie.
 
this was the definition of "hype that didn't live up"
 
The sequel or w/e was even worse.:(
 
Count me in as someone who dug it. I know its depised, and I can understand why, but as someone who spends a lot of time outdoors, I can say that it strikes the right chords as knowing was is truly scary.

Heck, it's a thousand more times scarier than 99.9% of the stuff in what I consider is the worst movie genre which is the horror genre.
 
may just be one of the smartest films ever released with an incredible marketing strategy that still pumps originality.
as far as horror or fright films go, this is smart one. never exposing the creature/villain that chased them builds a much worse feeling than a man in a hockey mask.

to each their own. own and love it.
 
Get a video camera, turn the volume down on your TV, get a couple insane buddies together, then point the video camera at the TV and record. Then do the voices and sound effects. You'll end up having a badass movie that you'll watch 20-50 times a month.

^ Also, you can basically do that for ANY movie, but this one works well for some reason.
 
Worst movie I've ever seen in theatres. I saw it for free before it came out and still felt ripped off by it.

Subtle suspense is one thing, non-existent is another. The only threat in this film is some shaky camera work and tree branches. Sure, leaving it up to the imagination can work, but if I wanted an entire movie left up to my imagination, I'd stay home.
 
piece of ****.........plain and simple

they treid to do something new and good and failed
 
xwolverine2 said:
piece of ****.........plain and simple

they treid to do something new and good and failed


Shaky cameras man! SHAKY!
 
I liked it, thought it worked well as a scary movie, fear of the unknown is much scarier to me than a guy in a hockey mask. However, I can understand why a lot of people wouldn't like it.
 
This movie was terrible.
Stupidness...
 
I thought it was original and interesting, different from your standard crappy Hollywood horror film.
 
I remember the media and press around this made it seem so intense. I actually drove an hour to see it a week early at a screening, and everyone in the theater seemed to love it at the time, I remember the ride home I just kept complaining about the ending with the guy in time-out and not showing the witch. :(
 
SolidSnakeMGS said:
Heck, it's a thousand more times scarier than 99.9% of the stuff in what I consider is the worst movie genre which is the horror genre.
I hope you're not judging all of the horror genre based on some of the crap that's more mainstream. I've been getting more into horror lately, and it has a lot to offer. There's a ton of really great stuff out there.

Anyway, I saw Blair Witch in the theatres. I didn't hate it, but it wasn't as frightening as some people said. Well, okay... it wasn't really frightening at all.
 
DOG LIPS said:
I remember the media and press around this made it seem so intense. I actually drove an hour to see it a week early at a screening, and everyone in the theater seemed to love it at the time, I remember the ride home I just kept complaining about the ending with the guy in time-out and not showing the witch. :(
The Witch would probably have been a disappointment if they had shown her.

I like that they tried something totally different with this film. Most people I know either found it extremely scary or not at all.
 
I think the basic idea of what they tried can work. I love Open Water (which I know a ton of people find boring as hell) which also tried the documentary style cinematography with extreme realism and showing almost nothing.
The problem I had with Blair Witch is it's just 3 irritating as all hell people shouting horrible dialogue for 80 mins and the bad camera-work and the woods are the only supposed scares.
Open Water doesn't show much, but with sharks all around, you don't need to. That film had a threat, this film had none; the characters also weren't nearly as annoying.
 
One of the crappiest movies I've seen. If you want a good horror movie, go see The Descent
 
I was only nine when I saw this movie, so I BELIEVED the hype, that all of it was real. So, there's still that lingering fear from my adolesence that still resonates when I see the film.

But yeah...the characters were annoying as Hell. The only real flaw in the film for me.
 
I appreciated its originality but other than that, it was a mediocre film. Overrated and overhyped.
 
I liked it. When they interview that old lady, and she says that the Blair Witch has horse-like hair on her chest. . . that ****'s freaky. I tip my hat to the filmmakers for never actually showing the Witch. I agree that it was overhyped, though. But, that's not the movies fault.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"