1999 horror movieRating: 17/20
Plot: Some kids explore the woods with a couple video cameras in an attempt to make a documentary about a local urban legend. They die!
I always avoided seeing this a second time because I didn't figure it could be anywhere near as good as the first time. And it really isn't. The initial shock of watching this no-budget horror movie without a single damn witch just isn't going to be duplicated in subsequent viewings. But the movie, one that my brother says is the best horror movie ever made, is still so well done. They really do a ton with their one hundred dollar budget, and the three principals do a good job of keeping this thing real. I've said it before--if the actors fail in something like this, the whole foundation falls to pieces. There might be a handful of moments where they slip and don't quite respond like normal folk, but for the most part they sell this. This movie feels very loose, more or less unscripted, and I think it benefits from that. The three probably look genuinely freaked out at times because they are genuinely freaked out. I also like how Blair Witch builds tension, subtly and with never an over-the-top moment. The mystery progresses realistically, and the rather ambiguous ending keeps the feeling of unease alive long after you take this out of the dvd player. Blair Witch really succeeds because it doesn't do things the way regular movies do--the unknown actors, the lack of script, the absence of a score, the refusal to ever show us anything that resembles a witch. And unlike most movies like this that unleash a caboodle of copycats, I don't mind it so much because a lot of those copycats are actually pretty good.
I had exactly the opposite reaction to this film when I saw it at a midnight showing in Portland Oregon the first night it was released. So I go in and start watching...and watching...and watching. All the while waiting and waiting and waiting. I just wasn't scared or creeped out. I had high hopes at the end, with all the running around and stuff, but when the movie ended and the screen went dark, I just felt anger and disappointment. We left, and the only thing my wife (at that time) could say was she felt nauseous from all the camera movements and that she did not want to go to pie at Carrows, as we had planned. This led to a fight that I am sure was connected to the marriage ending less than a year later.
ReplyDeleteIts not a movie that has held up well over time, as I saw it again a few months ago.
You should see something called "The Last Broadcast" which was made a year before Blair Witch. Its very similar to Blair Witch. Except they are going after the Jersey Devil instead of the titular witch. Of course Blair Witch completely rips it off, right down to the shaky cameras.
Man, sorry to hear that the movie ended your marriage! Damn!
ReplyDeleteI'll check out 'The Last Broadcast'...I've only heard of it.
"Blair Witch" was the only problem with Barry's marriage. I will say that the film had one truly great moment...when they go downstairs and see the person in the corner. Brilliant and chill inducingly creepy. Other than that, all I remember is wondering why they don't just follow the river to civilization, wondering if I would ever actually see anything, and being put off by all the hysterical screaming. In the quiet of this room in front of the computer, I can still hear the screaming. A 12.
ReplyDeleteI saw this in the theater on opening night. I had read about the buzz on the internet, and took two friends, who knew nothing about it, with me.
ReplyDeleteIt was maybe the most fun I had ever had with a crowd seeing a movie.
It was (mostly) the first of it's kind when it came to the POV/shaky cam films. That was a lot of it's appeal. If you could suppend belief, it is that much more fun. Great ending and great performances.
I'll back your 17.
Well, it's about time somebody fucking agrees with me!
ReplyDeletei didnt really watch tv the year before this was the big spoof and i think my first viewing, alone, at home, in the country, near woods, made this all the more powerful. i think it stands up to multiple viewings well, and i could write a whole book on the lack of a visual monster here. the monster is our own projections or ourselves. it could be argued the first person to disappear is who ultimately kills the remaining 2, and there is no horror in the woods but the 3 intrepid film makers. also the lack of a "monster" meant we didnt see some shitty special effect monster. had they had a bigger budget they may have tried, but i think the writer knew what he was doing. the best horror films work this way.
ReplyDeleteJen and I lived in a farm house in the middle of the woods/cornfield when we watched this. She will never watch it again. I think she still might be mad at me for making her watch it the first time.
ReplyDeleteCory, Kairow's experience with this reminds me of what you've always told me about 'Jaws,' by the way.