I appreciate what Blair Witch was trying to do, but it failed.

[mrbungle]

i liked it. same with thing clerks. it showed you do not need 20 million bucks to make a movie.

could have it been better,sure but for what is was, i liked it.

 

[Lvbolts]

I agree, the advertising was the new point.

When folks say "nothing like that had been done before" in film history, they are talking about the effectiveness of the advertising campaign.

 

[Lear60man]

Exactly Larry.

Cannibal Holocaust as a comparison?

I would compare BWP to Paranormal Activity but PA wasnt really scary because you knew it was just a movie. BWP was being promoted as real. Remember this was a time when daily use of the internet by average people was just in its infancy. There werent websites like Snopes or The Smoking Gun to bust the charrade. Thus the moviegoer actually thought what they were seeing was a collection of recovered footage.

 

[niennumb1]

Yep. Prior to that, there wasn't any other movie like that. :lol No, really, there wasn't any other movie like that prior to BWP. :lol :lol

I'm sure they meant mainstream in theaters. I'm sure when you talk indie stuff most everyone's not aware of that stuff is always being done.

Who knows... maybe the big wigs out there look for something new off an internet video and then make their own ripping off others ideas. heheh....

 

[Ford W Maverick]

That's the thing guys, I haven't seen it since then. I'm writing about my recollections of it from back then and even back then, the advertising campaign drew me in and then the movie disappointed me terribly.

I truly do appreciate the fact that they tried something new, which I wholeheartedly commend, but I was presented one thing and given something else. Truthfully, I think if I'd seen the movie without the ad campaign I would have liked it better. I'd have still disliked the characters, but I'd have been more willing to roll with it.

 

[CB2001]

That's the thing guys, I haven't seen it since then. I'm writing about my recollections of it from back then and even back then, the advertising campaign drew me in and then the movie disappointed me terribly.

I truly do appreciate the fact that they tried something new, which I wholeheartedly commend, but I was presented one thing and given something else. Truthfully, I think if I'd seen the movie without the ad campaign I would have liked it better. I'd have still disliked the characters, but I'd have been more willing to roll with it.

I'm sorry, I didn't mean to offend you if I did. I just thought it was a good opportunity for a little bit of a joke.

 

[greylocke]

First- When did you see it? When the movie was released there was a lot of misinformation planted to make viewers think what they were seeing was real. Years later, of course, everyone knows it was a fake. It had several movies ride its shaky camera, found footage coattails that will never fool us again.

If I remember correctly Cannibal Holocaust was one of the first films to use the found footage theme. To the point that the director was actually charged with the murder of his actors and had to cancel the contracts of the actors so they could appear in court to defend him.

Third- I completely disagree that there should have been a Blair Witch shown. This movie was meant to fool you into thinking it was found footage. Show too much and it becomes unbelievable. It becomes Alien Autopsy and Paranormal Activity. The first people to see it would have said it was fake bs and no one else would have gone to see it. The movie leaves you with a feeling that it could be real and you don’t really know what happened. Besides, as I see it, horror movies about ghosts show way too much these days and it completely takes me out of the moment.

I agree. The fact that there was no witch shown heightens the suspense in my opinion. You don't know what she looks like, you don't know if she is real or an ethereal being. My ex-wife to this day is terrified of that movie, my oldest daughter and I think it's hilarious.

Either way, I don’t see it as a “fail.” It just doesn’t hold up very well after all these years.

See my above. My 18 years old daughter was laughing 30 minutes into it.

 

[Kerr Avon]

If I remember correctly Cannibal Holocaust was one of the first films to use the found footage theme. To the point that the director was actually charged with the murder of his actors and had to cancel the contracts of the actors so they could appear in court to defend him.

I think "The Last Broadcast" might have been about the same time, maybe earlier. Found footage films aren't new, but they didn't have quite the distribution that BWP had.

Oops, TLB was a bit later. I could of sworn there was an earlier version.

 

[stevo]

im gonna have to watch again

 

[Ford W Maverick]

It's all good CB2001, I wasn't offended. Just wanted to clarify myself.

 

[terryr]

Tried But Failed?

1. It was made for a few bucks by some guys. Then sold to a major studio.

2. The studio made big bucks. $500,000 spent, $248 million grossed.

3. It invented internet marketing of major movies.

4. Made people throw up from the jiggly camera. [I had to close my eyes for a few minutes or do likewise.]

5. And it had something really unique. You didn't see the bad guy. EVER. Most movies, and especially hollywood movies, are very eager to show the bad guy as soon as possible. You see Darth Vader way before the Heroes.
Here there may have not even been one most of the time except their imaginations.

6. Did so well they made a quicky sequel, which sucked. Book of Shadows - Blair Witch 2 never had a book of shadows in it, but still made 48 million.

 

[Ford W Maverick]

Ahh yes, but money earned does not a good movie make. This movie made all it's money off of hype. I contend that the hype was a success, the movie, not so much.

Remember, I was drawn in by the hype, I went in WANTING to like this movie. The hype was too much for the movie to live up to in my opinion. It was a case of all flash and no substance.

 

[Kerr Avon]

Ahh yes, but money earned does not a good movie make. This movie made all it's money off of hype. I contend that the hype was a success, the movie, not so much.

Remember, I was drawn in by the hype, I went in WANTING to like this movie. The hype was too much for the movie to live up to in my opinion. It was a case of all flash and no substance.

I'd say more people left the theatre having been entertained than those who left who didn't enjoy it. So yes, that makes it a good movie.

 

[Ford W Maverick]

Kerr Avon, I'll give you that. If people find a movie entertaining that IS the mark of a good movie. Personally I was disappointed in it. The people who watched it with me were disappointed in it and overwhelmingly the people I've talked to about it were disappointed in it.

 

[dblv25]

One other point that is often overlooked is the acting. Let me explain before you rip into me...

I had just completed military survival training about a week before this movie was released. I had been in the woods for almost two weeks on an extremely limited diet (25+ lbs lost, lbs I didn't have to lose) with guys that I liked when we went into it. However, after a couple of days of limited sleep, physical exhaustion, and poor nutrition, everyone got on eachother's nerves. I can remember at one point honestly thinking "What would I do for a Klondike bar?" and admitting to myself I would probably kill half of my group.

Fast forward to the movie, where the internet really was used effectively for the first time. It was set up so that you didn't know if this was real or a movie. Then, while watching the movie, I saw the same behavior patterns in these students that our survival group had. The realism of that made me believe that this might be real.

I heard an interview after the film was released that the film makers purposefully limited food and rest for the actors to get this sort of response. Sometimes, when they got under someone's skin, they were REALLY getting under someone's skin. I think that is a major selling point of this movie. They went all out, made it as realistic as possible, and had guys like me walking out of the theater the weekend it opened wondering if it was real or not. Remember, the actors "hid" for about two weeks or so after it opened. They didn't do any interviews and they weren't seen anywhere. If you can't appreciate the attention to detail while on such a small budget, then maybe you should just go sit and watch Waterworld over and over...

 

[Larry Young]

Ahh yes, but money earned does not a good movie make.

No, but movies aren't made to show you how awesome they are. Movies are made to make money. I really wish folks here would get a handle on that.

The Blair Witch Project succeeded spectacularly at what it was trying to do; perhaps even groundbreakingly so. Just because folks can produce anecdotes claiming it failed from their perspective doesn't mean it failed in the context under which it was produced.

 

[Larry Young]

If you can't appreciate the attention to detail while on such a small budget, then maybe you should just go sit and watch Waterworld over and over...

Speaking of anecdotes... I think Waterworld is unfairly maligned. :lol

 

[Contec]

The movie scared the crap out of me then. Knowing what it is now, not so much.

I still refuse to go in the woods at night to this day, hahah! That movie messed with me a bit

The same thing with me. Was in collage when i saw that movie in the cinema..did not really scare me when watching it but i was scared when walking outside at night.
Now it's just a crappy movie... but at that time it was great.

Well... I'll try not to beat a dead horse...

 

[dblv25]

Speaking of anecdotes... I think Waterworld is unfairly maligned. :lol

I just had to throw it in there because of the anecdotes. I'll admit it, when it's on, I watch it...

 

[Lear60man]

I agree mostly to what Contec is saying. But I take the movie for what it is/was at the time. I dont think it has aged well. I have watched The Shining and Exorcist again in recent years...unfortunately they didnt hold up well either.