mitabrin
crosser of fallen logs
Posts: 7
|
Post by mitabrin on Sept 18, 2016 15:15:16 GMT -6
Yeah... Lisa suddenly turning around and getting killed made the ending seem a bit... too sudden. I like the idea of the camera's battery just running out while she stands there, crying in fear and it's simply mind-boggling, that while writing/filming/editing they didn't decide to end the film like that... That ending is so simple and amazing, that it just begs to be made... I wouldn't be surprised if the reason for the "Lisa getting killed" was some kind of demand from the producers... "Every good horror nowadays must end with a jumpscare! End the movie by making the witch kill the girl!"... Ugh...
I think the saddest part right now about the new film is that while it wasn't a masterpiece it at least has proven, that there is still some potential in the Blair Witch franchise and there are a lot of possibilites for a BW sequel. Just imagine every other possible story, that may occur inside the forest. There could be a movie about the police trying to investigate the occurences in the forest, there may be a film about a group of "paranormal investigators" trying to make an episode of a TV show, where they research hunted places. Since the witch has time bending abilities there could even be a movie that takes place in the past... Imagine if the main characters were transported to a nightmarish version of Elly Kedward's trail... With a good script and clever ideas there are still a ton ways to explore the lore and expand the universe! But sadly most probably they'll never happen.
A lot of horror franchises got milked to death, but the one that actually created a ton of backstory and unexplored possibilities was nearly forgotten... And yeah... I know that many horrors tend to get really bad at some point, but at the same time I'd rather have like 3 later movies to hate and disregard, than being left with a gigantic "What if?" for the rest of time...
|
|
|
Post by Rekti1013 on Sept 18, 2016 15:53:13 GMT -6
Yeah... Lisa suddenly turning around and getting killed made the ending seem a bit... too sudden. I like the idea of the camera's battery just running out while she stands there, crying in fear and it's simply mind-boggling, that while writing/filming/editing they didn't decide to end the film like that... That ending is so simple and amazing, that it just begs to be made... I wouldn't be surprised if the reason for the "Lisa getting killed" was some kind of demand from the producers... "Every good horror nowadays must end with a jumpscare! End the movie by making the witch kill the girl!"... Ugh...
I think the saddest part right now about the new film is that while it wasn't a masterpiece it at least has proven, that there is still some potential in the Blair Witch franchise and there are a lot of possibilites for a BW sequel. Just imagine every other possible story, that may occur inside the forest. There could be a movie about the police trying to investigate the occurences in the forest, there may be a film about a group of "paranormal investigators" trying to make an episode of a TV show, where they research hunted places. Since the witch has time bending abilities there could even be a movie that takes place in the past... Imagine if the main characters were transported to a nightmarish version of Elly Kedward's trail... With a good script and clever ideas there are still a ton ways to explore the lore and expand the universe! But sadly most probably they'll never happen.
A lot of horror franchises got milked to death, but the one that actually created a ton of backstory and unexplored possibilities was nearly forgotten... And yeah... I know that many horrors tend to get really bad at some point, but at the same time I'd rather have like 3 later movies to hate and disregard, than being left with a gigantic "What if?" for the rest of time... In my opinion, I think the franchise has to take a different route. I don't think there should be another modern day film. That's where it could spiral down quickly. The prequel would be the way to go.
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Sept 18, 2016 16:01:03 GMT -6
The writer should have come on here. We could have given him all sorts of script ideas!
|
|
|
Post by Rekti1013 on Sept 18, 2016 16:15:33 GMT -6
The writer should have come on here. We could have given him all sorts of script ideas! What is your opinion of it being some ancient entity instead of it being Elly?
|
|
eone
crosser of fallen logs
Posts: 16
|
Post by eone on Sept 18, 2016 16:21:37 GMT -6
Maybe he does. I heard an adam wingard interview where he said he read a theory about Heather bringing out the blair witch by doing her own rituals in the woods, because she has a pentegram ring on in one scene. And I just read it myself on this very site blairwitch.proboards.com/thread/2560/pentagram-ring
|
|
eone
crosser of fallen logs
Posts: 16
|
Post by eone on Sept 18, 2016 16:25:52 GMT -6
What is your opinion of it being some ancient entity instead of it being Elly? I don't like it. It devalues Elly and starts making it something different. I don't like fucking with the mythology like that. It leads down a road where we'll find out the blair witch is a government conspiracy or some other lame shit
|
|
|
Post by Rekti1013 on Sept 18, 2016 16:31:18 GMT -6
I don't know, i'm not against it. I think it could be interesting if done right. But if it was the government... Ha, then i'm out.
|
|
|
Post by bw.asylum on Sept 18, 2016 16:48:30 GMT -6
Here's a theory. It seems (at least before this film) that the witch appears differently to different people. Mary Brown saw one thing. Robin Weaver saw another. I'm thinking Lisa and James saw her differently too. James saw fake Heather and was following her through the house. Lisa (and her camera) saw naked Slenderman. Just a thought. That's probably one of the best theories. That never crossed my mind. I remember thinking that when I walked out the theater, did they do that to say Mary Brown lied? But I suppose if Robin Weaver saw something different then it really could be different forms. That would also make sense for when we see what was supposed to be Heather in the house.
|
|
|
Post by Anarchist86ed on Sept 18, 2016 17:51:19 GMT -6
The writer should have come on here. We could have given him all sorts of script ideas! What is your opinion of it being some ancient entity instead of it being Elly? It's hecachexmix from the video games.
|
|
|
Post by Rekti1013 on Sept 18, 2016 18:39:39 GMT -6
What is your opinion of it being some ancient entity instead of it being Elly? It's hecachexmix from the video games. I think maybe it is. Now I want chex mix.
|
|
|
Post by captainwacky on Sept 20, 2016 9:55:43 GMT -6
Personally, I thought it was good. I have now seen it twice and I thoroughly enjoyed it both times. I will definitely be picking up the blu-ray when it drops.
It is sitting somewhere between a 7.5 and an 8 out of 10, at the moment.
It definitely wasn't a perfect film. It has flaws and doesn't reinvent the wheel or anything when it comes to the series. But to be honest, I don't think I wanted it to do that. I actually found Wingard's restraint quite admirable. He had clearly done his research on the original film, including the legend that Myrick and Sanchez created, and had clearly invested a lot time in researching fan theories too. I like the fact he incorporated a lot of this into his own interpretation of the Blair Witch universe. I thought he expanded nicely on the lore and mythology (but only just enough so that most things still remain very ambiguous and open to interpretation, which is very good). I especially liked the fleshing out of the idea that the 'Witch' can play with time, space and place easily - and I liked the impression that she is able to do this on an individual basis so that everyone has different experiences (more on that to come).
I thought it was a worthy successor. It was certainly not better than the original, but it was never going to be. But, all in all, I rate it much higher than Book Of Shadows.
I really liked the character of Lane, and actually feel like he was probably the most intriguing character in the film. His motivations and even who he actually was are all completely up for questioning - was he possessed? Was he a tool of the 'Witch' from the beginning? An unwitting pawn who the witch alternates between possessing and scaring the hell out of until he loses all sense of reality? Another interesting question to ask, for me, is what ELSE was on the tape that Lane 'found'? We only saw the small clip on YouTube, but what if the tape he found had EVERYTHING that was filmed on his DV camera on it? What if he had already foreseen many events by watching the entire tape and genuinely was convinced that he would be let go if he did what he thought the 'Witch' wanted? When he said "You have to do what she tells you", maybe he really meant "Do what she SHOWS you", he had already been SHOWN what to do and considered it the Blair Witch telling him how he could serve her. When he jokingly says to them that he is 'leading them to her', I think he really KNOWS that he is because he has SEEN it. Just my take...
The 'Witch' certainly does seem more aggressive in Blair Witch. I don't mind that too much. I liked the atmosphere that they created. It was more like: shocked and hunted, whereas the first was more: lost and scared. It created different tones and that isn't a bad thing per se.
I liked the ideas of the 'Witch' messing with their equipment, especially the radios and wished they'd played on that aspect more. There could have been a very effective scene with Peter or somebody asking James to come and meet them to help collect wood, except it is really the 'Witch' spooking him out. They had moments but I feel like it could have been fleshed out more. Still though, good stuff.
I also really liked the various nods to the original - though I failed to spot the map both times. I also heard that you can apparently see Heather's bones and some of her equipment in a dark corner of the basement. But I looked really hard for it on the second viewing and couldn't see anything that looked like that.
My most major criticism was the overuse of fakeout 'trick or treat' jumpscares. These cat closet moments were obnoxious and grated very quickly. That whole... BOO! Oh don't worry, it's just this person! It's just so far from what the original tried to be and it hurts the experience in my opinion. I personally think that if they had cut these moments entirely, the film would have been even more effective for it.
I don't mind that you saw something. In a way, they kind of had to do it. And it's basically 3 seconds of still barely seeing anything. I also agree with the poster, and even posted the same theory on IMDB, that suggested the Witch takes on different forms for different people - and it certainly is supposed to still be ambiguous, in my opinion, exactly WHAT that entity is that torments Lisa (maybe the 'Witch' is simply playing with her mind based on the description that Lane gave her). I thought they maybe showed the thing one too many times though. I didn't think they needed the shot of it in the attic at the end. You already knew something was behind her. It was a scary enough idea, and I think it could have been even more creepy just not seeing anything at all from that point.
One thing that has been playing on my mind though is the whole 'stand in the corner' concept. Leaving aside the fact that it was Lane who told them this (who as we know, cannot be fully trusted), if you take it on face value, then maybe it makes sense when they are both in the corner but once Lisa starts walking backwards, surely the thing could just pop up in front of her? Job done. Surely? I mean, this is an entity that has complete control of the forest - time, space, place, everything (as demonstrated) - surely it could just materialise in front of her as soon as she moves out of the corner! I actually think this is the case, but it was just toying with her at the end, making her think she had a way out! She was doomed even if she didn't look behind her in my opinion.
I also am a proponent of the theory that the forest itself IS the evil and is inherently demonic. There is much more going on than just the Witch. The entity that you see in the last ten minutes of the film is simply an expression of this evil.
I also like the ideas being proposed of possible alternate ending ideas - I actually thought it would have been interesting if the tunnel had ended up leading her out of the house and back to the car. She gets in the car and drives as fast as she can back into town... Only to find Burkitsville completely shrouded in darkness just like the woods and totally abandoned. She looks around for any sign of anybody and doesn't see anyone at all. There is a lighting strike and just for a second, instead of shadows of the town, the shadows are of trees in the forest (implying either that she is still in the woods and never escaped and then the battery dies - or that the evil of the woods has engulfed the whole of the town.)
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Sept 20, 2016 10:39:14 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by captainwacky on Sept 20, 2016 10:51:23 GMT -6
Another thing that I think was a slightly missed opportunity is that I really wish they had made some harkbacks to the 'sounds' in the original. "Could be deer, I guess..." If the first night had started and the sounds were very much the same type that were heard in the original - then, they all retreat to their tents and THAT is when the first BIG thud happens. It would have been a nice way to pay homage, demonstrate the connection, and THEN suddenly up the ante. But that is just a personal idea.
I will check that link.
|
|
tom96th
crosser of fallen logs
Posts: 8
|
Post by tom96th on Sept 21, 2016 13:11:33 GMT -6
I'm a long time die hard fan of the original and I've read about all the mythology I can get my hands on. I knew going into the movie that there would be some disappointment. That being said, I liked it. The disappointment doesn't come from any negative attributes about the film as much as it does the things they could have gone further with, but failed to. I loved all of the little nods to the original. The Parr House, stick figures, dialogue references, etc. I just feel like they missed some good opportunities.
1.) The extended mythology makes note that Parr's house was burnt down after his trial in 1941. This is even mentioned in the film by Lane. What a better way to drive home the witch controlling time phenomena than by having the group visit the stone foundation of Parr's house (like the one in BOS) and later stumbling onto the same place with the house still standing in the rain?
2.) No Coffin Rock? Really? Only mentions? It's a big part of the mythology and they could have easily shot a scene in Maryland or recreated it as a studio set like the house.
3.) I was pretty stoked that they were finally going to incorporate tunnels in Rustin Parr's basement into the film. In The Blair Witch Project: A Dossier it mentions that the house had a tunnel that led from the basement and let out near Tappy East Creek. This is a playable scenario in the 2nd video game where it leads from the Parr House to a cave near Coffin Rock. What did this movie do with the tunnel? It gets really small and empties into the same basement she just escaped from. Downright lazy missed opportunity.
4.) Was the drone just a convenient way to have someone climb a tree and die? They could have done more with that. A lot more.
5.) It lacked more crossover from the first film. I know at the end James supposedly sees Heather in the upstairs of the house and hears her scream. They could have had them stumble onto Heather's camp, find a map published in 1994 on the edge of the creek it was kicked into by Mike 20 years ago further adding to the time warp. They could have heard Josh's screaming at night using recordings from the first movie. Thoughts?
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Sept 21, 2016 15:15:44 GMT -6
Supposedly the map from the first film that Mike kicked in the creek can be seen in the new one. I didn't see it in two viewings but it's supposed to be there. Did anyone see it?
And the tunnel bit made no sense to me. Why toss Lisa down there if it just leads back to the basement again?
|
|
|
Post by captainwacky on Sept 22, 2016 4:28:53 GMT -6
Supposedly the map from the first film that Mike kicked in the creek can be seen in the new one. I didn't see it in two viewings but it's supposed to be there. Did anyone see it? I looked out for it extensively on my second viewing. But, could not conclusively say that I was able to spot it. There IS something in the lake, just after the foot incident when the characters reach the other bank and are tending to the injury. In center bottom frame, under the water reasonably close to the embankment, there is something brown and square-ish shaped that seems larger than a leaf (it is also stationary) - however it is kind of blurry and hard to tell. I couldn't say that it wasn't a leaf or some bit of river detritus or not. That is the only possible sighting of it I made. But I can't conclude...
I also heard tell that Wingard said that another easter egg is that the bones and equipment of Heather or Mike are visible in the basement. However, I really looked during all shots of the basement and couldn't see anything that looked like this.
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Sept 22, 2016 16:50:31 GMT -6
The bright light in the attic. It lasted too long to be lightning. And it was moving. UFO landing outside?
|
|
|
Post by treaclefurther on Sept 22, 2016 17:56:51 GMT -6
The bright light in the attic. It lasted too long to be lightning. And it was moving. UFO landing outside? Dear Lord I hope not.
|
|
trey
rock pile disturber
I see a dirty behind!
Posts: 198
|
Post by trey on Sept 23, 2016 8:33:05 GMT -6
One of the articles I read suggested that it could be the witch manipulating time, making the daylight zoom by really fast.
|
|
|
Post by bw.asylum on Sept 23, 2016 16:45:17 GMT -6
The bright light in the attic. It lasted too long to be lightning. And it was moving. UFO landing outside? I thought it was the time loop resetting or something.
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Sept 23, 2016 18:06:43 GMT -6
The bright light in the attic. It lasted too long to be lightning. And it was moving. UFO landing outside? I thought it was the time loop resetting or something. Might have been. Just throwing some possibilities out there.
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Sept 24, 2016 14:24:26 GMT -6
Now that I've seen it again, the light in the attic is the sun coming up and setting really fast. And there's no map in this movie. We're being messed with on that.
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Sept 25, 2016 10:02:12 GMT -6
Anyone else notice that any time anyone runs through the woods they are following a neat little cleared-out trail? Not a complaint, just an observation.
Another thing. The footage that lured James and friends to the woods is a combination of video from the first film and from this one. Together.
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Oct 4, 2016 18:40:00 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Oct 15, 2016 12:10:29 GMT -6
Wonder why they changed the Rustin Parr story? His victims were killed in the basement not the attic. They said so in the first film. I guess they just wanted to end things in the attic so they could do the whole weird light/mothership landing/sun rising-and-setting-fast thing first. Nice shot I suppose but it doesn't line up with the mythology.
|
|