|
|
Post by Anarchist86ed on Jul 6, 2017 19:21:48 GMT -6
Been nearly a year. What are your thoughts on why we waited 16 years for a thud?
|
|
|
|
Post by Heather, taking a piss. on Jul 6, 2017 20:48:37 GMT -6
Still offended.
Made me realize how I keep things the way I appreciate them in my head.
|
|
|
|
Post by Savior1981 on Jul 6, 2017 21:09:51 GMT -6
I'll dare to be a Daniel, dare to stand alone. I like this movie. Is it perfect? No. But it's still a pretty good flick. It's a hell of a lot better than most horror flicks that have come out recently.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Jul 18, 2017 8:55:01 GMT -6
You're not alone. It's not that bad. It has its flaws but parts of it are quite good.
|
|
gator
rock pile disturber
Alive and seeing
Posts: 234
|
Post by gator on Jul 29, 2017 23:15:19 GMT -6
I actually liked it, thought it was decent. Is it the best Blair Witch movie out there, no. But if we are comparing it to Book of Shadows, it is... But we shouldn't have to compare this to that garbage, though.
|
|
|
|
Post by Savior1981 on Jul 30, 2017 21:07:38 GMT -6
I actually liked it, thought it was decent. Is it the best Blair Witch movie out there, no. But if we are comparing it to Book of Shadows, it is... But we shouldn't have to compare this to that garbage, though. I don't know. I liked BW 2016 more than Book of Shadows. But, as long as you don't view BOS as cannon, it is kinda enjoyable. I view it like Halloween 3 Season of the Witch. If you view it as it's on stand alone film not completely tied in with the original, you may enjoy it more. Just think of it as it's own movie and it does have some pretty cool psychological moments. Just my 2 cents... |
|
|
|
Post by kisstheslate on Mar 7, 2018 4:49:16 GMT -6
I really, really liked this film. Flawed, not perfect, but extremely enjoyable. Glad to get a more than decent sequel to the unsurpassable original.
|
|
|
|
Post by bw.asylum on Mar 7, 2018 9:08:45 GMT -6
I liked it. Could've been better but could've been so much worse. Although I will admit because of how long I waited, anything with Blair in the title could've been released and I would've tried to find the good in it.
|
|
eone
crosser of fallen logs
Posts: 16 
|
Post by eone on Nov 14, 2020 11:53:26 GMT -6
4 years on now and I increasingly think the film sucks balls. At the time I thought I liked the time distortion stuff, overt as it was, but that’s because I hadn’t noticed it in the original film and thought it was a novel idea. After realising it was handled 100x more subtlety 16 years earlier in Curse of the Blair Witch, I retract my praise. The only thing I like about it now is Callie Hernandez’s acting.
|
|
|
|
Post by Heather, taking a piss. on Nov 15, 2020 0:36:14 GMT -6
4 years on now and I increasingly think the film sucks balls. At the time I thought I liked the time distortion stuff, overt as it was, but that’s because I hadn’t noticed it in the original film and thought it was a novel idea. After realising it was handled 100x more subtlety 16 years earlier in Curse of the Blair Witch, I retract my praise. The only thing I like about it now is Callie Hernandez’s acting. It was broadcasted yesterday; spanish audio, lights out. As much as I tried to get into it, I was just repeating "could've been better executed". Too much happening around: I won't get into their intention to expand the lore, didn't work in a substantial way towards the plot as a "true sequel"; very aggressive highs and lows (Lisa and James' moment amidst the flying tents frenzy and the "who are you talking to?" moments VS having GPS and a drone to play with as a means of "we are NOT in 1994" only to end up with... a "stupid technology" type of message). Aaand comedy! From Peter's "it's just a little infected" line on Ashley's foot to Lisa's "can you please stop doing that?" (which really connects with the audience, doesn't it?). Yay for the house set though. Still not into noisy creatures. |
|
|
|
Post by Tweek on Nov 15, 2020 6:51:33 GMT -6
Right. There are parts that I like. The house rocks. The time manipulation bit was cool. It was almost a soft reboot, with the volume cranked up to 11. I'm not a fan of jump scares. BW16 had way too many.
|
|
|
|
Post by stevens25 on Aug 15, 2021 19:46:09 GMT -6
I caught some it on cable a few weeks back. That's the first time I watched it since it was in theaters. It's a film that if I never saw it again,I'd be ok with that.
|
|
jmexplorations
rock pile disturber
Do whatever makes you feel alive!
Posts: 81
|
Post by jmexplorations on Aug 17, 2021 8:30:24 GMT -6
We are trying not to compare it to the original Blair Witch Project because there is no comparison. This 2016 version was pretty good and we enjoyed it. Didn't like the actors much but they were ok. We really loved the ending in the house! Was that a set house made to replicate the original Griggs House because it looked the same. Blair Witch was Definitely better than Book of Shadows which goes without saying but Book of Shadows did have Kim Director in it and that is a HUGE plus!! lol
|
|
|
|
Post by terror93 on Jan 13, 2022 9:59:42 GMT -6
The movie is okay but it could definitely use some improvement. Going by the actor's age, James would've only been about 4 years old when Heather disappeared, so if he remembered her at all it would've been just barely. I think there should've been a scene with the parents. James could've told them he was going in the woods for them so they could have closure and they could've begged him not to. I think it would've created a stronger connection and made it more emotionally powerful.
And overall, it just felt too artificial and professionally done. The first feels so authentic but this one, there was never any doubt in my mind that it was only a movie. The many special effects no doubt contribute to that as well. Overall, I'm still glad we got a Blair Witch 3 because I spent years and years wanting one. And while I do like it, I can't honestly say I love it like I do with the original.
|
|
