|
If you had asked me like a week ago if I wanted a new Blair Witch movie I'd have laughed in your face, but put Wingard behind it and It's my most anticipated movie of the year. I'm still kind of hoping they dropped the found footage aspect, but I know they didn't because it's loving Blair Witch. Either way, I've been waiting for this since The Guest came out.
|
#
¿
Jul 27, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:37 |
|
|
Well that's a bummer. Going to check it out tomorrow night still but I was hoping for some kind of spin on it like You're Next had. I guess once it's a legit licensed Blair Witch movie you only have so much wiggle room.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 15, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Caught it Friday night and I hate to admit I'm pretty disappointed in it. It felt like they rushed the initial slowly losing sanity bits and wasted some potential there. The whole thing felt like it could have benefited from some breathing room. There were some really creepy bits (twig snap, "you look exactly how I remember you") but coming off of Wingard last two movies it feels really boring.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 19, 2016 19:00
|
|
|
Heh. If you actually paid attention you'd have realized it was all a dream. I'm all for reading into poo poo but man you are reaching. My real secret theory: a witch did it.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 20, 2016 22:58
|
|
|
SuperMechagodzilla posted:Ok, so what is her motive. She doesn't like people cause they killed her. She wants to be alone. She is an unknowable force of evil born of the evil of man. It's spooky. Take your pick.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
a cop posted:The whole 'sun never comes up' bit should have had so much more weight than it did. If they'd developed the characters more and built tension better it could have been so effective. I hate all the wasted potential more than anything. Totally agree. That and the different characters experiencing time differently was pretty creepy concepts but they didn't do anything with it. It was only 89 minutes long, they absolutely could have had a slower ramp up to the craziness at the end and it would have been much more effective. It went from "eh, sorta spooky noises" to "well they're hosed as hell, the tents were just ripped into the sky" in like a minute. I love a quick "get in get out" movie with a lean run time if it is super effective in what it wants to do but here I don't really know what they wanted to do.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 21, 2016 03:26
|
|
|
Yeah that's a really lame way to drum up speculation and publicity. Oh OK, the monster witch lady wasn't the witch even though nothing in the movie suggests that isn't the case. Whatever. It's like JK Rowling adding that dumbledore was gay after the books were over even though nothing ever suggests this in books. Ooh ya got me person who wrote this fictional work. I'm a loving rube for assuming that the witch monster thing was the witch.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
If it's supposed to be Elly and not "the witch," that would be like having Rustin Parr show up and and then saying, actually you didn't see the child murderer! You made up another secret character, owning everyone who watched the movie. Good job.
|
|
#
¿
Sep 28, 2016 20:21
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 26, 2024 09:37 |
|
|
I mean the end of the film is the same footage they watch to get there in the first place. It's magic. It doesn't make sense.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 18, 2017 21:00
|
|