Ever since "The Blair Witch Project" was screened at Sundance, I've been reading notices at Internet fan sites describing it as the scariest flick ever made. But the curtain is coming up on their product, and "The Blair Witch Project" doesn't even come close to living up to its hype.

Two weeks ago I attended a preview screening in a packed theater. When the lights came up, people actually chuckled. There was a palpable sense of "That's it? That's all?" in the air. Somebody came down to the front row and asked, "Gee, was it scarier down here?"

I understand the film was conceived as a spoof of the old "In Search Of..." TV series, with interviews and video clips detailing the story of the witch and the search for the missing filmmakers. Somewhere along the way, the directors decided to drop all that good stuff and stick with the footage showing the filmmakers lost in the woods. This was a disastrous mistake. There are a couple of mildly creepy episodes at night, but the film loses what little steam it has when the audience figures out that nothing bad is going to happen during daylight. The bulk of the film is dull improv -- think of a John Cassavetes sleepaway camp -- with variations on twentysomethings yelling, "We're in the middle of the woods!" The conclusion is supremely unsatisfying.

The result is a mildly clever student film that simply doesn't stand up as a feature release. The most frightening film ever made? I've made sandwiches that are scarier than this flick! Anybody who claims to have been spooked by "The Blair Witch Project" must be a very nervous and fretful individual.

-- Steven Hart
Highland Park, N.J.

In answer to Williams' question, "Why does Heather pack a book called 'How to Stay Alive in the Woods' and then never use it?"-- I simply assumed it was because her edition did not contain a chapter on how to survive attacks by an unknown and possibly supernatural assailant. A foolish oversight by an amateur camper.

-- Michael Clausen

Method madness
BY CHARLES TAYLOR (07/14/99)

Why wouldn't Salon's reviewer have a difficulty with the mistreatment of actors? Isn't it part of a critic's job to question this sort of unethical trend in filmmaking? I recall a friend refusing to see "9 1/2 Weeks" years ago after he'd heard about Kim Basinger's mistreatment on the set (presumably to help her get into the mind-set of the film's sexual power plays). Hasn't "The Blair Witch Project" simply traveled further down the same troublesome route? Yes, it's terrible to watch someone else be genuinely scared on film. And it was fun to scare the shit out of our little brothers by creeping up behind them when we were 10. But is there anything transcendent or artistic about this?

I'm not going to say that it's indicative of problems in our culture that we increasingly trust "reality" as a form of entertainment -- this sort of waxing nostalgic reeks of neo-con posturing. Nonetheless, there is something troubling when we vicariously enjoy others' misfortune and mistake it for entertainment. Films that use "extreme" methods to evoke real reactions on screen seem to me filmmaking's answer to prime time's "Cops." Perhaps there's a larger point to be made about the increasing public demand for art that blurs fiction with reality, but I leave this for another issue of Salon. But this blurring for its own sake simply patronizes the viewer and diminishes the potential of art to move and transform.

-- Paul Zakrzewski

Next page | "Open source" has never meant you can't make money