Blair Witch Project indeed swept me off my feet, but it also flew off the handle of the broom. It was kinda nausea inducing at times.

Rating: 6/10 (12 December 2016)

Shot entirely in the style of a documentary gone horribly wrong, this movie was indeed groundbreaking for the time, as it re-popularized 'the found footage' horror subgenre marketing style that was somewhat lost in the late 1980s, after the minor success of 1980's 'Cannibal Holocaust'. Using internet-based viral marketing, directors Eduardo Sanchez and Daniel Myrick was able to promote the idea that 'The Blair Witch Project' was truly the recovered footage of real documentarians that went missing in the woods of Maryland, in order to cover the local ghost stories, using fake online documents, footage, published dossiers, interviews, and even a couple of professional-looking television documentaries blurred the line between truth and fiction. The only problem with this, is that the movie doesn't know, what type of horror story, it wants to tell. For a movie titled 'Blair Witch', it doesn't really talk much about 16th-century witchcraft that much. Instead, it look like they wanted to talk about the fictional account of a 1940s child murder named Rustin Purr. Despite that, people were subtly convinced that these two legends were real, as opposed to something the film-makers made up themselves. Many were also convinced that the movie was based on a true story, or even consisted of actual footage. Because of this, the real-life actors, Heather Donahue, Joshua Leonard & Michael C. Williams had to play the part of the fictionalized version of themselves as demise, even after the credits start rolling. They did this, by not appearing in any type of media, motion pictures, or commercials for one year following the film's release. It really did seem, like they walk off the face of the earth to the point that a police investigation was order to expose the facade. For the most part, this verisimilitude marketing kinda works, as it got people interested in seeing this low-budget horror movie that has nothing much happening, including me. However, the marketing did leave some very jarring questions, like if this was a real movie, how was the film footage even recovered, if the woods was really that haunted. Another, is how was any upstart studio got the rights of the footage, from the families of the demise, and able to make a profit off their family members 'supposedly' deaths. Doesn't that seem, a bit odd!? Also, it's really hard to believe that this footage is indeed 'raw', when it look like it been edited to follow a narration path. After all, doesn't it seem a bit odd for these film students to film a lot of footage of them, arguing, cursing, & bickering with each other over a map, that they can't use on their documentary, rather than saving that footage for documenting the events. Still, I guess, they gave a good reason, with Heather's insistence upon filming everything, is suggested by Josh to be her way of coping with the fact that she's lost in the woods. Mad props to Heather's apology scene. She acted so hard that you could practically see the bite marks in the camera. She sobs, screams, and shakes so realistically that her acting was so convinced, making people forget that, she accidentally zoom the camera, too far on her face. However, I did think the directors went a little too far to promote discord between the actors, by deliberately ruining their sleep, and starving them. From what I heard, they were really butting heads toward the end. Still, it does seem, a bit out of character for one of them, to throw away the map for no good reason!? It doesn't make sense, unless, one of the students was really trying to kill the other filmmaker, but that's just a film theory. Despite that, I did enjoy the actors genuinely upset reactions, even if it was somewhat annoying at times. Still, it doesn't explain, why their film footage look like crap even in the beginning, if they supposedly go to film school. Yes, it can be said, the footage was made to look like it has degraded since it's been in the open woods for nearly a year, but it doesn't explain, why these 'student filmmakers' have so many badly shots. All these low grade blurry poorly focus shots make the movie, nearly unwatchable. Also the cringe-worthy shaking cam is really annoying, as it known to makes people vomit. Although, this movie show nearly nothing that was really scary. Like some sort of cinematic Rorschach test, there was enough suspense to keep me, looking for at least something that would get a reaction from me. I give the movie credit that, it didn't relies much on outright special effects of blood, gore, and violence to get people to watch; just the psychological horror and tension of unseen forces and sounds that is slowly ratcheted up with each passing day and night of the characters' descent into madness. It left everything to the audience's grisly imagination. While, this movie had a 2000 & 2016 sequel, 'Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2' & 'Blair Witch'. They didn't live up the hype of the first movie. Overall: I have to say, there is a strong reason why this movie lead a new age of 'found-footage' horror films. It was unique at the time, however rewatching it, now. It's a bit date. Nevertheless, it's not worthless, so no need to kick it in the creek. It's more like a nostalgia watch, these days. So check it out, if you want to.