Clever cinematography; very clever marketing

Rating: Null/10 (3 September 1999)

Okay, okay, so it's low-budget. Think about why (just for a second, though--the movie really isn't worth that much thought). Were these two cinema dilettantes millionaires? did they have slick access to millions? No. They had, what? Thirty grand. So they made a movie with what they had. To consider it a stroke of genius that they made something low-budget is to give the filmmakers too much respect; they did what they could with what they had. It was not a choice, but rather a necessity.

That aside, I would like to mention that although easily the most enticing part of the whole show, the pedestrian cinematography and is-it-real-or-is-it-not debate works as much against the movie as it does for it. I found myself picking the movie apart as it progressed, determining for myself the parts that showed it to be just a thirty-thousand pet project. Oh? Piles of stones? Hmmm...verdict? Cheesy! Of course this isn't real! But hey, she looks kinda scared...verdict? Cheesy! Who really swears that much when they really know what they want to say? Of course this movie's a fake! They're searching for their lines amidst massive quantities of vulgar expletives!
Final verdict: This is one for the marketing execs' books, but overall it's a gimmicky piece of crap, and I live in fear of what it may spawn. The Children of the Blair Witch? I guess it's time to start bringing Dramamine to the local multiplex.