At atmosphere, rather than a story

Rating: Null/10 (18 December 1999)

Blair Witch is most effective if you disregard the Hollywood nature of its hype and go in with an open mind. This is not a Hollywood horror film; it is not frightening or tense (or dependent on lovable characters/clever dialogue/smart cinematography) in the traditional way; it's an atmosphere rather than a story.
It reminded me of Tom Stoppard's play 'Rosencranz and Guildenstern are dead,' in that it concentrates on the small, bewildered people who usually form a backdrop to the principal action of a narrative. They're the ones who wander off and vanish mysteriously so that the hero can say, "My God, there's something nasty out there," and go on to deal with it. 'Witch's' characters never come close to dealing with the Thing in the woods. They never even try. They're uncharismatically human.
Yes, the faux-documentary technique has been used in indy films before. Yes, 'Witch' is repetitious and sometimes frustrating. Yes, the last half- to three-quarters of an hour of the film needs a few more ideas, and yes, the editing should have been tighter. In fact, I spent most of the movie thinking, "I'd chop that, I'd make that shorter; I'd hack whole minutes off the end of Heather's scene with the bundle of sticks; nice cut; hey, that's a good moment, was it scripted or spontaneous, I wonder?" - and somehow, none of that detracted from the overall feel of the thing. 'Witch' seeped into my mind and will probably remain there for a very long time.