Literally vacuous movie

Rating: 1/10 (19 September 2001)

I have often wondered whether I would have been more frightened if I had seen Silence of the Lambs on a full screen rather than on TV, but in any event I was somewhat scared by it (actually, more like shocked, not really frightened). And I was frightened by The Exorcist the first time I saw it, but sort of laughed later at some of the scenes, altho I think it was good. But I was not frightened by this idiotic, silly, and literally vacuous movie that I saw on a full screen.
One thing I do not like in a movie is for nothing to happen, and this is certainly in spades here. Those who are familiar with Cannibal Holocaust know the camera and no faces (and journey into woods/jungle) were not a new idea, and, still, in that movie that was only a partial effect and you saw most of the characters most of the time (I think faces and bodies -- at least some -- are important for a movie). Of course, the characters in Blair Witch were such idiots that it is hardly worth knowing them; the men were jerks and the woman was a complaining and screaming (pun intended) loser. All the interplay between the three was nothing but stupid; it is fitting they lost the map. And the character development was limited to what we had here?
My comment about nothing happening's being an albatross rings particularly true with a "horror" film. If I admit, having not been frightened by the tree etc. events throughout the movie, that I was slightly frightened at the end, so what? The movie is so bad it not only should have been on no magazine covers, it should never have been made.
1 out of 10.