The Blair Witch Project

Starring: Heather Donahue, Michael C. Williams, Joshua Leonard By now everyone knows the story: how these couple of guys on a very low budget dreamed up the mythology of the Blair Witch and the story of a young film crew lost on their documentary shoot about the myth; about how the "lost footage" of the young crew became the movie itself; about how they sent their three actors into the woods with very little scripted instruction, and then ran outside their tent at night making noises just to scare them; about how they used the very internet you are now surfing to get the word out; and about how this micro-budget project became a sensation and made about a jillion dollars. I was amused by "The Blair Witch Project," perhaps even a little excited about it; it had the jolt of something really new, even though these clever guys and gals have parlayed what is essentially a film school assignment into a feature smash, and made virtues of the deliberately low tech, grainy, amateurish look of the picture. It's a stroke of genius, in its way.

No mainstream picture would last thirty seconds on screen with these production values, yet I have never seen a theater full of people so riveted by a totally black screen. (Literally: there are long seconds that go by when you can't see anything at all.) This is a good gimmick, and a good gag. But is it a good movie? Well, it has the frisson of the cutting edge. I enjoyed that aspect; it is definitely the anti-Hollywood picture of the decade, a good antidote to too many failed star vehicles, pallid tear-jerkers, and unfunny comedies. In our favorite parlance, the picture succeeds brilliantly on its own terms, which makes it a good movie despite--or more accurately, because of--it's bad movie-making. And the performers certainly do the job. They do really seem to be scared, hungry, and cold (and apparently they were). You feel lost with them, and you really wish they had brought along a Boy Scout Handbook. The filmmakers do achieve an immediacy--an authenticity--sorely lacking in most major features. On the other hand... And there are lots of other hands. Indeed, there has been a bit of a backlash against the picture by people who would have liked to see a bit more exposition, and, not to put too fine a point on it, story.

As I left the theater I heard more than one person say, "That's it?" Oops. But I can see where they're coming from. The picture is definitely thin in that regard; you could even imagine it a rip-off, if you weren't into the "experimental" aspect. Certainly anyone expecting a conventional horror movie will be disappointed, if not actually annoyed. The movie isn't really that scary (except for a few quick jolts). The reports of people who totally freaked out on it, or who are afraid to go into the woods after seeing it, lead me to suspect that they must have been highly suggestible individuals--or shills. The picture does, however, make good use of the unseen quality of the best terror. Very slyly, it gives little away, allowing our own imaginations to do most of the heavy lifting. It is moody and atmospheric, and gets under your skin as you watch, though, in my case anyway, it evaporated the minute I walked out the door of the theater. I had to admire the craft of the picture, and the concept, but as I watched, I could never quite get past the awareness that I was seeing a well-crafted concept. That may be enough for me, but it won't be enough for everyone, though millions of people have paid eight bucks to find out if it is. As I said, very clever. (2/19/00)