Blair Witch questions

I admit I just saw it yesterday so this may have been addressed already, and I apologize if so, but I had a couple of questions. I may have just missed something in the movie.

First, if nobody really knows who or what the witch is, and the seven kids were killed in the house and all, how does anybody know they had to stand in the corner??

Second, when the 3 filmmakers decided to walk south and follow the stream, how did they end up at the same log? A round stream? That’s a first for me.

Please enlighten.
Thanks,
SW


www.thecats.com

Ahhh, I do not think that everything in the film was entirely accurate, in fact I would go so far to say that the film makers took some small artistic liberties such as the three student film makers ever going into the woods to make the film at all.


You know, doing what is right is easy. The problem is knowing what is right.

–Lyndon B. Johnson

  1. That’s just one of the MANY plot holes in that stupid movie.

  2. They got turned around because the witch’s magic could make stuff like that happen … Ooooo scary … yet so convenient for the filmmakers, who didn’t even have to walk 100 feet to shoot a new scene.

Say, here’s a Blair Witch question: Who cares?

Isn’t it a fairly well-established proposition that people who are lost without a map tend to walk in circles?


“I love God! He’s so deliciously evil!” - Stewie Griffin, Family Guy

I’m with pldenni. Too often, folks lost in the woods try to navigate by the stars, forgetting that the stars revolve around the earth, and so they walk in circles.

Also, people somewhat more knowledgable in woods-lore look for moths on the north side of trees. But the moths tend to hide out disguised as caterpiggles, who circle the trees counter-clockwise looking for smaller insecks to eat, so people following them also tend to wander in circles.

The best way to find your way home if lost in the woods is to have dropped a trail of poker chips to follow backwards, like in the folktale about Handel and Gristle. That way, when the forest ranger arrests you for littering, AT LEAST YOU’LL BE FOUND.

(( Sorry, incontrollabobble urges sometimes overtake me. ))

In any case, here’s a link to Mailbag article on Blair Witch: http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/mblair.html

I saw part of it last night, I have not seen the entire film. It did seem funny, like MTV’s Real World in the real world. They had no idea what to do in the woods.

They were using a compass to go south. They were crossing the streams, not following one.

If you search, there should be a lot of messages here already about that flick.

Funny how they made so many commercial camera-style parodys of it, as if it wasn’t to be taken seriously.

DISCLAIMER: I liked the movie–I thought it was 100 times better than the crap that mainstream Hollywood comes up with (“I have an idea–what if we cast Bruce Willis/Mel Gibson/Clint Eastwood as the disgruntled loner…and we’ll get a chick who’s at least half his age to be the love interest…”)

  1. Early in the movie, one of the guys in town tells the kids that the guy who murdered the children would make one of the children stand facing the corner while he killed the other one–I guess that was part of his confession when he turned himself in.

  2. It’s not supposed to be “the real world”–it’s supposed to be a creepy movie where, although they try to do what they’re supposed to (follow the stream, head south, although I agree they didn’t do it very well) they end up going in circles.

For what it’s worth, I would guess it sucks on video.

Nah, It’s pretty good on video. I saw it for the first time last night on video. I won’t watch it again. The Canadian writer Mordechai Richler, in his newspaper column last Saturday, referred to Hollywood movies “made for retarded teenagers”. That might explain the stupidity of the characters. The movie makers were being professional. If any of your friends made this movie (and I have a hard time picturing it costing $30,000 to make) you would, rightfully, think they were geniuses.

I haven’t seen a breakdown on the costs, but I get the impression that the bulk of the expense was post-production and promotion. Professional editing equipment is generally very pricy, rented by the hour and they had a ton of material to pour over (the hotel room scene was edited down from an hour and a half of raw footage, for example). Much of the audio had to be given serious treatment, since several scenes were shot in an area where the local airport had a flight going over every 2 minutes. The house at the end had to be completely re-painted, inside and out (it was covered with graffitti when they found it) and the floor had to be reinforced. Etc., etc…

I like Chris Rock’s observation. “That movie cost $64,000 to make? Someone is walking around with $63,000 in his pocket!”


Stephen
Stephen’s Website
Satellite Hunting 1.1.0 visible satellite pass prediction
shareware available for download at
Satellite Hunting

The kids sold their film for $1M.

As it made many times that, I am sure they are kicking themselves & swearing the F word in every other sentence, just like they did in that film…

Way too much F this & F that.