Ask someone who was at the Comic Con screening anything. The only things I won't answer are anything about the ending and major plot twist.
But anything about quality, production, plot, general goodness of it are all on the table. I just want to say that it's good. It's better than you'd expect it to be.
How much do you get paid to do these threads
I don't, but I just found the movie to be really interesting and I wanted to do a Q&A about it. Everyone was really skeptical about the use of the found footage format in yet another film, but I was suprised at how good it actually was. I'm still looking forward to seeing "Don't Breathe" and comparing the two.
>he doesn't know about the filmography of Adam Wingard
Look at him. Look at him and laugh.
Is the witch herself shown in any capacity? Even for a split second.
there are already spoilers online, we don't need this miral varketing
>he STILL doesn't know about the filmography of Adam Wingard
It just doesn't stop being funny!
Yes, 3 times. One is a direct CGI (albeit good CGI) shot, the other two are blurry and one of which I'll hint you've already seen in the trailers.
It's a way better monster than you think it's going to be as well. Really accurate and not something like a cheesy Smile Dog jpg rip off.
Is it Found Footage
Do you see the fucking Witch?
I made this thread BECAUSE I'm a big fan of Wingard and his take on modern horror. I think that fans will be really satisfied with his take on the mythology and lore. He puts a lot of effort into giving it that comfy feel of watching the original for the first time while also making the footage quality watchable.
It is, but he takes a lot of time making sure the characters set up tripods (especially in the earlier scenes) to ensure you're not sea sick in the first 12 minutes like the first one. He also puts effort into showing how the tech has evolved since 1994. So even though it is found footage, it feels a lot more pleasant to watch.
And yes they do show the witch. Thankfully she's not over used because I feel like that would have killed it like Lights Out.
How does it compare to his other films?
How would you rank You're Next, The Guest, and this movie against each other?
Do you have to watch the first Blair Witch to understand it? I'd like to be able to show this movie to people without making them watch a 20 year old movie filmed on a potato.
You're Next and the Guest are objectively better films in my personal opinion, but only because it's original source material.
This is a really good sequel. It's on par with the original in every way, so how much you like this will depend on your opinion of the original. I personally really liked BWP, so I thought this was a really good horror movie that upped the suspense and the danger a lot more without making it cheesy.
Yes and no. This could be a really good stand alone film were it not for the tie that the lead guy has to Heather. That's not for no reason and we see a lot of the original movie's scenes get called back in one way or another. However, there's an entire scene where two characters discuss what happened in the first film, so it's not like you HAVE to watch the original.
Haven't seen The Guest but rest of his shit is painfully average
I also forgot to mention that the standard Wingard gore factor comes back. It's not just that one scene in the first one where Heather finds a basket of meat and clothing and cries for an hour. We see some real shit happen.
I saw Don't Breathe tonight. What possible comparison could be made?
Blair Witch: Fool Me Once looks like steaming shit.
Well what a coincidence I did too.
But that being said, I have to say that Don't Breathe was more successful in the suspense department. Blair Witch is scary, but in the "this is hopeless" category. You have something to route for in Don't Breathe, but in Blair Witch you're just gripping your arm rest till the end. It is a very claustrophobic movie that has some pretty mind fuck heavy stuff. I walked out of Don't Breathe content with the ending and feeling like I got off of a rollercoaster, but I walked out of Blair Witch cold sweating through my shirt and ready to vomit.
So, they show the witch but it's CGI?
DROPPED
Jesus, look at this kid
It's not completely CGI like the god awful Lights Out monster, but practical effects only go so far when you're working with arm stretching. She just looks like a feral, old women who spent too much time alone in the woods. However, the backstory says she died by getting her arms tied to rocks and being literally stretched to death, so there's elements of that. NOT slenderman like in any way shape or form btw.
Well, what a coincidence, you smug twat. The Blair Witch Project also made me want to vomit. No need to sit through a sequel, even if it's "better" than the first.
obvious shill
Thanks for the thread, OP.
I was a little dishearten when I found out it's a direct sequel to the blair witch and not something else entirely.
But this might be cool