> I've finally seen the Blair Witch Project, and while I'm not going to rave over it and call it the best movie of the year, I do think it's a masterful accomplishment. In any case, the criticisms some people are making of it in the reviews we've been getting are maddeningly and obviously flawed. One was simply that it was cheaply made. What the heck does that have to do with anything? If anything, the "cheap" way in which it was shot was to the movie's credit -- you certainly wouldn't have students tromping around in the woods with million dollar cameras. I just don't get it.

Frankly, I didn't like the movie. I DID like the 'found documentary footage' concept, I just wish that the director(s) would have done it slightly differently. If these were real kids out doing this project that they had done extensive research on, they would have been a little more determined to leave the woods before dark. I'll give them the first night. After driving up there, hiking in, and shooting their footage, by the time they get lost it's probably getting late. However, the next day, they have ALL day to simply get out of the woods, yet they spend a huge amount of time sitting around arguing unproductively. It was frustrating as the viewer trying to believe in something scary, yet the only reinforcement from the characters was undermined by their own apathy to actually keep moving. The subsequent days of still being lost only compiled this feeling.

I wanted to be scared. I was ready to be scared. I was told that I would be scared. Nothing made me scared.

It didn't live up to that promise for me. It had the potential to really be a fantastic film and knock Hollywood on it's $100,000,000-per-film buttock, but something got lost somewhere.

Tra "my 2 cents" nio