I just cannot understand why anyone likes this film. The whole premise of 'found footage' genre is flawed, for example, would you still be holding a camera and filming if you were running away from someone or something? One other film that uses this genre is Cloverfield and I cannot get over the fact that you would be fleeing from a so called monster (that you never really see properly by the way) and still filming! Think about it - would you really be doing this? Also, surely the whole point of cinema is photography, how things look, putting images on screen, with The Blair Witch Project most of the film is in darkness, you can hardly see anything most of the time, what is the point of film in this case? If the screaming and whining is scary (I just think it is highly annoying) to you, it might as well have been broadcast on the radio. One of the other reviewers stated that without BWP there would not be other found footage films, this is probably true, but that is nothing to be celebrated! The only one of the found footage genre that I find remotely scary is Paranormal Activity and I think that in this case it works, because the scary in this film is supposed to be a ghost, something we can't necessarily see, and there are static cameras around the house, which you may have in your home for security reasons, this makes the premise all the more acceptable and believable. The cameras just happen to 'catch' or 'capture' unusual events or happenings as they occur. I must admit I was scared by these movies and the addition of times and dates made the films seem more real like it had actually happened. I am not knocking BWP for being low budget, there have been plenty of excellent low budget movies over the years, eg I don't think Jaws or Halloween had very big budgets, BUT I would like something to see for my money! Personally I think people fell for the hype, it was a very clever marketing ploy by the makers of this film to pretend that the Blair Witch legend was real and even that the found footage was 'real' and not a movie at all, more of a documentary! Please do not remake this film in 10 or 20 years time, once was enough!
Reviews
2 Reviews
Anna Karenina
(2000– )
Good Performances in this Version
27 November 2013
This was the first version of Anna Karenina that I saw and apart from the 'shaky camera' direction which seems to be in fashion these days it is a really good version.
Kevin McKidd and Helen McCrory are excellent and give it their all in this tale of passion and love. It made me become a fan of both actors and seek out films with them in.
All in all a good version, with the themes of the story, lust, love and passion coming through very strongly. I seem to remember this was shown in 3 or 4 parts over as many weeks and I could not wait to see the next part every week, a sign of good drama!
Watch it and see if you agree.
Kevin McKidd and Helen McCrory are excellent and give it their all in this tale of passion and love. It made me become a fan of both actors and seek out films with them in.
All in all a good version, with the themes of the story, lust, love and passion coming through very strongly. I seem to remember this was shown in 3 or 4 parts over as many weeks and I could not wait to see the next part every week, a sign of good drama!
Watch it and see if you agree.
Tell Your Friends