MovieChat Forums > Blair Witch (2016) Discussion > Not great, but will always be better tha...

Not great, but will always be better than the original


The movie was not the best, but you can not compare to the trashy original!

reply

It's precisely the trashy visuals of the original that appeals to some people. It's like comparing a home brew beer to Budweiser. The first might be a little bit rough around the edge, but has a robust taste and you can tell it's made by someone with passion for what they're doing. The second is tepid, watered down and designed to appeal to the non-discerning public.

reply

That's a brilliant analogy.

reply

I agree. Lets nominate lunchboxattacks as The New Great Leader For Life. All in favor raise your home brew.

reply

By "trashy" I think you mean "realistic." At least the original film captured something semi-raw and relatable. This film was no different than any found footage horror of the last decade. It wasn't a bad movie per se, but it can't even touch the original.

reply

It wasn't a bad movie per se


Sure, it is.

reply

I guess it depends on your definition of "bad." I didn't think it was "bad" as in unwatchable, but it was bad in the sense that it was painfully predictable and phoned in just about every post-2000 found footage horror trope. I thought it was amusing in spite of this, though fairly uninteresting overall.

reply

It's definitely not the worst film ever and certainly not unwatchable, but I'd definitely label it on the upper side of bad. Largely it's a script, possibly editing, problem. The pacing is atrocious. Too much time wasted on things that ultimately went nowhere. The acting isn't too bad, the players just don't have anything to work with.

It's not The Sighting bad, but it ain't good.

reply

better.. ROFL

reply

There is no way in hell this mediocre movie will ever come close to being comparable to the greatness of the original.

reply