Ain't It Cool News (


About a week ago I received a call from a publicist at Artisan saying that they wanted to set up a screening of BOOK OF SHADOWS: BLAIR WITCH 2 for me today, Sunday, and they were going to bring Joe Berlinger in to talk to me as well. And they asked if I was open to this.

Well, this was a proverbial bag of worms. My history with THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT is well documented... Many attach me and AICN with some level of the success of the first film. Some people don’t trust my opinion on the first film because I loved it so much... But what some of these people never understood was that the original BLAIR WITCH PROJECT was never a film that was meant to be as BIG a release as it wound up getting.

A film like the original, is on the surface this wonderfully amateurish seeming Art house fare that has the basic mythos concept that deserves to be picked up for a larger more professional film. But as someone that loves Art House films, experimental cinema and old style William Castle promotion and P.T. Barnum showmanship... I loved the first film and the whole experience that went with it.

At the same time, since then I’ve had conversations with horror filmmakers that have loved it (William Friedkin) and really really didn’t like it (John Carpenter) and well... I’m unswayed... I still like the first film.

BUT... The second film... all of the hype following the original has created an air where we WANT and NEED to hate a sequel.

When Artisan announced they were going to make a modern day followup film to the events that occurred in the first film... I gagged. Horrible fucking idea.

Then they attached Joe Berlinger. Great idea.

So I was at a weird place for this film. Everything about the concept that I could glean from the publicity and pre-release materials and trailers were saying PIECE OF FUCKING SHIT.

And then there was Joe Berlinger, who has made 3 of the absolute most journalistically sound and brilliant documentaries that had not only great stories, but through the filming and pacing... were actually chilling, haunting and really... quite scary.

Now, having experienced the terrible marketing of WAY OF THE GUN by Artisan earlier this year... I completely discounted the SCREAM/I KNOW WHAT YOU DID/URBAN LEGEND style trailer that I saw... Even though... the mere appearance of Goth Chick made it seem as though... the only place this film was going was into the sewer that would take EXORCIST II: THE HERETIC and PIRANHA II: THE SPAWNING and SCARLET: THE MINISERIES.

Well... let me tell you where I was when I saw this film this morning....

I woke up early this morning and saw a fantastic indie film called ABCD that I’m going to be presenting at the AUSTIN FILM FESTIVAL tomorrow, MONDAY, and I was getting set to go to a comic/memorabilia convention to buy some posters and then to the film festival when all of the sudden... THE PHONE RANG...

Caller ID registered the identity to: Glen Oliver. Oh good, what did Glen want?


“Harry?” Glen said.

“Ummm, yeah.”

“Uh, I thought you were going to see BLAIR WIT...”


So I grab a shirt, slip on shoes no socks... and run towards the living room screaming for dad to get going.

“Come on... we’re late for BW2!!!”

“No we aren’t... that’s on Sunday!” Father Geek says.

We lock eyes.

“Oh Shit,” he says grabbing his keys, slipping on the shoes and we’re on our way laughing at how fucked up our sense of time and space are given the schedule of the film festival and such.

We get to the theater about 10 minutes late... spilling out apologies... and Glen, Dad and I head into this empty theater to watch the film alone.


I know that many of you are going to believe... no matter what I say that Artisan or Berlinger slipped me 3 gold bars from Fort Knox, but... I really loved the film.

First... This is not BLAIR WITCH PROJECT 2: SHAKYCAM BOOGALOO. At many many levels this isn’t even near the same universe or genre or whatever ya wanna call the first film.

BW2 should not be compared to the first film... nor should it be included in sentences with the first film. It is... that much... A different film.

The first film that comes to mind to compare it to in my mind would have to be Robert Wise’s THE HAUNTING. Now, while I had fun with Jan De Bont’s rollercoaster remake... even though I fully acknowledge the addle-mindedness of the intelligence of that film... I do feel this is closer in form to that except that it’s set nearly 40 years later and is made 40 years later and exists in a different stylistic world than the world that existed in 1963. Also there is an entire extra layer put down atop BW2 that THE HAUNTING doesn’t have...

Imagine, if after what had happened at Hill House, if there had been a police investigation... and if Dr Markway, Luke and Theodora had to explain to the police what they experienced in the house... but in addition the police had a different story via film and audio recording devices that witnessed the entire events.

Without too much spoilers being in place... that is the type of intelligence at work here. Berlinger has crafted a film that is extremely intelligent... that is less scary as it is disturbing and unsettling... and ultimately leaves you with the ability to have two distinct feelings about what happened. Psychological or Supernatural... you decide. He merely shows you the perception and then the perceived reality of video... but of course... if you believe in the supernatural... reality of video... just doesn’t exist.

Before I go any further... I have to say... The following is going to head into deep spoiler territory, so you may very well want to run screaming into the hills armed solely with the knowledge that Berlinger has made a film that you folks that hated the first film will find intelligent, spooky, well-crafted and good if you approach it with an open mind. And you folks that loved the first film... well he advances, comments, acknowledges and pays tribute to the power of the mythology that the first film created.. while also commenting and satirizing not only the fandom and fanaticism that erupted around the first film, but also takes on and comments upon the perceived influence of the whole Violence in Art affecting Reality and Youth... and makes something unique, different and good enough to stand completely apart and away from the first film.

Now... go away... I’m going to discuss spoilers and character profiles and all sorts of deeper material at play here in BLAIR WITCH 2....


First off, there are two formats that we see in this film. Video and 35mm Film.

When watching and rewatching the film, notice the absolute intelligence that Berlinger uses when going between these two.

It was my belief (confirmed afterwards by Berlinger) that the 35 mm film footage is the perceived memory of the events that led up to present in the film. And that the video/dv footage was in fact reality as seen through the unchanging eye of the video camera, which is unswayable by delusion or hysteria or drugs or alcohol or suggestion.

Nearly the entire film is a flashback... with moments of the current time and suppressed memories speckling about like the remnants of some sort of bizarre nightmare delusion.

You see... at its heart the film is a tale about these 5 people that go off in the Black Hills outside BURKITSVILLE, MARYLAND to explore and indulge their obsession with the whole post BLAIR WITCH PROJECT hysteria regarding the movie and the mania that swept the country last year.

The film acknowledges that the first movie was a fiction, a creation and even thumbs its nose at all of that hysteria.

HOWEVER, where this movie goes and what it explores with a great deal of skill and intelligence is the group paranoia and hysteria that can come about through isolation, alcohol and drug abuse as well as the injection of mild insanity, conflict and psychologically unsound people.

You see.... Here’s the cast...

First up is Jeff Patterson. He’s an uninsane person. Ya see, he was committed and locked up in an institute for the treatment of the mentally unstable... But... He’s... ahem... all better now. Upon his release and fanatical love for the film, THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT, he assembled a entrepreneurial venture of selling ‘Blair Witch’ artifacts on EBAY while also offering BLAIR WITCH HUNT tours up into the Black Hills to tour such hot locations as Coffin Rock and Rusty Parr’s alleged home remnants.

Next is Kim Diamond, the goth chick. The mere inclusion of her in the trailer sent up all my red flags and beliefs that this film had HAD to be awful. However, in the formation of the group dramatically it was not only important to have her, but absolutely integral. You see, besides being the archetype Goth Chick... she’s also your friend that believes herself psychic... though in reality she’s really good a reading subtle behavior and body postures... while also having the intelligence to make the connections and make the next logical step while telling the person she’s a psychic... though really, she’s a study of human nature that has self deluded herself into believing otherwise. She’s perfect to have onto this group because... well... A Goth chick would go on a tour like this.

Onto Erica Geerson. Besides being absolutely the most adorably cute doable chick I’ve seen on film in quite some time... She’s Wiccan... meaning she’s one of those folks that believe in the whole.. animal, vegetable, mineral spirit thing... dance around naked, be peace, love and happiness embodied and so on and so on.

Then there is the couple, Stephen Parker and Tristen Ryler, who are on board as researchers for a book they are writing called BLAIR WITCH: HYSTERIA OR HISTORY. Stephen is a cynic and believes that hysteria and mania is feeding the popularity and sudden belief by those that really do believe in BLAIR WITCH stuff... and his girlfriend Tristen, who’s six weeks pregnant with his child, is a complete believer in that perception is reality and that the two are not separate because if you perceive something to be real.... then it is in fact real.

Now... The danger with this group is basically this... You are looking at a formula for probable disaster. You have 5 people... who left to their own devices... separate and not in those woods... would probably just be fine and ok. BUT... when you have 4 people being led by someone who has serious mental issues but believes he is cured.... that has someone believing absolutely that their perceptions are psychic truths... and then you have a Wiccan who is casting her little spells and is very touchy touchy friendly friendly... and then the provocateurs of the group that are feeding directly into all of this with their own non-professional theories and beliefs... And then you isolate... introduce drugs and serious alcohol abuse.... while directly getting into the whole Blair Witch methodology... well... you’ll see.

What is even more interesting though... is Berlinger’s handling of giving these guys footage that speaks completely of the truth... but when seen by people that are feeding their own paranoia... the truth is analyzed as being further evidence of WITCHCRAFT AND SUPERNATURAL as... well how else can you explain them doing what they’re doing... and they’re too entrenched in their own insecurities to believe THEY COULD’VE DONE THESE THINGS... so they create delusions and visions to excuse what they’ve done... and refuse to accept the videos as truth...

Have you ever seen the news... ever seen one of those deals where you see kids being arrested for having killed a couple of friends... and they claim the devil made em do it... and that they were doing witchcraft and they were possessed and have no memory of doing said horrible thing?

Well... this movie is Berlinger’s examination of that phenomenon as tied to the Blair Witch Project.

All the flashes of gore, dreams of damage... those are moments in the characters’ minds remembering what they had done. But they are only flashes and unfamiliar and alien to them because THEY DON’T REMEMBER doing it and have suppressed and buried these memories.

This is real. This happens. People convince themselves and delude themselves into believing their own lies to a point that their stories become perceived reality.

Now the characters are not particularly deep because they are archetypes.... You instantly know these types... and therefore you understand them instantly.. and it is disturbing as can be when what happens happens.

Does Berlinger cheat? Meaning... does he ever throw us something that you can point at and say... LOOK... THERE’S THE BLAIR WITCH!!!! LOOKIE LOOKIE LOOKIE!!!

Ya know, I thought for a second he had. The video from out on their camping trip is damaged after being buried and banged around... well it’s a bit shoddy... a convenience I’ll give you... but not beyond the realm of believability in the natural suspension of disbelief... but there is one flash that in a Rorschach split second seems to be something that SHOULDN’T BE THERE... but... it is a Rorschach jumble... that is instantly commented upon by one of the deluded... and in afterthought, I’m curious to freeze frame on it myself to check. But the comment by the person is actually a window into his own psyche and hazy memory of what happened that night. And the more I think about this moment... the more I really dig it.

Now on an aesthetic level... the film is lovely to look at and not at all the wild running with the camera through the woods stuff of the first film. There is no over-exposed foggy lens moments... This is a professional film being directed by a person that’s documentary background provided him with an insight to the type of characters and events that take place in the film.

This film, I believe, is being terribly mismarketed as being pabulum for the SCREAM crowd... Beginning two months ago this should have been being shown.. including at Toronto with Joe in attendance... Now, they are screening it for people around the country... that might help some of the damage that the trailers have done. This isn’t horror... it is psychological suspense akin to Wise’s THE HAUNTING and that ol William Shatner TWILIGHT ZONE episode with the Devil fortune machine (gosh blast it... can’t remember the episode title)...

After the film Glen came down from the back of the theater... looked me in the face and said... “That isn’t the film it’s being made out to be!” Glen liked it, he felt there were a couple of places where it had pacing problems... But when I countered with... for this sort of psychological suspense... you sort of need those spaces where it seems long to give you the sense of isolation and forboding sense of doom... Well Glen did seem to agree. Look for his review sometime soon over at Film Force.

Dad and I then had to drive over and talk with Joe Berlinger over lunch... and I had a surprise for him. You see, Berlinger believed I wasn’t going to like the film. He had a feeling an intuition. He had called me a couple of days ago and from that talk I sensed hesitation in his desire to come here.

When I met him, I could instantly feel his eyes searching my face for a sign as to whether or not I liked his film. We were at this Oriental restaurant out North, here in Austin, called P.F. CHANG’S, I believe.

When I told him... his face relaxed and you could see this entire sense of exasperation flow away from him. I was fascinated to find why... having made such a wonderful film... he felt that I would hate it or not like it. And basically... it came down to the fact that on the site, I was saying things like, “I’ve got a baaaaaad feeling about this!”

I laughed and said, “Oh.. I understand that completely. I mean sure I was saying... ‘Even though I have a baaaaad feeling I’m going in with an open mind,’ I could see how you would think... ‘Yeah right, he’s out to crucify me’”

My first question to him was where the hell did the whole BOOK OF SHADOW thing have to do with anything.

His answer? Well, it was about 20 minutes... but had a lot to do with a combination of Wiccan Diaries, the shadow existence the character create for themselves and the stories they tell. Personally whether it is true or not... I will always believe that some Exec somewhere came up with it and Joe’s just interpreting it as best as he can... but who knows... maybe it really did come from there... but unfortunately alot of people will leave the film saying...

“Where was the fucking BOOK OF SHADOWS?”

And they won’t listen for 20 minutes while Joe explains the symbolic and mythic nature and subtext to the characters that the film stands for... However, if you do enough reading about the film after the press junket in Los Angeles tomorrow... I’m sure you’ll hear plenty.

Now... while this isn’t part of the review, I can tell you that Berlinger has two immediate projects that he’s working and developing at ARTISAN right now... One is a remake of THE WICKER MAN (which is one of the great cult classics which everyone should be familiar with... go rent it) and another film based on a true story about a man that... well, I’ll keep that one for later... hehehe...

The bottom line here is that while I personally don’t like the film as much as say... Wise’s THE HAUNTING... I do very much love this movie. What keeps it from that type of quality is 1. I prefer the period of THE HAUNTING. 2. There is a certain ease and serenity to that film that is just magical and lyrical that is missing here. And lastly 3. That house was a better set.

Berlinger is a filmmaker that we need to keep an eye on. He made the film that I was hoping he could make when his name was very first attached to the project... and he very deftly steered clear of all of my fears that could’ve torpedoed this film instantly.

Remember, walk in with an open mind.... the idea that you at least want to like the film and the movie will surprise you quite a bit. It is intelligent and smart filmmaking deserving of your attention and time.

Now begin calling me names...

Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:12 a.m. CST

    I'm converted

    by jsp2000

    I wasn't excited about this movie AT ALL until I read a couple of reviews, (including this one) and the article in this weeks EW about it. Before everyone starts slamming on the movie, I'd like to say I think it sounds pretty decent, and I didn't like BW1.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:19 a.m. CST

    Tabula Rasa (did I spell that wrong?)

    by Robin Goodfellow

    Ok, ok, ok... now we've got good reviews and bad ones. I'm going into this movie with a clean slate and gonna judge it for what it is. Wish I hadn't missed the San Diego promo screening on the 11th or something. Damn my inability to remember things. Looks like I too share in Harry's warped sense of time. Ah well. I guess now my greatest fears about the quality or lack thereof may just be the "goofy sequel jitters" that I get more often these days. Hope it's as good as some of these folks say. Laters and goofy sequel jitters to all

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:33 a.m. CST

    I'm curious.... Will we be welcoming Artisan/Haxan sponsored PR

    by Alexandra.DuPont

    ... for we, the AICN Talk Back regulars, stand vigilant! And I might add that I ask this question independent of my opinion of the first "Blair Witch" film -- which I quite enjoyed (on video), DESPITE the brazen manipulative efforts of last year's Hotmail-abusing, self-promoting plants. (Remember all those "scariest movie EVER" posts addled with exclamation points?) **** A memorandum to Artisan: Fanboys and -girls didn't resent the "Blair Witch 1" narrative gimmick -- they resented the manipulative MARKETING of that narrative gimmick. Hopefully, you'll be above-board in your promotional efforts this time around. **** And so: Will I partake of "Blair Witch 2"? Most assuredly. Do I need to be cattle-prodded into it by false declarations of "masterpiece"? Certainly not. Best of luck, Mr. Berlinger. Sounds like you've earned a break.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:35 a.m. CST

    So its not crap... ok

    by alpha

    I liked the first film but like most everyone else cringed at thoughts of a sequel. Two reviewers have now come back kind of suprised that its actually pretty good and it sounds like they have gone the Aliens rote by basically making a totally different style of film with some connection to the first one retained which is probably the best way to make a sequel to something so quirky as BW. By the way the Harry Sound of Music animation is too disturbing for words.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:36 a.m. CST

    F.I.R.S.T.!!(For I would Really like to See This!!)

    by DarthShaggy

    Harry's review puts a positive spin on what otherwise , the trailer makes it look like a garbage dump of a movie . Really looking forward to this one. Hope that the DV doesn't look to shoddy or compressed.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:54 a.m. CST

    well fuck me gently with a chainsaw

    by lester_long

    I have serious doubts about this but I alsow have had high hopes. I am anxious to see this now

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:55 a.m. CST

    THANK GOD!!! A ray of light through the dark clouds that were m

    by Psyclops

    What a relief! I absolutely loved the original and had my doubts about the sequel but... THANK GOD!! I really want to like this movie and since I usually agree with webmaster Knowles... I'm rushing to the theater on October 27th. Thank you Harry for making my day! Thank you Joe Berlinger for giving me hope! Thank you Artisan for not fucking up! Thank you talkbackers for not yelling "First"! Now I can relax and enjoy the film without having to fear ultimate failure. The witch lives on!

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 3:21 a.m. CST

    Horror movies!

    by Psyclops

    I'm wondering how Artisan will market this baby, I haven't really seen any commercial ads on TV or anything on radio for that matter. How's this... show more of Erica Leershan... naked! Anyway, I'm going to promote my website now... feel free to roll your eyes and scroll down to the next insightful talkback: --I've just posted some info on horror movie revival screenings in the Southern California area including Friday the 13th in 3-D! The Fly! Cujo! and one of my personal favorites... Fright Night! See you at the movies!

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 3:41 a.m. CST

    BW2 and Really good horror films...


    Hellknight here! Just a few words on this whole BW2 thing. I just finished watching "THE WICKER MAN", and must say that that was a stand-out piece of excellent movie-making... I can't see how a remake could top it, but who knows? Anyway, BW was, in my humble opinion, a decent and quasi-unique film that shocks and disturbs more out of the atmosphere of realism and panic it created, than anything genuinely frightening. However, I can't say that this was either fully unique or original. Tobe Hooper created a similar atmosphere with a little film called "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", and I found it more disturbing than BW any day, despite its darkly humorous overtones. Sam Rami's "The Evil Dead" also managed to be tons scarier, and both films had a definite "you are there"/documentary feel. Also, I have just recently learned of a film called "The Last Broadcast" (thanks, AICN!), apparently made even before BW ever came out! The web-site for this film also features a detailed description of events surrounding the film, so realistically presented that I still am not sure if there was ever actually such a case! ( I am assuming not.) My point is, I enjoyed BW and will likely see BW2, but the ridiculous hype and post-release huzzahs have greatly diminshed my ability to appreciate the film. Simply put: It was good, but not GREAT. For those who want real horror and suspense, check out Bob Clark's "BLACK CHRISTMAS": the first true "slasher-flick" ever made, and uniquely creepy in that YOU NEVER SEE THE KILLER. EVER. Not to mention the "Oh, Crap!!" ending! And of course, "KOLOBOS" still stands for me as one of the most unsettling, brutal fright-flicks I have ever seen. Not for the meek and weak. By the way, watched "Hellraiser 5: Inferno', and thought it an interesting "film-noir"-ish detective-mystery with a little cenobite fun thrown in for kicks. Not Great, but watchable. reminds me more of the "Hellraiser" anthology-comic published by Marvel/Epic comics back in the early, early 90's. My fave of the series is still "Hellraiser 4: Hell on Earth", just because it allows Pinhead to "cut loose" and be a really pointless, murdering asshole. "Some people have a strange idea of entertainment..."-Friday the 13th, part 5, I believe. Anyway, thanks for listening, and check out "KOLOBOS", "THE WICKER MAN", "BLACK CHRISTMAS", and a great homage to Fulci/Argonte/Romero called "THE DEAD HATE THE LIVING"... "Make them die... slowly." Later, kiddiees!-Hellknight:)

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 3:44 a.m. CST

    BW2 and Really good horror films...


    Hellknight here! Just a few words on this whole BW2 thing. I just finished watching "THE WICKER MAN", and must say that that was a stand-out piece of excellent movie-making... I can't see how a remake could top it, but who knows? Anyway, BW was, in my humble opinion, a decent and quasi-unique film that shocks and disturbs more out of the atmosphere of realism and panic it created, than anything genuinely frightening. However, I can't say that this was either fully unique or original. Tobe Hooper created a similar atmosphere with a little film called "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre", and I found it more disturbing than BW any day, despite its darkly humorous overtones. Sam Rami's "The Evil Dead" also managed to be tons scarier, and both films had a definite "you are there"/documentary feel. Also, I have just recently learned of a film called "The Last Broadcast" (thanks, AICN!), apparently made even before BW ever came out! The web-site for this film also features a detailed description of events surrounding the film, so realistically presented that I still am not sure if there was ever actually such a case! ( I am assuming not.) My point is, I enjoyed BW and will likely see BW2, but the ridiculous hype and post-release huzzahs have greatly diminshed my ability to appreciate the film. Simply put: It was good, but not GREAT. For those who want real horror and suspense, check out Bob Clark's "BLACK CHRISTMAS": the first true "slasher-flick" ever made, and uniquely creepy in that YOU NEVER SEE THE KILLER. EVER. Not to mention the "Oh, Crap!!" ending! And of course, "KOLOBOS" still stands for me as one of the most unsettling, brutal fright-flicks I have ever seen. Not for the meek and weak. By the way, watched "Hellraiser 5: Inferno', and thought it an interesting "film-noir"-ish detective-mystery with a little cenobite fun thrown in for kicks. Not Great, but watchable. reminds me more of the "Hellraiser" anthology-comic published by Marvel/Epic comics back in the early, early 90's. My fave of the series is still "Hellraiser 3: Hell on Earth", just because it allows Pinhead to "cut loose" and be a really pointless, murdering asshole. "Some people have a strange idea of entertainment..."-Friday the 13th, part 5, I believe. Anyway, thanks for listening, and check out "KOLOBOS", "THE WICKER MAN", "BLACK CHRISTMAS", and a great homage to Fulci/Argonte/Romero called "THE DEAD HATE THE LIVING"... "Make them die... slowly." Later, kiddiees!-Hellknight:)

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 4:06 a.m. CST


    by *veers*

    Even if did come out before BW it is a far inferior film, lacking the depth & intellgence that BW possessed so much of. Trust everyone avoid it at all costs. Oh and the ending is godawful.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 4:51 a.m. CST

    That quote was from Friday the 13th part VI: Jason Lives...

    by Psyclops

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 5:23 a.m. CST

    "less scary as it is disturbing and unsettling"

    by SDG

    I don't know about anybody else, but this exactly sums up my feelings about the original BLAIR WITCH movie -- which I liked well enough.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 6:05 a.m. CST

    Harry 'tha playa' Knowles

    by Morningwood

    Blind item: According to sources, a certain famous actors girlfriend was 'putting major moves on Harry tha playa' in LA recently. sources: Harry Knowles.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 6:28 a.m. CST

    That Shatner TZ episode was called "Nick of Time", I think

    by Veidt

    Classic episode. And this review of BW2 is great news if it's even in the ballpark of how most fans will feel about this movie. I'm still going in with mid-level expectations but I'm hoping my impressions of the movie are as positive as Harry's.

  • As Alexandra DuPont noted, the first "Blair Witch" was seriously oversold as the "scariest movie ever", but I still found many, many merits to it. It's creepy, spontaneously funny, grim, and yes, o doubters, flawlessly acted. But most of its power, of course, derives from its novelty value. No crime in that at all, it just means that the sequel would necessarily have to be very different. Now I'm not sure a sequel should even exist to a film that by its very nature is a novelty, but it sound like "BW2" just might stand on its own merits. If true, that's pretty cool. Anyway, I've snagged a free pass for an advance screening on Wednesday, so I guess I'll know what's what soon enough...

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 7:29 a.m. CST

    Psyclops, you rule!!!

    by Mr_Sinister

    Ya know why? Because you like FRIGHT NIGHT! That film is awesome! Who can forget the typical 80s music? And Jerry Dandridge is one of the coolest vampires ever. "SLOWWWWWWWW". But really, Evil was just the best: "Oh look, she left a note...MMMMM MMMMM, his dinner, is in, THE OVEN! RAAAH!"

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 8:36 a.m. CST

    Harry, Harry, Harry...???

    by MrWhite_1

    I wonder what Harry enjoys more, reviewing movies or talking about Harry..???

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 8:45 a.m. CST

    Harry, a question...

    by Vincent D.

    Okay, Harry, I respect your viewpoint, as it has lead me to seee some great films since I've read this site. I have one question, something I really hope you will tack onto your review. As a Wiccan, I am catious about this film, both because of it's title (I mean, how would people react to BW2: The Torah?) and because of the Wiccan character. Witchraft/mytical witches have been used in horror/suspence before, often to great effect, and Wiccans in general tend to accept this, as most recognize the witchcraft has cultural connotations that will always remain fictional. In this film, however, they aren't just using "a witch" or some type of supernatural entity that is given that catch-all term. They actually use the term Wiccan. A character assosiates herself with it. So now, this does take a level of importance for Wiccans. So, Harry, on the religious-defaming scale of 1 to 10, one being "Maus" and 10 a sermon, where would you rate this film?

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 8:54 a.m. CST

    Three gold bars from Fort Knox...?

    by Feudal Fetus

    Harry would never give a film a good review for three gold bars. We all know Harry has reached such a level of fame that Fort Knox would gladly let him walk in and take what ever he wanted. (But what did Artisan bribe him with...?)

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9 a.m. CST

    Harry, what the hell is an Oriental restaurant?

    by devil0509

    I've never been quite sure where the Orient is. As far as I know, there is no group of people in this world that refer to themselves as Orientals, or Orientians, or Orientas. Oh, wait, you must be falling into that ignorant white boy routine of refering to East and Southeast Asia, an area encompassing billions of different people with dozens of different cultures, NONE of which refer to themselves as the Orient, as Oriental. Maybe you meant Asian. Of course, I have yet to find an Asian food restaurant. You'll have to tell me the location, because I'd love to go to a restaurant with a menu featuring the various wonders of Korean, Mandarin, Cantonese, Japanese, Mongolian, Vietnamese, Thai, Burmese, Etc etc etc cuisine all in one roof. Sounds yummy. Hadn't pegged you for a redneck, Harry.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:26 a.m. CST

    Nice pink panties, Harry!!

    by thebigham

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:26 a.m. CST

    Re: Orient and Whoop-De-Do

    by Vincent D.

    First, if I'm not mistaken, Oriental is an anthropological term for a mystified and glorified alien object or culture. (At least, that's how they used in in my Folklore 307 class) Any type of culture can be "Orientalized" by another culture. It's been used on the Middle East, Southeast Asia, hell, even on the Hip-Hop Graffiti culture of the Eighties. (Yes, I'm paraphrasing, if anyone has a better explanation, please feel free.) Now, UncleFuka, congratulations on relvealing facts that around 99% of Wiccans already know. I am not, nor did I ever, claim that Wicca is in any way ancient. I'm simply asking for how someone who is labeled a Wiccan (a modern one) is portrayed in this film.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:36 a.m. CST

    I'd just like to see a scary movie. Is that too much to ask?

    by ziranova

    I'm happy to read that Harry liked BW2 and disappointed to learn that it's not a horror film. I'm glad to know that in advance so that I can go in with an open mind. Word to Ms. Dupont: I didn't resent the manipulative marketing of BW1, I just thought it was a crappy movie.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:40 a.m. CST


    by mrcbear

    Devil 0509, A slip of the rhetorical tongue does not (necessarily) a redneck make. The point would've been better made with the pertinent info, minus the name-calling. Its not as if the man <defamed> a culture with an epithet, he just misapplied a general term -- and might I add, that term is used by many such restaurants themselves in both name and advertising. Take a fucking pill, and stay on topic.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:49 a.m. CST



    I 'm amazed that Harry has given BW2 such a positive review. He speaks of the sequel's intelligence, unsettling and disturbing. I saw the film last week and not one of the people I was with had a good thing to say about it. Many went in hoping it would be good, having enjoyed Berlinger's previous work. But honestly, BW2 is a catastrophe. So what if Berlinger pays tribute to the mythology of the film... Is that such an original thing to do? Why try to read so much into BW2 Harry? Is BW2 really that clever and is it really such a fascinating comment? This film is about as deep as a toddler's paddling pool It's like wasting your breath saying SPEED2 is a clever comment on terrorism. At best, It's just another post-modern horror flick with all the in-jokes you can wearily expect. At its worst its a stupefyingly shoddy insult to what was a very cunning debut. The vaguely amusing MTv style collage of newscasts and folk on the street footage at the start is about as good as the film gets. From then on it just gets worse, and really incoherent too. I loved BW1, having seen it before all the hype, but this movie just goes nowhere. It was actually so embarassing to watch that had it been any other movie I probably would have walked out. Weird that Ain't it Cool's review has so little criticism of the film when in my eyes, structurally and even visually BW2 really had some very major problems... to me THAT'S unsettling and disturbing.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:55 a.m. CST

    Pretty Typical, STARFUCKER

    by Wyers

    Again, STARFUCKER proves all of his critics correct. BW2 has been getting poor word of mouth and some early reviews have it bordering on LUDICROUS. Artisan begins to panic, however, a light emerges from the end of the tunnel. A phone call is placed to STARFUCKER and he is whisked out to a private screening. When I began to read this review I knew it was leading to a glorious review. STARFUCKER was made to feel important and accepted and in return praised an inferior film. Now maybe I'm wrong and this film will be regarded as a worthy sequel and the nameless cast will be catapulted into fame and fortune ...but its NOT FUCKING LIKELY. STARFUCKER, you are predictable and played out. You have been bought and paid for and are the punch line of many a good joke in the film community. The unfortunate thing, STARFUCKER, is you may actually have yourself convinced you have an ounce of credibility...

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:56 a.m. CST

    Harry: Book of Shadows and Damien Echolls

    by CubHugNYC

    remember, Harry, that in "Paradise Lost":, Damien Echolls, the one West Memphis Three Defendant still on Death Row, had a copy of The Book of Shadows that was brought in to question during his trial. Can't believe that that did not come up over with a meal with Joe.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:58 a.m. CST

    devil0509, you're ignorant!

    by Uncapie

    Before you were manufactured by your significant maternal keepers, people called Asia, the Orient for hundreds of years. Do your history and research your topic before you start name calling(Cheap shot at Harry, by-the-way.). Some people still call it the Orient or use the phrase, Orientals, just like some Asians call us Occidentals. Its not derogatory and its describes the East as a whole. While you're at it, do you think that the phrase, "The Far East" is a put down? Anyway, you can kiss Harry's rear for allowing you to post your petty comments on his site and think before you stick your foot in your mouth next time, you simp!

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:59 a.m. CST

    BWP and Last Broadcast

    by Omega Red

    My "Fundamentals of Video Production" professor worked on the Last Broadcast, and from what she would always say, I gathered that she and the entire crew were quite resentful of its success. She seems to believe that Blair Witch is a blatant copy of the Last Broadcast. But in truth, although the Last Broadcast was released a year before BWP, BWP was completed back in 1996, they just couldnt get it released for a few years. Almost seems to me that someone working on Last Broadcast knew about BWP.... Anyway, I doubt I'll see BW2 in theaters (everyone I know hated the first one, I thought it was pretty cool, but no one will see BW2 with me :( ) so i'll have to wait for video/dvd...but it definately looks more promising now. I was very upset when I first heard about a sequel - the first film was fine the way it was, the ending was perfect. But now I can see that this won't (or at least appears not to be) your average run of the mill Friday the 13th part 7 sequel...thats good.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 10:20 a.m. CST

    "The hills are alive with the sound of Harry's lips kissing stud

    by 'Nuff Said!

    Harry, in your review you confused the word "archetype" with "stereotype" and the word "convenience" with "contrivance."

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 10:41 a.m. CST

    I'm just a humble TB user.

    by FrankMackey

    While that may be true, I'd like to give everyone attacking Harry some cryptic advice: "Before Anyone's Tempted To Leave Elitist Posts, Ostracizing Someone's Take, Everyone Remember: Leaving Inciteful Venom Eventually Stings." "WTF?!" you say...well, I'm just a big fan of karma. After carefully reading the above article, I've determined that BW2 will probably suck, but I wouldn't go so far as to accuse the writer of being something from a NIN lyric. The review sounded honest, if not a little mixed at times. I personally am disappointed that the actual Blair Witch (assuming there is one) is not revealed, if for no other reason than it increases the probability that we'll be lamenting BW3 in 2002 or something. It may be as good of a film as Harry says, but it should stop at two. None of this movie about a movie about a movie bullshit again anytime soon, please. "Always two there are...a master and an apprentice..."

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 10:46 a.m. CST

    you stole my $8 once, it will not happen again.

    by kpoarse

    as the legendary cock-rock band great white put so eloquently....once bitten, twice shy.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 11:16 a.m. CST


    by LordZanthos

    Very nice review Harry! I enjoyed it. Very articulate and intelligent. It makes me want to see this movie (more than I wanted to before, which was not at all).Thanks for the great info and descriptions. This would be actually interesting to see.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 11:16 a.m. CST


    by LordZanthos

    Very nice review Harry! I enjoyed it. Very articulate and intelligent. It makes me want to see this movie (more than I wanted to before, which was not at all).Thanks for the great info and descriptions. This would be actually interesting to see.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 11:16 a.m. CST

    It just seems like somebody read a negative review of a movie an

    by Fat Paul

    Am I missing something? It just doesn't sound any good! No matter how much enthusiasm you throw at it, it just doesn't sound like a good movie. Everything Harry liked about it makes me feel... icky. The characters were good because they were archetypes? What, does that mean SLUMBER PARTY MASSACRE 2 had great character definition? In fact, if you crossed SLUMBER PARTY MASSACRE 2 with KOLOBOS or maybe HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL, you might just wind up with the BOOK OF SHADOWS storyline. But I guess the movie it's really starting to look like deeper into the review is GOTHIC. You know, the whole Ken Russell Frankenstein thing? Sure, I liked GOTHIC, but now the words, "rip-off," are flashing behind my eyelids and... Hell. I won't really know until I see the damn thing, and that won't be until it comes out on cable. Maybe later than that. Hell.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 11:28 a.m. CST

    BWP 2

    by Darth Grego

    Give us a goddamned break, Harry, this is a piece of crap like the first one. Anyone out there who PAYS to see this or ANY movie with a number after the title deserves to be ripped off, and they will be. Here's a clue for everyone: a "2" in the title usually indicates SHIT SQUARED. "The Last Broadcast", which was shown in the NYC area on cable on New Year's Eve past, was interesting but fell apart at the conclusion. And I wouldn't recommend "The Dead Hate the Living" to a monkey - stay away from this cutesy piece of brain-dead garbage! I CAN recommend, surprisingly, "From Dusk Till Dawn 3", thereby inserting my foot in my mouth. It was brainless vampire fun that KNEW it was brainless and was a blast. And if anyone else is sick of the latest wave of pseudo-religious crap like "Lost Souls", "Stigmata", and, especially, "End of Days", RUN, don't walk, to Blockbuster and find Alex de la Iglesia's "Day of the Beast". Terrific "devil-is-coming-to-earth- and-must-be-stopped" fun, with a great sense of humor. And the luscious Maria Grazia Cuccinotta in a supporting role should keep you all interested. What the hell is "KOLOBOS"?

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 12:05 p.m. CST


    by gigolo aunt

    was a great fucking movie.As far as those downing Harry, remember this He liked the first one.So what does this mean?It means that if you disagreed with him on that you will disagree with this.I know that was a hard conclusion to come to, but after reading some of these semi-literate posts I thought I'd clear that up

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 12:14 p.m. CST

    Do not be fooled

    by Einhander

    I saw this movie at an early screening at MGM studios. Don't listen to Harry- this film is as scary as the Haunted Mansion, only without the cheesiness that makes it all worthile. You can look it as brilliant psychological interpretation, or you can look at it as I did- since the characters are never actually in control of their fate, it's all a sad exercise in illusion. Every time they try and do something right, they don't have a prayer of winning out against themselves. So there's really no point to the movie. And while Berlinger does a good job of dealing with the woods and the creaky house, he's not yet comfortable with handiling actors (as supposed to real people in his wonderful documentaries). The steriotypical sheriff is a big example of a failing here, as is a scene in a convience store that just screams misconception. This is not a terrible movie, it was just doomed to not be very good. Harry's probably just impressed that it didn't outright SUCK, but, that's no need to heap praise on it either. I mean, Speed 2 didn't tottally suck either, but lord it wasn't good.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 12:16 p.m. CST

    "The Blair WItch Project", this review and how no appreciates an

    by Tender Branson

    God, you know I listened to every single gripe, complaint and bitch about "BWP" from all my misguided and slightly uneducated friends, then from all the pop-culture name dropping, think they know everything because they have the internet dickheads I worked with at Blockbuster, then from my family who just couldn't see why I uggested they pay $8 for what was what they called: "A home movie". Well, fuck them and anyone else who can't stop complaining about how BAD IT SUCKED! It didn't suck, (Obviously, because somebody went to see it twice for it to have made that much money!!!! Someone had to have rented it when it came out on video too!!!! There wasn't a copy for six weeks so who the fuck was renting all these copies of "BWP" IF IT SUCKED??!?!?? Anyone care to field that?) it was actually one of the boldest moves by a horror film in quite some time. It--OH MY GOD, GRAB SOMETHING TO HOLD ON TO SIMPLE PEOPLE--made you think. No one has offered up a satisfactory explanation of "BWP" that suited my sensibilities aside from, "I don't know what happened, I can't figure it out." I've read every theory and reason, but they all sound false and that's the BEST PART!!! I walked out of the theater in a complete daze and spent hours thinking about it afterwards. That single image of Mike standing in the corner was about a hundred and fifty times scarier than anything John CarpenCRAP Wes Hasbeen HAVE EVER OFFERED UP!!!! It was frightening, BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T KNOW! Your mind wandered back and forth from visions of horrible gore to that place in your subconcious which is so frightening it doesn't have pictures to go along with the thoughts. That's why "BWP" works. You never know wht was chasing them, you never know what was making the noises at night, you never know who piled up the rocks, and you never know who clocked Heather at the end. You just don't know. Not knowing is the worst, most firghtening thing I can imagine. Once you know, you deal with it and move on. But, not knowing will ring those thoughts right back into your head every time the subject is brought up. A lot of people can't deal with something that doesn't spell everything out and tie it up in a nice, neat little bow by the time the credits roll. To them, I say: GO FUCK YOURSELVES AND BLOCKBUSTER IS HIRING!!! Anyway, Harry, thanks for a good review (Your "Almost Famous" review....uh....hmmmm.) I fully plan to see this flick and I'm thrilled it doesn't suck nearly as bad as the trailers.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 12:16 p.m. CST




  • Oct. 16, 2000, 12:50 p.m. CST


    by Becka

    You're so not jaded. If you like something you like it and you dont hate it to try to look cool. Much much love for you.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:30 p.m. CST

    Ft. Knox?

    by Kentucky Colonel

    Harry, I live about 20 minutes from Fort Knox. It's right off Dixie Highway at Bullion Blvd. between Radcliff and West Point, KY. (Roughly 15 minutes from Louisville) Now, my question to you is ....Is the vault at Ft. Knox on the surface ie:is the building you can see from the road "it" or, as in Goldfinger, is the vault recessed 4 or 5 stories underground? I do know that the field that seperates it from public land is supposedly ringed by landmines. Not that I am planing a heist anytime soon, just as a local I was curious to what the inside of our local most famous mysterious place was all about. Vote Nader, or anyone else, jost not Bush. Puh-leease!

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:50 p.m. CST

    Hey seven11

    by gigolo aunt

    I see you finally learned punctuation.Good job.I give you 2 gold stars.You didn't have your mommy help with this TB, did you?That would be cheating.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 2:59 p.m. CST

    Leave Harry the fuck alone, you bitches

    by freexter

    So he liked this movie, it's his opinion. And it IS his website, you fucks. If we have to listen to you morons rant and rave about how Harry's this and that, then at least give the man some respect for his opinions. Jesus Christ, don't be so fucking bitter. You KNOW you all wish someone would set up a private screening for you and fly the director out to meet you. You KNOW you all want this, so just admit it.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 3:18 p.m. CST

    Some questions...

    by Fatal Discharge

    -1- are teens so jaded that if they don't see loads of blood then it isn't scary? -2- has it become cool to hate BWP because fanboys think if a movie doesn't assault their senses then it can't be scary? -3- can anyone trust Harry's reviews after he liked The Flintstones:Viva Rock Vegas? -4- has Harry not liked any movie for which he's gotten a personal screening?

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 3:38 p.m. CST

    Jar Jar Binks is the Wlair B. itch...I mean Blair Witch!

    by Dark Predator

    As for the rest of you... Why say stuff like "i'm not even close to thinking this will be a good movie." Such sayings just show how you are influenced by OTHER people's opinions rather than seeing the movie for yourself and then saying if you liked it or hated it.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 3:40 p.m. CST

    Where's the review for "The Ladies Man?"

    by 'Nuff Said!

    I guess I'll have to provide one. It stars Tim Meadows - 'Nuff Said!

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 4:29 p.m. CST

    ok, but how does it compare to Godzilla or Armageddon?

    by wash

    Just curious.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 4:44 p.m. CST


    by Robertblood

    Let's see, Joe Dante versus James Cameron. Gremlins vs. Terminator. Hmmm. Gee, I just don't know (although Eerie, Indiana was way better than Dark Angel)

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 4:50 p.m. CST

    Harry Really Messed Up!

    by stardust

    He is soooo wrong on this one. I saw this in philly at a free screening last week and he way off base. I knwo it's his "opinion" and all but this is terrible, a really shit movie. I loved the original and was NOT expecting a similar film, my mind was open to anything of qulaity, and this was not it. Terrible actors, Terrible plot, Terrible idea. I love the documentaries from Joe and HOPED that this would have some of the creepy realism of that or at least the be scary in ANY way. It wsn't. It was stupid and boring and silly. There is a little girl that walks backwards in it which is slightly weird/spooky and that is IT. It's like a 100 poundman on a 400 pound woman...all over the place. Trust me...Do Not Waste Your Money. The whole theater was booing after this flick and was really pissed. Saying, "What the fuck?" to it's awful ending. AND we all saw it for FREE! Stay away and don't believe Harry 'cause it looks like he has been B-O-U-G-H-T. Sorry Harry, love your site but this is TOO much to swallow. Later!

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 5:05 p.m. CST

    Harry is still a shill and those who follow are sheep

    by pfloyd

    Wonder where Harry put those gold bars he got, because here he is again ballyhoo-ing for Artisan. Harry must really love PT Barnun because he loves using all the old "side show" stragies, to promote crappy movies to sheep who need Harry to tell them what to like. This site used to be a cool little spot on the heavily commercial internet. I'm all for capitalism and making money, but Harry is blatently becoming a tool for the studios. I respect a man who can raise his own web site, about a subject he loves, and watch it go from obscurity to very popular. But I can not respect a man who doesn't stand up for his said established beliefs, he set out when starting the web site. So go out you sheep and go see BW2, and tell everyone here how cool you are because you like the movie too.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 5:45 p.m. CST

    This does sound better than the trailer!

    by superninja

    However, I think one tends to lose objectivity going into a film knowing you will have Q&A with the filmmaker afterwards. I'm not saying it's deliberate, but I don't see how it can't alter your perspective of the film. I thought BW1 was annoying, and I was dissapointed that they took such an interesting premise and came up with such mediocre results. Part of this, I'm sure was do to the overhype and guerilla marketing of the film. But to be fair to the filmmakers, I think you either buy into the concept from the 1st frame or not at all.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 5:52 p.m. CST

    An Art House Flick!??

    by X-Girls

    What? It wasn't like an art house flick more of like a school project.. that was satisfactory. BW2 still seems like it was done right but still...I HATE those characters, I can't accept that, it's like a tv show.. arrgh.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 6:11 p.m. CST

    Seven11 is J E A L O U S

    by X-Girls

    and people like 'Harry Is Obese' are annoying idiots. Do these guys think they're the only ones who could have thought up the idea of Harry being a 'sellout' ? Harry, why aren't these idiots banned? If you aren't keeping to the movie subject and you're bashing the webmaster... no one wants to hear from you. Not that we can always keep to the subject... BW2 could probably used a better script, sounds like Harry dug the directing.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 6:18 p.m. CST

    Why destroy the mythology?

    by coop

    This may be a good film, (I'll give you the benefit of the doubt) but why the hell did they have to treat the first film like fiction? Doesn't that screw up the idea of an Ellie Kedward movie? Maybe you all don't give a damn, but I enjoyed the back story and by pulling the curtain back it screws the first film, and all the side stories that had so much detail. The prequel (which would take place over a hundred years ago)was actually gonna be the good one. Oh well, Artisan had to make some quick money, that's all that matters anyway.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 6:27 p.m. CST

    Why all the Blair Bashing?

    by TheCenobite

    Why are all of you people so quick to bash BWP when you know that if it hadn't been a huge hit last summer and had been a small independant release like initialy expected you'd be singing the praises of this unknown gem that YOU discovered... but since everyone saw it and it made a bunch of money and now a sequel it's a sellout and it sucks... well if making money defines a film as a sell-out suckfest then most films could only dream of being so lucky... give a film a chance before you decide it's gonna suck you closed-minded bunch of self-righteous...

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 6:37 p.m. CST

    The cast of BW1 would've flunked Survivor.

    by superninja

    What really bothered me about BW1 was that all the characters lacked any survival skills. I'm not talking about Boyscout badges, I'm talking about the thing that will make you get absolutely desperate in any attempt to survive. There is no way in hell that even after the first guy was picked off, those TWO, count 'em, TWO people would've laid down and died like that. At least some backstabbing or some plotting on each of their parts to try to survive perhaps at the expense of the other; an attempt to build a weapon to try to kill whatever was hunting them -- THEY SHOULD'VE GOTTEN PRIMITIVE. I think it would've been much more powerful, but that's just my opinion.

  • For less than the totally ridiculous prices they are charging at the West Memphis 3 website?

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 7:39 p.m. CST

    We're just two hooded guys...nothing else

    by Battle-Poster

    "Uh, everything is going as I have forseen...ha ha..." "The AICN TB is sparsely populated, my ever--uh, my master. If the trace is correct, then I will fla--find them easily. At last we will reveal ourselves to the talkbackers. At last we will have revenge. All post--" "Shut up, Darth Flame! That's not in the script!" "Yes, Darth Idiot..." "We must first take care of Chancellor Knowles and his legion of sycophants. He is vulnerable to simple human pleasures and bribes and is on the payroll of the industry I might add..." "Yes, it appears that way, my master. I have been prog--I have been trained well..." "Now, let us go, my apprentice. There are Twi'lek twins to shag and false spoilers to leak..." "Yes, my master. We will hold the AICN ransom million dollars!" "No, you idiot! That's the wrong movie!" "You are the idiot. Your name is Darth Idiot, therefore..." "Silence!!!"

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 8:36 p.m. CST

    Thoughts on manipulation

    by Lobanhaki

    People who believe everything is marketing and that anybody who doesn't keep an absolute distance between them and the makers of the movie will be sullied are the most likely to sell out themselves. Harry is even-handed with his reviews. He's not calling BW2 brilliant, but I think he may have gotten the internal logic of the piece right. Maybe. I'll know for sure (on this movie. Unlike some, I don't disagree or agree with people's reviews irregardless of the movie itself.) once I've seen the movie.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 8:39 p.m. CST

    Anybody seen that little Radiohead clip "The Bear Witch Project"

    by EL Duderino

    While most of you have given up on MTV (me included, except for select shows like JACKASS), check out MTV2 at times, and you will catch these little Radiohead blips. The Bear Witch Project is a force to be reckoned with, especially if you have a fear of overly cute animals.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:07 p.m. CST

    Harry, your incessant profanity is making it increasingly diffic


    But that's my two sense. Anyway, I liked the Blair Witch Project and was one of the first people to be seen in public wearing the t-shirt. Course, not long after I saw "The last Broadcast", which i kinda liked better, and which I kinda think got it's thunder stolen by "Blair Witch". Still, I'll probably wind up seeing "Book of Shadows", cause I liked the directors "Paradise Lost" documentary.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:20 p.m. CST

    Do you know "How to Disappear Completely?"

    by KidA

    I do. In reference to the "Bear Witch Project," you can also catch all of the blips at Radiohead's official web site. They're quite disturbing and eerily comical, at the same time. Needless to say, my user name indicates I'm quite a fan, but you all really owe it to yourselves to give "Kid A" a listen. It's not driving music, it's not shagging music, it's 'lie on the bed and stare at the ceiling' music. Finally, a lyric for Harold: "they love me like I was a brother/they protect me/ listen to me/ they dug me my very own garden/ gave me sunshine/ made me happy/ nice dream. Cheers. P.S. Rubbish is still rubbish. I have no interest in the Blair Witch or any subsequent scams.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:46 p.m. CST


    by Lion Fire

    I think it's going to be a really REALLY interesting movie. Not to mention whenever Harry reviews a movie and gives it a high mark I myself usually like it. Try not to look at the trailers and snub your nose at it as if it is another cruddy Scream/urban legend/i know what you did movie, but more of an extension of an ultra cool movie like The Blair Witch Project. Berlinger is an excellent film maker and if anyone can make a good sequel it would most definately be him. I think alot of people have just seen too many bad sequels and can't get those memories out of thier head and are determind to make themselves believe that this is going to be something like that.. and it's not.. I say listen to Harry on this one, sounds like it's going to be an interesting and fun flick.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 9:57 p.m. CST

    Ticket Prices!?!?

    by Lion Fire

    I was just perusing (spelling?) the previous posts and noticed alot of people saying .. $9 of your hard earned cash and $10.. If anyone is paying 9 or 10 dollars to see a movie they are getting jacked like a crackhead in NYC.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 10:03 p.m. CST

    c'mon harry, get your shit wired a little tighter for us, would

    by heywood floyd

    it might be possible that harry actually liked bwp2, but we will never know for sure. his review is, by his own admition, almost comically biased. "some people might think i was an integral part of the success of bwp1" (paraphrased) so they flew out a fucking print for him, not to mention the director for him to hang out with? how on earth could he give it a negative review if it deserved it? i probably wouldn't be able to do it either. harry needs to be more honest to his obviously loyal fans, but more importantly to himself. maybe he could just keep his "look how connected i am with hollywood" attitude to himself and stick to reviewing the flicks. and to capie, the bottom line on your ignorance concerning referring to asians as orientals is this: no asian person i know, and i know quite a few, wants to be referred to as oriental. they would all prefer to be called asians, so why not stop bitching about it and do it?

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 10:10 p.m. CST

    why I lambasted Harry over the Oriental thing

    by devil0509

    First off, to Uncapie, you post THAT and all me ignorant?! Sure, Oriental has been used as a term for hundreds of Europeans or those of Euro-descent who didn't (and still DON'T) care to learn what people of other races choose to call themselves. The VAST majority of Asian people, both Asians and Asian-Americans, do NOT identify the term Oriental or Orient with themselves or their culture. Many Asians view the term as one imposed on them by foreigners, one that anachronistic, and one that is unwanted. Using the term Oriental is basically the same as using the term Indian to describe Native Americans. It is simply inaccurate, misinformed, and unwelcome. Now, why give Harry shit over it? By and large I heartily support Harry and his website. I like the site, I value his reviews, and I appreciate this FREE service that he provides. However, by the fact that Harry's site is successful and therefore viewed by thousands of people, Harry has a greater responsibility to be informed and, frankly, careful. Therefore, he should be held to a higher standard than the average person on the street. As for calling Harry a redneck, that is a very different thing from calling him a racist. A racist is a person who has malicious prejudices towards others, and from what I have seen on this site, there is no reason to hang that label on Harry. A redneck, however, is simply ignorant. If you want to go around referring to Asians as Orientals, sooner or later someone is going to tell you you're being ignorant.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 11:08 p.m. CST

    I just dont get it?

    by pogo on my own

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 11:21 p.m. CST

    Jeeze people BWP was just a movie shitty or not

    by pogo on my own

    I dont see why people think that saying they saw BWP before it hit big really changes anything. It was the same movie after the hype that is was before the hype, and that is a huge gimmick. I think the reason so many people harbor so much resentment for this film is the dishonesty in the advertising. The BWP is probably the film most responsible for people posting fake reviews on sites that were once completely fan based like this one. We can no longer trust our sources because they can so easily be tainted. Do i think Harry is selling out and hyping a shitty film? No. Maybe he did like this film, maybe he did jizz all over himself during the first BWP who knows. I personally thought is was really boring. You may say that it is because i need everything spelled out for me, and who knows maybe I do, but does that invalidate my opinion? Well its good to know that Blockbuster is still taking part in hiring our special people, and they should be commended for that.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 11:35 p.m. CST


    by Mother Plucker

    SuperNinja is right as always. I've never met the guy or know what stuff he's made of but I know if I was out in some tent and some old hag was meanacing me I'd conk her over the head with a rock and then make Blair Witch the Snuff Film. I was glad to see those goobers die. As for Goth chicks in movies, the best depiction of one I ever saw was in The Faculty.

  • Oct. 16, 2000, 11:59 p.m. CST

    Like I said, devil0509, you are ignorant..

    by Uncapie

    China was called Cathay so does that mean the Chinese consider themselves, "Cathians" still? All domestic people call anyone who is a native a foreigner, wheather it be European, African or Asian. If you want to get techical about how the Asian races get along, you're in for a big, fucking surprise. The Chinese consider the Japanese the "Little Brown Monkeys That Live On the Island" while the Japanese call the Korean's, "Dog Eater's." The Vietnamese, the "N...gers or the Orient." We won't count the many Indians, Siekes and Pakistanians that lived there as well. Let's not forget the Aussies or the Kiwi's either. Having lived in Hong Kong for four months, it was quite a Oriental/Asian big, happy family experience. There were signs in Mandarin, Cantonese and English that had the word "ORIENTAL" in it. So, the next time you sound off and start calling people "rednecks", you backwards fuck, take a trip outside of your momma-san's basement and experience the world. You'll find the word "ORIENTAL" is not worth having a liberal, panty-waist, conniption fit over.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 1:22 a.m. CST

    Perhaps BW1 is not as 'supernatural' as people think.

    by Henry Fool

    It's not far off to link the ambiguity of supernatural presence with the first film. I always got the impression that the kids from the first film could have been merely feeding their own dellusions about what they were seeing and hearing while lost in the woods. I'll have to rewatch the film, but it seemed as though the character who dissappeared first (Josh, I believe) could have been the one to bump off the other to. I'm sold on this film simply because I saw Paradise Lost and found it extremely compelling. I also like the idea that it acknowledges the first film as a work of fiction.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 1:22 a.m. CST


    by Buzz Maverik

    There he was. Alone in the woods. Cold. Hungry. Where were Larry and Louise? What had happened to the Kravitzes? It was getting dark quickly. The voices would start then. Mocking. Filled with malice. "Derwoood! Oh, Derwooood!" That wasn't his name, but he knew the voice was calling him. Already he'd been changed into a monkey, a trained seal, a street mime, and a ventriloquists dummy. Why had he come into the Burkittsville woods seeking the Blairwitch? He thought back. She was hot. That was one thing. His kind of blonde. Sometimes she wore that black and white neglige and she always met him at the door with a drink. She could make dinner with his clients and always come up with his advertising campaigns. The real evil was her mother. Her mortal-hating witch of a mother. The others he could stand. Uncle Arthur. Dr. Bombay. Aunt Clara. Esmerelda. Maurice. But Endora belonged in hell. "Derrrwoood!" moaned the voice again, and he felt his testacles swell to the size of basketballs.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 2:53 a.m. CST

    Completely off topic....

    by Phalex

    ...but when the fuck is the timecode DVD gonna be out? And will it still have take 1?

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 3:08 a.m. CST

    Russians are Asians, too...

    by Jackass

    The subject says it all.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 3:49 a.m. CST

    This Is A Talkback I Posted...

    by Henry Chinaski

    Over A Year Ago In Response To One Of Harry's "I'm Important!" Rants -- Hey Harry, I agree with you that it would be a refreshing change for a major studio to go ahead and release a flick with a downer ending, despite the advice of the bean counters. However, for you, the great (and I mean Great Big) Harry Knowles to actually respond to a Talkback (I know it has happened before a few times, but it is rare) concerning your knowledge of studio executives' knowledge of strong films smacks of desperation. Sure, you might have read the script, but, you sad excuse for a player, you sure as hell haven't seen the flick. And your disappointing cut and paste information for The People Vs. Larry Flynt from the IMDB demonstrates you are only as cutting edge as the information that the public and the industry provides you. Please don't forget you're just a fat film geek from Austin who decided to parlay his love of film into a cool public forum for the rest of us fat film geeks around the world. Your response to a troublemaking cynic like Nickarcel (or myself, for that matter) was so sad, desperate, and heart-rending. Pay attention to the site, you geek, Universal hates you just as much as they hate the rest of us with a passion for film. "I know because it's what I do!" That quote made me laugh so fucking hard. You self-important deluded with illusions of grandeur clown! What you do is answer your phone and cut and paste e-mail you've received from the true people in the know and it kills you that you're not more deeply involved. "I could've gone to one of the preview screenings of Episode I, but I turned down the pass. I am such a true fan!" Hang on, Harry, we're all going to hoist you on our shoulders. Like I said, hang on, it might take a little while. Just another example of how you have to rely on others to make what little connections to the film industry you have. And far as telling the others to educate themselves, I am educated to the fucking gills with film theory and film history, as well as english literature. No less than you, Harry. I simply rely on your site for the info I need; just like I rely on Coming Attractions, ShowBizWire, Drew's Script-O-Rama, IMDB, The, and all the others I haven't mentioned. Don't forget your geek roots, geek, we never will. The only positive thing about your fat head is that it is now proportionate with your fat ass. This rant is not based on envy, all of us geeks struggle with the knowledge that the endless useless trivia stuffed inside our heads won't earn us a fucking dime in the real world, it is based on the opinion that this site is heading down the crapper because you are more deeply involved in becoming a player (you may have even deluded yourself because of Premiere's hopelessly out of date the moment it hits the stands Top 100 list) than in making this previously outstanding site stronger and more informative than it ever was. How's Pauly Shore, Harry? How's your quest for that porn star girlfriend going? We're all curious. More curious than hearing about why you are so cool. "I know because it's what I do." Holy Mother of God, pure fucking early morning comedy!

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 5:47 a.m. CST

    "Many attach me and AICN with some level of the success of the f

    by JackBurton

    And those 'many' would be who exactly? Or is this just another case of something that became popular partly because of the internet so automatically that means Harry Knowles (tm.) was behind it all, rather than the efforts of a first class website campaign by the creators of the Blair Witch Project themselves. You know if it wasn't for this level of self congratulatory backpatting bullshit this site might actually be able to live up to it's cool moniker, but as it is it's stuff like this all the time that definitely takes the sheen off of any level of coolness the site might have. Sorry, it might seem a petty complaint to many of you but this thing just bugs the piss out of me, anyway end of rant. As for Blair Witch 2 I'll see it and make up my own mind, as per usual.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 6:43 a.m. CST

    A Thought ........

    by Deni

    Perhaps if Harry DID have to buy all his own ticket, he may look at the movie a different way. Nobody likes being ripped off and if they feel like they have been, they are more likely to tell others. Harry has to realise most of us want value for money, unless he is willing to take a few others along to his "private screenings"!

  • Is that the only way you can get it up cock-boy. Do you sit back and think, "Man, I'm going over to AICN, I'll insult Harry and call everyone a geek and a sheep, sit back and wait for the shit storm and when I finally get hard I can jerk off as I insult more people and I ..No don't come in right now Mom, I'm doing something,...shit anyway then I will be the king of all the internet hahahahahahaha.....Mom I told you not to come in, I'll do my homework later I promise."

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 8:14 a.m. CST

    Well well well...

    by George McFly

    ...I was not looking forward to this at all, but after reading Harry's review...hmmm, maybe I'll take a look after all. I'm a big fan of the first film; I own it on DVD and just watched it again the other day. The trailer for BW2 is absolutely horrid, IMO, and it failed to interest me immediately. Even with Berlinger on board ("Paradise Lost" is an excellent documentary and a must-see) I wasn't convinced after the crappy trailer. Well Harry, if you say it's actually a good film, I think I'll check it out--although at an early showing for a cheaper price. I hope you're right about this one. McFly<--

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 8:29 a.m. CST


    by Obscure Homage

    Here it is folks...Proof that BW2 is one of the worst films of the year.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 8:55 a.m. CST


    by Darkman

    This is my personal theory about sequels, concocted after viewing I STILL KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER: When a movie studio puts out a sequel, they're basically saying one of two things: 1) "We made this film for you, the audience, because your approbation means more to us than anything", and 2) "Just give us the goddamn money!!!" ISKWYDLS falls into that second category as do many sequels: SCREAM 2, this film (I'm sure of it), the FRIDAY THE 13TH films (which is inexplicable because, to merit a sequel, the original film has to be at least marginally good) and so on. This is a little something I wanted to get off my chest. Hopefully, you'll agree. And Harry, the animation rocks; that's one of the best scenes in the film! Darkman out.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 12:19 p.m. CST

    uncapie-you are a jackass

    by HeywoodFloyd

    i apologize to everyone who just wants to talk about the flick, but i couldn't let this go, and i promise i'm done now. uncapie-you think that 4 friggin months in hong kong has earned you the right to dispute how asians want to be referred to? you are a moron. in spite of your staggering four months abroad in hk, you still lead a sheltered life, don't you. my guess is that you don't live in a city. whoever it was that came up with the derrogatory (sp) "bwp2: book of bullshit"--good one.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 12:35 p.m. CST



    The movie sucked!! Talk about false advertising. Me and two friends could have done a better job with a camcorder, and definitely acting.As for BWP2, I WON`T WASTE MY MONEY!!

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Regarding seven 11

    by samscars

    I would just like to say that I take full credit in pushing seven 11 into using puncuation. Thank you. You see he went away for awhile, so that he could learn to use periods, commas, and such. Now that he is back, using puncuation, I swear his posts read like he is an entire 6-8 months older. Now instead of sounding seven years 11 months old, his true age of 12 years 5 months old is plainly clear. Congradulations seven 11! Oh! I mean Twelve 5!

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 2:53 p.m. CST

    I don't know whether or not to thank you

    by gigolo aunt

    I used to just skip over his posts, because it was too annoying to break up his sentences.Now that I'm able to read them I see I wasn't missing anything.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 4:29 p.m. CST

    Made trailer?

    by Smurfette

    Harry, did you see the trailer for Made?

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 4:32 p.m. CST

    Shifts in perspective

    by Mr.Stiggs

    Henry, Thank you for saying what desperately had to be said. Your observations on Harry Knowles pathetic posturing illustrate what I

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 4:42 p.m. CST

    Uhm, Darkman....

    by Fatal Discharge

    Scream 2, no matter that it wasn't as good as the first, was not made "solely for the money" because the Scream series was always envisioned as a trilogy. But you're right in that most sequels, which are made soon after the first becomes a huge success, are made to make more money.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 8:30 p.m. CST

    to the sheep

    by pfloyd

    Mr Stiggs, seven 11 and myself (forgive me if I forgot anyone) are the only ones around here with the balls to tell it how it is. If Harry said Home Alone 3 is a masterpiece you would all agree. Learn to debate and not fall into the follower mode.

  • Oct. 17, 2000, 11:05 p.m. CST

    Balls Have Nothing To Do With It

    by Easy Rider

    More like sheer stupidity. You fellows are acting like you're uncovering a mass conspiracy, a plot Harry developed at the tender age of 9 to take down you "real" people, as Mariachi called you. What are you keeping real? What are you exposing? How you have so much free time that you have chosen to spend it targeting web-site runners? How sad it must be to wake up bright and early every day and know that you have to spend another 24 hours as yourselves,angry at the world for being deprived of something. If you loathe Harry and the site so much, exactly why do you post? Do you really think that by making yourselves look like humongous asses, with your "sheep" calls and self-promotion conspiracies, that you are some how tearing down "Empire Knowles"? Do you not realize that by spending more time here you quite possibly are helping the site traffic-wise? If you were so smart (since you "tell it how it is", a phrase used by people that try to make others think they are intelligent), you would not come to the site at all. That's what most sensible people do when the dislike something. But, wait, I forgot, you guys are fighting the good fight, trying to stop evil Knowles and his army from destroying you, the last bastion of real people. What makes it all the more pathetic is that you are so emotional about it, like it really is some kind of threat. So, so, so depressing to see humans lacking the common sense they were born with. But, then again, since most young people act like you fellows do now days, I really shouldn't be too depressed since I have witnessed the stupidity level in this country rise over the past few years. Do something for me. Look at yourselves in the mirror and ask, "What has Harry done to me? What has anyone ever done to me that was so harmful that I harbor so much anger at minor threats?" I think if you guys do that, maybe you'll realize you have become what Jack Nicholson used to call "lame-o's".

  • Oct. 18, 2000, 3:17 a.m. CST

    pfloyd, you've got balls?

    by *veers*

    Because you come to this site, completely anonymous and you and all your little fag friends berate the man whose site it is. One word, JEALOUS.

  • Oct. 18, 2000, 6:30 a.m. CST

    But Harry IS going to leave the web page...

    by funkbunny

    You say Harry isn't going anywhere but that's not true - he's in talks with Comedy Central to review films on the cable network. He sold out a long time ago, and anyone who thinks that having lunch with the director of a film immediately after a screening won't affect your opinion of the movie is a bleeding idiot. The Artisan people are laughing at how cheaply they bought you off, Harry. NOW DANCE FOR THEM, DANCE FOR YOUR MASTER YOU LITTLE MONKEY!

  • Oct. 18, 2000, 10:03 p.m. CST


    by Noon Blue Apple

    I personally have to with the above posts

  • Oct. 19, 2000, 8:44 a.m. CST

    Exorcist II is Under-rated

    by Caitrin

    Arcturus, wherever you got that information that The Heretic is under-rated you are right. I enjoyed the film for what it was, and it can't escape the fact that it was released some years after the first film, once the hysteria of the 1st had worn off. To my knowledge only four films so far have provided the psychological horror which hits you for days after; The Exorcist, Texas Chainsaw Massacre, Halloween and BWP. Films like Scream and I know what you did blah blah blah don't even come close. I am getting sick of seeing half of Dawson's Creek getting chopped up, though in real life it wouldn't be so bad. It is nice to see that some users on the TB think those that disagree are assholes and such. Takes one to know one.

  • Oct. 19, 2000, 8:57 a.m. CST

    Blair Witch 2: The Train Wreck

    by avasca

    I don't know what Harry's talking about, but this movie is an absolute train wreck. I was so embarrassed for all involved I actually got "douche chills" and my stomach hurt. The preview audience I saw it with bolted out of the theater afterwards as if to get away from a bad smell... ...I feel really bad for Kim Director, who actually seemed like a charming actress who might have had a career. The other actors were godawful (although the Wiccan chick looks great naked). And as my friend pointed out... what's the deal with all the unapologetic stigmatizing of weird-looking young people, i.e. the very thing Mr. Berlinger railed against in Paradise Lost 1 & 2? That's the ickiest part of the whole icky experience!

  • Oct. 19, 2000, 9:11 a.m. CST


    by Caitrin

    There is an imaginery line stretching from the North Pole to the South Pole called the International Date Line. (Same as the Equator). Everything to the west of this line is referred to as Occidental. Everything to the east of this line is referred to as Oriental. The Orient comprises of the Near East e.g. Eastern Turkey, The Middle East e.g. Saudi Arabia, Jordan etc, and the Far East e.g. China and Japan. As far as I know, the term Oriental has never been regarded as racist or offensive to those living there. In fact, an Arab that I knew, who is of course Asian referred to another Arab as Oriental, so why the hell would this Arab have insulted the other like that?

  • Oct. 19, 2000, 11:43 a.m. CST


    by Lex

  • Oct. 19, 2000, 1:15 p.m. CST

    Making the same mistakes twice...

    by Metatron

    The first movie left me thinking "What a piece of smoldering shit." Not only was there a brain-damaged understanding on the part of the creators and directors of Blair Witch Project of the difference between improvised cinema for the sake of spontaneous reaction and improvised cinema for lack of preparation and a decent concept. It wasn't half as scary as it was annoying. Now, after reading the review of what BW2 is supposed to be about... I realize that they are plagiarizing in two parts what The Last Broadcast did in one horrible independent film-disguised-as-a-documentary. It's been done. In fact, if you really think about it... the entire Blair Witch saga (if one can even grant it a name like "saga" that normally carries with it some connotation of actual quality) is pretty much a Scooby Doo episode, without the part where the bad guy gets unmasked and says "If it weren't for those meddling kids!" Again, both these films combined pretty much rip off an indie flick JUST AS SHITTY, which the producers from the first Blair Witch, Myrick and Sanchez, ADMITTED to having seen before making their little Fumble-cam fest (a cinematographic bullshit improvisation that would make even David Letterman, king of stupid screen tricks, proud). Yet Myrick and Sanchez insisted that they didn't copy The Last Broadcast. Well, shit, coulda fooled me! The only difference is, in the Last Broadcast, you're not bored to death by a screaming match between three fucks who can't say a sentence without swearing every two seconds (which isn't in itself bad, but swearing every other word does kinda dilute the impact)... instead, in The Last Broadcast, you're bored to death by a documentary filmmaker who through the ENTIRE film reminds me of the scene in 2001: A Space Odyssey where HAL9000 drones at two words a minute just before Dave Bowman disconnects him. And like the ending of Blair Witch, the ending of The Last Broadcast is predictable, albeit slightly more satisfying. If you want a film that makes you agitated, scared, and leaves you with an open ending that doesn't just make you go "huh" but slams into you like a Mack truck and doesn't let you forget the film for the next three weeks... go see The Usual Suspects. It wasn't big budget, it wasn't full of superstar actors, and it certainly relied a hell of a lot more on intricate plot and clever screenwriting than ShakyCam, SwearCam, SnotDrippingNose-cam and WhyDidWeWalkThisFarAwayFromtheCar-cam to intrigue the viewer and keep their interest locked in at all times. BW2 promises to be just as boring and worthless as the first film, except maybe this time they spent a bit more money on figuring out a whole new list of stupid indie film suspense devices to use in place of good screenwriting. Maybe this time they could afford inserting a score or musical soundtrack, to take your mind off of how insanely boring the film is.

  • Oct. 19, 2000, 1:47 p.m. CST

    Oh, I just realized something...

    by Metatron

    After writing my little piece above, I actually read some of the other posts and realized people are rather disgruntled with Harry's reviews. Let me just say this, I've been on to his bullshit style of reviewing for a while now... and I've criticized him repeatedly for making his reviews more about his prancing around Hollywood, supposedly rubbing elbows with all these people who aren't so damned important in the grand scheme of things... when instead he COULD be actually talking about the movie. Nope, instead he spends 90 percent of his space going on some diatribe about the pleasures and displeasures of hobnobbing his way into movie screenings as if it's some sort of great achievement. But folks, that isn't all... after one scathing statement I made about the pompous-ass nature of Harry's diatribes, he actually emailed me to tell me "but they're true!" THAT is perhaps the biggest tasteless thing a reviewer can do, is actually waste time defending his diatribes when my whole point wasn't just whether I believed them or not... but WHY THE FUCK CANT HE WRITE A REVIEW NOT A FAIRYTALE that sounds something like "Once upon a time, there was this reviewer from a supposedly renegade website, that pandered enough to the establishment to get his way into the screening for 'Attack of the Killer Tomatoes 12'..." I'm not actually going to bother giving Harry any advice, because in my experience, most journalists are too egotistical to listen to anyone... which is why they do their work in a closed venue where they don't have to actually stand up and tell people their story and get sacked by flying beer bottles if the story sucks. However, I am going to say this: If the story of how Harry managed to squeak his way off to Blair Witch 2 is so damned important, why doesn't he write a book... Pam Des Barres did... and now she's made a career out of being a groupie... which in itself is sort of pathetic, but isn't that what journalism eventually becomes about? What with paparazzi and "investigative reporting" and shows dedicated entirely to what fucking bathing suit Natalie Portman was wearing at some beach no one ought to really care about, the footage for which some unscrupulous shmuck probably got paid a million dollars? Pam Des Barres, Joan Rivers, Harry Knowles... maybe Harry should be a body double for Bruce Vilanch, another person who has made a career out of nothing. I just have one last thing to say, to all you folks thinking of how Harry and company believe themselves to be legitimate journalists because of the places they get to go... I worked for a college newspaper and called up numerous record companies to weasel tickets or backstage passes to cover concerts, and without having to really produce credentials of any sort of reputation, with only so much as a phonecall and some embellishment, I got in... Nobody who ever ead my columns cared about details like that, though early on I did write a bit about it, thinking perhaps people were interested, but they're not. They don't want to hear about some shmuck who seems like he gets to go places they don't... but the silly truth is this: Any idiot can get press access, considering it means free advertising for companies promoting something--which makes you the fool if you think YOU took advantage of the situation, sorry... the situation took advantage of you. So before you guys start feeling worthless because Harry tells you some great story about some experience that seems to good to be true... just know that any idiot can do it. Amyway, what was my point? Oh yeah, Harry might actually change his reviewing style if advertisers were thoroughly convinced that we, the readers, stopped giving a shit about this site. That would be my suggestion... boycott the Harrys of the world who don't write reviews, but Hollywoodesque banter that belongs in The National Enquirer.

  • Oct. 20, 2000, 1:30 a.m. CST

    If you don't like it.....

    by Ironcloud

    OK, I hated the first show. I spent pretty much the entire movie wishing I was anywhere else. Work, School, with my wife, anything. I will admit that the hype probably had a lot to do with that. I heard so much of "it does for camping what Jaws did for swimming in the ocean." that I had pretty high expectations. I really had no desire to see the sequel. But I'm sure I'll see it whether I go willingly or get dragged there. I'll go with an open mind because SOMEONE didn't hate it. If I may; If Harry's style of reviewing pisses you off so badly, why are you still reading the reviews? I refuse to believe that anyone out there has enough spare time that they would make repeated negative comments about a website. I mean come on, it's a fricken website that some guy runs out of his basement for the benefit of the common moviegoer so that they don't have to pay attention to those flakey, sellout, rat bastard professional movie reviewers that we see on the news. They say three lines about the movie, usually something very insightful like "Joe Pesci certainly LOOKS Italian" or "Carrot-Top just isn't convincing as Dracula to me" Harry's reviews, while peppered with information on his trip to the theater, or the lunches he has with his fellow reviewers, are honest. They don't reek of cheap suits, or corporate influence. He doesn't give movies "three popcorn bags". He just tells us what he thinks of the movie, as a geeky guy who loves to see movies. Eventually. He doesn't write reviews like he's getting paid to do it. That's why I read his reviews, and that's why I trust them. And as for Harry making a career out of nothing, he loves what he does and I'd rather see that than some uppity fuck that got thrown into the job because he's "good at talking to the camera". Besides, who are you to criticize that life? What do you do for a living?

  • Oct. 20, 2000, 6:06 a.m. CST

    The constant whining about Harry

    by Zachsmind

    Anyone who complains and whines about Harry's style of writing his critiques is showing their lack of experience with AICN. Harry's been at this since before he became "famous" and I use that word quite liberally cuz the man's not hobnobbing as much as you guys think he is. I mean he's got more connections now than when he started but it's not like he's freakin' Regis okay? Before everyone from Roger Ebert to Oprah Winfrey actually knew Harry existed, and before most of you whiny buttwipes waltzed in here whining about how Harry spends more time talking about what happened before and after a movie than the movie itself, Harry was in here plugging away with reviews and news and insights whether people were reading or not. And y'know what? Back then, he spent more time talking about what happened before and after the movie than the movie itself. It's part of why the majority of us keep coming back, cuz Harry's more than just a movie critic. He's a person like you or me and he shares his thoughts and if you dig it that's great and if you don't SHUT THE HELL UP and go to or some crap cuz we're sick and tired of hearing it. YOU ARE NOT TELLING US ANYTHING WE DON'T ALREADY KNOW. Yes, the "fame" for lack of a better word has affected this website somewhat, and where Harry used to talk about the drive to the movie theater and sitting there in a cramped place with a bunch of strangers and then having a trip to a fast food joint on the way home, nowadays he tells us about the drive to the movie theater and sitting in an almost empty theater for a prescreening with a very select number of friends and then he tells us about his private meeting afterwards with the director. SO WHAT? He's still doing what he did from the beginning. It's just that the events surrounding his experiences are different. You bozos are talking about him "hobnobbing" with Hollywood as if he's trying to hide it. HE'S THROWING IT IN YOUR FACE LIKE A CREAM PIE. It's natural. It's the progression of where he came from and how he got where he is. And anyone who continues whining about it incessantly looks like nothing but a bunch of envious pansy-assed spoiled crybaby wannabes. You're just ticked off that it's not you. Harry's website is kinda like the whole Blair Witch thing: it is what YOU make of it. You wanna be a whiny wuss and channel nothing positive into this place? That's what you'll get. That's what you'll deserve.

  • Oct. 20, 2000, 9:34 a.m. CST

    I love it when people fight cynicism with more cynicism....

    by Metatron

    I'll be brief. I'm not a big fan of reviewers, period. Why? Because I like forming my own uninhibited opinions about things without knowing anything going in. This is not to say that I think reviewers in general are scum, or that I think some reviewers are gods and others are subhuman vermin (except for the paparazzi). That being said, I've spent time doing what Harry does, and I've spent time making the kind of content that other people criticize. What I currently do for a living, to answer one question that was asked, has no bearing on whether or not I'm entitled to hold an opinion of someone. Perhaps, maybe I'm just a smartass, writing this to entertain the other smartasses of the world, without really taking any of this seriously. What I find disturbing is that my cynical view of journalism gets taken so personally by people as if their lives are defined by the articles they read. I'm not new to this phenomenon, and yes, I do tend to get a little tweaked when people tell me I'm out of my gourd for liking "Who's That Girl?" However, I just try to remind myself that nobody's actually criticizing something I invented and built with my own two hands... so what should I care? I never said Harry was a bad person, a mean person, even if I think he writes like shit... which, I'm entitled to... think of me as a reviewer of reviewers... and for god's sake try not to take it so seriously. Otherwise you'll have absolutely no fun with it, and the whole point will be lost. It's kinda like going into a Paul Verhoeven flick and expecting it to be this cathartic, dramatic, epic journey only to realize what you already knew, that Paul Verhoeven's films are anything but serious. Lastly, my suggestions to the people who seriously dislike Harry's reviews were just that... suggestions to them, based on the kind of things I hear them saying. You are telling me "well, don't be here if you don't like what he has to say"... and almost as if it's an all or none sort of thing. Since when does a person have to love all of a thing to partake, and not just some of it. Mostly, frankly, I come here to see what kind of crazy shit people will post next on Talkback... why? Because I think it's funnier than the actual reviews, and more interesting. I finished my post saying pretty much the same thing you two were saying... to not be here if you don't like what you see... that's precisely what a boycott is. Me? I still don't like Harry, and having known many journalists myself, and having been one, I can certainly say I don't consider Harry a reputable journalist... but then, is there such a thing at all? Ok, so I guess I wasn't brief.... sue me.

  • Oct. 22, 2000, 4:22 a.m. CST


    by Maynard

    I learned from an ancient source that it was a religion for women. The nurturing aspect of the matriarch as opposed to the patriarch. Wiccans believe that way back in caveman days, that they had control over the men, and that it was a overly feminine society. I would rather stick to the norm, cause the feminist view seems rather skewed. It was the beginnings of lesbianism. Many dark goth chicks today are dykes pretending to practice this "religion." Crap, if this was an ancient, or even old religion, there would be a hell of a lot more carpet munchers out there wasting wombs. Then again, have any of you really met a hot looking wiccan dyke that was partly sane? Me neither. I hope this movie works on more than one level. Watch Buffy if you want magic that has results. Wicca is really lame. More like potpourri and herbal teas mixed with plain insanity.

  • Oct. 22, 2000, 7:44 a.m. CST

    Harry: sold out and paid off, like a dancing monkey!

    by funkbunny

    Harry, I saw the commercial for BW2 on Saturday Night Live with your ridiculous quotes. Congratulations, you have finally proven once and for all that "integrity" is meaningless when it comes to a weak grab for some sort of pathetic celebrity. NOW GO DANCE FOR YOUR MASTERS YOU LITTLE MONKEY! HURRY UP, I THINK THEY NEED A GREAT QUOTE FOR DIRTY DANCING 2! C'MON HARRY, DANCE DANCE DANCE MONKEY-BOY! Love, funkbunny

  • Oct. 22, 2000, 12:34 p.m. CST

    I saw this last nite...

    by Doc Brown

    I saw BW2 last ntie and it FUCKING SUCKED! DO NOT SEE THIS! Harry's wrong dammit. Don't let them get your money!!!! I'm glad I didn't pay anything, DON'T GO. go mets

  • Oct. 22, 2000, 6:50 p.m. CST

    El Mariachi & SNL

    by funkbunny

    I never said I ENJOYED watching Saturday Night Live. There are a myriad of reasons one may find oneself watching something bad on tv, and many of them involve things like being over at friend's homes. See what happens when you ASS-U-ME, El? And I never registered an opinion on BW2, I haven't seen it. I am, however, calling into question Harry's integrity, which as far as I can tell simply doesn't exist. One thing I'd like to know, HARRY, is WHO PAID FOR LUNCH? I'll bet you any amount of money it was Artisan. And if you talk to ANY journalist, even one for a high school paper, he/she will tell you that is a huge breach of ethics and integrity. Either review the movies, or be a "celebrity gossip," but don't try to pass off this "review" as anything other than a paid ad from your MASTERS at Artisan. DANCE, HARRY, DANCE LIKE A MONKEY! Love, funkbunny

  • Oct. 23, 2000, 12:03 p.m. CST

    I smell a shill...

    by Drunkenfist

    Saw the "Shadow of the Blair Witch" faux documentary on Sci-Fi last night. It was actually a lot of fun - except for the scenes taken from "Blair Witch 2". The acting was excruciatingly bad, and the dialog was laughable. I can't honestly pass judgement on the film until I've seen it, but given what I've seen so far, I don't have much hope. Face it folks - Harry has been bought and sold. "Everything about the concept that I could glean from the publicity and pre-release materials and trailers were saying PIECE OF FUCKING SHIT." Until that call from Artisan... Calling all studios... need good buzz for your film? Give Harry a sandwich.

  • Oct. 23, 2000, 7:24 p.m. CST

    Speaking of SNL...

    by Metatron

    Ok, I didn't see the BW2 commercial during Saturday Night Live... which I haven't watched religiously since the mid-80s because the show sucked ever since Dana Carvey, Jan Hooks, Phil Hartman, Dennis Miller, Jon Lovitz and Victoria Jackson left... which maybe is why that one dude caught SNL this weekend (the one who said that's where he saw the BW2 preview)... because Dana Carvey was guest hosting... DAMN, I missed it... I fucking MISSED Church Lady! Ok, anyway... what do I think of the fact that Harry was quoted in that review? I wouldn't say he was paid off... but I'm not going to make any bets against the fact that Artisan definitely "wined and dined" him, so to speak. However... I will say this: The fact that the BEST quote by FAR, and one of pretty much only THREE reasonable quotes they COULD get, was of Harry... I repeat, the best they could do was a quote from Harry Knowles. That's like saying I won a silver medal at the Special Olympics (but lost the Gold in the long jump to a guy in a wheelchair). DISCLAIMER: No offense intended to the participants of the Special Olympics... all offenses are directed towards the mentally handicapped, allegedly "normal" individuals of the world who write good reviews of otherwise horrible films.

  • Oct. 23, 2000, 7:28 p.m. CST


    by Metatron

    SNL: some would even say it sucked since Eddie Murphy left. Which would be a fairly good assessment But hey, Church Lady, Weekend Update with Dennis Miller, Jon Lovitz' Devil skits... I guess ya gotta give em a LITTLE credit. Lately though, it seems like Jack Handey (the misunderstood genius... I mean, blithering idiot who writes "Deep Thoughts") writes ALL their material.

  • Oct. 23, 2000, 8:53 p.m. CST

    Want an unbiased review of BW2... check THIS out.

    by funkbunny

    More proof that Harry has lost his integrity with this one: Read the review over there and compare the two. Clearly, one reviewer didn't get a free lunch with the director. And what's the deal with the Comedy Central thing, Harry? Love, funkbunny

  • Oct. 23, 2000, 10:36 p.m. CST

    the title really bad they should have called it book of worms or

    by Uncle Jebb

    book of lies book of putrefaction that rocks i hope the producers will read this before the movie opens! quick ya bunch o' fuckers!

  • Oct. 24, 2000, 7:14 a.m. CST

    Can only negative reviews be considered "unbiased"?

    by Veidt

    It seems that some people think unless you're expressing a negative opinion then you must be a studio-bought shill. Whether Harry's opinions are for sale or not, it's ridiculous to suggest that just because one reviewer slams a movie that his opinion is automatically more "honest" than one who gives a positive review. Regarding the Variety review of Blair Witch 2, without having seen the actual film, I can say that there's several elements to that review that seem suspect to me. Mainly, the review takes issue with the entire direction the sequel takes saying that it misses the opportunity to answer audience's lingering questions about what happened in the first film. Personally I think to make a sequel that directly followed up on the events of the first film would've been the biggest mistake and in fact Berlinger rejected several early drafts of a sequel script that took that approach. The Variety review also complains that the sequel fails to deliver on a true reveal of the witch when that also would seem to me to be a pointless inclusion. Although the sequel is more explicit in other areas, I think it's better to keep the witch something suggested rather than shown. I may end up hating this movie but nothing in Variety's review is enough to sway me from approaching Book of Shadows with an open mind.

  • Oct. 24, 2000, 9:51 a.m. CST

    What is it with Hollywood and sequels?

    by Metatron

    I think I understand why Berlinger took a different direction with the second movie--although his motive might actually not work anyway, given the drab "been there, done that" aspect of this film. In fact, as I've said before, this film becomes even MORE a ripoff of "The Last Broadcast" with the directions the sequel explores. Berlinger probably wanted to walk away from doing a direct sequel that picked up where the first left off because the first story was too shitty to actually follow up. It's success was a fluke, that was almost IMMEDIATELY stopped dead in its tracks by another film... but we'll get to that in a bit. See, when you start with a shitty film and have an odd stroke of luck, its best not to push that luck and make a sequel that is every bit as bad as the original story and premise... which, in this case, includes three unoriginal college losers who can't act to save their lives do pretty much everything in their power to defy the laws of common sense... making Blair Witch about as intelligent as a Scooby-Doo episode: "Oh, hey, this spooky house... lets go in here, and then go up to the 2nd floor and down to the basement, both times cutting ourselves off from any possible exits in a place that is covered in blood and has weird sounds coming from it..." BW2 is as much about marketing as the first film was. I remind you that Artisan picked up the tab for the first film's promotion, distribution and marketing, and picked up the entire tab for the sequel. When Myrick and Sanchez' idea of making everyone think BWP was actually real failed miserably so quickly because people weren't that stupid to buy into it, they turned around and said "Yeah, ok, its a fabrication, but it's oh so scary, please come and see our film... otherwise Artisan might cut off our balls and sell them on the organ donor market to make up for the money they shelled out to sell this piece of shit." Then, sometime during the making of the second film, Artisan marketing was probably talking to some focus groups and determined that a predominantly LARGE group of people (not large people, a large group...) grew out of the "Shaky-cam" scaryness of the first film as quickly as people saw through The Crying Game's stupid SINGULAR element of dramatic surprise... Jaye Davidson is a guy! Oh my god! If you didn't see THAT coming, you need glasses. So, the focus groups for BW2 revealed that no one wanted another Blair Witch... and as a result, they were left with "How do we explain the first film?" Folks, this is the proverbial "Highlander 2" dillema where they try to erase a previous sequel's relevance by dismissing it all together, and then they follow it up with an entirely new definition of shitty sequel. So, how do they explain the first Blair Witch? By regurgitating in the 2nd film what people knew when BWP producers Myrick and Sanchez still took the American people to be so stupid that they actually TRIED (for about a week) to pretend the film was real... that it was all a hoax. Again, a nonoriginal idea pretty much borrowed from the public reality of how bad the first film really was. So, instead of following the first shitty premise, they have created a whole new shitty premise for BW2. What I have yet to figure out is... if they KNOW that a certain premise won't work twice... why do they bother putting their money on a sequel at all? Why, instead, don't they go take that money and use it on a different film... or at least maybe take the actors on a big cruise and hire a bunch of hookers to keep them entertained... that would at least be more entertaining for them, and we wouldn't have to go through another year wondering what crack the folks at Artisan must be smoking. Oh, and that movie that pretty much blew Blair Witch off the map at its height of popularity? M. Night Shyamalan's "The Sixth Sense"... proof positive that shitty acting and improvisation spurred by lack of a screenwriter's work ethic are no substitute for clever scripting, great direction and good planning. Shyamalan was also a young director, 29 to be precise, with only two other features to his credit (which both earned a combined $350,000) and STILL he made a film superior to Blair Witch in every aspect of the word. And the American people agreed... most people I talked to after seeing Sixth Sense didn't talk much about Blair Witch ever again after watching Shyamalan's low-budget psychological thriller that wasn't big on special FX and had only one superstar actor (whom some would argue became relatively easy to get after films like Hudson Hawk). Cmon, Artisan.. spend that money elsewhere, before someone gets the idea to do Blair Witch 3, where the producers of the first two films are murdered by a serial killer who saw the first film and was driven into a killing spree... then it turns out that he happens to be the brother of Heather Donohue (who lately seems to think she's an acting genius... she'd be right if that consisted of dripping snot on cue, and screaming "FUCK" every two seconds for lack of better improvising skills)... wait a minute... THIS film has already been made... it's called Scream 3, and it was total shit. Again proving that it's best to leave well enough alone... Kevin Williamson knew that.

  • Oct. 24, 2000, 11:23 a.m. CST

    The Book of Shadows previews are now quoting Harry's review.

    by LSHB

    The circle of life is complete.

  • Oct. 25, 2000, 1:35 p.m. CST

    Variety sez . . . .

    by fonebone

    "Disappointing in every aspect, sequel fails to make good on auds' curiosity about "what really happened" in part one, while draining the concept of any residual mystique or novelty. Even formula-slasher-pic fans are likely to find this hectic, unfocused effort a letdown. Expect a massive global launch's big opening numbers to plunge as soon as word gets out. Eventual ancillary biz will cushion that fall, but irked fans may well shut the "Book" on future "Blair Witches" beyond direct-to-vid cheapies." Well, I guess we'll see what Ebert says.

  • Oct. 25, 2000, 3:47 p.m. CST


    by flikfreek

    terrible What should have been made is a prequel aboot what happened with Rustin Parr.Although some scenes were cool over all it was bad.Fortunately I get private screenings of most movies and didn't have to pay for it or have to put up with people getting up every 10 minutes to pee I mean HOLD IT dammit your annoying everyone in the damn theater.

  • Oct. 25, 2000, 8:30 p.m. CST

    kewl, Harry's review was mentioned on BW2's TV Spot :P

    by zalasta

  • Oct. 26, 2000, 6:31 a.m. CST

    Book of Shady Critics

    by Zachsmind

    Anyone zapping the sequel on the grounds that it doesn't explain the alleged 'truth' of BW1 has absolutely no clue about this franchise and is not a true fan of the whole Blair Witch phenomenon. Was Bigfoot ever captured? Was the myth of the Loch Ness Monster ever solved? How about the Bermuda Triangle? Did we ever find out who Jack the Ripper really was? Did they ever actually find the remains of Noah's Ark? Or be able to discount or verify the legitimacy of the Shroud of Turin? Hello! We will never know what happened to Heather, Mike and Josh in the forest. In real life Heather made it to Jay Leno, and kudos for her! But in the Blair Mythos? She's forever in limbo. If anyone irrevocably explains it for certain in any future Blair Witch franchise thingy, that is what would truly ruin the whole thing. This is about possibilities, not about certainties. You want plots that are cut and dried with absolutes and loveydovey happy endings? Check out the Lethal Weapon franchise, okay? Leave Blair Witch alone. If BW2 poses more new questions and avoids answering old questions, I for one will be happy. That's the POINT. Those of you still lost, take a refresher course by watching a season or two of "In Search Of" reruns with Leonard Nimoy. Then maybe you'll see the light. Thank GOD they didn't actually like, hire some old woman to pose as the "real" Blair Witch. Ten year old kids would be running around with Blair Witch masks on this Halloween which would have really sucked. It's bad enough they got Rustin Parr masks this year...

  • Oct. 26, 2000, 11:57 a.m. CST

    Blair Witch is a "franchise"?!?

    by Drunkenfist

    Star Wars is a franchise. Indiana Jones is a franchise. Blair witch is not a franchise. BW2 is a naked money grab by the studio, pure and simple. The first BW was a near perfect experiment in amatuer filmmaking that ended up making hoards of money for Artisan. It was a great film, but it was a fluke. Sequels are not going to build on the first film - they're just going to dilute its effectiveness. Remember how scary "Nightmare on Elm Street" was the first time you saw it? Remember how crappy it was after a series of shit sequels ruined it? That's what's gonna happen here. And, if you don't find the Variety review to your liking, head over to where reviews for BW2 are running 2 to 1 against the film. Think that reviews panning the film because it doesn't forward the Blair Witch mythology are not valid? Fine. I would hope that a film with "Blair Witch" in its title would actually have the Blair Witch in it, but hey, that's me. Anyway, try these on for size: "Some kind of letdown or disappointment was inevitable with Book of Shadows; no matter how innovative and intriguing it was, it wasn't going to live up to fans' expectations. Unfortunately, the filmmakers seem to have chosen the worst possible scenario and implemented it using the dumbest script and the least appealing group of young actors. Where The Blair Witch Project was creepy, tense, and hypnotically compelling, Book of Shadows is little more than a sub-par slasher film with the moniker "Blair Witch" attached. In other words, it's lifeless, tedious, and (even at 90 minutes) overlong. It's hard to recall a sequel that fell this short of the mark set by its immediate predecessor. Even Halloween II didn't leave this kind of ugly impression" - James Berardinelli, REELVIEWS "The sorriest quickie horror sequel since Jason turned in his hockey mask." -- Scott Von Doviak, CULTUREVULTURE.NET "The sequel tries hard to keep the mystique and creepiness of the original, but it instead churns out a hokey, unbelievable, and plain old lame movie." - Charlie Craine, HIP ONLINE "BW2 is hackneyed junk. The slick direction and editing do not outweigh the bad dialogue (mostly shouting and profanity), mediocre performances and characters that come straight out of Hack 'Em and Stack 'Em 101" - Willamette Week These are the reviews that I'm inclined to believe - not that PR blow job shat out by our "friend" Harry. And, our course, there is absolutely nothing wrong with those who like BW2. What is wrong, however, is a reviewer being wined and dined by Artisan, giving what in all likelihood is a shitty movie a glowing review, and then Artisan using the review to advertise their film. That stinks to high heaven, and both Artisan and Harry should be ashamed.

  • Oct. 27, 2000, 12:25 a.m. CST

    The Buzz from Milwaukee

    by iloveryan

    Our left-leaning, weekly alternative free-paper (every major city has one or two, I imagine) here in Milwaukee hated BW2. The review said that the writing and the acting were both horrible, but I suppose I'll see it anyway, since this paper's reviewers hate everything. In another talk-back about this movie, I made some comments both praising and criticizing Wicca, but I must take exception to Maynard's comments on Wicca. Wiccans may be a little loopy, but I think I prefer their "insanity" to Maynard's paleolithic ramblings.

  • Oct. 27, 2000, 1:12 a.m. CST


    by Metropolis

    I can't believe what a let down the film was. I just saw the film moments ago in a day early promotional local screening. I don't even want to go into details about this total LETDOWN. I really gave it a chance. The moments with (I think its Jeffery) in the mental institution had potential to move on into something, but didn't. The video/film realities were boring and very unorigional. Most good films have well thought out/strong endings, and it just so happens that this very bad film has a very bad and weak ending. The last half was tiring, and the ending was so bland that it iliminated any feelings of fright that the film may have conjured. It worked against what the film was trying to accomplish. I don't reccommend this film, and can't help but acknowledge another reason why the horror genre is a sorry empty place in our filmic society. Please someone, make a good horror film. It would be such a breath of horrifically fresh air.

  • Oct. 27, 2000, 1:34 a.m. CST

    My own Opinion

    by Rapscallion

    I saw this movie tonight and thought it was absolutely horrid, and then I read the review and realized the marketing DID have me going in looking for a slasher horror flick, and, once I thought of the dream/reality bit after reading the review, I really wish I saw it in that frame of mind. DON'T see this movie if you want to see a horror flick, it's not scary at all. If you see it like that, the movie sucks; instead, read the review fully and watch it with that mindset, it might be ok.

  • Oct. 27, 2000, 6:20 a.m. CST

    Blair Witch Websites

    by Airshowguy

    I guess this movie must really be in trouble seeing how much web-effort Artisan is putting into this. I just came from Yahoo! Movies and there's a site listed that is actually worth the trouble...lots of clips I haven't seen yet, interviews and stuff, and they promise 10 movie tickets for your 'circle of friends' if sent out a 'spell' postcard. Cool idea. Worth the visit. Brian

  • Oct. 27, 2000, 6:22 a.m. CST

    Scooby Dooby Doo Blair Witch Two

    by Smakker

    Saw BW2 last night at a London preview. Drivel, drivel drivel - tremendous fun though was had by a large portion of the audience who kept singing 'Scooby Doo' and making scooby noises and chucking snacks around. Five kids, a van, torches, a mystery mansion - even a barking dog - it all seemed terribly familiar - then someone whooped 'Dooby Doo!' - and the audience howled in recognition. Sorry, Harry you've been bought for the price of a meal and the chance to chum up with the least talented director I've had the misfortune to come across for an incredibly long time. Eat at home in future. This is not an intelligent movie - it's an insult to everyone who loved the first film and who will dole out their cash this weekend. If this wasn't called Blair Witch it would never have found a distributor. DON'T GO or if you have to - SCOOBY DOO!

  • Oct. 27, 2000, 6:31 a.m. CST

    Blair Witch Two

    by Smakker


  • Oct. 27, 2000, 6:37 a.m. CST

    Blair Witch Two

    by Smakker


  • Oct. 27, 2000, 8:25 a.m. CST

    Harry, wake the fuck up!

    by Shawn F.

    This film is an incomprehensible piece of shit! You really have to learn to distance yourself from being influenced by studios into giving their crap product a good review in exchange for seeing the movie first and meeting the director. Anyone with half a brain cell would see that this is one badly made movie. I can't believe this is from the same guy who made "Brother's Keeper"!

  • Oct. 27, 2000, 4:07 p.m. CST


    by Zachsmind

    I just want to vent.I just want to spread the word. I saw the alleged sequel: Book of Shadows: Blair Witch Part Two. I went to a matinee at a theater that opened at 10:30am. Saw the first show. There was no line. God, I can remember the line going around the block for the first one, can you? This is not intended as a spoiler. I won't ruin it for you cuz I can't. Hollywood beat me to it. If you haven't seen Blair Witch Two yet, don't bother. Harry Knowles at is wrong. The movie sucks. Don't even bother renting it. I'm giving you fair warning. You can still go if you want. This is just my opinion, but if you find yourself leaving the theater feeling the same way I did, don't say I didn't warn you. There is only one redeeming quality of this film. Kim Director is actually a very talented actress. She's also drop dead gorgeous, but even if she didn't make the goth look look so good, she'd still be a fantastic blossoming talent. I hope to see her in something good someday. Remember years ago when William Shatner was hosting Saturday Night Live? and they opened up with a sketch where he was attending this scifi convention and he was at the podium and the people in the audience were asking him stupid questions and he broke down at one point and said, "c'mon guys it was just a stupid tv show! You people have taken something that I did as a lark for a couple of years for a paycheck and turned it into this crazy thing!" Remember that? I could understand where Shatner was coming from. I mean twenty five years of that would drive anybody bonkers and make someone wanna just slap silly anybody who wore pointed ears and could recite every line of dialogue from the original series. I could understand and appreciate where he was coming from but at the same time I couldn't help but feel like he was biting the hand that fed him. And as someone who was reared on Star Trek, as someone who had a sister that would dress up as a vulcan every year for Halloween, I felt insulted by Shatner's participation in that sketch; a sketch obviously written by someone who had no understanding of the whole Trekkie phenomenon, and why people actually liked what is objectively speaking a pretty hokey show. I mean it was fun, and it said some powerful statements, but it was still hokey. The hokeyness was part of Star Trek's charm though. I felt I appreciated the effort Shatner put into his role but he was making it blatantly obvious he didn't appreciate we the audience. He thought we were stupid and worthless and should drop the whole Star Trek thing and get on with our lives. He claimed we were clueless, when he was really the one who had no understanding of his own audience. Well, that's what Blair Witch Two is. I wanted to like it. I walked in there trying to understand where the director was coming from but I walked out of it feeling like I'd just been slapped in the face. Because someone appreciates a film that approached storytelling and performing in a unique way, this means there's something wrong with them. I went to see it seven times in the theater and I bought the videotape. Why? I enjoyed the film. I enjoy the whole mythos surrounding the original film. If I like something, I support it. Hollywood believes only psychos would want to go to Burkittsville and explore it for themselves. Only psychos would see BWP more than once. Intelligent "normal" people would realize it was a piece of crap. It's like Hollywood is saying, "No you don't understand. Horror movies are supposed to have all this blood and gore in them. They're supposed to be stylized and filled with flat stereotypical characters that are little more than cannonfodder for shock value violence and depraved mild nudity. Blair Witch Project was a fluke, okay? You people shouldn't be watching movies which are made on a low budget and involve creative ways of doing much with comparatively very little. Horror movies are supposed to be made with million dollar budgets with steadycams and we Hollywood types have to spoonfeed you people cuz you're stupid sheep. We have to fill the screen with every possible visual we can imagine, because we don't trust that you have an imagination. We watched Blair Witch One and we don't get it. So you people must be stupid. So with this sequel we the Hollywood egomaniacs are reclaiming our right to fill your heads with imagery and metaphor and blood and gore because we don't think you're capable of thinking for yourselves." Do you ever think about why some people say when they read a book before they seen the movie adapation, they often say they liked the book better? Ever wonder why? It's because when they read the book they saw in their mind's eye the movie the way they would have done it. They already know what it's supposed to look like and sound like for them. So when someone in Hollywood comes along and does it their way, all stylized and melodramatic like The Shining, or filled with blood and gore like many Stephen King films, the person who read the book first sees that and goes, "wait. That's not what it's supposed to look like. What the heck is John Travolta doing in Carrie? The guy in the book isn't anything like John Travolta. This is stupid." In Blair Witch Two they leave nothing to the imagination. In Blair Witch One they left everything to our imagination, and that's where the power of Blair Witch really resides. In the hands of the audience. Hollywood can't understand that. It can't appreciate it. It means the control is not in the hands of the director or the producers. Blair Witch puts the entertainment value in the hands of the audience; where it belongs. It presents itself to you and lets you make up your own minds and your own judgements. And then Blair Witch Two's message is this: if you let your imagination run wild, and don't let it be controlled and channelled through Hollywood special effects, something will go wrong. You'll all go mad and end up dead or in jail or you'll become a lunatic or something. Only people who allow others to be imaginative and creative for them (i.e. sheep) can be 'normal.' Excuse me, but since when has 'normal' ever been cool? Kim Director is a joy to watch as an actress. She's very subtle when need be. Her actions and reactions were the only ones that seemed believable in the least. She actually made the whole psychic thing about her character believable, because even though the character doesn't understand why it's happening, you can tell that the actress does. Kim's character in the film is just open to reading people's body language and how they interact, and from that she's able to surmise logical reasons based on common sense. And then she misinterprets that as maybe being psychic and kinda freaks herself out. I totally bought that because Kim Director's performance is so believable. Her character was more than just the archetypical goth. She's got a distinct past and approach to her character's reality. And when the crap hits the fan her response is like, "well that sucks," but she wasn't over the top about it. She didn't start screaming and freaking out. Kim Director actually thought her character through, and the rest of the actors in the film seemed to just be rushing around her and past her, going through the motions. The ticket price for this film is almost worth it, just to watch Kim Director's talented performance, but the rest of it is been there done that stylized Hollywood horror dreck. If you've seen Halloween sequels or Nightmare on Elm Street twelve, you've already seen Blair Witch Two. What they SHOULD have done is take a note from the play "Waiting for Godot." Have five people go out into the woods after the film looking for the witch, and they find nothing but each other. No freaky blood fests or decadent orgies. Just five people spending a night in the forest spooking themselves while having a good time and getting to know one another. That would have been a more enjoyable experience than this. At the end of Blair Witch One, we had so much to discuss in this mailing list. There were so many possibilities. At the end of Blair Witch Two, there's only one possibility. Nothing has been left open. It's signed sealed and delivered and the aftertaste is a bitter one. Blair Witch has jumped the shark.

  • Oct. 27, 2000, 7:32 p.m. CST

    BW2 Sucked Donkey Turd

    by timsterino

    Harry, What movie did you actually see? This film sucked so bad. It was a complete, waste of celluloid. It is not amazing and to me that Artisian stuck Harry's opinion to the top of all of it's advertising. THIS MOVIE SUCKED! Thanks for making me waste my time Harry! I usually respect your opinions but you were way off base on this one!

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 12:01 a.m. CST

    BW2 is a failure of a film!

    by Oingo Boingo

    I have to agree with those that thought this movie was terrible. I'm certainly not going to knock those that do enjoy it. Damn! was it bad! Harry's review and many others at Dark Horizon's were really positive. I understood this film was going in a different direction and it used the first film as it's basis. What it was trying to do and say was a faliure in the eyes of me and my girlfriend. We didn't hear any complants when the film ended, like we did after the first film though. We did have a small group for the first showing of the day. It was around 13 and this includes me and my girlfriend. Many of the points to those positive reviews like the acting, story, and filming style were really all very, very poor. I couldn't help but laugh through the whole film. The acting was pretty cheesy, mainly in the beginning when we see the group heading to the woods and during the segments in the woods! The acting doesn't get much better after that. I can understand how some feel Kim Director did well, but it still wasn't that good, but much better than the others. Some have commented that the actor who played the sherrif was bad and I would agree with them, but the rest of the actors weren't too far behind him. Joe Berlinger did a lousy job on the whole with this film. Harry, you shouldn't have given Joe a pat on the back for this rubbish. What should I have expected from this rushed piece of garbage. For a film that is suppose to be a commentary on society/the media/entertainment/ personal responsibility and accountability, put in a "WhoDunnit?" setting, just turns into a campy failure in my opinion. I knew what we were getting into when we went to the film, story direction wise, and I don't regret seeing it, but I just have to call it the way I see it. This film didn't even provoke any type of reaction or discussion on it's subject matter. Was the subject matter suppose to be taken seriouly in this film? It's lame even if the subject matter is satirical. If this is what Joe wanted to do, subject wise, he should have saved it for another film. The original film was a good basis to tell his story and I give him that, but the film is so bad that both the intended message, subject and the BW story is ruined! One thing I did wonder about the film, was if the story of the Blair Witch was going to be treated like fiction, like how the first film is treated in this movie. It appears that the story of Elly K. being a witch and sent into the woods to die and the Rustin Parr murders are treated as fact in this new movie. Does anyone agree with this? This keeps things open for the prequel and I hope that another film isn't made. Time to put a fork in this baby 'cause it's DONE! It's such a shame to. Maybe enough hardcore fans of the story will keep it alive, but another film will be so-so, right down to plain bad. This film was really setting things up for the prequel and I don't much like how they talk about good 'ole Elly in this film. Just listen to Tristen describe her dreams to her boyfriend. It makes Elly sound like a wrongly accused old lady and the kids of Blair aided in her death. What was wrong with just the basic story of a evil old witch sent into the woods to die and she comes back for revenge and haunts the woods? How about that tongue-in-cheek intro about how this film was a re-inactment of actual events. I got the joke and it still wasn't funny. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't So in summary: Cheesy acting. The film style wasn't special or interesting at all. The story was poorly executed. All around disappointment for what it was trying to be. This is not a review. This is just my lame-ass opinion! I sure would like to read those other rejected scripts to compare this lame crapper to what Joe felt was a lame rehash.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 12:45 a.m. CST

    Video doesn't lie, Harry does

    by mr_ripley

    It is rich that Harry would applaud Mr. Berlinger's journalistic skills. They are about as fuzzy as his own. Berlinger's greatest fault is his lack of objectivity. His greatest strength is his subject matter. A documentary is only as interesting as its subject. However, I would argue that a documentary is only as strong as its objectivity. Some would argue this to be naive, that there is no objectivity. Every camera is embued with a point of view, but Mr. Berlinger's cameras have an agenda. He doesn't document as story so much as argues a thesis. "Paradise Lost" is a great movie, but it works overtime as a defense for the accused, which negates its claim of being a documentary. If Johnny Cochran told you "The O.J. Simpson Story", chances are, you'd consider the source. No objectivity, no documentary.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 1:17 a.m. CST

    BW2: Better than the first

    by Theta

    For me, at least. I didn't find the first one creepy in the least, although I did find it HIGHLY convincing. This one is more of an old-school horror flick, and by old-school, I'm talking "Haunting" (original, not remake) and "The Exorcist", not "Friday the 13th" or the vomitous dreck that was the vast majority of 80s horror. It works on a simple concept: What goes on could be supernatural. It could be. But it could just as possibly be easily explained by everyday, or at least somewhat logical phenomena. Think about it. In "The Haunting", it really could all be in Eleanor's mind. In "The Exorcist", explanations that are far-fetched but nonetheless still in the realm of science are offered that could work. BW2 is much the same. Also, it has a few of the neater elements of the first movie in it; namely the conceit that video never lies. The script is amazingly good, especially when you consider it was written by a documentarian and, of all people, Dick Beebe, to blame for "House on Haunted Hill." This movie is worth your cash. Ignore the asshole reviewers. Especially Owen Gleibermann. This guy has struck out consistently when it comes to genre films; he gave "The Patriot" a better grade than X-Men, which pulled a C- for no other reason than, apparently, it had a lot of special effects and it wasn't another "Usual Suspects." He rips "Blair Witch 2" for "showing everything." He's clueless. I'd say give Lisa Schwartzbaum the genre job, but she doesn't strike me as all that capable either.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 1:22 a.m. CST

    Thank you baby Jesus for not turning BWP2 into "SCREAM PT 4"

    by MrFrost

    Well,I was happily surprised to see that the BWP2 didn't suck monkey fecies through a crazy straw. In fact, it was a very clever film. I enjoyed how it dealt with the idea of perception. Did they have a supernatural episode, or were they just psychologically unstable people? I also felt that strangely this film reminded me more of THE LAST BROADCAST than BWP. But I have no problem with that. I was just so happy it didn't turn into a SCREAM type movie. One more thing...the goth gal in the movie, made a stick figure appear in the front of my pants the minute she was in her bra, and panties. It must be the devil's work. Harry you can have the Wiccan gal, that goth chick is yummy. Excuse the drool.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 1:24 a.m. CST

    And also...

    by mr_ripley

    THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT worked on many levels. It informed on documentary films. The camera's (& the audience's) point of view remained objective. The film WAS a documentary. Everything recorded was absolutely real. It was the subjects that were lying. It made people wonder about the veracity of its subject. Was the footage real? Was the mythology historical? Was Heather Donahue really that obnoxious? The BWP website only blurred the line further, as it elaborated on the lies. What is a real shame is that BWP2 says that the first film is fictional, that it is JUST a movie (and a phenomena to be mocked). However, BWP was more than that. Even if it were a ripoff of "The Last Broadcast", BWP was an elegant cross-genre/cross media film, which clearly cannot be repeated. BWP2 is a mess of a film. Its ideas are muddier than the hills of Maryland. So video is subjective? I saw "Paradise Lost", so I already know that. People who wear black aren't necessarily murders, even if the video evidence supports this allegation? I already told you I saw "Paradise Lost" so I know that. BWP2 merely teaches the lesson that less is more. A bigger cast & a bigger budget do little when handicapped by a horrid script. Archetypes, Harry? The gothic chick, the Wiccan chick, the other chick, the lunatic, and the grad student. Yes, their stories are as old as the hill. STAR WARS had archetypes. This ain't STAR WARS. Shallow characterizations do not make for archetypes. Reread "The Power of Myth". There is no reason for this film. It's not interesting to look at. It's not scary. It's not thought provoking. It's just a game that is played at the feet of BWP. People left THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT wondering if it was real. People will leave BWP2 wondering if Joe Berlinger is for real. This film, along with Mr. Berlinger, should be relegated to HBO, where they belong.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 1:54 a.m. CST

    Why Sequels Suck.. or "why The Movie I Saw Tonight was Better th

    by Nightshot

    **Spoiler** You were warned.. While you were all seeing that piece of crap, BW2.. I saw a movie tonight about a conciliatory but intelligent girl who, in the interest of maintaining an intellectually interesting relationship with her lover pursues their common debate to an extreme. As they spend their time alone with new friends, she, for health reasons, abstains from partaking as much as her lover and their friends, and watches helplessly as they, in a riot mentality and blood lust, viciously and precisely murder innocent bystanders. Blocking out what has happened, she sinks into a deep depression and suffers from a physical response, only to go to sleep and finally wake up feeling better, and ready to just go on with her life. As she happile approaches her friends and her lover, they surround her, taunt her for her illness, and then wrap a rope around her neck. As she pleads for her life, her lover pushes her callously off a balcony, watching in glee as her neck snaps. That story just really bothers what did you see.. a movie about some stupid witch?

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 2:03 a.m. CST

    Nightshot.. you're an a-hole.

    by Nightshot

    **Spoiler alert** Dude.. you're a F**king ignoramus. .. BW2 isn't about a stupid witch. Its about the result of mass hysteria on people who are stressed out and scared. It delves into the ideas of the first movie that were never explored because they rely on the existence of some outside force to provide the story. The point wasn't to be scary, but to be thought provoking. Think about it, the LA riots.. the Manson Family.. The Holocaust.. and oh BTW.. have some KoolAid! Somehow, in a group setting people have a different view on the horrible things they do. That was the point, you d*ck! Don't go calling this a Stupid Witch movie. I'm glad I didn't see your stupid movie about some b*tch who gets offed by her boyfriend.. please. A-hole.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 2:10 a.m. CST

    You missed the point.. and switch to decaf.

    by Nightshot

    **Spoiler Alert** Okay, first.. easy with the personal attacks. Second.. My point was that the movie I saw had stories like this, that, when contemplated, are more disturbing then they seem on the surface. MY movie managed to get this across without even showing most of it. I've seen the previews for BW2.. its going to be just another "Scream" ripoff with some witch running around, or its going to be just a rehash of the first one, with more.. ooh.. its a pile of rocks BS. Who wants to see that when you can see a movie that makes you think? That's my point. MY movie is creepier when you think about it. Yours is just a slasher flick. Out.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 2:15 a.m. CST

    Again, I must submit this for all of you to consider....

    by MickWeeKnee

    Imagine for the moment you are the host of a nationally recognized website. Imagine that site is the source for scoops on upcoming projects and unadulterated film comment - allowing input from the audience itself on a site that is read at every level of the industry. Imagine creating such a stir that film makers and studios alike try - and fail - to shut you down. Imagine you triumph. What would happen then? A possible scenario would involve the studios changing tactics - as studios often do, despite the popular opinion - because while they don't make movies more ways than one, they know how to skin a cat. The studios would invite you to premiers, include you in note sessions, put your face in the paper, rope you into development deals, by the rights to your life, erase your precious anonymity (which, despite its practical applications was a principal motivator in the creation of your site in the first place) and - like all corporations do with the competition in the end - they co-opt you. Then, the tail starts to wag the dog. To curry favor and get the honest to goodness deep inside information, you have to chug outrageous amounts of studio head. You can't be too abrasive - or even honest - for fear of being cut off. You can only elude to films you didn't like - usually after they have come out and failed - and you even find ways to "forgive" the odd bomb. Soon, your aw-shucks facade becomes almost comical. Your tragic attempts at humilty and incredulous gratutude for the way things have turned out make you the cartoon icon that is the banner on your home page. Pretty soon, people start to take notice - but their criticism are put down as quickly as they spring up, because like a good studio, you have learned the power of bad press and rush to quell it. In fact, in many ways you have become what you have beheld. You forget that what you started out to do was improve film by exposing its weaknesses and instead, you have become a media-whore. You have injected so much of your own personality into your work, that your work IS your personality. Your comment becomes a relfection on yourself and not the medium. In short - you have sold you soul. You forget that you made yourself and they were afraid of you. You overlook your own rapidly swelling irrelevance. None of your scoopers on the inside are telling you that no one is afraid anymore. No one is checking in with you for fear of what you know, but what you don't. Hollywood has long since breathed a sigh of relief, knowing they can check in on you and your utterly pathetic, blind and uninformed cronies and see that nothing about their film is there - it's all about you. But hey, you have what you want. You are recognized the world over. You have found a large enough cadre of dolts to justify your self agrandizement. You even foolishly believe in the back of your mind that this is a transition - a stepping stone and not your honest and admirable calling. You think, one day, you'll get to tell your story, and then you'll show 'em. You'll change the system from within. And like every idiot in every movie from Citizen Kane to Episode One, you will be the only one to overlook your undoing. The audience will sit back and shake their heads and when the lights ome up, they will forget you like Godzilla. And late at night, when you lie awake inbed and stare at the ceiling, you know exactly who you are. You have fleeting glimpses of the truth and you swat them away like flies. Because movies in this day and age aren't about the truth. They are about fame. and somewhere... out there... The studios will go about their business, and they won't even taste you when they belch. Harry. It's about the movie's, old man. Nothing else. Tell the truth.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 2:16 a.m. CST

    Okay, you both need to stop.

    by Nightshot

    Look.. its obvious that you're never going to be satisfied with one another. Its impossible that you two would ever see the same movie. One is looking for messages.. then great, go see your movie. The other is looking for what is disturbing in the the human interest aspect of a dark story. Great again. Go see your movie. But just lay off.. they're never going to make a movie that will please both of you. Not when they can make sequels with the same plot or sequels that are knock off of other horror films like UL:Final cut and Scream 3. So, I'm going to go to BW2 tonight. Hope I see a guy in a mask kill some chick. Over and out.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 2:27 a.m. CST

    Hey Nightshot!

    by Oingo Boingo

    I'm glad you enjoyed the film. Really! Just because I personally thought it failed in what Berlinger was attempting to do with his new direction, doesn't mean I can't accept your opinion. I think your description of the film is one hundred times more eloquent than what Joe Berlinger presented on screen.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 2:33 a.m. CST


    by Nightshot

    I wholeheartedly and respectfully disagree with your assessment, but I appreciate the civility with which you've expressed it. But, just so this isn't a love fest.. F**K Lucas, Die Jar Jar, Blah Blah Blah.. oh forget it. Oh.. and BTW. Anyone see the parallels with the Tell Tale Heart? They're there!.. oh.. and Oingo? Loved the 1993 release Boingo. Overlooked. LOVED "Insanity"

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 3:40 a.m. CST

    It was O.K.

    by curtdog

    So, Harry didn't love the movie, he sold out and deluded himself into believing that he did to make meeting the director more comfortable. But I agree with him in some ways, I too admire the films creativity and intelligence. Unfortunately it suffers from a small budget, a weakness that is glaring while some of the main characters attempt to act. A lot of the ad-lib stuff from the first movie was better than this crap. It's also very annoying to hear the bashing of these films continue to spew from the mouths of dim-witted ignoramuses who feed the cash-hungry idot-box that hurls moronic movies at us like Urban Legends 2 and Scream 3.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 4:51 a.m. CST


    by Zachsmind

    *Potential Spoilers you have been warned blah blah blah** MickWeeKnee. No really. Tell us how you feel. Don't hold back. So Harry sold out. So what? You make that sound like a bad thing. I don't care so long as his opinions are honest, but that's where the knife cuts both ways. If he sold out, suddenly he can't be honest about his film criticism because that's what Hollywood would want to control. And remember, it's all about control. I mean, I've read many of Harry's critiques and there are times when we disagree, but I cannot possibly believe that Harry, given his past track record, could actually enjoy the same movie I saw. Its characters were hollow. The plot twists were transparent. The dialogue was stiff and unrealistic. The movie made its own rules about what was real and what was fantasy, then it broke its own rules. Film is untrustworthy. Only videotapes can be dependable. So you start paying attention to what's on film and what's on camera. And it really doesn't matter. Depends on the director's mood at the time. Bogus. There is zero continuity. I could pick the movie to shreds on continuity alone. When were all the flashbacks. Could you tell? I think I caught most of them, but really what order did the events actually happen? The director purposefully made it vague. Why? Cuz he didn't know himself. I mean who's got the weird symbols carved into their body and when? Why were there no witnesses to Kim's murder of the cash register lady when people were all over that place? Just how bad did she mess up the van? Did the other Blair Witch tour group trash their place first or did they trash their own? Or both? Wasn't the reference to the big tree just so freaking stupid? From what we learn at the end, Erica died when they were still in the woods. However, she continues to 'haunt' them and is discovered in the closet - knife wound in the gut cleaned and stitched up. What, did they carry Erica's body into the emergency room when Trysten had her miscarriage and go, "oh by the way while you're plugging Trysten up you mind cleaning up Erica so we can stand her up in the foyer for tourists? Thanks." The movie I saw was not a movie that Harry would have done anything but laugh at two years ago. Until now I have been really annoyed and pissed off by all you losers who hover around in AICN like buzzards insulting Harry at every turn. You say he's sold his soul. You don't trust him anymore. You rip him a new butthole every chance you get. Now I think I understand. You've probably noticed how Harry's changed his tune too. But y'know what? You don't respond by calling Harry names and being utter pricks about it. If you don't like Harry's critiques, and they no longer are of any value to you, just stop reading. Stop posting. Stop wasting your time. This is not your house. It's his. Got a problem with how he does things? You leave. When you have a problem with the manager of a bar, you don't get to kick him out. He has his bouncers kick you out. That's the way it is. So if you can't stand Harry do us all a favor and kick yourselves out cuz it's bloody annoying. As for me, I will henceforth do with Harry what I do with most film critics. I won't believe him. He's become the enemy. If he says "Lucky Numbers" is bad, I'll give it a shot. If Harry says Charlie's Angels is good, I'll expect it to suck raw donkey turds. So Harry's still going to be helpful to me. I don't hate him, but he's obviously sold out, man. So I just have to use his input the way I do any sell out shill critic of the movie industry. I'm not hateful about it and I wish him the best. I mean I hope he gets something out of this y'know, like I hope they're paying him or something, but I just won't trust his opinion anymore. And besides usually the Talkbacks are more fun than his posts anyway. I just wish the Talkbacks weren't so filled with venom and spineless hate towards Harry. It's not his fault. All film critics suffer this eventually. Otherwise you end up like Orson Wells. But I mean if you REALLY can't stand Harry, you're only hurting yourselves by calling him names and throwing mud at him. Really. You'd do us all a service if you just walked away from AICN, if you can't behave yourselves. Think about it. A mass exodus from AICN would start with you. If you REALLY got a problem with Harry and you're not just pissing and moaning cuz you're a bunch of lame Harry haters, put your money where you're mouth is. And finally. Really Harry. Book of Shadows? Good? There's something brown on your nose Harry. It's pretty obvious. Not that I'm mad or anything, but I am disappointed in you.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 6:37 a.m. CST

    I hate to say "sell-out" but...

    by Veidt

    Anyone saying they "loved" BW2 must've been swayed by more than just the movie (and a person can be swayed by just a little bit of personal attention more than money sometimes). And unlike others I was far from hating this. The acting is decent for what the movie demands and Jeff Donovan and Kim Director are actually quite good. The story is provocative to a point until it's clear that all the themes of memory vs. reality and fact vs. fiction are not going to pay off in any satisfying way at the end. The twist that the movie concludes with is way too tired (it'd have to move up a notch to be called "old-hat") to wrap the entire film on. But I will say that there's a certain amount of effort that shows here on behalf of Berlinger and the cast. Maybe if this hadn't been shoved through production so quickly they could've crafted a better film. But all that is moot now, I guess. At least it was better than the remake of The Haunting. My grade: C

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 8:05 a.m. CST

    Why this movie cant, and shouldnt be reviewed by idiots(subtitle

    by XTheCrovvX

    Well, peoples, after a month, and a severe pig-fucking by the greasy cloven hands of AOL, i have returned.....and i must say, im disappointed in the Talkback community, at least the part bashing this flick.....personally, i think its all mostly this burning desire by some people to defy Harry Knowles on every subject.....those people remind me of those independent music zealots, who, once their favorite band gets airplay on MTV, automatically brand them sellouts....i have zero tolerance or respect for those types, and the same goes for this movie...ohh......ladies and gentlemen....bear with me here....NO ONE is able to give an intelligent rview of this film....thats right...nobody.....the only person qualified to do so, would be the person with all the answers...and nobody does....Joe Berlinger...i expectd to walk into this movie, get some answers for some of the weirdness that happened in the first flick....what did i get? POSSIBLY one answer, and a boatload of new ones....Berlinger, in my opinion, does an excellent job of barraging us all with new quandries, while at the same time, paying the original film its due tribute....theres an old saying that says something along the lines of "Theres three versions of the truth...the way it could've been, the way it should've been, and the way it is..."...well, this movie applied a new formula...theres the way we think it happened...the way the cops saw it happen...and the way it is....the problem? WE DONT KNOW WHICH ONE'S RIGHT! i mean, wlking out of the theater, im left asking "ok, were thy drunk/high/wasted/plastered the whole time?" "did the witch fuck with em all?" "were they all just crazy people(ok, jeff, obviously, was from minute one)", and all through the movie, we're hit with the one major question "what the hell does it mean?!?!", and i dont think anybody who just saw the thing once can make any intelligent judgement or rating or colorful adjective on what they just saw, because the first time, you were seduced into believing the truth that Jeff and the others saw, not the results of the cops' tape...(by the way, as a side note, that police chief with the mustache who sounded like Yosemite Sam pisses me off)....i'll give you this much, though...chances are, if you hated the first one, you can go ahead and hate this one all you want, then pull out your I Know What You Did Last Summer DVD and jerk off to Jennifer Love Hewitt's screaming, cause a real horror movie would go right over your ignorant head....but as for the rest of you, this carnival of weirdness needs a second viewing, if not by you, then by me....i dont even know if i can call it a horror movie by conventional standards....yes it disturbed me, and surprised me at points, but theres more mystery to this thing than anything else...and to me, while that mystery is still there, i cant find the right words to get a good review adjective out to describe it...but, if it will make you feel better, i got three things to say...1. The Goth chick and the Wiccan were both not going to spoil why i got this theory if you didnt see the movie, BUT because of how this all went down, anybody else end up thinking that in BWP 1, Josh was the one luring Heather and Mike into the basement to kill em? think about it.....and 3. Like everyone else, i gotta ask...WHAT THE FUCK DID A BOOK OF SHADOWS HAVE TO DO WITH ANYTHING?!?! thats it, im done...flame away, BWP haters....Ellie Kedwar--::ahem:: Revolution is still my name.....P.s.-The Crow has returned....

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 8:40 a.m. CST

    *NEWSFLASH* AICN Talkbacker States The Obvious

    by Veidt

    The fact that we DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED in BW2 is pretty obviously the point of the movie. And it's also a momumentally boring non-issue. Were the kids wasted? Were they possessed? Is there another explanation? These are all shallow mind games people can play with themselves that have no real answer within the context of the film. The notion of whether Josh was luring Heather and Mike into that house at the end of BW1 was a theory already batted around plenty when the original film was released so this sequel hardly adds anything new to that (especially as this sequel approaches the first film as "just a movie" and doesn't even acknowledge its events as being "real"). If you want a real horror film with real mystery watch Peter Weir's Pinic At Hanging Rock (1975) or Nicolas Roeg's Don't Look Now (1972) or Roman Polanski's The Tenant (1976). Or the first Blair Witch for that matter. BW2 is about on the level of a Witchboard sequel. It's far from the worst movie out there but it's no grace note in the history of horror - not even in year as bad as this has been.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 11:18 a.m. CST

    liked it a lot

    by southsidemike

    I think Berlinger did a helluva of a job, especially if you can get past the shots Artisan obviously reordered, like that crap in the asylum. I very much liked his emphasis that people can convince themselves of almost anything and bring themselves to do almost anything. These people all went into expecting something and they got just that. I also liked the use of film for subjectivity and video for objectivity. This film stands on its own as a study of what people are capable of when left to their fears and misconceptions (and lots of booze and drugs). It also gives Artisan an interesting twist on continuing the franchise, as it maintains the existence of Elly, Eileen Treacle and Rustin Parr. Remember the book The Blair Witch Cult? There is still evil in them, thar hills.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 7:43 p.m. CST

    Reality vs. Illusion

    by Jack Burton

    I loved BW2. I am also of the impression that the things the characters saw happened, at least they believe they did. I think it leads perfectly with the 1st films manipulation of surroundings and sounds and images that may or may not be real. I understand Harry's view point and the whole 35mm vs video bit, but I have a hard time thinking that those 5 would go that far off without some kind of influence beyond drugs and alcohol. I have been on plenty of bender's but none of them, to the best of my knowledge, ended in ritualistic murder. I think it is a lot like a novel called "Dead in the Water" by Nancy Holder in that it is about what is and is not real and at the end you cannot trust anything that came before. That book is incredible and Book of Shadows was far, far, far better then I thought it would be.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 7:55 p.m. CST


    by splat

    I can't believe you people saying you loved/enjoyed/liked this movie. It was HORRIBLE.. easily the worst movie of the year, yes, even worse than Urban Legends 2. Why was it even called "Blair Witch 2"?! Did Joe Berlinner even watch the first movie?! Did he get it at all?! This film could have been title "Morons Get Posessed And Kill Each Other". I mean, the majority of it takes place INSIDE, with the characters staring at film editing equipment!! Harry, I am sorry, but you must have seen a different movie, or were swayed by your free dinner. This film was drivel. Thanks for wasting two hours of my life!!! -Dan

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 9:34 p.m. CST

    Ditto on the pos and..

    by Scorebird

    I think the Crow and southsidemike hit the nail on the head mostly as far as my view on the movie.I like that sort of stuff,if you don't well {shug]. I would like too add that perhaps the filmmakers should have kept a lid on the fact that BWP1 was not real for a few months.Work it out with the actors I guess. By the time they actually admit that it was fiction,they might have may more money becuase people would have thought it was *real* longer that they did. THEN they could went with BWP2 with the premise that the first one was fiction afterall.

  • Oct. 28, 2000, 11:25 p.m. CST

    Good movie

    by Eyegore

    Thank god I didn't read harry's total spoiler review until now that I've seen it. I can only skim these replies, I can see it's full of retards who did read the spoiler review, then 80% of them commence bitching and putting the movie down as the worst movie of the summer without bothering to go see it. I've seen it and I agree completely with Harry's enlightened review. I thought it was easily better than any "Scream"/"I know what you did" crapfest. But to appreciate it, you have to have a brain...something about two thirds of the people here are lacking.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 12:03 a.m. CST

    Eyegore, I did see it. It sucked.

    by Zachsmind

    Don't lump all the people in this talkback together as 'retards' alright? I am a big fan of the first film. I am insulted by this alleged sequel. Sure yes of course the first movie was a 'fake'. Big deal. There's still a story to tell there. We never saw bodies. Heather, Josh and Mike could still be alive within the context of the original film. In the fictional reality where BWP takes place there's still a tale to tell. They completely avoided going there. You think Jason's real? What would have been the point of Friday the Thirteenth part two if they started it by saying, "well there is no real Jason but the set where the first movie was filmed did happen to be a little spooky..." I mean sure BWP wasn't real, but if you're going to make a sequel you stick to the premise of the first movie. Otherwise there's no point. It's like with Highlander. They created an entirely different premise for the sequel, hired Connery and Lambert, and stamped the Highlander name to it but it had nothing to do with the original. They weren't from outer space in the first film, alright? They were immortal. You don't have to add to it that they're from outer space. The original Highlander stands alone as a unique and powerful film. Everything since that first movie has been a commercial ripoff. Anyone who liked Book of Shadows (which is NOT a sequel to Blair Witch, bite me) had no proper understanding and appreciation for the original film. The prequel will be Blair Witch's final saving grace. If Myrick and Sanchez can pull that off, it'll be sweeet. Berlinger should go back to documentaries. At least until he's learned the definition of the word "continuity."

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 12:50 a.m. CST

    Do the two movies make sense together?

    by joshg2fl

    Do the videos shot in BW1 and BW2 match up? The video the characters shot in the first movie doesn't show them killing each other like the video shot in the second one does. In the first one, the one guy disappears, and the other two die in the house...we think. Is this a problem, an inconsistancy? This isn't a big complaint about this sequal, because this witch can choose to kill people however she wants. And, in the first one, they could have killed each other in the basement and we just didn't see it. That was just something I was thinking about and wondered if anyone else thought about the same thing.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 12:52 a.m. CST

    BW1 not real?

    by cmr80

    First of all I'd like to say I liked BW2 a great deal for the reasons Harry stated and more. It was really the only way that BW1 could have been followed; to do another "lo-tech all shot on video" like the first would have been redundant and boring, but this movie managed to take everything about the first one and expand it for a "regular" movie format. The elements that made the first movie interesting: raw emotions of scared people grating against each other, group hysteria, an ending that raises more questions than it answers - pretty much the same question of "was this just overactive imaginations of people already obsessed with witch legend, or was it a group of people manipulated by a supernatural being?" But anyway, my question is, in the BW2 world, is BW1 not real? That's the impression people on this board seem to be giving, but my impression from the movie was that BW1 takes place in the same continuity as BW2. In the BW Universe, a group of kids went off to search for the Blair Witch in 1995, they disappeared, their footage was later found in the abandoned cabin of <whatever that guy's name was> and made into a movie in 1999. The movie was a success, which caused Blair Witch mania (a lot like in our own world) and people began selling memorobilia, etc on the internet, and giving tours, which leads to the events which occur in BW2. I thought this was pretty straightforward, especially from the fact that the kids in BW2 actually visited many of the locations from BW1, including the cabin where the tapes were found.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 2 a.m. CST

    Come on Harry...

    by Rylz

    Calling a film "Intelligent" is a nice way to make your opinion look superior. It relieves you of all the burden of appearing to be a dope who liked a movie. This movie was a poorly put together waste of time. I left the theatre wondering who was drinking and taking the drugs, the cast or the director. The only really distrubing thing in this movie was the crazy drowned girl walking backwards. The dialog was horrible and totally unnatural. The imagery was barely connected to the plot of the movie. Ideas were briefly discussed in the movie then never reached any sort of development or closure. This was the typical "lets take some cool ideas and throw them together but not really go anywhere" movie. This site is really good when it comes to rumors etc, but the reviews are really misleading lately. Time to start watching movies in a crowded theatre for fun again Harry. It's doing you no good to watch them in a sparsely populated screening room.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 5:22 a.m. CST

    19 more reasons to hate BoS

    by Zachsmind

    Book of Shadows is bad on many fronts. 1) The dialogue was wooden: people just don't talk like that. 2) The alleged plot twists were predictable. 3) The whole lack of continuity is pathetic. 4) The storyline [there was a storyline??] had obviously been decided upon by committee even though allegedly the director wrote it himself. And I think half of the storyline was re-decided in POST. 5) They called their flat characters *archetypes* when they were really insulting stereotypes that were not thought out and gave the ironically talented actors very little decent meat to work with. 6) The stylized montages of visuals were purposefully designed to disorient and confuse the audience and all they did was make me crave the shaky cam from the first film because that annoyed me less. 7) There's zero suspense, because they show you in the first twenty minutes of the film which characters survive to get interrogated by the police, and which ones curl up and die. 8) Any film must stay true to the world it creates. It creates rules within itself and as long as it keeps true to those rules the audience will go along with it. BoS repeatedly broke its own rules as well as the rules of the previous film, so the end result is the BoS world which admits the BWP world was fake ends up looking more fake than its predecessor. 9) "Play the video backwards!" How laughable! How can one possibly record BACKWARDS on videotape!? It can't be done. The plot elements of this movie threw suspension of disbelief out the window. 10) There is nothing raw and real in Book of Shadows. 11) It's all scripted. 12) It's too practiced. 13) It's blatantly phoney. 14) There's no desire on the part of the audience to relate to these characters. 15) The humor was bad and forced. The old man under the fridge who was still there when Kim came back, saying "I'm finally finished." Ooh groaner. How many Heather Donahues does it take to screw in a lightbulb? Ooh groaner. Erica questioning why there was no sex in the first film. Ooh groaner. 16) What's with the tree? Was the tree supposed to be funny or scary? Then the tree isn't there in the video footage. That supposed to mean something? It was an exercise in ambiguity and futility. That's what it was. 17) I've known A LOT of pagans and wiccans in my lifetime. No offense to any of them. I love them dearly, but I have NEVER met a wiccan who looks as good as Erica naked. And Kim's make-up was flawless all the way through the trip into the woods. Not possible. The actors looked too perfect. Even the acts of violence were too clean and polished. 18) There's a reason why most movies take over a year to make. This one took less than eight months. And it SHOWS. Looks held together with Elmer's Glue. 19) The soundtrack didn't do anything to help build the feel of the storyline, but man it did sound cool. Made me wish I was out at a dance club with friends instead of watching this dreck. The music had little to do with the film itself. Just more commercial claptrap. OH MAN I could keep going ripping this film to shreds. It's just too easy.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 7:48 a.m. CST

    All-Time Funniest line on TB...?

    by Napolean Wilson

    "Made me wish I was out at a club with friends instead of watching this dreck" - Zachsmind. Uh, yeah. I'm not saying you don't have friends or that you've never been out to a club but scrolling through this talkback and seeing that you've already left like five or six long, rambling posts leads me to believe that a social life just isn't your forte. Not to mention the fact that you said you saw BW2 at 10:30 in the morning (probably alone) on the day it came out. Definitely the mark of a busy, sought-after man. And is 10:30 in the morning the time most people think "Gee, I wish I was out clubbing with my friends"? BW2 was a disappointing movie to be sure but most of your criticisms are stretching for it ("Most Wiccans I know don't look that good naked"). So bottom line - the movie didn't do it for you. But look at it this way - it obviously gave you something to focus your energy on for the last few days. I think you probably needed it. Wilson out.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 9:09 a.m. CST

    the real blair witch

    by star80

    a friend who saw the movie let me know that eric roberts plays the sheriff. now im goin!

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 9:18 a.m. CST


    by Oingo Boingo

    Why do you have to result to some lame insults because some of us didn't care for this film. Man, Your position is rock solid! I'm a changed person now! You opened my eyes! If you have a problem with some of the negative reviews, maybe you should debate certain points and the authors that post them. Don't make some blanket "RETARD" statement. It just make your viewpoint weak. Mmmm... and are you implying only those who like this film have brains and can understand what Berlingers was trying to say with this film. If you do? Then you are the most closed mind person so far. I didn't think the film worked for what Joe was trying to do, in fact, I think it's down right poor. You like the film and I don't have a problem with that at all. I don't think your a "RETARD" because you liked the film and our opinions clash! Sheesh... Are we all suppose to have some collective thought center. Btw: If someone has an inkling of interest in a film, they should just go see it and try not to let a review sway their opinion. We can all make up our own minds for ourselves. OH!, I did see the film this past Friday afternoon at 1:00, at the Ridge theater with my girlfriend, and if you think I didn't, I'm suffering over a hour blackout like those drugged out characters in BW2. Mmmmmm... Apartment/Blackout/Shopping..Where did that time go? Have to go review the tapes!

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 9:46 a.m. CST

    fitting the pieces of Blair Witch 2 together

    by greenlightscafe

    blair witch 2 is a great movie, but it's very confusing with flashbacks, flashforwards, the stuff on the tapes, what is a dream, or wishful thinking, or omission for sanity, or the witch controlling. The film does deliver and it does satisfy, but to help myself fit the pieces together better in my mind I've developed a very in-depth webpage on There are spoiler warnings, but if you've seen the movie and enjoyed and want to talkback to me, check it out. Like our six blockbusters we're trying to sell, it's intelligent and entertaining. Enjoy.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 1:23 p.m. CST

    Mentally challenged individuals

    by Eyegore

    Why do you think I'm calling you a retard? If you went back and read what I said, you'd see I only said that two thirds of the people here are like that. I also said it would be likely that 80% of them would blast this movie without seeing it. I leave a good 20-33% of the people out of that blanket statement because I assume they're not retarded, probably intelligent, and might or might not agree with me but will at least have an open mind. Stop jumping to the conclusion I'm calling YOU a retard just because you disagree with me. And I have to add it's because of shit like this that I'm so jaded towards this whole crowd. Re-read a post before you reply to it. Jeez.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 2:37 p.m. CST

    So sad...

    by a touch of zen

    Harry, next time Artisan or any other studio calls you, wants to set up a special screening for you and plans to bring the director with them, just say "no!" That is, if you want to be considered as a legitimate critic or even taken seriously. Harry, remember! They may wine and dine you but they're not your friends. They don't even like you. Remember "Almost Famous?" And you're not even a legitimate critic. Hollywood makes fun of you. They rely on you when they know they have a stinker. What's so sad is that Harry doesn't know it. When I discovered your site a few years ago, I was thrilled. AICN really challenged Hollywood like no other in the past and those assholes in Armani suits were running scared. So they started kissing Harry's ass (Hollywood fears and revers power). Had he not accepted their sweet offers, Harry would've remained a true guru. How cool it must've been if Harry didn't give a shit about them. Let me tell you something. Hollywood doesn't fear Harry any more. Because they know it's easy to buy him out. Having his quote on a national TV doesn't mean a victory for AICN. We all know whenever there's a quote from some website or obscure newspaper, you know the picture's in trouble. Harry, you should find this insulting. Because you've become a laughing stock in Hollywood. Those publicists at Artisan should apologize to all of us because as they made fun of you, they made fun of all of us. Harry, you're entitled to your own opinion. You could hate or love BWP2. Yes, I would like to believe you liked it. Then why is it that I hesitate to believe you?

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 2:52 p.m. CST

    Eyegore...Double Jeez!

    by Oingo Boingo

    I didn't take your first message as a personal affront. I didn't read your first message and think to myself " This guy is calling me a retard "! So you are wrong by jumping to that conclusion. I suppose my message to you can be viewed as ambiguous as your initial post was to my eyes. Hey!, and guess what? I did read your post fully. I'm only telling you, without making specific points to what people are posting, your initial post comes off as a blanket statement.<- please read that sentence again. Your use of two thirds/80% doesn't cover your position in my view! You said in your response back to me: " I leave a good 20-33% of the people out of that blanket statement because I assume they're not retarded, probably intelligent, and might or might not agree with me but will at least have an open mind. Even you state it's a BLANKET statement in your reply. Again, unless your specific, how are the one's who have a opposing view suppose to know who you are insulting? You were just throwing out insults and without addressing them to something, or someone, you just set yourself up. You said: " And I have to add it's because of shit like this that I'm so jaded towards this whole crowd." Your follow up reply clears things up a bit. Your initial post just sets yourself up. You said in your first post:"But to appreciate it, you have to have a brain...something about two thirds of the people here are lacking. " Again!, that is an ambiguous statement, but I guess everyone is suppose to know who your insults are directed towards? You said in your first post: "I can only skim these replies, I can see it's full of retards who did read the spoiler review, then 80% of them commence bitching and putting the movie down as the worst movie of the summer without bothering to go see it. " You can only skim through the messages, but right away make assumptions on those posts????? Hey!, who said this was the worst movie of the SUMMER????? The movie was released in Fall right? And you were telling ME to re-read your post? Double Jeez.......

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 3:29 p.m. CST

    Setting myself up?

    by Eyegore

    Oingo, how do you know I wasn't responding to Zachsmind's post? You only assume I was talkng to you. Heh. Actually I don't like directing my posts at specific people because it just leads to stupid flamewars. I like to generalize and make blanket statements, but I always leave room for you the intelligent reader to squeeze out of them and say yeah I agree, those people suck. Anyway, I read about a dozen posts from people who hadn't seen the movie but couldn't wait for it to come out before bashing it before making my blanket statement. I still stand by it. The majority of talkbackers talk out of their asses. Notice I didn't include you or myself in that blanket statement. heh

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 5:51 p.m. CST

    it was actually pretty damn good.

    by Westrum

    I was skeptical even after reading Harry's praise of it, but having seen it I admit that it was BRILLIANT. I loved the movie. But, like the first, it's being marketed in a way that is misleading. It's not truly horrific, although there are some truly unsettling moments. Instead, it deals with the idea of group hysteria. I loved it, and in many ways it's the equal of the first.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 7:29 p.m. CST

    just as a devil's advocate...

    by Nightshot

    I liked the movie.. I really did. I thought it was disturbing and well made.. bringing up some very good points. However, here's something that occured to me. The first one was a scary movie where something was screwing with the characters. **spoiler alert** this one was TOTALLY different, but it was called Blair Witch..I guess I would feel jipped if They Slapped the name A Nightmare On Elm Street on a movie that never featured Freddy, but only alluded to him. So.. from that point of view, I understand. Might have been better if this were completely seperate from BW, because as a standalone movie.. I thought It worked. it just was TOTALLY different.

  • Oct. 29, 2000, 10:45 p.m. CST


    by DEVO

    About a third of the way through this movie, I honestly felt like getting up and walking out. It was that bad. The acting was terrible and the story was confusing to follow. I really think this movie could have been a lot better. Instead, they tried to make it seem like a feature movie based on a true story. And it didn't quite work. (And they also ripped off a scene from an old 60's documentary about an insane asylum that I once saw in a film class in college. I forget the name). They definately missed the mark with this dud. Bad!

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 3:48 a.m. CST

    Why do I think you called us retards?

    by Zachsmind

    Let me repeat out of context. Eyegore said: "I can see it's full of retards who did read the spoiler review..." That's why I think you're calling most of us in here retards. I did read the spoiler review on purpose. I purposefully spoiled the first film for myself. I didn't go into it the first time thinking gee this is for real. I suspended disbelief for the purposes of the film, but I wasn't "taken in." I enjoyed the first film immensely. I wanted to appreciate this second one. I went in wanting to like it. Harry said he liked it so that was on my mind as I was watching it. The movie sucked. Plain and simple. Oh and one more thing. People who call people retards are retards. *smirk*

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 3:53 a.m. CST

    Why I think Eyegore called us retards?

    by Zachsmind

    Harry's message board is freaking on me cuz this post didn't show up the first time so I'm gonna try to send it again and I'll bet you when I do it'll either not show up at all or appear twice. Let me repeat Eyegore's words out of context. Eyegore said: "I can see it's full of retards who did read the spoiler review..." That's why I think you're calling most of us in here retards. I did read the spoiler review on purpose. I purposefully spoiled the first film for myself. I didn't go into it the first time thinking gee this is for real. I suspended disbelief for the purposes of the film, but I wasn't "taken in." I enjoyed the first film immensely. I wanted to appreciate this second one. I went in wanting to like it. Harry said he liked it so that was on my mind as I was watching it. The movie sucked. Plain and simple. Oh and one more thing. People who call people retards are retards. *smirk*

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 5:56 a.m. CST


    by GEEKBASHER 3.0

    So my best friend called me and said he DID Not GET IT...I JUST TOLD HIM, "well bitch, you haaave been on the wagon for three months, yer bitter, I was hung the fuck over and I HAPPENED TO LIKE THE BLAIR WTICH 2 CHACH, and FUCK YOU and hung up! end of story, they all were fucked up, and killed everyone, I love it, in the spirit of Halloween, LOVE IT...GO WATCH IT and HAVE FUN!

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 6:05 a.m. CST


    by GEEKBASHER 3.0

    HOW MANY TIMES HAVE U WALKED INTO A 7- ELEVEN at right before two and they sssaid "SORRY NO BEER" we LOCKED IT UP...WELL LET ME TELL YOU I WOULD LIKE TO FUCK YOU UP THE ASS WITH A CHAINSAW THANK YOU VERY MUCH" but I can't cuz there are cameras..... THE GOTH CHICK RULED BW2 will be a cult movie, trust me, wiccan breast and insane guys ass' ohyeah What pisssses me off more is that MEAT the PARENTS won this weekend and the only reason why is cuz all the cool people were out doing crack and smoking EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE hello

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 7:48 a.m. CST

    Incompetent film-making

    by enmenduranna

    I'm breaking my personal code of silence to speak out in the strongest possible terms against this cynical piece of crap. One would think - if for no other reason than an overwhelming sense of guilt - that the BWP producers and/or money-men would attempt to redeem themselves for ripping off the public in the first place. (Call it 'blood money'.) You don't have to look any further than the casting of a pathetic Slim Pickens wannabe as the token authority figure. How could any director have permitted such blatant scenery-chewing? Above and beyond that obvious insult to audience intelligence, there's the insufferable endurance contest of trying to stay awake during the first 60 minutes. Abandon all hope of logical continuty here. Has this new breed of writer/director lost the ability to construct a frightening movie? OK, I was warned how bad this film was by about 2 million credible film critics; mea culpa for wasting good money on a film that should've gone straight to video. (And Harry's credibility is just about zilch these days. Won't get fooled again.) -en

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 8:09 a.m. CST

    I'm with you Harry

    by rifficman

    After taking a quick view through these postings, just wanted to let you know Harry that at least one person sides with you on this flick. Well, I side with you for the most part. I'm not as sold as you, but I was impressed......especially after a second viewing. But all this vehement towards this film leaves me slightly worried. In fact, I haven't been bothered this much by a film's reception since..........well.......since the first Blair Witch. I've learned that film fans--especialy of the sci-fi and horror genre-are inherent ball busters. It's just the way of the pocket-protector. But to have so many people denounce the first Blair Witch, to me, signifies a rather disturbing trend in movies today. Yes, it may have been overhyped. But to go ballistic on the movie because of the handheld camerawork and whatnot strikes me as insane. In the history of motion pictures, with the thousand and thousands of films made, is it such a crime to break the mold for just one film? Blair Witch was not trying to say that all fims should have that style. It was just one film. A break. A reprieve. Just one little 80-something minute movie featuring hand-held cameras, and then we can get back to regular old films. I find it frightening that not only did so many people dislike this notion, but that they reacted as vehemently as they did. I's a combination of things, I think. The death of imagination is one. And, whether these people like to admit it or not, some kind of hidden jealousy that these people did not think up the idea (I'm not claiming all of you are calm down). My god, reading some of posts slamming blair Witch makes me realize how ill-advised their criticisms are: if the movie was as poorly made as their reviews were poorly written......then we'd have something to bitch about. The combined talents of many of these people couldn't come up with a film 1/1000th as good as Blair Witch. And as for the sequel, it's not perfect by any stretch of the imagination. Nor is it nearly as good as the original. But there is something rare going on here people--intelligent ideas are at play here. This is a sequel with something on its mind, and instead the same cynical people go ballistic. I'm not completely sold on the sequel. There are definite problems here, but there are definite ideas here as well, and the fact that 90% of these people slam the movie suggests that their MTV is turned up too loud and their reading lamps are unplugged. People slam idiotic and vapid horror sequels, and then slam ones that at the very least try to be original and bring something to the table. Well, I for one agree with Harry for the most part and want to thank Joe Berlinger for this.

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 12:17 p.m. CST

    The Last Broadcast

    by Fertility Hollis

    is on TV tomorrow night. Is that worth watching?

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 2:12 p.m. CST

    Even WORSE than the original...(spolier)

    by lemon1

    When I saw the first one I wasn't expecting much. Eventually, though, I got into it. I mean, it's something of an experimental film after all, no script, right? (by the way, if you think this is "revolutionary" at all, go to your local library, check a book out on Film History, and read about the French New Wave, you'll be pleasantly surprised). I gotta be honest though, playing on peoples' fear of being lost in the woods, a popular nightmare, is a pretty good idea. Now on to the REAL crap-load: whereas the first one dealt with more or less real people, this one goes straight to unrealistic clich

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 2:23 p.m. CST

    Insultingly Awful

    by Roxychick

    I ventured to the theatre based on the accolades bestowed by Harry - I used to respect his opnion, no longer. This film is just awful from the acting - that Sherrif was a joke and where'd they find that Stephen guy - to the entire "film lies, only video tells the truth" premise. It was unfair and manipulative and not intelligent enough to follow through with that interesting idea. Do not go to see this movie - it is a waste of time and money!

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 3:11 p.m. CST

    Sell-out: spies v. screenings.

    by LSHB

    Harry's got problems, and the trend from using spies and rats to find out the goods to the current spate of free screenings and ego-strokes from the hollywood execs is a big indicator. I agree that once Hollywood has fully tamed Harry, the party stops. The talkbacks themselves will probably disappear or be even more heavily 'moderated' to include only viewpoints like those expressed by all those B:E Scientology plants. There's still time to step back from the brink, such as, oh, writing legitimate reviews of bad films despite the favor you were shown, instead of the diplomatic, wishy-washy "perhaps it's not as good as [classic] but" language I always read in reviews of films that turn out to be god-awful. I actually wrote Harry an email when I saw that his quote was in the BW2 commercial, but that was before I realized they'd paid him for it.

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 8:28 p.m. CST


    by freakorange

    This movie was amazing! Superlative! Marlon Brando is a genius actor. The depth he brought to the role of the Blair Witch was heartbreaking. Meryl Streep is a shoe-in for best actress as the tormented college student lost in the woods. Samuel L. Jackson rocked the foundation as the local yokel Sheriff Motherfucker who investigates the murders. John Woo's direction tops all past efforts. And the script by playwright Neil Simon was pure gold. Terrifying, yet funny. I give the whole experience 'two big toes up a nun's butt'!

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 10:59 p.m. CST

    Look how the last four people missed the point entirely

    by Eyegore

    (not counting the moron above talking about meryl streep and neil simon). It looks to me that they all thought it was some kind of drug induced mass delusion. Purely scientific. Didn't it occur to you that it was the blair witch that made them see things as they did, just like in the first movie when they had a perfectly good map and yet couldn't find thier way out of the woods. Remember int he first movie when Heather screamed that they had walked in the same direction all day and it just didn't make sense they went in a circle? It was the blair witch. Just like this big halucination. This is what the big ending is about when the characters are shown what really happened. It's the same type of horror as that moment when Heather realized they had walked in a complete circle. Logic fails and the only explanation left is the supernatural. So of course all you can do is say how much it sucks. You just didn't get it. Besides, you know you wanted it to suck. Roxychick went in after reading Harry's total spoiler review...what's left after reading that? All you can do is sit and be critical. No suprises, no suspense. I wouldn't be suprised if most of the people who post here that the movie sucked went in the same state, knowing basically everything about the movie and chomping at the bit come back here and slam it. It was a good movie. Better than all the screams combined, and that's good enough. It's not the best horror movie ever made, but it stands out above the vast majority of so called horror movies we're used to these days.

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 11:11 p.m. CST

    What was real and what wasn't

    by Eyegore

    I've only seen it once so I'm not positive how much is assumed to have been fake about the first movie. All of that conan obrian, jay leno stuff works the same if heather, josh, and the other guy actually did disappear in the woods or if they were just actors. I think it's assumed that they were actors and their whole story was fake. But that's where it ends. I really think this movie assumes the whole blair witch history is real. The witch was real as was rustin parr and everything he did. But it's all history, stuff to tell ghost stories about and make a fake mocumentary about (BW1) but in this movie (like the first one) the characters find out there's more to it than just ghost stories, and fall victim to the blair witch's curse after thumbing their noses at it.

  • Oct. 30, 2000, 11:22 p.m. CST


    by Eyegore

    Oh yeah, well there's a good chance that people who call people who call people retards redards and post it twice and think they didn't might be mentally challened. Okay? Give it up. *smirk*

  • Oct. 31, 2000, 11:55 a.m. CST

    You can do it!

    by Ree-vew-ur

    "No, no! Type the commands in backwards!"

  • Oct. 31, 2000, 12:57 p.m. CST

    Yes Backwards yrraH!!

    by lemon1

    Because apparently digital video tape is no different than a vynil record. At least according to the "geniuses" who came up with this "film". Hey I wonder what happens if you play Cocoon backwards, I mean, that s*** is scarier that BOTH Blair Witch movies.

  • Oct. 31, 2000, 2:15 p.m. CST

    by supershauna

  • Nov. 1, 2000, 12:31 a.m. CST

    Comments on gripes and questions *spoilers*

    by Minion Hunter

    Excuse the novel. OK, let me say that I didn

  • Nov. 1, 2000, 8:21 a.m. CST

    End of an era.

    by Moochbaby

    The prophesies are-self fulfilling. Some time ago I read an article suggesting that once AICN reached it's full potential, it would eat itself. And lo! Harry was schmoozed by gracious filmmakers, and the sky did darken, and I was horribly mislead by the steaming pile of shit they called a review. And I paid five entire pounds for the privelige. OK, from now on I will stick to reading the publicity for the film, at least that doesn't have any pretentions to integrity. Your days as a beacon of truth are over, maybe you should ask SKG for a job.

  • Nov. 1, 2000, 11:19 a.m. CST

    Video backwards...

    by Jarek

    This is response to all the idiots who are trashing BW2 because they allegedly play the video backwards: that isn't what happened..... they simply ran the keystrokes backwards. Not the actual video. But what difference does that make? If you look at the theme of the film, you will realize that them "doing stuff backward" was a part of their fantasy/story that was not real, and fits in with all the supernatural stuff that happened. The missing video was always there, they just couldn't see it because they chose not to. When they run the video "backwards" they are finally accepting the truth, and are letting themselves see what really happened. Hence, backwards video/keystrokes happens in fantasy and is logical.

  • Nov. 1, 2000, 5:28 p.m. CST

    kiss hairy's knolls = get positive review

    by di11rod

    Shawn F and Devo are right on the money. Pay homage to Harry and you'll get a positive review. This is the oldest PR trick, and real journalists know to avoid it. That's why the FilmThreat people were dead-on in that piece they did about how Harry's not a film critic (i.e. journalist). "oh, we love your writing, Harry. Please come down to our film set and meet the actors!" "Oh, thanks for that great review, Harry. You're brilliant!" ugh. I loved Brother's Keeper, but I think Roger Ebert says it best in his review of BW2: (from "This is not one of Joe Berlinger's proudest days." Oh, and while I'm crapping on Harry Knowles, I should probably point out the hypocrisy of his saying that he's into 'Art House' films. How many of those did you ever see get reviewed / hyped/ mentioned on this site compared to the number of Godzilla, Phantom Crapace films? In fact, if you search this site for any of Joe B's films (Brother's Keeper, Paradise Lost, etc.) you won't find a single review or blurb about them. AICN is completely ignorant to his earlier work, but painfully celebrates this piece of poo.

  • Nov. 2, 2000, 9:20 a.m. CST


    by DoJoTy

    After several years of reading AICN and having a fair amount of respect for Harry (which I almost lost once before when he raved about Godzilla), I now must admit that I have lost ALL respect for you, sir, after seeing your review of Blair Witch 2. This was a conventional "post-modern teen horror screamfest" with a little bit of satirical commentary sprinkled on top that had nothing to do with the original classic, or with good horror filmmaking. No wonder Myrick and Sanchez have distanced themselves from this poor, greed-driven excuse for a horror film. As for you, Harry...hmm, a trip to NYC nets a rave for Godzilla (surely one of the most cynical pieces of shit to ever be vomited out of Hollywood) and a private screening yields a highly positive review for BW2. Methinks your credibility is slipping, friend. You should rethink your priorities, and how highly manipulative influences are affecting your critical judgment, lest you become just another shill for the Hollywood marketing machine.

  • Nov. 4, 2000, 6:22 a.m. CST

    Uh Oh... Did we see the same movie?

    by mastvam

  • Nov. 4, 2000, 7:14 a.m. CST

    Uh Oh... Did we see the same movie?

    by mastvam

    Harry and all, the movie you described was the movie that I wanted to see, and I think the movie that Joe wanted us to see, but desire does not equate with reality, and no matter how much I tried to buy into this film, the elements you spoke of were only suggested, and, perhaps, attempted, but they were not successfully pulled off. Essentially this movie covers the same reality vs. perception ground as such movies as Jacob's Ladder, or even The Sixth Sense, but in every way that those movies succeed, this one failed. Now don't get me wrong. I loved pretty much everything about the first movie, and what I loved the most about it was that it set up a strict set of rules about the mythology and the reality of the experience, and then had some very competent actors improvise their way through that world and those rules, but this movie did the exact opposite. There were no rules... the story went all over the place, hallucinations upon hallucinations, and it was all written off by essentially saying, 'it is not real, the rules don't apply...' The hell they don't! By using this method to cover everything from script weaknesses to continuity problems, they missed the mark on everything that was cool about the first movie. I went into this movie ready to forgive some weaknesses, I liked the first one that much, and I am still dying to find out what the original crew will do with the prequel... but this movie just got lost in the woods. I spent the entire hour and a half sitting there, saying to myself, this is going to twist me in the end, they are not going to pull the 'we did the bad thing and just don't remember it' trick, but they did just that, and like watching a large buffalo in the tracks ahead, the train never braked and sped right into the worst place the Blair Witch mythos could lead to. Even the general plot would not have been a bad idea, but it was executed in such a bad made-for-TV style that I just am planning on forgetting that this movie was ever made. If they had just made a film about kids getting fucked up and severely misbehaving in the woods, it would have been a much better film, but their entire time in the warehouse whining, looking over the tapes, and worrying about whether they 'brought something back' or not was just wrong. I should have run screaming when the video cameras came out. Just in case we see something? Uh, no

  • Nov. 4, 2000, 3:55 p.m. CST

    Dull. Pure and Simple

    by Flix

    Hi Harry. I loved "The Blair Witch Project." Going into "Book of Shadows" I knew I wasn't going to like it as much as the first by any means. In the end I can say that while I didn't hate "Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2" I can say that it was very slow paced. It was painfully obvious what was happening very early. Now, why didn't the actors see that? This movie took way too long to get to where it was going. This movie could have had about 30 minutes cut out of it and it would have been better. The actors cannot be faulted. They certainly do an acceptable job given the bad script.

  • Nov. 5, 2000, 8:56 p.m. CST

    BW2 sucked ass

    by NHLfreak

    This is the worst movie I have ever wasted my money on, there aren't enough words in the english language to describe how much this sucked. I felt like asking for my money back at the end of it. what was the point of this stupid dumbass movie? I would really like to know what kind of idiot could come up with this retarded movie. It's pathetic

  • Nov. 6, 2000, 4:20 a.m. CST



    I went in not expecting much and I actualy thought it was worse than what the trailer looked liked. It didn't go anywhere it didn't say anything. A complete waste of time money and effort. Oh the kid use to be in an asylum. SO. There was a tree there now there isn't oh well lets just forget about it shall we. It could have been about anything but slap the Blair Witch name on it cause it will sell a whole lot better. One of the worst I have even seen. a rival for Spawn.

  • Nov. 12, 2000, 4:12 p.m. CST


    by Angry Catholic

    Wow...So now were told goths are psycic and can fortell the futrure and are this opressed class who needs protection...BULL SHIT KILL EM ALL>>>>>

  • Nov. 17, 2000, 5:19 a.m. CST

    1 out of 10?!

    by andymunro

    After voting for bw2 (I gave it a 9), I was pretty much in shock after seeing that more than a 1/4 of the votes gave the film 1/10. How the fuck this film can only be rated 1/10 by anyone who has seen the film is beyond me. My girlfriend saw the film with me the other night and although didn't like it as much as me or the first film still said it was a middlr of the road type of film. I hold my hands up high to admit that when I saw the advertising campaign for the film I could expect nothing more than a shite cash in on the name of the first movie. But when I was in the cinema watching the actual movie, all I wanted was the film to end as quickly as possible so I could get out of the dark, claustrophic, and head fucking world that I let my self get sucked into. I just wanted to feel normal again! That's why I rate the film so highly. I watch alot of films, on average 2 or 3 a day, and I am a would be fan of horror films, if only more of them actually worried me. I'm starting to see that it isn't actuall horror films that are scary movies, they are in fact the phscological headfuckers that are scary. Out of the hundreds of horror films that I have watched, only 2 have given me the feeling of scaredness, Candyman and Blairwitch Project. BW2 will be added to my headfuck film list which include Videodrome and Scanners (2 Cronnenburg films i know, but 2 very dark and twisted films I'm sure). For a director to actually achieve what the audience asks, is a feat only perfected every now and then, and even then not completely perfected. This film locked me into a world of hysteria a paranoia for two short hours that seemed to close in on me like being trapped in a box that keeps getting smaller. It was though I felt what the characters felt, and quite a few times during the film I muttered fuck me in disbelief at waht I had just witnessed. The direction of this film was faultless, the characters strong and the script great but for a few cheesy lines. Overall this film has been let down before it was even released by a piss poor advertising campaign which in my mind should have destroyed if not all the links to the first film calling itself a sequel. It's good enough to go it alone without the back up of its predecessor. I'll argue happily with anyone who honestly believes it deserves 1/10, you weren't watching the same movie I was! Andy Munro

  • Nov. 17, 2000, 2:36 p.m. CST

    If BW 1 were a person, I'd make love to it......

    by Mister Man

    But, BW2 deserves to die. May I personally do the deed?

  • Nov. 20, 2000, 6:38 p.m. CST

    BW2, Harry, paranoia x2, *SPOILERS*

    by Warlock One

    Gotta love all these people accusing Harry of having been bought to give a good review. Little warning shots over the bow of someone who dares to have an opinion different from your own. I'm just waiting for the alt.flamewars crowd to suggest that Mr. Knowles was bribed to give a bad review of a movie by a competing studio... The paranoia deepens, the plot thickens. That being said... I really wanted to like this movie. I went into it relatively uninformed, knowing mostly that the original BW was one of the most genuinely scary and disturbing films I'd ever seen and that this was probably going to be different in style, but that was okay. The director had a good reputation, the preview displays I'd seen looked like there was going to be a serious attempt to deepen the legend... I'm sorry, this movie is bad. Don't get me wrong, compared to one of the "I Know What You Did Last Summer"s or some such, it's okay, having a bit more depth and a decent attempt to scare in ways more psychological than gore-oriented. But it didn't scare me, and it didn't make me want to bother going through the sort of deep analysis some of the talkbackers have obviously gone through in order to enrich their own movie-watching experience. I'm not knocking them- they liked it, and examining it makes it more rewarding for them, more power to 'em. It didn't seem worth it to me. Most of the connections they tried to make to the first film seemed trivial and obligatory, with the "recreation based upon actual events" note at the beginning being especially laughable. In trying to tie in to the expanding BW mythology they did better, but so much of the tone of the first film was ignored. And no, I'm not talking about the shaky camera- get a life, people, can't you see anything past the most basic production values? I mean things like caring about the characters, letting the tone rise out of the situation naturally, feelings of isolation and helplessness in the face of the natural and supernatural. It never bothered me when someone was killed in this movie, because I'd never really gotten a chance to give a damn about most of them. The situation they find themselves in is incredibly contrived, whether it's supernatural or psychological hallucination. Rather than sticking together and trying to think things through, the idiots start sniping at each other and getting paranoid in a manner I felt was flat unbelievable, accelerated by the dictates of the plot rather than any manner of character development or believable dialogue. Your wife has a miscarriage- is your first inclination going to be to stick around a spooky warehouse near where it happened? Or are you going to want to go home to family and friends, and try to put back together the book so recently destroyed? "But the wife wanted to-" Yes. CONTRIVED!!! Even ignoring that point, if these people would either agree that what they were going through was some sort of mass hysteria or a supernatural attack, stuck it out, and stuck together, none of the "tragic" events of the plot had to happen. Frankly, if it IS all psychological, I don't find the amount of hallucinations and misrecollections they have in common remotely credible, even with "horror movie-level suspension of disbelief" set to maximum. The original Blair Witch scared me by knowing the scariest things were in my mind, what was implied, what I discovered for myself. This piece of drek uses too much horror pacing, horror angles (we can't see his face- do you think when he turns around we'll see something scary?!), too much inappropriately timed bad rock music (buy the album at...) ... All I can say is, it's a pity. This will probably kill one of the few hopeful points on the horizon of independent film-makers.

  • Nov. 21, 2000, 1:09 p.m. CST


    by Jupee

    I loved the first movie even when everyone else dogged it. But this movie absolutely sucked. The ending was pulled out of somebodies ass and the acting was horrible

  • Nov. 27, 2000, 10:36 p.m. CST

    You stole 2 hours of my life

    by AnnaO

    I was willing to give Harry's review the benefit of the doubt, despite the fact that it sounded like he was falling all over himself trying to justify a film that never should have been made. BWP was scary as hell, a unique and welcome departure from the usual nonsense at the megaplex. BW2, on the other hand, was just plain awful. Nothing in this movie was scary. Nothing. I - and most of the people in the crowded theater - LAUGHED at anything and everything that was supposed to be scary or creepy. And get off your high horses people, like Moriarty said in his Unbreakable review "I got it, I just didn't like it." What began as a moderately interesting plot quickly devolved into a jumble of nonsense - with bizarre, creepy, shock value items thrown in that made utterly no sense. I think they were there to keep us awake, because Berlinger utterly failed to create or maintain ANY tension whatsoever. The only thing that kept my attention was the desire to see what element of the film would fail next. Archetypes? Come on Harry! The characters were shallow jokes - ooooh a hot wicca! ooooh a rebel goth! hahaha - characters just as bad as the stereotypes in any crass movie more concerned with its own overblown "creativity" than its story or characters. Did anyone involved in the production watch this at the end and say "hang on a second. there's nothing scary, haunting, or in any way compelling about any of this?" Did anyone say "Is this really how you're going to end it?" I guess not. The riduculous ending - someone actually threw something at the screen in my theater - was the icing on the cake. As I walked out shaking my head, I realized this schlock was no better than any of the other crap being put out these days. Throwing in some 'cool' rebel characters and referencing a different, better movie doesn't prevent schlock from being schlock. This baby was doomed before the cameras ever started to roll. And to those who agree with Harry's misguided review - while I respect you, nobody likes intellectual snobs. This movie wasn't more sophisticated than I was. In fact, this movie wasn't sophisticated at all. Harry - now that you've had a taste of fame, please don't become a movie poster apologist like Paul "Terrific!" Wunder and Jeffrey "Fabulous!" Lyons. I swore I wouldn't be suckered into another BS studio sequel, and I feel like a fool for grabbing at the rotten BW2 carrot being dangled in front of my face. Did she stab the clerk or didn't she? Is the bridge there or isn't it? Is the car wrecked or isn't it? zzzzzzzzzzzz.... WHO CARES. Bring on Dracula 2000 - likely to be as deep and moving a character study as this waste of time. AnnaO out.

  • Dec. 10, 2000, 6:06 p.m. CST

    Harry Knowels fans in denial.

    by Creexul

    The saddest thing on the earth. You people can't even admit that a bad movie is bad unless Harry tells you?

  • Feb. 27, 2001, 5:55 p.m. CST


    by Aimster

    I'm sorry you guys but I LIKED this movie!! It was CREEPY. It was nothing at all like the first, thank goodness. That never would have worked. Some of the dialogue was pretty retarded. But it was still good. A little bit like Scream, where a movie inspires media attention and violence, etc. But it had the whole scary, supernatural element to it! It also had a little bit of the Event Horizon flavor, also.( It would be interesting to do the frame by frame thing.) There was one thing I DIDN'T really get. What was up with all the flashbacks to the one dude being in a mental institution?? And what did that have to do with the price of eggs?? All aside, I liked it. It was spooky. I made my husband get up and shut the closet door before I could go to sleep. :) Aimster

  • March 17, 2003, 10:58 a.m. CST

    can you say paid off?

    by cyber

    nuff said