"In October of 1994, three students filmmakers disappeared in the woods near Burkittsville, Maryland while shooting a documentary. A year later their footage was found."

I first took notice of "The Blair Witch Project" on the Internet before the entire media blitz hit hard. I used to visit the official site, wondering what the film was about, e-mailed the directors of the flick to get some info and read about the film wherever I could. One night, I got preview tickets for the movie and my brother and I hit the theatre to check it out. Once the film was over, both my bro and I came out with our stomachs in knots. We felt like we just had lost three close friends. It wasn’t a pleasant feeling.

"The Blair Witch Project" is a one-shot deal, a great idea that Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez fully capitalized on first. I applaud them for every aspect of it. Be it the marketing which they commandeered on the Net, passing the film as “real life” found footage, the fake documentaries that played on TV ("The Curse of The Blair Witch" is the only one I saw) that supported the film’s claims and the actual film itself, which effectively milked the most obvious low budget film location (the woods) to its full potential. The film successfully taps into our fear of being lost in the woods at night and apart from Jason Voorhees, I think everybody is afraid of that.

But what made the movie really work for me was not only that I got attached to the kids throughout the film, but that I also felt like I was there with them. The film is shown from the kid’s POV and we walk through the nightmare with them. When they got lost, I got lost. When they heard sounds, I heard sounds. When they were scared, I was scared. Since the film isn’t shot in a slick “professional” way (it's shot with a camcorder and a 16 mm BNW camera), the line between reality and fiction is blurred. That made it possible for me to get fully swallowed by the world of this film. The acting by the three leads also helped the film’s case. Since everything (dialogue included) was mostly improvised, their reactions felt genuine and unrehearsed. That made everything seem so much more real.

I’ve heard people complain about the “shaky cam” effect which the film sports and how it gave them headaches. I even read that some audience members with “motion sickness” hurled in the theatres at the time of its big screen release. Fortunately for me, I have a strong stomach and the “shaky cam” didn’t bother me one bit. To me, it added a level of mystery to the film and reinforced the feeling that I was there. Having some of the shots be blurry, dark or badly framed kept me on my toes and had me searching the screen trying to figure out what the hell was going down. How’s that for audience participation?

The film’s concept does result in a few lapses in logic though. First off, I don’t know any student filmmakers that would waste so much film stock, shooting everything and anything. Film stock costs lots of money and these kids didn’t look rich to me. I also doubt that they would be shooting themselves during the more tumultuous moments. Take the finale for example: being in their shoes I would’ve tossed that camera aside and ran like a bitch in heat! But on the flip side, my brother brought up a good point: they used the cameras as flashlights to see where they were going. Do I buy it? I guess…

The film cost around $37,000 to make and has pulled in over $200 million worldwide.

The film was shot in Maryland’s Seneca Creek State Park near where Sanchez grew up.