Connect with us

Editorials

Spooky World-Building: Looking Back on the Sci-Fi Channel’s ‘Blair Witch’ Mockumentaries

Published

on

In professional wrestling, the concept of “Kayfabe” refers to an unspoken agreement between fans and performers to never acknowledge the fictional aspects of the sport. In the horror genre, we have something similar with the way Found Footage movies invite audiences to play along with the scares to enhance their viewing experience. And when it comes to Found Footage, no movie handled this blending of reality and fiction better than The Blair Witch Project, which was accompanied by an ingenious viral marketing campaign featuring websites, dossiers and even missing person posters.

Among this supplemental material was an infamous mockumentary known as Curse of the Blair Witch, which premiered on the Sci-Fi Channel and was instrumental in convincing audiences that the film’s footage was meant to be taken seriously. A year later, Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2 had its own lesser-known tie-ins with Ben Rock‘s The Burkittsville 7 and Shadow of the Blair Witch. It’s been over two decades since these TV specials first aired, but I think they’re still worth talking about after helping to solidify the Blair Witch franchise in popular culture.

Directed by the same duo behind its parent production, Curse of the Blair Witch originally hit television screens in the summer of 1999. Through archival footage and interviews with friends and family of Heather, Mike and Josh, the hour-long special presents itself as a serious documentary about the “real” story behind the (then) upcoming Blair Witch Project. While there are occasional excerpts from the film to hype up its release, the meat of the special consists in expanding the mythology behind the titular witch and the crimes inspired by her story.

Watching supposed experts comment on the history of witchcraft and Elly Kedward’s cruel demise makes for some surprisingly entertaining television, especially with the spooky illustrations and tongue-in-cheek inclusion of faux ’70s programs. While these details aren’t really necessary to enjoy the film, they enhance the viewing experience by making the lore feel more fleshed-out and believable.

It’s also fun to see investigators discuss details from both the film and Dave Stern’s The Blair Witch Project: A Dossier like fragments of a True Crime incident. Like the film, the special still doesn’t offer up a concrete explanation for the disappearance of these young filmmakers, but piecing together the interconnected story and forming your own theories is half the fun here. In fact, Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez‘s narrative puzzle-box likely inspired viral ARGs like Marble Hornets and TheSunVanished despite predating them by literal decades.

[Related] Blumhouse and Lionsgate Join Forces for Brand New ‘The Blair Witch Project’ Movie

Elly Kedward did nothing wrong!

The added characterization of the film’s protagonists also enhances the experience from an emotional standpoint. Having loved ones comment on the victims’ personal lives before the ill-fated project makes the movie’s horrific ending hit that much harder despite being a foregone conclusion. It’s a lot easier to understand Heather’s insistence on completing her movie once you’re aware of her personal ambitions, and it’s hard not to root for Mike once you find out that he’s a lovable underachiever. The eerie revelation that the film’s footage was inexplicably found within the ruins of the Rustin Parr house also adds an extra layer of mystery to the story, with the special implying that the tapes were somehow already there when the house burned down in the 1940s.

It may lack the raw scares of the feature film, but I appreciate Curse of the Blair Witch as an exercise in spooky world-building and often revisit it alongside the main attraction. Some viewers might be bothered by the lack of a proper resolution, but I think the subtle suggestion that the events of the movie might be real are much scarier than any concrete answer, making this a worthy companion piece to the original film.

A year later, the world would see another expansion of the Blair Witch mythos through Joe Berlinger‘s strange sequel. While Book of Shadows was critically panned and more-or-less disowned by its director, the film has undergone a recent reappraisal as fans realize that it has a lot to say about mass hysteria and the negative effects of media while also serving up some quality scares and a kick-ass soundtrack. It’s still no masterpiece, but I think Blair Witch 2 is an underrated horror flick with its own peculiar backstory.

To me, the most interesting part of this sequel is the studio’s choice of director. While Artisan Entertainment must have thought that hiring the co-creator of HBO’s true crime opus Paradise Lost: The Child Murders at Robin Hood Hills would result in an even more believable Found Footage production, it turned out that Berlinger was vehemently opposed to the sub-genre. An experienced documentarian, the director believed that it was unethical to mislead audiences to sell more movie tickets, resulting in a traditional horror film simply “based on true events.”

However, that wouldn’t stop the movie’s supplemental material from blurring the line between fiction and journalism like the original film. This time, director Ben Rock was brought in to produce a pair of promotional mockumentaries expanding the lore behind Blair Witch 2. Once again airing on the Sci-Fi channel, these specials would actually borrow from Berlinger’s work in True Crime, treating the film’s story like a down-to-earth murder mystery and courtroom drama rather than a paranormal investigation.

Eerily believable.

The first of these specials, Shadow of the Blair Witch follows the prosecution of the “real” Jeff Patterson once he’s accused of the murders which supposedly inspired Berlinger’s Hollywood sequel. By revealing extra details about this troubled young man and the mysterious deaths which led to his imprisonment, the special recontextualizes Book of Shadows as a sensationalist re-enactment cashing in on a real crime, which I think makes the sequel much more interesting as the successor to a Found Footage classic.

In contrast, The Burkittsville 7 returns to the lore of the original film and chronicles the aftermath of the Rustin Parr murders through a more grounded lens, mostly ignoring the supernatural elements. With more than a little inspiration from the real world horrors of Frederick Wiseman’s Titticut Follies and classic True Crime tropes, this is one of the creepiest entries in the Blair Witch franchise as well as one of the most believable. The archival footage and interviews are eerily convincing, and the focus on mental health issues makes it a great prelude to Berlinger’s film.

This commitment to authenticity may be part of what makes these specials so effective in the first place, but it also became a source of controversy. Some viewers apparently objected to Sci-Fi presenting these fictional narratives as real events, which resulted in a minor backlash. The criticism isn’t entirely unwarranted, as misleading media has only become a bigger problem in the digital age, but I don’t think the filmmakers intentionally set out to profit off of naïve viewers.

To me, this kind of promotional material feels a lot more like the cinematic equivalent of prefacing an urban legend with “it happened to a friend of a friend of mine” rather than a legitimate case of false advertising. In all honesty, I actually wish that the 2016 Blair Witch had chosen a similar route during marketing, as it would have helped to contextualize that film’s scares.

Like the aforementioned Kayfabe, which allows wrestling fans to accept undead fighters and dramatic feuds within the ring, a little suspension of disbelief can go a long way when it comes to horror. These TV specials might not be required viewing when revisiting the Blair Witch movies, but I think they perfectly capture the innovative spirit of Myrick and Sanchez’s original film by focusing on subtle and realistic scares. The way I see it, the added context makes these movies even more enjoyable, so I’d recommend these spooky appendices to any fan of the Blair Witch mythos.

After all, wanting to believe makes these stories that much more fun.

Editor’s Note: This article was originally published on November 1, 2021.

Born Brazilian, raised Canadian, Luiz is a writer and Film student that spends most of his time watching movies and subsequently complaining about them.

Editorials

11 Years Later: The Horrific Cycles of Violence in ‘Only God Forgives’ Starring Ryan Gosling

Published

on

Traditionally, movie theater walkouts are usually associated with the horror genre, with infamous cases ranging from 1973’s The Exorcist (particularly during the crucifix masturbation scene) and even Lars Von Trier’s controversial serial killer memoir, The House That Jack Built.

That being said, there are exceptions to this rule, as some movies manage to terrorize audiences into leaving the theater regardless of genre. One memorable example of this is Nicolas Winding Refn’s 2013 revenge thriller Only God Forgives, a film so brutal and inaccessible that quite a few critics ended up treating it like a snuff film from hell back when it was first released. However, I’ve come to learn that horror fans have a knack for seeing beyond the blood and guts when judging the value of a story, and that’s why I’d like to make a case for Winding’s near-impenetrable experiment as an excellent horror-adjacent experience.

Refn originally came up with the idea for Only God Forgives immediately after completing 2009’s Valhalla Rising and becoming confused by feelings of anger and existential dread during his wife’s second pregnancy. It was during this time that he found himself imagining a literal fistfight with God, with this concept leading him to envision a fairy-tale western set in the far east that would deal with some of the same primal emotions present in his Viking revenge story.

It was actually Ryan Gosling who convinced the director to tackle the more commercially viable Drive first, as he wanted to cement his partnership with the filmmaker in a more traditional movie before tackling a deeply strange project. This would pay off during the production of Only God Forgives, as the filmmaking duo was forced to use their notoriety to scrounge up money at a Thai film festival when local authorities began demanding bribes in order to allow shooting to continue.

In the finished film, Gosling plays Julian, an American ex-pat running a Muay-Thai boxing club alongside his sociopathic brother Billy (Tom Burke). When Billy gets himself killed after sexually assaulting and murdering a teenager, Julian is tasked by his disturbed mother (Kristin Scott Thomas) with tracking down those responsible for the death of her first-born child. What follows is a surreal dive into the seedy underbelly of Bangkok as the cycle of revenge escalates and violence leads to even more violence.


SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?

There’s no right or wrong way to engage with art, but there are some films that clearly require more effort from the audience side in order to be effective. And while you can’t blame cinemagoers for just wanting to enjoy some passive entertainment, I think it’s always worth trying to meet a work of art on its own terms before judging it.

Despite being a huge fan of Drive, I avoided Only God Forgives for a long time because of its poor critical reception and excessively esoteric presentation. It was only years later that I gave the flick a chance when a friend of mine described the experience as “David Lynch on cocaine.” It was then that I realized that nearly everything critics had complained about in the film are precisely what made it so interesting.

If you can stomach the deliberate pacing, you’ll likely be fascinated by this stylish nightmare about morally questionable people becoming trapped in a needless cycle of violence and retaliation. Not only is the photography impeccable, turning the rain-slicked streets of Bangkok into a neo-noir playground, but the bizarre characters and performances also help to make this an undeniably memorable movie. And while Gosling deserves praise as the unhinged Julian, I’d argue that Vithaya Pansringarm steals the show here as “The Angel of Vengeance,” even if his untranslated dialogue is likely to be unintelligible for most viewers.

However, I think the lack of subtitles ends up enhancing the mood here (even though some editions of the film ended up including them against the director’s wishes), adding to the feeling that Julian is a stranger in a strange land while also allowing viewers to project their own motivations onto some of the “antagonists.”

And while Only God Forgives is frequently accused of burying its narrative underneath a pile of artsy excess, I think the heart of the film is rather straightforward despite its obtuse presentation. I mean, the moral here is basically “revenge isn’t fun,” which I think is made clear by the horrific use of violence (though we’ll discuss that further in the next section).

To be clear, I’m still not sure whether or not I enjoyed this movie, I just know that I’m glad I watched it.


AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?

There are two different kinds of gore effects. One of them is meant to entertain viewers with exaggerated wounds and excessive blood as you admire the craftsmanship behind the filmmaking. The other kind is simply a tool meant to simulate what actually happens when you injure a human body. Like I mentioned before, Only God Forgives isn’t trying to be “fun,” so you can guess what kind gore is in this one…

From realistic maimings to brutal fist fights that feel more painful than thrilling, the “action” label on this flick seems downright questionable when the majority of the experience has you wincing at genuinely scary acts of grisly violence. I mean, the story begins with an unmotivated rampage through the streets of late-night Bangkok and ends with the implication of even more pointless violence, so it’s pretty clear that you’re not really meant to root for an “action hero” here.

I can’t even say that the deaths resemble those from slasher flicks because the movie never attempts to sensationalize these horrific acts, with Refn preferring to depict them as straightforward consequences of violent people going through the motions – which is somehow even scarier than if this had just been yet another hyper-violent revenge movie.

Not only that, but the characters’ overall lack of moral principles makes this story even more disturbing, with the main antagonist being the closest thing to a decent person among the main cast despite also being a brutal vigilante.

Only God Forgives doesn’t care if you like it or not (and actually takes measures to make sure that the viewing experience is often unpleasant), but if you’re willing to step up to this cinematic challenge and engage with the narrative and visuals on their own terms, I think you’ll find an unforgettable nightmare waiting for you on the other side.


There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.

Continue Reading