ASK & DISCUSS
INDEXThe Blair Witch Project
6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin
We all know it as that found footage film that every aspiring horror filmmaker includes in their investor pack, but I just realised its' approaching 25 years old, many shooters weren't even born, let alone over 18 to watch it in cinemas. Has everyone actually seen it? Even if not first time around in the cinema?
I'm currently in a hotel room in the Middle East, and it came on TV. I've not seen it in decades, so watched. It's still a good film, still carries a lot of lessons for aspiring filmmakers. As opposed to shying away from making a film whilst waiting for the million dollar investment, they got creative.
What's scarier than getting lost in the woods? Such a simple premise, but creatively got around having no studio. They shot largely with available light or camera mounted lights. They shot in the rain. They used a tiny cast. They created the witch entirely through suggestion and a bit of art department magic. They had real budgetary constraints, but didn't let that stop them, they let it steer the production instead, cutting their cloth to their means. There's no music, there's very limited grade, the sound mix is actually pretty good considering, but again inexpensive. It's a pretty inspiring little film even all this time later.
Of course what it did have that we don't is 50x the production budget going on promotion during the early days of the internet when all bets were off and Google didn't exist. The campaign went viral before viral was a word. They caught an upbreeze and got lucky in the right place at the right time, no question. The environment was perfect and nobody could have guessed it would be. I remember the promotion even included a custom web browser that played audio clips from the film (at a time of the Wild West internet)! That's where I first heard about the film in fact, a browser skin!
Am I suggesting everyone goes out to make the same film and hope to get lucky? Well probably not, it's unlikely to happen, but it was just as unlikely in the mid-90's at the time. The point is that they got creative to get around problems and still make a film. To anyone procrastinating, just get started. Get the ball rolling. Don't allow a lack of money/cast/studio/kit to stop you - the lack of those things made the film have to work harder, and that caught the imagination.
If you do, will it make you rich? Lots of people reference the film as a case of small production budget with huge revenue, yet the stars who were in an equity share didn't get to retire. Perhaps the company that paid for the promotion took the lion's share of a huge, huge hit. But that's how it goes, most films lose money for investors!
If you get a chance and haven't seen it, or if you last saw it decades ago, it's worth watching from a filmmakers position. Maybe you won't get a million bucks and custom browser for promotion, but it's still inspirational what you can do being creative to solve problems!
Everyone seen it?!
Only members can post or respond to topics. LOGIN
Not a member of SP? JOIN or FIND OUT MORE
6 years, 9 months ago - Alwyne Kennedy
Cheers for that post, Paddy.
There's a Guardian article on how they made the film - https://www.theguardian.com/culture/2018/may/21/how-we-made-the-blair-witch-project
ps it was released in 1999, so more like it's approaching its 20th year, not its 25th year.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Alwyne Kennedy SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin
Ha! That shows how muddy my memory was... Good call though, thank you.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Vasco de Sousa
Great article, Alwyne. The part about them being listed as deceased on the IMDB page shows how unreliable wikis can be for research, but how filmmakers can leverage that.
I'm not sure we can trust the numbers. The low budget was part of the marketing plan, to make it look like "found footage." The actors had SAG contracts, and get residuals (or their heirs do.) The 300k number is what Louise Levison says (she was involved in the original business plan) and may have involved pre-production and a lot of other expenses which contributed to the film.
Found Footage was already used in mockumentaries like Battle for Algiers and it was almost a genre in France before I was born.
There's not really that much original from Blair Witch, what I think it did was move fans of Man Bites Dog, Dinner With Andre, El Mariachi, Brothers McMullen, She's Gotta Have It (Spike Lee, who's most recent film is BlacKkKlansman), Hollywood Shuffle, This Is Spinal Tap and Clerks toward horror.
But, Dogme, Napoleon Dynamite, and other films still have influence.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Vasco de Sousa SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin
@vasco Specifically you CANNOT trust the numbers - there's a shedload of costs excluded from the "production budget", the opposite from most films, to make it look smaller. That was their marketing schtick, so they made it as small a number as possible where most productions try to include everything possible (marketing, financing fees, contracted deferred fees, etc). Colgate will never tell you how much it really costs to make toothpaste, producers will never tell you what it really cost to make a movie (or the precise scope of what's in/out). It's a marketing figure more than anything else ;-)
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Marlom Tander
I remember seeing it and I loved it, and was most impressed that (unlike The Imposter, grrr) they didn't blow the ending. And I would normally run a mile NOT to watch anything with that box cover. (I have never, even as a teen, been one for horror/slasher stuff).
But as "business" - yes, it was the right film in the right time and place. In that sense it's a bit like the early Internet. In 1994 I hand built a web site, for fun, to see if I could. £10pm hosting fee. The first week, 20 visitors. In 1997 I was at 10,000 and in 1999, 30,000 (people) a month. Still non commercial. I added a few select ads - maybe it would pay for my holidays. In 2000 I was a made a silly offer that cleared my mortgage.
But I can't repeat that and you can't repeat Blair Witch. But what can you do? Do what you love, with money you can lose. And if you're lucky, others will love it, or you, too.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Marlom Tander SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin
You never can tell what'll catch the breeze, for sure, and your point about doing what you love is so on point
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Ray Brady
Inspirational stuff indeed Paddy!
Maybe not making at much proportionately as the "Blair Witch Project" after the mega success of "Jaws" every decade or so there is another massively successful shark movie, a sub-genre in its own right i.e.
Open Water (2003)
Budget $120K-$500 Box office $55.5million
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0374102/reference
or say: The Shallows (2016) - IMDb
neither reinvented the wheel but added a spin on what was proven box office successful genre formula.
Second important point: Whereas the cast and crew may now have benefited from the vast amounts earned by the company that purchased and marketed the "Blair Witch Project", but after making it the produce and director could get a meeting with any production company and studio they wished, their calling card opened all doors, well at least for a few years after and also the on-screen talent went right to the top of every casting directors wish list. Sam Rami didn't make a lot from his feature "The Evil Dead", or George A. Romero for "Night of the Living Dead", but boy they have both done so very much after their low budget debuts made so much money for so many other people.
After "Get Out" Joran Peele's film turned $5mill budget into $316mill box office his name helped produce "BlackkKlansman" and "Sorry to Bother You" and he is fronting the remake of The Twilight Zone (and over ten other studio projects in development), working it incredibly.
So it's not all about the production fees and profits made on films it's about careers being started and getting a foot firmly in the door.
Ray Brady
https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0002916/
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Ray Brady SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin
Very valid points about it being what comes next that is the value for the filmmakers. It probably oughtn't be as exploitative as it is, but, well, it is what it is, showbusiness is 1/3 show and 2/3 business after all, and low budget projects aren't going to be able to afford to get the business end "right"... :'-(
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Allan (Mac) McKenna
Watched (part) of this some years ago on TV. Didn't watch all of it for the simple reason I got bored. I thought it amateur i.e. I was aware I was watching a low budget film all the time, and I'm afraid for me it lacked pace. They were lucky. It was a fluke. Not as big a fluke as any of you who've had Hollywood buy a script off you (how many is that by the way? but surely we've all made films like this. More than once I'm guessing.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Allan (Mac) McKenna SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin
It was certainly amateurish, indeed that was the whole setup, which is how they could get away with it. But then "found footage" films with pro camerawork don't look right either...it was my biggest beef with Cloverfield!
You're right in that they got very lucky, the timing was fortuitous, and they made their own luck by spending heavily on a viral campaign for over a year. It could easily have not worked, and probably wouldn't work now, but it's still a bit of a landmark I think, and worth a watch. At least they don't have a soft ending prepping for "part 2..."
FWIW, I thought the second in the franchise was actually a pretty decent film, not a carry over from part 1, but in itself it was better made :)
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Glyn Carter
I'm with Mac, though I did watch it all. It was a good creepy short, stretched out way too thin. Not scary.
A great case study on low-budget filmmaking, on found-footage, and par excellence on multi-platform marketing. They even had a best-selling book about the Blair Witch.
But, for me, also a case-study in how not to structure a story.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Glyn Carter SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin
Good points on the story structure being a stretched short, Glyn.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Marlom Tander
OTOH sometimes a stretched story appeals (in Blair Witch I liked it). I have just wasted a couple of hours on Mandy (son wanted to watch, and Nicholas Cage I like a lot when he's good). Slow, predictable, pretentious tosh but with 92% on Rotten Tomatoes....
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Marlom Tander SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Stuart Wright
@Marlom Tander loved MANDY... B Movie bonkers with art house audaciousness... Like being on the inside of a heavy metal album looking out at the world :)
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Stuart Wright SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - davina brown
Films like The Blair Witch, Man Bites Dog and Paranormal Activity are prime examples of the synergy that can occur when high-concept meets genius marketing strategy. It's less about dramatic filmmaking and more about the sort of creativity that goes into classic TV commercials. It's no coincidence that none of these filmmakers were able to develop their craft consistently in the intervening years.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - davina brown SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin
True, and arguably it's all, and always been, about the marketing. Blockbusters doing a "big bang" launch just before the weekend historically were because the studio knew they had a stinker, and wanted the weekend audience before the reviews started getting into print in the dailies...
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Paddy Robinson-Griffin SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Vasco de Sousa
Benoît Poelvoorde (one of the directors of Man Bites Dog) has a great acting career (in some awesome French language films.) Perhaps he's not into directing, and just made that film as a showcase.
He was terrific in Coco before Chanel, Asterix at the Olympic Games, and Nothing to Declare. I'd love his career.
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Vasco de Sousa SHOW
6 years, 9 months ago - Ray Brady
If anyone's curious as to actually why Benoit didn't direct again as opposed to a wild stab in the dark... well I had a similar controversial feature doing the rounds of festivals
at the time and first met Rémy Belvaux, André Bonzel, Benoît Poelvoorde in Cannes, we met at the Petite Majestic, one night they didn't show up as usual and when we met them the next night we asked where they were, they said incredibly modestly then , for the first time they revealed that their film was in the main competition and screened the night before, anyway they won the festival and when I next ran into André and asked what they had been up to since he told me a true indie filmmaking horror story. They chose a friend to represent them in legal negotiations & sales, he had signed the rights over to an agent he met and trusted, that said trusted agent then sold the film all over the world but gave nothing to the guy's legal rep. Yep...they had an incredibly successful film, which sold all around the world and they didn't make a penny. Worse still their debts from making and delivering the film crippled them financially. They couldn't even go out in their hometown as everyone that had done them favours on the film for them thought that they should be buying the beers in and just wouldn't believe that they hadn't got any money from the film and were just being miserly. The whole experience was so disheartening that it completely put them off filmmaking for a while. André was shooting pop promos to make a living and didn't intend to get involved with making another feature ever again.
Regards Ray
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0002916/
Response from 6 years, 9 months ago - Ray Brady SHOW