5 out of 5

Sidebar: when “Blair Witch 3” came out in 2016, there was an article from ‘reputable’ site Bloody Disgusting claiming it would “leave viewers shaking to their core”, in the opinion of its author. Certainly one could make that distinction about the original, but there was no way audiences were getting an out-of-the-blue sequel, sixteen years after the last, without any kind of prerelease hype, was there? Especially not after the wealth of viral marketing that went into pumping the first & second pictures.

Turns out, that review was the hype, because Blair Witch 3 was forgettable. Why spend the kind of money the original producers did in the late-nineties, making whole fake behind-the-scenes documentaries about the fake myths behind the fakery, when you just need to post something online that sounds credible? That review was probably my inaugural experience getting fooled by clickbait, other than being sixteen-years-old and watching Kevin Trudeau informercials for the first time.

But I really wanted to believe 3 was going to be good. The original is good. Great, even: often cloned but never imitated. Surely if you’re from that generation, you will have already formed your own opinion. My wife’s is that the handheld camerawork is stomach-churning, although I’ve never had that problem (I wish my stomach was in 4DX, not).

But what struck me on this recent viewing wasn’t how little Burkittsville lore is actually featured in the opening act (although what ‘facts’ are, all have payoffs) or how well-paced the film’s brief 80-minute runtime is as I imprudently watched on a work night. It was how relatable all three of its main characters are, and how the film never goes out of its way – nor needs – to textually individualize any of them, despite how much background the supplemental material may contain. The movie itself is delightfully uncluttered: Heather is believably headstrong; Mike is believably cautious; Josh is believably aggravated; and there isn’t one choice made by the characters stemming from these traits – not even Mike’s fragmented decision-making at the midway point – that didn’t feel convincing under the narrative circumstances.

And it’s scary. Maybe not as scary as it was when I was twelve, watching it for the first time, but unnerving, with a splendidly abrupt ending devoid of the time-stretching tactics of contemporaries like “Paranormal Activity”. Mwah! Chef’s Kiss!