A Disappointing Continuation

I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

There is just so much movie here. For some it may be too much. But in the same secretly sarcastic way most telemarketers say the phrase, the title of this one is particularly apt.

Great story, amazing characters, superb action, enthralling cinematography. Yes, this is something I am glad I spent money on.

If you enjoyed the original Blair Witch Project and expect Book Of Shadows to follow relatively faithfully in its footsteps, you'll be in for a massive disappointment. Other than the opening 10 minutes or so with all the 'look what the first movie did to Burkittsville' stuff, the rest of the film might as well be a standard spooky horror yarn with nothing whatsoever to do with the Blair Witch lore. Go into it expecting a cheesy B-movie other than a Blair Witch sequel, then, and you may be pleasantly surprised by the bizarre and unexplained goings-on that... um, go on. Please stop making bad sequels like The Descent 2, Hostel 2 , Saw 2 and this one .

This follow-up to the ground-breaking film that introduced many of us to the Found Footage concept is a 'fictional re-enactment of events following the events of The Blair Witch Project.' It starts promisingly, with Burkittsville residents being irritated and financially bolstered by the notoriety their town has attracted. Some dialogue is rank, ("There are always naysayers who come here and say … nay.") and the characters are pretty unlikable and stereotypical (we are introduced to Kim (Kim Director) lying back on a grave, smoking, dressed all in black and daubed with heavy make-up – so she'll be a goth then). Erica (Erica Geerson) is a Wiccan and therefore sensitive to whatever 'curse' may or may not be out there. They seem to be a bit stoned and listen to rock music and might possibly have just stumbled off a catwalk. Text book, picturesque teens. A disappointing development after the realism displayed by Heather, Mikey and Josh from the original.This is a major flaw. Main character Jeffrey (Jeffrey Donovan) has a history of hospitalisation and is victimised by the local Sheriff (who seems to have strolled straight out of 'The Dukes of Hazzard'). And yet because of his uncharismatic, postured playing, it is impossible to sympathise with, or feel anything for him or his plight. Tristine (Tristine Ryler) is really the only sympathetic, or realistic character present … And yet, this sequel is undeserving of the critical drubbing it has received. It has some great unnerving moments: the stuttering doll-like creature Tristine sees in the hospital, the image of her drowning her dead, bloodied baby in a stagnant pond (would anyone who suffered a miscarriage during such an unnerving trip seriously then consider continuing with that trip?), the slow drifting into delirium … and the ending, where the group watch the recording they made of themselves and it contradicts their memory of events is a pretty neat way to wrap things up.The temptation could have been to produce another docu-drama, but events here are deliberately stylised in such a way, the audience is in no doubt it is watching a professional production.The locations are excellent and the whole production is very well shot, but I think 'Book of Shadows' is a (perceived) failure because while it is good, it isn't brilliant – and it needed to be brilliant to match the virtually insurmountable success of the first."She's a witch, maaan!"

A formula for a movie this bad only comes around a few times, and it should definitely be studied and observed to prevent future tragedies of it's kind.What happens when a studio wants to cash in on a wildly successful movie but can't get the original director? Then hires someone known only for making documentaries with no experiencing directing narrative-driven fiction? And that director doesn't even like the first movie? And then that director makes the exact opposite of the movie they want out of pure spite for them and original film?You get a cinematic 30-car pileup like "Book of Shadows." Whereas the first film was a fake documentary that showed a group of people fall to pieces in a realistic situation and at the end only hinted at something supernatural, Book of Shadows is a more generic horror movie that makes no attempt to seem like a documentary at all. Staffed by a team of insufferable, banal characters with no interesting or redeeming qualities. They are all apparently based on people who all serve as a metaphor for the people "effected" by the first film, like Wiccans, Goths and people who thought the movie was real. The director put so much thought into what they were supposed to represent, he forgot all about how to make them compelling character in the actual film.The movie is laden with subtext and hidden meaning, but that doesn't justify it's existence. Now, not only is the film a mindless, generic, incoherent and totally unentertaining mess, it's also extremely pretentious and smugly satisfied with itself. Like an especially dimwitted dog who takes a poop on your carpet because he's mad at you and grins at you like he actually accomplished something. But at the end, you're going to have to clean the carpet, he has to sleep outside, and nobody won here.One half of this film is motivated by greed, the other half is motivated by wrath. You put the two together and it's like mixing nerve gas, everyone in the room dies horribly.The director apparently blames the studio in some regard for the movie's poor reception due to the heavy editing they did. But honestly? Even just from watching the footage that actually made it into the film, it's easy to see there wasn't much to salvage.It's rare to see a film that's cheap cash grab AND insanely pretentious, but Book of Shadows pulls it off. It's one of my top ten worst movies of all time.And no, "Book of Shadows" doesn't mean anything.

Yeah, this is entertaining, but it takes on too much and ends in a muddle.The characters are clear, the acting is good - I like the goth particularly - and the mix of satire and parody works great in the first half.But then we switch to a different location, and it becomes a paranoid, haunted house story with a comedy element thrown in. Also too tame and prudish.Add on top of that self-conscious cleverness with cameras and "perception is reality", and it really loses its sting. A couple of laughs, but in a Josh Wheedon way.Overall - all things to all men, but still a dog.