Talk:The Blair Witch Project/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Famous Hobo (talk · contribs) 20:15, 9 February 2017 (UTC)

I'll take up this review. Found footage films have always had a special place in my heart, and this film was basically the granddaddy of them all. I'm a bit busy today, so right now, I'll give you a few notes to begin with.

First pass

Comments There are a decent amount of dead refs or refs that redirect to different links. Please fix. Fixed. Bluesphere 09:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC) The Blair Witch Project is a 1999 American found footage supernatural psychological horror film written, directed and edited by Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez. Supernatural is not a film genre. Also, you mention the "recovered footage" at the end of the paragraph, which also links to found footage. Either remove found footage from the first sentence, or delink the second instance of found footage. Removed the "found-footage" and "supernatural". Bluesphere 09:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC) There is no mention of the film's production in the lead. There needs to be at least some mention of how the film was made. Added. Bluesphere 09:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC) You devote two paragraphs to the sequels, which is very unnecessary. This article is about the first film, that needs to be what the lead is primarily about. You should mention how the film spawned a franchise, but that should really only be one sentence toward the end of the lead, not two entire paragraphs. I moved those two paragraphs about the sequels in their appropriate section. The sentence has also been added. Bluesphere 09:25, 10 February 2017 (UTC) Will be back for more later.Famous Hobo (talk) 20:15, 9 February 2017 (UTC) @Famous Hobo: I believe all of these have now been addressed. Bluesphere 09:06, 12 February 2017 (UTC)

Second pass

Comments Sorry about the wait, I had a few things to take care of with school. However, I was able to rewatch this film (thanks Netflix), so there's a plus. Plot Although everything in this section is correct, it does seem a bit too overdetailed. There are a few words, and sometimes entire sentences, that have no real importance to the plot, and can be removed. For example: They travel to Burkittsville, Maryland, formerly Blair, and interview residents about the legend. We don't need to know that the city was formerly Blair. Locals tell them of Rustin Parr, a hermit who lived in the woods and kidnapped eight children in the 1940s. He took the children down to his basement in pairs and made one stand in the corner while he killed the other. After turning himself in to the police, Parr claimed that the spirit of Elly Kedward, a woman executed for witchcraft in the 18th century, forced him to commit the murders. The students then interview Mary Brown, a Burkittsville resident deemed insane by the public. She claims to have encountered the Blair Witch in person, describing her as a hairy half-human, half-animal beast. I don't think you need to include every detail about what the residents said. I guess the stuff about the hermit is fine, since the stuff about standing in a corner comes up later in the film, but part about Mary Brown seems unimportant. The witch is never even seen in the film, and Brown doesn't appear in the film afterwards. Josh accidentally disturbs a cairn and Heather hastily repairs it. I don't remember this happening. I'm sure I just didn't notice it, but even so, this is unimportant. The second paragraph begins with On their second day.... The third paragraph then begins with The next day they move deeper into the woods..., which contradicts the next paragraph, which begins with On day three... Also, could you combine the fourth paragraph with another one. It's only has three sentences that are really short. Removed superfluous details, and fixed inconsistencies in paragraphs. Bluesphere 16:54, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Cast Is a cast section even necessary? The three main actors in the film are just playing themselve (albeit fictionalized versions), but I don't think you need an entire section for that. Perhaps just a simple mention that the actors played fictionalized versions of themselves in the casting section. Removed. Bluesphere 15:36, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Production The Blair Witch Project was developed during 1993[5] by the filmmakers. Development of The Blair Witch Project began in 1993. Fixed. Bluesphere 15:36, 15 February 2017 (UTC) This has nothing to do with the review, but I must say the anagrams part gave me a laugh. I find it funny that Rasputin of all people was somehow connected to this film. This documentary, originally called The Blair Witch Project: The Story of Black Hills Disappearances was produced by Haxan Films. Unsourced Not really sure where this came from, but this title doesn't appear elsewhere nor did the directors ever mention it. Probably OR, so I deleted it. Bluesphere 15:36, 15 February 2017 (UTC) The picture of the cemetery doesn't seem important. I'd just remove it. Removed. Bluesphere 15:36, 15 February 2017 (UTC) I've heard a rumor that the witch was originally supposed to be seen in the film, if only for a few seconds when the three characters run away from the tent at night. I'm not sure if this is real, but if it is, that might be something you'll want to add. Added as scope of the Filming subsection. Bluesphere 04:18, 16 February 2017 (UTC) Release From a cursory glance, everything seems fine. I'll do a more detailed look on my second run through of the article. Marketing Shouldn't the marketing section go before or in the release section? Marketing is usually done before the film is released Merged before the Release section. Bluesphere 15:36, 15 February 2017 (UTC) You do a good job telling the reader just how famous the marketing for this film was, but I feel that adding this picture would really show just how far they went to market the events in this film as real events. I uploaded a better quality of that photo since the one you gave me becomes pixelated when downgraded to a lower resolution; I had to comply with the non-free rationale after all. Nonetheless, it's in the article. Bluesphere 16:18, 15 February 2017 (UTC) Soundtrack Honestly, I'd just remove this entire section. As you state in the section, none of the songs actually appear in the film. In fact, the film is notable for not including music at all. The one review isn't expanded upon, and by the looks of it, there aren't enough references to justify a section dedicated to the soundtrack. Removed. Bluesphere 15:36, 15 February 2017 (UTC) I'll look at the rest of the article tomorrow, but for now this should be a good starting point. Famous Hobo (talk) 04:53, 15 February 2017 (UTC) @Famous Hobo: Hi, not to sound too nagging, but while I'm fully aware that you're pretty busy irl, perhaps you could devote just 20-30mins of your time to continue the review? :) Bluesphere 16:24, 4 March 2017 (UTC)

Third pass

Well I'm a terrible person. Sorry to keep you waiting for over a month, let's continue. Lead The Blair Witch Project directors Myrick and Sánchez conceived the idea of a fictional legend of the Blair Witch in 1993. You already mentioned that Myrick and Sánchez directed the film in the first paragraph. Remove "The Blair Witch Project directors".  Done I don't think it's necessary to mention the exact release dates of the two sequel films, just the year should be good enough. Using exact dates for the The Blair Witch Project is fine, but for the other films, leave the exact dates for their respective articles.  Done Plot They realize they have walked in a circle, despite having traveled south all day, and once again make camp, completely demoralized at having wasted an entire day, their sixth. Bit of a run on sentence with a few too many commas. Try "They realize they have walked in a circle, and once again make camp, demoralized at having wasted an entire day." Walking south all day is a bit superfluous, and I think the reader can figure out that it was their sixth day. This leads into my next concern... Done Five out of the seven plot paragraphs begin with "On the X day", which gets very repetitive. Try to reword some of the paragraph openings.  Done Hobo, the plot currently clocks at 783 words, and I'm stumped as to what to cut down here. Thoughts? Production After graduation, Myrick and Sánchez, along with Gregg Hale, Robin Cowie, and Michael Monello started the production company Haxan Films, derived from Benjamin Christensen's 1922 Swedish silent documentary horror film Häxan, which is titled Witchcraft Through the Ages in English. Part of me wants to say that the last part about the English translation is unimportant, but part of me also believes that it's important to mention that the documentary is about witches, which obviously has relevance to this film. It's your call if you want to leave it or get rid of it. — I would just leave it there. Although I assumed Haxan produced the film, it's not explicitly stated in the production section what the company's purpose was. Haxan is mentioned one more time in the article, and that's talking about a lawsuit. As it stands right now, Myrick and Sánchez co-founded Haxan after college for no real reason. Dunno about this one – The only thing I gathered about Haxan was that it was founded to produce the film... Donahue confided before audiences during the 1999 San Diego Comic-Con on August 14, that the white figure was Ricardo Moreno, the film's art director. We don't need the exact day, just leave it at 1999 San Diego Comic-Con. Woah, I got rid of this one long time ago. Did you want me to restore it? Filming commenced on Halloween. For what? Filming for the final scene? If that's the case, then it should be mentioned at the beginning of the paragraph.  Done — I actually meant "concluded". I'm embarrassed by this typo, sorry. Marketing All good. yay Release Andrew Sarris of The Observer said, "Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez's The Blair Witch Project represents the ultimate triumph of the Sundance scam... You already linked Myrick and Sánchez.  Done Legacy We don't need to know the names of the eight young adult books, you can just get rid of that list.  Done In the video games section, "Each game, developed by a different team, focused on different aspects of the Blair Witch mythology: Rustin Parr, Coffin Rock, and Elly Kedward, respectively" is unsourced.  Done I just removed it. Sequels In January 2015, Eduardo Sánchez revealed that he was still planning Blair Witch 3 and that he considered the film "inevitable", but added that there was nothing to officially announce at that time.[101] This line doesn't seem necessary, especially since the entire next paragraph is talking about how a third film was actually made and released the following year.  Done Famous Hobo (talk) 18:09, 15 April 2017 (UTC) @Famous Hobo: — I have some concerns written above, coloured in red typeface. See you in another month or two, lol. Bluesphere 07:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC) @Famous Hobo: Hello? Please come back if you're not that busy... Bluesphere 05:35, 13 May 2017 (UTC)

Alright, time to end this review. I've been god awful for letting this sit so long, and I sincerely apologize for making you wait. Rereading this article, it still has some issues, but for the most part, it's well written, well sourced, and well researched. It talks about this film's importance to the found footage genre, but portrays it from an academic standpoint, and does not feel biased. With that said, here is the long awaited and coveted GA promotion. Famous Hobo (talk) 22:06, 31 May 2017 (UTC)

Famous Hobo, you could've just told me what the remaining issues are before your pass this to GA. Bluesphere 04:55, 1 June 2017 (UTC)