Originally Posted by deepred
I find it funny how quickly some fans dismiss this movie as a relic of 1999 when the internet just began or put most of the emphasis on why it worked so well was the clever marketing attached to it but I think there's more to it than that.
I rented it when it first came out but by that time it was a known hoax and my friend at the time kept dissing the movie all the way through so it was hard to enjoy. I went back and watched it this weekend and thought it was very well-done but can't help but think that maybe the "clever" marketing hurt it in the long run since people dismissed it when it was announced as not true and hung all of it's strengths on the marketing.
I think it holds up and is really clever as a film (kinda like a found film version of Picnic at Hanging Rock), regardless of the marketing. I saw a panel for it this weekend before a panel for the original Texas Chain Saw Massacre and couldn't help but think how much these two movies have in common. Both movies were very low budget, had uncomfortable working conditions that impacted the actors's performances, were highly influential, had the documentary feel and claimed to be based on a true story, dealt w/ youths investigating a case and then stumble across something worse then they ever would have imagined and both used the power of suggestion to make the viewer use their imagination. I never thought about all the similarities between the two.
I think as time has gone on more and more people are seeing it for what really is. A classic and one of the best horror films of all time.