So do you actually see her this time?

So do you actually see her this time?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=G1TnnfpfrjY
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Apparently

Shes a weird lanky tree looking thing. Looks pretty stupid honestly.

ayy blair lmao

This is fucking terrible and that's coming from someone who loves found-footage. I can't stand writer's inserting their gay agenda into films.

I nearly fucking walked out when I realized that they had cameras on their heads.

I actually enjoyed the first half more than I did the second half of them in the woods

She's not, it's just a henchman that we see.

I went with two of my friends to a preview the night before this came out. We were the only people in the entire theater (and it's a pretty popular theater) so we spent the movie just yelling nigger whenever the black couple showed up.
Last 10 minutes feel like the first movie (good) while the rest feels like a less scary and VERY boring walk through of a haunted house attraction. Too professional with the audio mixing and acting.

I wrote a review of it for my college's newspaper and gave it 2/10. I thought it might be biased since the original is one of my favorite movies, but one of the friends who went hadn't seen the first and he hated it even though we have similar taste in film.

r u rly darknet666?!

That reminds me of the huge opportunity they missed.

With the time-loop stuff, I thought for sure they would make the hipster couple get stuck in the woods until they were old and time travel out of the woods to end up becoming Elly Kedward and Rustin Parr. Would have been sweet, but more importantly it would have been a plot, which the movie didn't have.

here you go OP footage and a screencap

youtube.com/watch?v=G1TnnfpfrjY

Ashely was set to become Elly. Lane had become Rustin Parr.

She's a Spriggan

If this is true, why didn't they focus on that instead of Heather's brother who never even mentions Heather once between the exposition and ending?
I get that the first movie was good because it left so many questions unanswered, but this isn't the first movie and it never had a chance of being anything like it since people know the story is fake now. If they just made it a regular horror movie it would have actually been watchable.

dope story

Yea. Just got back from seeing it. Looks like the monster from the REC series. Movie was ok though.

>big horror fan
>think found footage has been done to death
>wish I could go back to comfy innawoods horror of yesteryear

No, the lanky thing isn't the witch according to the writer.

not sure what the hell that vision the guy was following was.

>No, the lanky thing isn't the witch according to the writer.

Honestly, that just seems like backpeddling to me. They realized no one liked the design and it was completely unnecessary to see the witch, so now they're claiming it wasn't.

But come the fuck on, the movie specifically included a line about how the witch was executed by being tied to a tree and stretched out, and we see a stretched out tree-looking monster follow them. It's obviously supposed to be the witch, and there's no believable way to claim that it isn't. Why else would you mention that backstory?

>Honestly, that just seems like backpeddling to me.

yeah might be, but IF they get a sequel, which they probably won't, they can play that up. Be all ok guys NOW you get the see the witch in this one for realsies.

But this forest thing would be too played out for a third movie.

...

Can you recommend some?

>Be all ok guys NOW you get the see the witch in this one for realsies.

Why? We don't need to see the witch. The first one doesn't even really confirm that she exists, and that's part of what's so great about it. Part of what was wrong with the sequel was that it went full-out modern supernatural horror. And when it did, it revealed something disappointing. There's nothing to gain from showing the witch.