Blair Witch reboot is an unwelcome surprise to original cast and crew

Like a trio of filmmakers trying to make a documentary about some Maryland folklore, The Blair Witch Project is at war with itself.

By Matt Schimkowitz | April 16, 2024 | 2:22am

Aux News Blair Witch

Blair Witch reboot is an unwelcome surprise to original cast and crew

Heather Donahue
Photo: Moviestore/Shutterstock

The Blair Witch Project has never been a cut-and-dry Hollywood project. This scrappy $35,000 mockumentary wasn’t meant to be a blockbuster, but it went on to become one of the most profitable independent films ever made. Now, due to the creative marketing and filmmaking savvy of co-directors Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sánchez and their team, Hollywood is legally obligated to attempt a Blair Witch sequel every decade. Historically, this has not been a good idea, but hope springs eternal in showbiz.

While some hold out hope that Lionsgate and Blumhouse’s latest attempt will be different than Book Of Shadows and 2016's Blair Witch, some of the original cast and crew aren’t so optimistic—namely because of how disregarded their work has been treated. Take Joshua Leonard, who plays Josh in the 1999 film, for example. Despite his face being used for promotional materials for a new Blair Witch, no one even bothered to tell him that a new movie was in the works.

Most Popular

“This is MY face on a press release for a film being made by two major studios — both I’ve worked for, both I respect,” Leonard wrote on Facebook in response to a Variety story that used a screenshot from the film. “The WEIRD PART is that I didn’t know anything about it until a friend sent me a ‘congrats’ screenshot yesterday.”

“There were many factors that made [Blair Witch Project] a success: timing, marketing, etc. But there was also the FACT that us weirdos got together, with virtually no resources, AND MADE A FILM THAT WORKED! Can we just go on record and say that the film itself is a huge part of why we’re still talking about it 25 years later?”

Leonard went on to dispel some of the myths about the film. He writes that Artisan Entertainment, the film’s original distributor, “claimed to have released the most profitable independent film ever (bought for 1M, grossed 250M+), while internally they told us that they were actually losing money from marketing expenses… so WE might wind up owing THEM [money].” Leonard also claims each actor made $300,000 and “never saw another dime.” Within a year of the film’s release, “Mike [C. Williams] was back to moving furniture.”

“At this point, it’s 25 years of disrespect from the folks who’ve pocketed the lion’s share (pun intended) of the profits from OUR work, and that feels both icky and classless.”

Others shared his sentiment, hoping that including some of the original filmmakers would help the film’s chances. One of the Blair Witch’s producers, Mike Monello, tweeted last week, “Radical idea: You could try putting this project in the hands of the original team that made the first one. You know, the team that actually has an entire franchise plan to reinvent what a Blair Witch movie could be?”

“Anyone working on this franchise must understand that ‘Blair Witch’events occur every 50–60 years,” he continued. “That’s been codified in the mythology even before the first movie came out, and it’s one reason why ‘sequels’ aren’t the way to go.”

Speaking to The Hollywood Reporter, production designer Ben Rock said the “original creators were overlooked” for Book Of Shadows and 2016’s Blair Witch. “Other people were brought in, all of whom were good, but neither one of the sequels connected with audiences the way they wanted it to connect. And so it might at least be worth talking to some of the original creators.”

“I’m hoping Blumhouse isn’t like, ‘Hey, let’s go reboot this without talking to anybody [from the first one].’ But they haven’t talked to any of us.”

Maybe it is time to put the cameras back in the hands of Leonard, Donahue, and Williams or, at the very least, bring Myrick and Sánchez back aboard. There’s a clear disconnect between what worked in the first film and where the two sequels ended up. Perhaps the people who turned the first one into a success can catch lightning in a bottle again. At the very least, they could probably do it much cheaper.