Going off its absolutely shocking reviews, I enjoyed Blair Witch a lot more than most - yes, it's an unexpected legacyquel, but it did plenty new - and one of my favourite things was the clue-filling expansion of the mythology, at various moments even getting to actually see the titular sorceress in all her naked, gangly glory.
Except that wasn't the witch. Director Adam Wingard and writer Simon Barrett have been pretty vocal on Twitter about the film, mocking its mainstream failure and providing answers for curious fans. And the latest from the latter is a head scratcher:
OK, cynicism out of the way first - he later says the Blu-Ray's audio commentary will fill in the gaps, so this may just be an attempt to boost home video sales. Assuming it isn't, however, what the f*ck?! The stretched arms surely meant that was Elly Kedward, who was accused of witchcraft in the 1700s, was creatively murdered by the villagers of Blair, then returned from the dead with a vengeance, so what's going on?
My theory is that the real witch of the title is some even older, more powerful foe who was controlling Kedward in much the same way as corner-loving child murderer Rustin Parr. It's a russian doll of reveals; just as Blair Witch confirmed Parr was just a complete pawn, so too would a sequel to this explain that what we thought of the witch was just another piece in the puzzle.
So... can you all go out and see the movie so we get a sequel, because I sure want answers!