Horror in the High Desert 3: Firewatch (2024) Review – A Dry And Repetitive Sequel

Welcome to Knockout Horror. We have been checking out some of the found-footage movies that Reddit loves. Today’s entry is the very recent mockumentary Horror in the High Desert 3: Firewatch.

Still struggling with this series

Being a bit of a FF buff (a buFF, perhaps?), myself, I didn’t think I would find much new to talk about in this feature and, to be honest, that has been exactly the case. Most of the movies that Reddit loves are the very same ones everyone has seen a million times. The usual suspects, if you will. But one of the movies I had missed was Horror in the High Desert. Now, don’t get me wrong, this isn’t some obscure title. In fact, it is one of the more talked about found-footage horror movies in recent years. I just never bothered to check it out.

“Horror in the High Desert is okay; it’s the definition of an average horror film. Horror in the High Desert 2: Minerva however, felt like recycling.”

Horror in the High Desert is okay; it’s the definition of an average horror film. The story is fairly compelling and the presentation works, for the most part. It doesn’t have many new ideas and the story is very clearly stolen from the case of missing YouTuber Kenny Veach. But if you know nothing about that case and enjoy the mockumentary format, you may just have a decent time with it.

Horror in the High Desert 2: Minerva however, felt like recycling. It had no new ideas, it weakened the mockumentary format, and had a far less interesting story than the first one. It was very clear that director Dutch Marich was attempting to stretch the formula to get a bit more squeeze out of the lemon.

If Horror in the High Desert was a person stuck in the middle of nowhere with no water, forced to drink their own pee, Horror in the High Desert 2: Minerva was the result of another person drinking that person’s already recycled piss in an attempt to extract some non-toxic hydration out of it.

This is way more of the same

You can probably guess where I am going with this. Horror in the High Desert 3: Firewatch is way more of the same. Only with far less substance than both of its predecessors and far less in the way of scares. If there wasn’t much water left in that pee before there is none at all now. It is pure salt and bodily waste. 

“Horror in the High Desert 3: Firewatch is way more of the same. Only with far less substance than both of its predecessors and far less in the way of scares.”

If Minerva‘s lack of cohesion with the original title was frustrating, Firewatch‘s lack of story progression is most accurately described as infuriating. The story of Firewatch follows social media influencer Oscar Mendoza (Marco Antonio Parra); the guy we see at the end of Minerva.

Mendoza, after dealing with alcohol abuse, has a renewed lease on life and his new high comes from, ermm, investigating disappearances, I guess? Determined to unravel the mystery behind the vanishing of the first movie’s subject Gary Hinge (Eric Mencis), Oscar heads to the desert, camera in hand, to film his journey.

Obviously some bad shit goes down and Oscar finds himself in a bit of trouble. Firewatch focuses on what happened to Oscar. It’s the same thing as the other two. Documentary-style interviews laced in with a few bits of found footage captured by Oscar. In fact, it is paced almost exactly the same as the previous movies, right down to saving the first-person camera jump-scare crap until the last few scenes. This formula is old and, worst of all, Marich has found a way to stretch it to another future film. Firewatch answers virtually none of the questions posed by the first film and introduces a few new ones of its own.

Still has the same issues

The things that Marich did well in the first two movies, he does well here, for the most part. The world-building, some of the cinematography, spooky locations, the general uneasy vibe, etc. But, by the same token, Firewatch has all of the same issues as the first two movies. There’s no growth here. Just a distinct sense of a filmmaker coasting on what he knows best. The mockumentary setup is basic and misses a lot of what makes most documentaries cohesive, and easy to follow, pieces of narrative.

“Firewatch answers virtually none of the questions posed by the first film and introduces a few new ones of its own.”

Disembodied voices play over random b-roll with no names to identify them. Characters are thrown into the mix haphazardly with no consistent point of reference to provide context as to who the hell they are. Interview subjects repeat the same points with different words in an impressive act of perpetual tautology. Giant leaps of logic are required to even put together the pieces presented and links between topics feel loose at best.

Horror in the High Desert always provokes a feeling in me that the director has never actually watched documentaries. It’s like they caught Lake Mungo on a streaming service and completely copied their blueprint. All while missing the subtle nuance that is so important in this format. All three of the movies just feel messy. And I say that as someone who has watched a ton of mockumentaries and considers themself a pretty big fan. 

It’s not at all scary

There’s only one moment in Firewatch that could be considered “scary”. The other two movies seem to balance the scares a lot better, even if they don’t land with all viewers. Firewatch focuses far more on the documentary format. It attempts to get by on the horror front with mere suggestion and atmosphere. It doesn’t really work, at least for me. The last ten minutes may get some people but I found it very lacking compared to its predecessors. 

Acting has taken a big dip in this movie. Marco Parra, as Oscar, is very capable and a fairly interesting character. He still falls foul of the “you know” bug. Suziey Block, again, feels like the most capable member of the cast. A few of the performances here are extremely weak. All of them look as though they are attempting to remember lines. There’s a distinct “thousand-yard” stare on many cast members that suggests they aren’t at all comfortable trying to act naturally in front of the camera. Sure, that’s also present in documentaries, as a whole, but it just looks wooden, here.

Our Scoring Philosophy: A Fair Fight

Horror is a genre that thrives thanks to indie film makers and low budget creators. At Knockout Horror, we firmly believe that every movie that we review deserves a fair fight. That's why we grade on a curve. Our star ratings are all about context, judging a film on what it achieves with the resources it has.

A 4-star rating for a scrappy indie horror made for $10,000 is a testament to its ingenuity and raw power. A 4-star rating for a $100 million blockbuster means it delivered on its epic promises. We don't compare them side-by-side; we celebrate success in every weight class, from the back-alley brawler to the heavyweight champion. Please keep this in mind when considering star ratings.