Red Woods

... good reviews must have been involved with it being made.

Ok I've just watched this and honestly, I would have given it an average 5 stars. It's not an awful film by any means, it's a low budget knock off of the Blair witch Project but with a serial killer instead of a witch.

Some of the locations are and camera work is pretty cool but it has all the same problems nearly all of the BW knock offs suffer from. Slow plodding pace, an hour of people talking, walking through woods and old houses, more talking, bickering and walking around and little to nothing happens until the last 15 minutes.

The death scenes in this are all off camera bar one and there's almost no gore to speak of. It's not scary, it's not unsettling, it's so tame and by the numbers. Sure I have seen a lot worse but that is not a glowing endorsement.

The reason I have given this 1 star is that I am sick of seeing these low budget movies being given glowing 10 star reviews the day they come out, from accounts set up that very day that have literally done nothing else. one review, one interaction and all on this film claiming it's the best most scary thing ever produced, usually over praising actors in the film or the director. It's so blatantly obvious they're fake and planted reviews from members of the production team to boost interest. It's insulting and a way of trying to cheat your film to success.

Until IMDB comes up with a system that only allows reviews from people with a reputation on here, you know, people who have been members for a while and regularly post here, rate and review films and are honest in thier opinions. This will just keep on happening, it's too open to abuse at the moment.

My honest opinion of this film, if you enjoy cheap found footage films where people spend an awfully long time walking through creepy looking forests and old abandoned houses, then you might enjoy this. But for me, there's not enough happened in it to justify its run time, the characters are stupid and say and do some of the most ridiculous things, thier interactions with things are absolutely bananas. They scream in shock when an old mattress is turned over with a big stain on it and yet when they find a dead body hidden under the stairs it's almost like "oh look at that, that's strange" and then they just move on.

There's a lot better found footage horrors out there but there's also a lot worse. But don't base whether or not you want to watch this solely on the reviews turning up on the net. Most of them are fake, most of them are written by people associated with the film and that alone should tell you all you need to know about what they, themselves think of thier own films quality.

But it failed.

The covered bridge seen early in the movie I believe was at McConnell's Mill State Park in Butler County PA. I've walked the trails there and I've walked across that bridge. It's a beautiful area but also dangerous.

I thought the camera work was awful. The entire movie is blurred and slightly pixelated.

None of the actors stand out.

There were some good moments in this movie but they were too few and far between and hard to see.

Disappointing.

To be honest I hate found footage-type movies and I hate low budget when it's really obvious. This movie has a lot of flaws, primarily because the storyline and the storytelling are very convoluted, it's too long and has unnecessary characters. It's hard to keep track of all the characters: who is dying, who is doing what, who is missing, blah blah blah. The bottom line is that it's a poorly conceived and executed movie, but it does have some upsides.

That said, I sat through it and was hooked after about 15 minutes. I wanted to see what happens next. The setting in the woods was beautiful, and the creepy abandoned, falling-down houses in the middle of nowhere had there own appeal. Why are they there? Their presence alone raises interesting questions in a creepy movie. Yeah I wanted to see if there were dead bodies in the houses, that's the whole point of the movie. So for me, there was a decent amount of suspense.

Plus there was just enough character development to make me care about what happens and I wanted to see more. The acting wasn't great (but there are FAR worse movies out there). Some characters were relatable and/or authentic and others were unnecessary. Yes this aspect was uneven.

There isn't much saving grace in this movie but I have to give credit where it's due. The fact that it kept my interest when it had so many downsides (and I am not afraid to criticize bad films and give low scores), means they did something well. Rating a 3 seems about right to me.

If you can get through the first 20 minutes, which is the slowest, then give the rest of the movie a chance. If you don't have interest after 20 minutes, then don't waste any more time.

As someone who explores abandoned buildings, I love watching movies about the hobby, as they are rarely ever realistic and provide a nice laugh. Red Woods is one such film.

The premise is cool: a group of people embark on a days-long trek into the woods to check out some abandoned houses and begin to find some strange things: a bloody mattress and a forgotten cemetery. The cinematography is gorgeous; they have some professional cameras, stabilizers, and a drone. The effects are pretty good and it's clear they spent some money on things.

The problem is everything else. The editing cuts bizarrely mid-sentence multiple times and it seems several scenes of plot are just missing altogether. The last half of the film becomes nearly incomprehensible. There are way too many characters and no one acts remotely like a normal human being would.

For example: the bodies. Both groups find dead bodies in these abandoned homes yet don't bother to tell each other and are joking about it less than a minute later.

Then that night for some reason one character attacks another and a random man shows up and tells a scary story to which NOBODY questions why he is there other than someone whispering 'who is he?'

The next day someone, I didn't even know who, disappeared. Then our characters find some cliche hillbilly's and murder them in self defense, which again doesn't bother them.

There is also a VERY confusing subplot about a "first team" that left beforehand they are going to meet up with and two of the group possibly being some sort of x-files type government agents.

I can only imagine that writer/director Nicholas Danko watched a lot of the popular urbex videos with clickbait titles such as "found bodies!" "Secret test lab!" Etc and based this all on that.

Found footage movies are meant to suspend our disbelief more so than a regular film, essentially telling the viewer 'hey, this is real' but literally nothing in Red Woods would make someone believe that. In addition to the previously mentioned issues, the acting by just about everyone comes off as kids in a high school play. The psychic girl, Jack (referred to as Jax in one scene by everyone) is the only one that shows some minor talent, and her friend is passable. The woodsman explorer guy, Cross is so horrible in his 'breakdown' scene after falling on a body that it gives new meaning to the word 'stilted'

Red Woods should have been a simple, fun setup but Danko is unable to tell a coherent story. Slick production levels alone do not make it watchable either.