Red Woods

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.

Usually I love this type of film, but this is a mess. Bad writing, bad direction, bad acting... There is nothing redeeming about this project at all. Please don't waste your time like I did. Imagine if Tommy Wiseau made a found footage but it had no comedic value like The Room did.

I'd rather watch your grandkid's home movies from the early 90s. I'd rather watch surveillance video from a parking lot of an abandoned mall. I would rather watch basketball.

Not even just boring, but actually annoying to watch.

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