NOTE IMDb
2,9/10
1,2 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA group of friends go on a roadtrip and come to a stop in a forest where legend has it a group of naked bisexual female monsters lurk. Will they awake them? And if so will they survive?A group of friends go on a roadtrip and come to a stop in a forest where legend has it a group of naked bisexual female monsters lurk. Will they awake them? And if so will they survive?A group of friends go on a roadtrip and come to a stop in a forest where legend has it a group of naked bisexual female monsters lurk. Will they awake them? And if so will they survive?
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Francesca Kingdon
- Sally
- (as Frances da Costas)
Marysia Kay
- Angel 1
- (as Marysia K.)
Charlotte Hunter
- Additional Angel
- (as Charlie Billson)
Mike Hannides
- Angels
- (voix)
Avis à la une
This movie is a terrible waste of time. Although it is only an hour and a half long it feels somewhere close to 4. I have never seen a movie move so slowly and so without a purpose. This is also a "horror" film that takes place a lot of the time during daylight. My friend and I laughed an insane amount of times when we were probably supposed to be scared.
The only thing we want to know is why such a terrible movie was released in so many countries. It cannot be that high in demand.
The supermodel Nicole Petty should stick to modeling because although she is beautiful she lost her accent so many times in this movie, half of the time she is British and half the time she is American.
The only thing we want to know is why such a terrible movie was released in so many countries. It cannot be that high in demand.
The supermodel Nicole Petty should stick to modeling because although she is beautiful she lost her accent so many times in this movie, half of the time she is British and half the time she is American.
Note to Horror fans: The only horror here is when you realized you just wasted 95 minutes of your life on a movie that's so worthless it's insulting.
I watched this because:
The premise sounded slightly promising: It's not. It's just an excuse to use the same lame set pieces from other low-budget slasher films that weren't good either.
The promise of naked forest nymphs sounded nice even if the movie turned out to be awful: It's not. It's SO not. The amateur cinematography makes sure the "fallen angels" are about as sexy as the average homeless person.
The name Tom Savini has a long history in the horror genre: He's the king of low-budget special effects and lower-budget acting. Come to think of it, Savini should have been a reason not to watch this movie. It's not that he's bad, but he's almost always in bad movies. His only good role was in From Dusk Till Dawn, and he's been milking that at horror conventions ever since.
But let's focus on the positive: Forest of the Damned is a great example of how NOT to make a movie.
Everything else is a negative. Obviously the writer is allergic to originality. The script is terrible. That's all a given after the first 10 minutes. But the clueless pacing; the way the director treats "plot" and "characterization" as a nuisance he thinks no one cares about anyway; and the excruciatingly long and boring driving, walking, and nature sequences (no doubt added to increase the running time to make the film qualify for distribution) show a complete lack of aptitude for film and storytelling in general.
This is another good example of the number-one way you can tell if a movie is going to be bad: If it's written and directed by the same person, expect garbage.
I watched this because:
The premise sounded slightly promising: It's not. It's just an excuse to use the same lame set pieces from other low-budget slasher films that weren't good either.
The promise of naked forest nymphs sounded nice even if the movie turned out to be awful: It's not. It's SO not. The amateur cinematography makes sure the "fallen angels" are about as sexy as the average homeless person.
The name Tom Savini has a long history in the horror genre: He's the king of low-budget special effects and lower-budget acting. Come to think of it, Savini should have been a reason not to watch this movie. It's not that he's bad, but he's almost always in bad movies. His only good role was in From Dusk Till Dawn, and he's been milking that at horror conventions ever since.
But let's focus on the positive: Forest of the Damned is a great example of how NOT to make a movie.
Everything else is a negative. Obviously the writer is allergic to originality. The script is terrible. That's all a given after the first 10 minutes. But the clueless pacing; the way the director treats "plot" and "characterization" as a nuisance he thinks no one cares about anyway; and the excruciatingly long and boring driving, walking, and nature sequences (no doubt added to increase the running time to make the film qualify for distribution) show a complete lack of aptitude for film and storytelling in general.
This is another good example of the number-one way you can tell if a movie is going to be bad: If it's written and directed by the same person, expect garbage.
turning them off before the closing credits start rolling. This was one of those few. I'm sorry I spent the $7.00 buying this movie and may consider either tossing it or using it to shim a kitchen table.
The movie opens with a couple making out on the hood of a new Mercedes Benz. Within the first 2 minutes, the "fallen angels" arrive, start making out with the guy who basically walks away from his girl friend. The angels go from beautiful to hideous with no care to how the special effects are done and basically kill the guy.
At this point, I'm saying.. "hmm, okay, I'll give it a bit more.. at least up to Savini"
The main characters were pathetic and the obnoxious sister was just overly obnoxious to the point of total annoyance.
Tom Savini comes in as a crazed homeowner with a house that's prolly 2-3 miles from his mailbox with no driveway.. yeah sure. His acting is terrible (stick to effects, make-up and George Romero cameo's please).
The "fallen angels" are played by cute girls, but not angelic looking by any means. Pretty but not gorgeous.
Bottom line checklist as to what this movie is lacking:
-Background story -Effects -Acting -Budget -Scares
What the movie offers:
-Total boredom
Take your money and your time and watch something, anything else.
The movie opens with a couple making out on the hood of a new Mercedes Benz. Within the first 2 minutes, the "fallen angels" arrive, start making out with the guy who basically walks away from his girl friend. The angels go from beautiful to hideous with no care to how the special effects are done and basically kill the guy.
At this point, I'm saying.. "hmm, okay, I'll give it a bit more.. at least up to Savini"
The main characters were pathetic and the obnoxious sister was just overly obnoxious to the point of total annoyance.
Tom Savini comes in as a crazed homeowner with a house that's prolly 2-3 miles from his mailbox with no driveway.. yeah sure. His acting is terrible (stick to effects, make-up and George Romero cameo's please).
The "fallen angels" are played by cute girls, but not angelic looking by any means. Pretty but not gorgeous.
Bottom line checklist as to what this movie is lacking:
-Background story -Effects -Acting -Budget -Scares
What the movie offers:
-Total boredom
Take your money and your time and watch something, anything else.
This film actually works from a fairly original idea - I've never seen nymphs that were thrown out of heaven in a horror movie before anyway. However, the way that it executes this idea isn't original in the slightest; we follow a bunch of kids that, for some reason decide to go on a trip into the forest. The fact that the forest is inhabited by these nymphs make it more interesting than merely another forest filled by rednecks/nutcases/zombies etc; but really, the monsters are just a variation on the common horror in the woods theme. Many films of this ilk don't have a single good idea - and it would seem that this one has worn its brain cells out with just that one. The only real asset that the monsters bring to the table is the fact that they're beautiful women that the characters lust for, rather than being hideous grotesques that they want to run away from. This is good up until a point; but it soon gets boring, and the almost complete lack of any back-story surrounding the central monsters ensures that the film is never going get itself out of the 'horror trash' category.
It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror setting. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct lack of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only real highlight the film has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's nothing to recommend this film for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties woodland flicks, you might find some enjoyment here.
It's been years since The Evil Dead made the woodlands a prime horror location, and in spite of films like The Blair Witch Project; it still makes for an excellent horror setting. This is one of the film's major assets, as the forest presents a good impression of the unknown - the only problem is that Forest of the Damned doesn't ever seem to have much up its sleeve. The death sequences show a distinct lack of imagination, and the fact that all the characters are clichéd in the extreme doesn't help, as you're more likely to be looking forward to seeing them get killed rather than hoping they can get away. The cast is made up of kids mainly, but there is a role here for Tom Savini; who unfortunately doesn't get to have fun in the special effects department. The only real highlight the film has where personnel are concerned comes from the nymphs themselves. The naked ladies tend to look great, and if it wasn't for them, this film would get very boring very quickly. There's nothing to recommend this film for really; but if you want a daft little horror film that harks back to the style of eighties woodland flicks, you might find some enjoyment here.
If you liked "Blair with" you'll like this one. It has the same lousy camera-work and soundtrack, and it has the same non-existent plot and suspenseful moments.
It also has Tom Savini, so if you like Romero's "Dawn of the dead" or Tarantino and Rodriguez' "From Dusk Till Dawn" you're in for a treat. He is an icon and a very good actor as well.
No, seriously. This movie is definitely the lousiest movie I've seen in a long time, and I've seen quite a few movies -- bad ones as well. I can tell you that I find most horror movies entertaining in some respect, but this was just a pure waste of time.
The only reason why I gave this movie 2 instead of 1, was the naked chicks and the hot action with all the sharp-looking plastic teeth... No, I'm just kidding. I must have missed before I hit "submit" on the vote form.
Stay away, even though it has sexy girls with teeth on the cover!
It also has Tom Savini, so if you like Romero's "Dawn of the dead" or Tarantino and Rodriguez' "From Dusk Till Dawn" you're in for a treat. He is an icon and a very good actor as well.
No, seriously. This movie is definitely the lousiest movie I've seen in a long time, and I've seen quite a few movies -- bad ones as well. I can tell you that I find most horror movies entertaining in some respect, but this was just a pure waste of time.
The only reason why I gave this movie 2 instead of 1, was the naked chicks and the hot action with all the sharp-looking plastic teeth... No, I'm just kidding. I must have missed before I hit "submit" on the vote form.
Stay away, even though it has sexy girls with teeth on the cover!
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThe main characters in this movie Emilio, Ally, Molly, Judd are named after Breakfast Club (1985) actors Estevez, Sheedy, Ringwald and Nelson.
- GaffesAfter Judd is hit in the head by the rifle, the wound repeatedly swaps between the right temple to the left temple.
- ConnexionsFollowed by Forest of the Damned 2
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Durée1 heure 35 minutes
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant
Lacune principale
By what name was Forest of the Damned (2005) officially released in Canada in English?
Répondre