Monsters in the Woods

Absolutely garbage! But some scene were so campy I actually got a laugh or two out them !! Could not believe Glenn Plummer a main stream actor was in this low budget to no budget trash.Watchable little picture but watchable just once.I have to think the horrible acting was done on purpose.cause no actor can be this bad !!Some nice set decoration with the caves and some of the make up was fairly good for amateurs. Wouldn't recommend watch this at a party with friends,U may get cursed out and lose friends unless you're serving very strong drinks and All your friends pass out! Yes this movie is really that bad .But the video sucked,the cameras were busted like they came from Toys R Us, but in a strange way like I said before it had it's points(though not many) and I was able to get through the whole thing without falling asleep !!

A film crew working on a creature flick finds themselves pursued by real creature and must fight to survive. The film stars directed by Glenn Plummer, who is a solid actor with a proven track record (Pasttime, The Corner, Things to Do In Denver When You're Dead, South Central,), but this is as poorly a directed film as Plummer himself has helmed (VooDoo Curse: The Giddah, 7 Deadly Sins failed to garner a rating higher than 2.6). Plummer must be on the outs with Hollywood's bigwig directors and now has been confined to "the goony leagues" of film actors, where actors' careers go to take their final breath. This film has it all-all bad, that is: Third-rate cinematography, f/x, acting, writing, pacing... sheesh. Director J. Horton has the nerve to flaunt to the world that this version is the Director's cut. At least he had sense enough not to use his full name, though he might've been better off passing this off as an Alan Smithee joint. This is 96 minutes of raw, fecal-scented sewage. If this were graded on an A-F scale this film would've earned a G-rating, and not because its palatable to General audiences.

........Also.. Hardly any Shaky Camera shots. (this film can be watched without getting a Migraine).

Having said that, one of the worse things about this film Is: It was over two hours long. 90 Minutes would have been long enough.

The few who have commented so far, didn't think too much of this film. Neither do I, but IMO this was Not the Most Awful movie I've ever seen. For example: "BLAIR WITCH" for me, was painful, but I watched 'till the end.

I've been on both sides of the camera (but never quit my day job)- Never made any money, or got noticed, etc. - but it was FUN while I was involved. So maybe I just can't Trash anything; so if you have two hours with nothing else to do, get ready to view something that could have been made in the 50s.

Would I watch it again? Never. Would being numb Help? Couldn't hurt

MST3k2 shows stuff much worse then this, with bigger budgets; and lastly, during the 'dramatic' scenes, IMO the actors were really trying to Act.

At least this Group TRIED, and Released it, and got comments. Maybe their next attempt will be better.

This movie is so dull and boring that even The Asylum or Troma might be embarrassed to release it. The plot in a nutshell is : a bunch of wanna-be film-makers venture into the woods to make a bad horror movie and are set upon by the afore-mentioned and barely-seen rubber-masked assailants. The movie is horribly 'color-corrected' into green-tinted nonsense. The 'FX' are not bad enough to be laughable or good enough to impress anyone. There is virtually no gore or even any nudity of note, but they DO toss in an impressive amount of 'Wilhelm Screams' and Commodore Amiga-caliber gunshots. O and there's a cave that looks like a menstruating vagina.

I don't get the hate this movie is receiving, don't get me wrong I am by no means saying its a great movie, honestly I don't know if I would even really say its a good movie, but its clearly not a bad one.

I mean the monsters looked great, a real throw back to the old school monster movies I enjoyed so much as a child, the rest of the f.x. gags where fun, the acting was... I'll go with OK, but over all I don't feel like I was robbed of the 2 hours I spend watching this, it will just fade into the hundreds of other nameless monster movies I've seen over the years. Lets be honest about one thing though. Even before I saw the budget, with a name like monsters in the woods you should not be expecting to get a film like the "Artiest". Its going to be camp, its going to be "B" grade. If common sense did not tell you that you deserve not to enjoy the movie.