NOTE IMDb
2,6/10
1,5 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA micro-budget movie crew treks into the wilderness to shoot horror scenes for their unsellable indie-drama. They soon find themselves in the midst of their own real horror movie, as they ar... Tout lireA micro-budget movie crew treks into the wilderness to shoot horror scenes for their unsellable indie-drama. They soon find themselves in the midst of their own real horror movie, as they are hunted by a large group of creatures.A micro-budget movie crew treks into the wilderness to shoot horror scenes for their unsellable indie-drama. They soon find themselves in the midst of their own real horror movie, as they are hunted by a large group of creatures.
Vince Cusimano
- Monster
- (as Vincent Cusimano)
Jacqueline Fae
- Suzy
- (as Jacqui Holland)
Avis à la une
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.
Somebody out there got hold of a video camera, and like Mickey Rooney in the 1930s said, " let's make a movie." Amateurish acting, an incomprehensible script, and silly make up add up to a total waste of 84 minutes; root canal would be preferable.
The editing and story structure is horrible beyond belief. The "Blair Witch Project" started a style of low budget filmmaking which Monsters continues. The creatures in this mess look like puppets created at the Jim Henson studios, although Kermit the frog would have made it more interesting.
The evil muppets come out of a cave containing the portal to hell which must be sealed to save the earth from ruin; I have no idea what the people who created this garbage were thinking. It's not funny or scary.
I can only advise any potential viewer to avoid " Monsters in the Woods" at all costs; trust me; it is horrendous.
The editing and story structure is horrible beyond belief. The "Blair Witch Project" started a style of low budget filmmaking which Monsters continues. The creatures in this mess look like puppets created at the Jim Henson studios, although Kermit the frog would have made it more interesting.
The evil muppets come out of a cave containing the portal to hell which must be sealed to save the earth from ruin; I have no idea what the people who created this garbage were thinking. It's not funny or scary.
I can only advise any potential viewer to avoid " Monsters in the Woods" at all costs; trust me; it is horrendous.
........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.
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.
I will give this film one positive comment and that is that it was ambitious and tried to some degree to make something a little bit campy but the buck stops there. First of all the acting is soooo bad that it wasn't even funny. Where did they find these people, with the exception of the director of the film and maybe the angel 1/2 way through the rest was just deplorable. Oh My God I just could'nt believe that this film got distribution. There must've been some collusion between the distribution and the makers of this film. I thought Episode 50 and bad bush were bad, this drives them to the supermarket. In fact this film may qualify for top 10 worst films I have ever seen. Monsters in the woods is so discursive that you have no idea what is going on for most of the film. Stay far away unless your on some serious drugs and alcohol because thats what it might take to remotely enjoy this calamity.
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.
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.
Le saviez-vous
- Bandes originalesThe Picture Show
Written and Performed by Doc Crow
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Sites officiels
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Монстры в лесах
- Lieux de tournage
- Fawnskin, San Bernardino National Forest, Californie, États-Unis(Forest Exteriors)
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 30 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 36min(96 min)
- Couleur
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant