Willow Creek

First thing's first this film is boring, about 45 minutes of this film is talking and driving. Then our couple get to the woods and get warned off, which happens in most if these films. When that happened I thought great the film will pick up, it didn't for awhile. Then we get to the infamous tent scene, for me it didn't work. This part was meant to be 18 minutes of flights and scares, where? By the time we get to the end of the movie, I had lost interest in the film. There was nothing wrong in the acting, in fact they did look like a real couple, which worked. The film had one problem as I said earlier, nothing happened. I would give this a three and a half but since I can't I will give it a four.

If you're looking for a good Bigfoot movie this is the only one that comes to mind.

Now, I call it good, not great. It has it's fair share of flaws, but being from the same guy who directed God Bless America and World's Greatest Dad I expected a certain level of quality often not shown to horror movies, and almost never to the found footage genre.

This movie handles it's scares with tact and maturity, and even has a very tense scene in a tent. I won't delve into detail as I do think this movie is worth watching. It's certainly nothing new, but it takes the good well established staples of horror, arranges them in a pleasant package, and doesn't have anything that really made it a bad movie...

...until the end. Sadly, without revealing too much, the movie has a rather disappointing, confusing, and unsatisfying ending. It doesn't ruin the movie as a whole, but since it's the last thing you see, a bad ending skews the rest of it in a negative light.

This movie was made solidly enough to the point where I can definitely recommend it. Willow Creek isn't the best movie in world, or even the best horror movie, but with all the recent schlock like Devil's Due and Paranormal Activity 5 it stands leagues ahead. I want a sequel to this, one that hopefully solves the problems this one had.

TLDR Version: Good, not great. Worth a watch despite it's flaws.

I admit that I like found footage films, or, rather, I find that story telling device compelling. Assuming it's done well. To do it well, your film relies heavily on acting first, then editing, then sound They all work well here.

Too often, these sorts of films have actors who don't know what to say, or how to say it, as they are expected to improvise and aren't confident how to be "natural". In this film, the actors are brilliantly natural and their chemistry is superb. They are a very believable as a couple and as people.

The goal itself is interesting, as I have rarely watched a Bigfoot movie, so I found that part of the film at interesting spin. But really, the slow burn here is what really makes me like this movie.

As with other films in which the protagonist is a wannabe filmmaker, there are lots of establishing shots with the local townsfolk to talk up the legend, and to get a sense of what is to come. It's all done pretty realistically, and, again, the actors dialogue/exchanges with each other are especially convincing.

Again, this film is very much about the slow burn of tension. This is very much exemplified in a scene near the end that lasts nearly twenty minutes for one continuous shot. And it's not boring. At all. The actors are brilliant in the scene, as is the sound. It's a highly effective scene and you really begin to get into the same dread of what's next as the characters due to the immersive nature of the scene.

Overall, I really liked it. I think the director did a great job in choice/direction of actors, and the overall story was not over the top. It's a great example of how found-footage should be done.

Though, the film doesn't actually try to tell you it's found footage, it's just that the only point of view is the camera(s) used by the characters. But I'll assume someone found the footage in that fictional universe at some point.

I cannot quite comprehend how one could go hunting for Big Foot yet be so ill-prepared to be in the wilderness. No knife, torches, bear spray, headlamps, no night vision camera, no interest in building a fire. This is the most frustrating movie to watch, not due to the slow burn nature but just the sheer idiocy and naivety of the main character. Incredulous.

In my review for the mediocre found-footage/horror film 'Followed' I talked a bit about my dislike for how serial murderers are often portrayed in cinema. While Se7en was a good thriller, it epitomizes IMO the problem... Serial Killers murder for sex and power, and usually a bit of both. However, fart too often, movies seem to depict them as these brilliant psychopaths whose sole purpose in life is to get into a game of 'cat and mouse' with their equally brilliant adversary, that is, whatever detective Morgan Freedman might be playing in any given film.

What's frightening to me about serial killers is that for the most part they go undetected and often get away with multiple homicides for years. That, and to top it off, they blend in with the outside world very well. That is what Willow Creek gets right-there is a hint of realism here on top of the campy thrills that separates Willow Creek from your average slasher film.

This is one of the few movies that I actually felt a certain sense of dread for our hero's, Jim and Kelly-which is a big thing for me, as it takes a lot more than gore and a loud bump to make me jump.

I would like to also mention that I thought the actors did quite well-not only the killer, but the protagonists as well. I thought Jim was really likable, which is another surprise for this type of movie, which usually has very poor character construction.

Worth the watch.