IMDb RATING
2.6/10
1.5K
YOUR RATING
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 ar... Read allA 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)
Featured reviews
This movie was God awful started with a man and woman having sex which I really don't understand why horror movies have to throw sex in there it doesn't make it any better for me if I want to see a sex movie I'll rent a porno I don't get it anyways this movie went no place after about 30 minutes I couldn't handle it anymore I took it out I will not watch this movie again I hate when they try to make documentaries like this and they go no place simply awful do yourself a favor don't ever buy this movie the movie I bought with came with 10 movies some are really lame some are so so. This one had terrible active I could have acted better myself just awful.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Did you know
- SoundtracksThe Picture Show
Written and Performed by Doc Crow
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Монстры в лесах
- Filming locations
- Fawnskin, San Bernardino National Forest, California, USA(Forest Exteriors)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- $30,000 (estimated)
- Runtime
- 1h 36m(96 min)
- Color
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content