A group of friends are going on a camping trip to celebrate graduating college. But once they enter the woods, the group are attacked by a creature.A group of friends are going on a camping trip to celebrate graduating college. But once they enter the woods, the group are attacked by a creature.A group of friends are going on a camping trip to celebrate graduating college. But once they enter the woods, the group are attacked by a creature.
- Awards
- 1 win & 1 nomination total
Chris J. Neal
- Customer
- (as Chris Neal)
Char Stone
- Ash
- (as Kayla Morgan)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
I had to give it one star because zero isn't an option. I really don't know what to say, that hasn't already been covered by the other reviewers other than, this movie left me with a lot of unanswered questions. Such as: Who the hell makes these films? Why? How? Surely the production cost outweighs the incoming revenue? Who signs off on it's production? Are they proud of their work? Do they have any concept of shame? Is it an inside joke nobody gets the punchline to? Who are these humans? Are they some bored affluent people taking the Micky out of Hollywood? Are they even human? The list really does go on. The mystery will forever baffle me. Yet oddly depresses me too.
But when I commit to watching a movie called "Don't F*ck in the Woods" I don't expect to be treated to a top tier cinema experience. I expect to see young hot girls get some variety of naked, have simulated sex, and then be killed horribly...
And that's EXACTLY what I got! Was it great? Nope... but it sure wasn't terrible! The dialog was great for the most part and they all seemed to be a real group of friends.
So yeah... I don't get why all the other reviews are 1 and 2 stars... I've seen plenty of movies that make this look like a solid 8. I guess people just went in expecting too much, which I don't get given the title...
And that's EXACTLY what I got! Was it great? Nope... but it sure wasn't terrible! The dialog was great for the most part and they all seemed to be a real group of friends.
So yeah... I don't get why all the other reviews are 1 and 2 stars... I've seen plenty of movies that make this look like a solid 8. I guess people just went in expecting too much, which I don't get given the title...
But when I see a title Don't F in the Woods in the horror genre, im assuming the title speaks for itself. If your not interested in seeing some skin, or anything else the title & genre clearly gives away then yeah I guess stay away. Otherwise enjoy the comedy/horror. I mean any1 expecting oscar worthy anything from screenplay down to acting-c'mon man
With all due respect to Nadia White (I'm a fan of your other work) I didn't think sitting down to watch this movie that I'm about about to see the next Exorcist,
Halloween, Saw or Silence Of Lambs. I mean the title is called Don't F*** In The Woods of course it's gonna be bad. Other than White, I've never seen or heard of anybody else in this movie. The movie is exactly what I thought it would be, a movie with bad acting, bad graphics (monster) bad script, with some funny dialogue and lots of skin. The only thing that surprises me that is relevant to this film is the amount of hate it's getting on IMBd. People, if you're looking for a good horror movie, don't watch something with expletive in the name of the film.
You have to admit, a title like this is hard to live up to. I am not even hard to please. I love low budget and even micro-budget cinema. The issue is, with all the hype online, the fact that it played Film festivals where other movies were shut out and the good reviews, I expected it to be a fun, wild ride. I was happy it wasn't a slasher film as that would be too expected. But the Creature in this Feature is a guy in trash bags with a Halloween mask from Spirit that has been doctored. And I could even forgive THAT if the film were more fun. The story is the same old retread "Group of jerks in the woods." Talky to the extreme, the 73 minute running time feels like 2 plus hours. And the online reviews obviously must be friends with the director. It's basically his show here as his name is pretty much every credit. We get that it's a Shawn Birkett film, how can we not? Just on the DVD box his name appears no less than 8 times in a small block of credits, not to mention the actual film.
After all that hype and the Film Fests and the rave reviews from these so-called Horror sites, this just simply wasn't the film ANY of them described. I guess that is the problem I am having. I have seen these same reviewers attack films I like for bad acting or pacing issues and pretty much all that I found wrong here, yet they acted like this film was simply perfect. So when I watched the film, it actually hurt. Had I not read that stuff. I probably would not feel so disappointed. As it stands, I gave it a 3 for effort, but execution was lacking. They just announced a sequel. That was another reason I rushed out and got a copy. But why make a sequel to a film like this one? A great title does not mean a great time at the movies.
There are some good things about the film, some of the cast tries very hard while others almost derail the film entirely. The technical aspects are all pretty decent. I can hear what everyone says for the most part and the dark woods scenes are lit well enough to see most of what is happening. Many of these micro-budget movies don't get that right so I am happy about that. Music was OK, but forgettable. I am hoping things improve for the sequel, as I really liked the "Last Girl" in this one and hope she comes back for part 2. But I think I'll wait until I can get it free on Amazon for that one.
Sadly, 3 stars. I really wanted to give it more.
After all that hype and the Film Fests and the rave reviews from these so-called Horror sites, this just simply wasn't the film ANY of them described. I guess that is the problem I am having. I have seen these same reviewers attack films I like for bad acting or pacing issues and pretty much all that I found wrong here, yet they acted like this film was simply perfect. So when I watched the film, it actually hurt. Had I not read that stuff. I probably would not feel so disappointed. As it stands, I gave it a 3 for effort, but execution was lacking. They just announced a sequel. That was another reason I rushed out and got a copy. But why make a sequel to a film like this one? A great title does not mean a great time at the movies.
There are some good things about the film, some of the cast tries very hard while others almost derail the film entirely. The technical aspects are all pretty decent. I can hear what everyone says for the most part and the dark woods scenes are lit well enough to see most of what is happening. Many of these micro-budget movies don't get that right so I am happy about that. Music was OK, but forgettable. I am hoping things improve for the sequel, as I really liked the "Last Girl" in this one and hope she comes back for part 2. But I think I'll wait until I can get it free on Amazon for that one.
Sadly, 3 stars. I really wanted to give it more.
Did you know
- TriviaProduction was shut down after a hornets nest was disturbed and sent one of the actors to the hospital.
- Crazy creditsAfter the actor credits have passed, there is a long blooper and behind the scenes reel.
- ConnectionsFollowed by Don't Fuck in the Woods 2 (2022)
- SoundtracksMass Perversion
by Eyes on Orion
- How long is Don't Fuck in the Woods?Powered by Alexa
Details
Box office
- Budget
- $10,000 (estimated)
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content