Back WoodsRating:
Release Date: 17 September, 2002 Retail Price: $9.99 Sorry, this product is not currently available. Cast: |
Back Woods Reviews
Back Woods is too bizarre to describe.........
This film reminded me of when I bought my first camcorder years ago. I made all kinds of little shorts. I still get a kick out of watching those tapes. This is a very student film. It's like watching a train wreck. You want to turn away but just can't.
I actually got embarrassed during a few scenes and I watched it alone. The makers of this film make no pretense as to the fact this is a good film. They know it's bad and they run with it.
I admire them for that.
This probably doesn't deserve 3 stars but I gave 'Silo Killer' 2 stars and I'll never watch that movie again!
Will I watch 'Back Woods'again? Yes, probably so but I won't tell anyone. 'Back Woods' is like nothing I've ever seen before and that's probably a good thing.
The copy I got is actually autographed on the cover by the star.
That's funny enough right there.
Here's my advice, instead of buying this movie talk a friend into buying it. After your friend has watched it ask to borrow it and just never return it. I promise your friend will be too embarrassed to ask for it back and you save a few bucks.
A Serious Review, by Someone Not Associated with the Movie
I cannot honestly say that director Grant Woodhill's _Back Woods_ is the worst movie I've ever seen. The problem is that I've seen Tony Malanowski's _Night Of Horror_ (which you'll only be able to find on an old copy of the VHS, if they haven't all been burned by now). _Back Woods_ is probably the second worst movie I've seen so far, and I've seen thousands (including lots of no-budget horror).
The positive reviews on the Internet for _Back Woods_ can only have a couple explanations. One, they were written by someone involved with the disc. If so, they must have been written only by someone in a position to gain financially from your spending a couple bucks on this turkey (they are probably trying to recoup the $20 they spent on the production plus the thousand or two spent to manufacture the disc and hire the sole professional associated with the project--whoever created the artwork for the case). The other cast and crew can't possibly want you to see this. The only other option is that they are written tongue-in-cheek by people who like to perversely mislead, who think it's funny to say that something is good if it's in fact terrible, and/or who aren't going to go down with a sinking ship unless _everyone_ goes down.
If you read about the movie on the box, _Back Woods_ sounds like it might be worth watching, especially if you like your entertainment on the bizarre side, or if you really enjoy "so bad they're good" films. Both of those descriptions fit me. I love all of John Waters' films. I'm an Al Adamson fan. I like Ed Wood--I even enjoyed watching _Orgy of the Dead_, which is basically 90 minutes of moderately tame go-go dancing. I love Troma. I think that Andreas Schnaas' films are entertaining in a perverse way. Heck, I even gave _Cabin Fever_ a 10 out of 10!
The problem is that if you hadn't read the box, and you tried to give an "objective" description of the film to someone, you'd have to say, " 'Filmed' on a digital camcorder with low resolution by someone overly amused by a couple cheap optical effects, _Back Woods_ is what Texas Chainsaw Massacre might have been like (the plot is a very rough rip-off) if made by a nine-year old who grabbed a handful of people at random in a county park, armed with bottle of strawberry jam for blood, and just made up the film on the fly, with the state park as the only location, in about three hours."
The most aggravating thing about the film, perhaps, is that it wouldn't have to be as bad as it is. It seems like the "filmmakers" made absolutely no effort, in any respect. There is no reason that the whole film has to be shot in a county park, with no sets. At one point, a picnic pavilion is supposed to be a gas station. You know this because they wrote the word "Gas" on a piece of cardboard with a magic marker and placed it on top of a garbage can. The villain, Luther, and his mom, both played by fat men, supposedly just live in the woods. Not in a house, they just stand around in the woods. During a "flashback", one character has a moustache that was drawn on with an eyebrow pencil. There is little concern with editing or pacing (of course). There are scenes where the camera just travels through the woods slowly for a couple minutes, and nothing else happens; there are scenes of someone walking through the woods and calling a name for about five minutes; the scant 60-something minute running time is further padded out with a nonsensical "fast reverse" replay of the whole film at the end; and the director was so amazed that he got the "lead actress" to show her breasts that he lingers on them for about a minute.
They don't even really try to create any gore effects, which usually are the best things about these kinds of no-budget horror films. People like Andreas Schnaas convey a true love for the horror genre, despite the fact that maybe they're not that talented and can't get together a lot of funding for their films. They still make the best horror films they can with the resources at their disposal. On the other hand, people like the crew and cast of _Back Woods_ only convey that they'd like to rip you off for a couple bucks, and want to spend as little money as possible to do it. It's like a three card monte game by someone who can't even be bothered to set up a cardboard box and use real cards--instead they just use the sidewalk as a "table" and draw cards on a couple pieces of scrap paper with an eyebrow pencil.
Surely someone involved with _Back Woods_ lives in a house or apartment. It's not that hard to take a couple rooms and dress them. It's not that hard to find a gas station where the owner would like some free publicity. It's not that hard (unfortunately) to find talented make-up and effects artists who'll work for free, just for the chance to do something in a genre they love. It's not that hard to learn how to shoot coverage and do some computer editing. It's not that hard to find writers who'll donate decent, or at least passable, scripts in exchange only for credit on the film. It's not that hard to locate someone with a home digital multitrack who would record some looping (dubbed dialogue) and maybe some foley (sound effects) for you, so that viewers can actually hear lines the actors say and it doesn't sound like they're inside a plastic cup. But you'd have to care about what you're doing, and care about the genre to make those efforts. The _Back Woods_ team didn't care.
More Customer Reviews (3 total)
You like Back Woods?
|
