Page 2 of 2

Re: A Night In The Woods

Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 11:06 am
by itchysore
I hate to truly diss any film but this was just terrible.

If you are going to copy Blair witch 10 years after the fact, at least bring something new to the table.

It had a good location and a game cast who turned in believable performances but the story was utter rubbish.

They cheated on the realism vibe by having huge sound effects for every jump moment and what were those big white lights in the campsite ?

I didn't buy for 1 second that the girl wouldn't have noticed someone standing 5 feet behind her while shes holding a torch nor the fact that when Mr beardy left the camp you could clearly see he had his backpack, so why was his laptop with incriminating evidence left in the tent ?

They didn't even keep to their own half hearted mythology as the hanging bloke was hung by his feet ? You hardly need a hangman's noose for that...

Bottom line, if your going to make me endure loads of horrible wobbly cam in the woods footage, for gods sake deliver with at least 1 genuine scare or creepy moment.

The only reason i can imagine the no review ban is they don't want their "cash in" exposed as there was nothing in the films story to give away or spoil.

A Night In The Woods

Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 4:26 pm
by daveroughcut
Canon 5D do not record sound. They can only record about 16 minutes of footage per card. The battery lasts about an hour. It had no night vision. That was not night vision tahr was black and white. Hate it.

Re: A Night In The Woods

Posted: Thu Sep 01, 2011 5:02 pm
by bnny666
We live not far from Wistman's Woods and despite his criticism of the film, my suggestion to dnky666 that we go camping there when we get back from FF was met with some opposition, so he must have been a bit spooked! :lol:

Re: A Night In The Woods

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 1:39 pm
by Stephen with ph
maxmum wrote:Gosh, some harsh comments on this one. These films always shit me up when done properly. I am constantly just waiting for something to come out of the dark!

I also liked blair witch and thought this one was just as well done, with a slightly more interesting back story to the characters.
Agreed.

The only thing I ever enjoyed about Blair Witch was its inventiveness - there was nothing in its plot to engage or excite, and the characterisation was non-existent.

Yes, this movie is founded on exactly the same principles - but, to my mind, this movie has refined the form. And, more importantly, it's taken the trouble to work on characterisation.

I enjoyed it immensely. Other opinions are, of course, available.

Re: A Night In The Woods

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 4:02 pm
by Scrof the Return
What a shame they couldn't show Guinea Pigs or that I decided not to go to the Disco Screen instead that morning.
This was a tiresome, massively unoriginal, load of pants.

Re: A Night In The Woods

Posted: Sat Sep 03, 2011 5:23 pm
by Wolfshade
When a film got cancelled in 2009, they bumped up Black to the main screen, and I think it would have been better if they'd done the same here, and bumped Rabies, Kidnapped or Midnight Son up to the main screen, and put this in the Discovery screen. It's nice to see indie UK films sometimes, but at least try to be remotedly original.

Re: A Night In The Woods

Posted: Mon Sep 05, 2011 9:31 pm
by streetrw
Wolfshade wrote:When a film got cancelled in 2009, they bumped up Black to the main screen, and I think it would have been better if they'd done the same here, and bumped Rabies, Kidnapped or Midnight Son up to the main screen, and put this in the Discovery screen. It's nice to see indie UK films sometimes, but at least try to be remotedly original.
Probably not Midnight Son - firstly it's awful, and secondly the picture definition was pretty poor on the Screen 4. Blown up to Empire 1's screen it would have been unwatchable.

Re: A Night In The Woods

Posted: Fri Sep 09, 2011 12:14 pm
by jonbly
daveroughcut wrote:It had no night vision.
It was probably supposed to be an infra-red adapted model. But then, that's normally a one-way adaption... and there was clearly a 'light' source being used (but there wasn't one mounted on the camera). At least picking apart the mistakes with those scenes added some interest...