Any good?


Right now, imdb only has the usual "the director is my cousin and mom told me to write something supportive" reviews saying that this is the best piece of horror since the Shining, a masterpiece that will change the very concept of cinema and will be considered as the biggest milestone in the early XXIth century.

So, anyone has seen it? Any good?

reply

well, it's probably the best "bigfoot horror movie" i've ever watched, but that doesn't mean much.
it's ok for a low budget genre flick. it has some fun practical fx (you can tell the director has a special fx background). just don't expect anything original from the story or characters.

my biggets complaint would be, the movie is overlong for what it is. it felt like it goes on forever.

reply

Thanks. Good to know. That reaches the minimum level I have for the horror genre, so I'll take a look.

By the way, regarding "bigfoot horror movies", there's an old movie which doesn't suck too much. It's quite an unknown one. I discovered it because the writer is the same that wrote Until Dawn (the videogame)

https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0275067/

reply

it's ok for a low budget genre flick... just don't expect anything original from the story or characters.


The depiction of Bigfoot in the movie is surprisingly original. It's not one-dimensional at all, like in most Sasquatch flicks, e.g. "Exists" (2014) (which is a good movie) or "Sasquatch Hunters" (2005). I'd say more but I don't want to spoil it for people who haven't seen the film yet.

It's a surprisingly well-done Bigfoot movie with authentic forest locations (shot in California & Oregon), a worthy cast of no-names, great creature effects, superb gore and a quality score. Not to mention cowriter/director Patrick Magee doesn't fail to highlight Casey Gagliardi's beauty in a tasteful way.

The flick is artistic enough to transcend the Sasquatch horror genre. Anyone who appreciates deep forest thrillers, like "The Edge" (1997), "Hold the Dark" (2018) and "Into the Grizzly Maze" (2015), will find a lot to like.

The problems, for me, are that (1) the depiction of the smart-aleck hunters is over-exaggerated to the point of taking you from the reality of the film and (2) the story needed more human interest or, at least, depth. For instance, "Sasquatch Mountain," aka "Devil on the Mountain" (2006), is actually moving despite its low-budget; and "Wendigo" (2001) contains heavy spiritual food-for-thought in its brilliant low-key manner. This picture features a little of both, which is to be respected, but not enough. The ending is on the daft level of the same in "Abominable" (2006), which leaves you with a "Meh" feeling.

I'd put it on par with "Exists" (2014), albeit more ambitious and imaginative. You just have to look past the eye-rolling rednecks and the out-of-place stabs at humor (which I didn't mind so much).

reply

can't really oppose to your comment, because i completely forgot about this movie. on the other hand, the fact that i forgot about it sort of confirms that the movie wasn't original enough to be memorable.

reply

Whether or not you like/remember the movie is your prerogative. But the depiction of Oh-Mah is quite original as Bigfoot flicks go. For instance (SPOILERS), it wears bark for camouflage and utilizes weapons, like bow/arrows and hatchets. Then there's the hideous witch in the deep woods who may or may not control the creature to some degree; whatever the case, the creatures don't harm her and allow her to live in their midst.

reply

I watched this on DVD a long time ago and it was pretty well done for a low budget.. One of things I admired was the filmmakers getting the law of physics right in this movie, like when the Bigfoot ran and you could feel the weight when he ran.. Practical FX were also very good.. Don't know if this will ever get a sequel the way it ended, but you never know??

reply