Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

Spoonatects Am i the only one who thinks........Average?

Loui Blair It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

Winifred The movie is made so realistic it has a lot of that WoW feeling at the right moments and never tooo over the top. the suspense is done so well and the emotion is felt. Very well put together with the music and all.

cecilliawhite As with a lot of the 'less known' films I tend to watch, I usually pick days or times when the weather outside my home is in correlation with the mood of the film I'm trying to enjoy. That being said, when I watched Dead Wood, I just happened to be doing it while listening to the rain coming down outside.Now, the DVD cover-art has a quote which reads "Sure to scare the hell out of you! -Slasherpool", but for me, this really didn't even come close to happening until the end of the film. For at least 50 min of the film (out of the entire 86 minutes) nothing except gentle plot building occurred. It was hard enough to manage to keep my eyes focused on what I was watching, especially with the rain outside making a better noise than the film. However, after that 50 min (or so) mark, the film greatly started to pick up - almost too quickly.For a good horror film, I think that there should be some length to the entire struggle/mystery that the characters are going through. This wasn't the case, though, for Dead Wood. I also found it somewhat difficult to pick up on what was happening until near the end, which was both good and bad I suppose.All of this being said, I gave the film a 5 out of 10, purely because A) The movie was pretty well made - just with a sub par script, and B) Because the ending finally started building intensity and recaptured my attention.If you're looking for something to 'scare the hell' out of you, this might not be it. But if you want a film that is rather short and takes place in the middle of nowhere, then this is a good choice.

KineticSeoul This has got to be one of the most boring horror movie I have ever seen. Do not trust any positive reviews for this piece of crap, they either was part of making this atrocious film, was payed off(which I doubt, knowing how this was made in less than a shoe string budget), don't know what a good horror film is suppose to be and being a nuthugger cause it's a British horror flick. Just about everything about this film is so boring to the point, nothing is original, nothing is unexpected, and nothing is scary. I decided to pick this film up after seeing how it was featured in bunch of festivals that probably takes any movie no matter how bad it is. I honestly don't know how anyone can find this terrible movie overall to be even remotely entertaining. Just pass on this one, you will be doing yourself a favor, it's not only a bad horror movie, it's a pointless one with events that lead to more pointless crap. The characters in this is not only stupid, but they are so awkward they don't seem like real people what so ever, so you just don't care if they die what so ever as well. I know everyone is entitled to there own opinions, but most of the reviewers that give this movie a positive review, either was involved with this movie or involved with the people that was involved with this crap. Either that or they are tree huggers, cause the plot is about some wood witch that turns people into trees for not respecting nature or something along those line. I give it a .5 cause the ending was pretty bad to the point it's sort of funny, and it's 1.5 by me cause there is no zero to give it. 1.5/10

fedor8 Four young morons go for a camping trip in the English woods. But instead of having undisturbed fun with the ol' in-out (during which they can enrich the world with even more moronic offspring), they end up becoming trees. Tolkien would have protested vehemently.Human-tree mergers in cinema have always fascinated me. From a very young age - indeed since I was a very young tree-spotting boy - the idea of having Oriental wood-witches turn horny young couples into semi-retarded, mute pseudo-Ents had tickled my fancy like no other floral or even non-floral concept. My imagination ran wild as I pictured myself becoming a plant - much like Sean Penn has been since his birth. What would it be like just to sit there and not ever have to think or eat food (much like Nicole Ritchie)? In particular was I interested how these bored magical forest women do this with the aid of cheesy CGI. Naturally, there was no CGI when I was growing up, but then again why should this IMDb comment have any more logic than this unique little British horror flick? The Oriental witch, played by the rather cute bad actress Nina Kwok, springs out of nowhere one day, informing the two bad-acting white couples that "her boyfriend had disappeared" and that she is cold and hungry. Someone suggests - quite foolishly! - that they call the police, but because most horror-film couples are rather brave morons, this strange notion of informing authorities of the disappearance of a person in the middle of nowhere gets quickly discarded and pooh-poohed upon by the majority. Hooray for horror-movie democracy. Apparently, Common Sense 101 and Wanting To Survive Forrest Demons 500 are courses that are never taught to horror-film couples.One of the characters is called "Milk". Don't ask me why. My intellect is too small to comprehend the limitless depths of profundity that is to be found in every pore of this tree-based horror-fest.Naturally, the fact that Kwok lost her entire boyfriend (all parts of him, including the only copy of the movie's script, which was stapled to his derrière) doesn't cause too much distress in our merry band of bad young actors. Soon enough, the missing boyfriend is as passé as bell-bottoms and punk music, and no-one gives him (or his obvious questionable existence) half a thought anymore. Hence it's time for the non-nerdy guy to go skinny-dipping with the grief-stricken-yet-casually-flirtatious Kwok, while his very blond girlfriend watches them with very mild contempt (bordering on disinterest). Hmm… Funnily enough, one of the skinny-dips ends up with the TOTALLY UNEXPECTED drowning of the blond's beau. The blond being a movie blond, she does not suspect at all that Kwok might have had something to do with the death of her boyfriend: after all, Kwok was only a meter away from him when he was last seen alive. At this point, the other unintelligent, sex-starved couple rejoins the group, and someone yet again comes up with the utterly silly idea of leaving the forest and searching for the police. Two boyfriends are already missing, but this doesn't seem to phase our underpaid (or overpaid?) dilettante thespians. Nothing can ruin their cheerful optimism: they're happy just to be in a movie.Eventually Kwok tires of playing games with such low-IQ campers (it's just not fun playing with your food when it's this daft), and starts turning them into trees. "Dead Wood". Get it? Dead wood. Wood is sort of dead, the bad actors are nearly all dead, hence their CGI merger with the trees means they're "dead wood". Plus, of course, the paper on which this movie's script was hurriedly written is made out of dead wood, and the ideas contained in the script itself are just as dead as the paper they were written on – which is wood-based, as I mentioned earlier.I can well imagine that the trees aren't too happy about having to accommodate such morons into their "dead wood", but the movie - though deep as it undoubtedly is intellectually - does not address this matter at all. Kwok never asks any of the trees if they'd volunteer to let humans become part of their trunks. There is a tree-hugging environmentalist message that could have been pursued here, and I think it would have made the movie a masterpiece. Alas, as it is, we only have a brilliant movie on our hands here, but not one good enough to quite compete with the likes of "The Godfather" or "Star Wars".Am looking forward to the sequel. "Dead Wood 2: Not Worth The Dead Paper It's Written On".

kaufman2000 Kim Newman recommended this in the last issue of Empire. He also recommended 100 Feet so the less said about that man the better. This has precisely two moments where the director actually achieves some semblance of 'horror' and one moment where he clearly blew the budget on one special effect. These three scenes collectively last for about ten minutes of screen time and whilst some understanding of how to frighten the viewer is present they are not worth watching the film for. For the rest of the time you are left with a meandering plot that truly contains some of the worst acting I've ever witnessed and that's coming from a fan of low budget horror/indie/B-Movies for 20 years. The quality of these performances are akin to watching a play performed by an below average GCSE drama group. The acting and dialogue are so poor in fact that I wondered if it was intentional. Sadly the film has a disturbing lack of awareness and is seemingly not tongue-in-cheek in its approach. This is the first review I've ever written but it's all come to head lately as I drift from one disappointing new horror film to the next mainly due to the untrustworthy or shilling production company reviews from the IMDb user comments. It's a joke honestly.As Macready says 'Trust is hard thing to come by these days'