The Redwood Massacre
- 2014
- 1h 22m
IMDb RATING
3.2/10
2.4K
YOUR RATING
What begins as a exciting camping trip to the legendary Redwood murder site, takes a terrifying turn when the innocent campers discover the legend is about to become a nasty and bloody reali... Read allWhat begins as a exciting camping trip to the legendary Redwood murder site, takes a terrifying turn when the innocent campers discover the legend is about to become a nasty and bloody reality.What begins as a exciting camping trip to the legendary Redwood murder site, takes a terrifying turn when the innocent campers discover the legend is about to become a nasty and bloody reality.
- Awards
- 4 wins & 3 nominations total
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaThe film crew consisted of only four people - Director, Focus puller, Sound Man & Grip.
- GoofsAt the beginning of the movie, minute 4:56, Jessica (Rebecca Wilkie) walks into the wood with Pamela. At minute 5:55, at the same place and situation, she looks notoriously skinnier and her make up is a lot different than the previous scene (another eyebrow design, false eyelashes, almost clownish).
- ConnectionsFollowed by Redwood Massacre: Annihilation (2020)
Featured review
The Redwood Massacre is an attempt on doing a slasher movie with some urban legend attached to it. Although, it's important to remember that this is a B movie.
Given that, it's obvious that the acting isn't great; in fact, it's terrible. Though some emotions got pictured rather good, some dialogs seemed so emotionless, as if the actors were college students trying to present a seminary. It's comparable to the acting on "Birdemic: Shock and Terror" (yep, it's that bad...)!
All the clichés are here: an urban legend that happens to be real, a psychopath, bloodlust, characters that are dumb as a door, gore, characters that go straight to the slaughterhouse; it's all here!
Credibility in this movie sucks! Though, it's understandable: things aren't that "entertaining" in real life. What I mean is that the main characters on this types of genre never try to get help of any kind, like calling the police or something; but that's the mark of an horror-slasher flick. I can bear that.
However, some flaws are noticeable. Some major flaws, actually. If you're that type of person who watches a movie and goes full critic on it, you'll see what I mean. (Some credibility mistakes can't be overlooked.).
Plot was nothing special and I felt it was fine, until the very ending. I mean, what more to expect: it's about a murderer who murders. There's nothing to it. Though, to me, they could've developed a better backstory to the main villain. It seemed unthought and kinda mediocre.
Also, I didn't like that the villain's personality changed throughout the movie. That's kinda bad and ruins credibility (and the movie) for me. It delivers that feeling that the story isn't flowing "naturaly", that it's being manipulated to the taste of some "sick f***" writer.
After the plot twist, I felt that the storyline got kinda rushed.
The ending was fine, by its standards, but what's up with one event that happens there? To me, that one fact ruined the movie's ending! It felt as an excuse, an unexplained, unadvised, unthought, excuse! I was in shock when I saw where things were going. Geez!
Besides, Kirsty's personality is hateful! I needed to clear that out!
Effects were fine, but the blood's color was way too dark. Overall, this movie delivers the same thing as every slasher flick nowadays.
Given that, it's obvious that the acting isn't great; in fact, it's terrible. Though some emotions got pictured rather good, some dialogs seemed so emotionless, as if the actors were college students trying to present a seminary. It's comparable to the acting on "Birdemic: Shock and Terror" (yep, it's that bad...)!
All the clichés are here: an urban legend that happens to be real, a psychopath, bloodlust, characters that are dumb as a door, gore, characters that go straight to the slaughterhouse; it's all here!
Credibility in this movie sucks! Though, it's understandable: things aren't that "entertaining" in real life. What I mean is that the main characters on this types of genre never try to get help of any kind, like calling the police or something; but that's the mark of an horror-slasher flick. I can bear that.
However, some flaws are noticeable. Some major flaws, actually. If you're that type of person who watches a movie and goes full critic on it, you'll see what I mean. (Some credibility mistakes can't be overlooked.).
Plot was nothing special and I felt it was fine, until the very ending. I mean, what more to expect: it's about a murderer who murders. There's nothing to it. Though, to me, they could've developed a better backstory to the main villain. It seemed unthought and kinda mediocre.
Also, I didn't like that the villain's personality changed throughout the movie. That's kinda bad and ruins credibility (and the movie) for me. It delivers that feeling that the story isn't flowing "naturaly", that it's being manipulated to the taste of some "sick f***" writer.
After the plot twist, I felt that the storyline got kinda rushed.
The ending was fine, by its standards, but what's up with one event that happens there? To me, that one fact ruined the movie's ending! It felt as an excuse, an unexplained, unadvised, unthought, excuse! I was in shock when I saw where things were going. Geez!
Besides, Kirsty's personality is hateful! I needed to clear that out!
Effects were fine, but the blood's color was way too dark. Overall, this movie delivers the same thing as every slasher flick nowadays.
- gabriel_sanchez
- Jul 27, 2015
- Permalink
- How long is The Redwood Massacre?Powered by Alexa
Details
- Release date
- Country of origin
- Official sites
- Language
- Also known as
- Redwood Massacre
- Filming locations
- Dunnottar Wood, Stonehaven, UK(Exterior)
- Production companies
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Box office
- Budget
- £50,000 (estimated)
- Runtime1 hour 22 minutes
- Color
- Aspect ratio
- 2.22:1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content