Preservation (2014) User Reviews

Don't Go In The Portaloo Alone!

[BA_Harrison · 4/10 · 9 March 2015]

If you and your loved ones are planning to spend a few days in the wilderness blasting the crap out of defenceless woodland critters, I suggest reading the following ten point safety guide that I have compiled based on the movie Preservation. You never know… it might just save your life! 1. If the park sign says it is closed, it could be because the place is a graffiti-strewn hellhole frequented by psychos. I suggest trying somewhere else.

2. When passing through a children's play area, be sure to leave a broken beer bottle on the ground. Sure, it's a thoughtless act that could injure an innocent youngster, but you never know when you'll need a jagged bottle-neck for a weapon.

3. Relax, have fun, but don't overdo the alcohol: there's always the possibility that, while you're out cold, strangers will sneak into your camp, steal your boots, bottles of water, guns, the very tent you're sleeping in, and your dog, and, while they're at it, draw a cross on your forehead for s**ts and giggles.

4. Try to leave all unnecessary electronic gadgets at home: constant phone calls from work will only create tension amongst your fellow campers, and that GPS tracking device might be more trouble than it's worth.

5. If pursued by a gun-toting maniac, try to avoid trapping yourself in a confined space that offers next to no protection. For example, a plastic portaloo.

6. Remember: an earring and some string make a handy makeshift needle and thread for the self-treatment of serious head injuries.

7. Murderous locals are tricksy blighters: never be tempted to turn your back on them, even if they look like they're down for the count.

8. If you discover your stolen water bottles suspended suspiciously from a tree, take care to look where you're treading when you go to retrieve them.

9. Should you need to return to your vehicle at any time during your stay, take the path—it's a lot easier than scaling a crumbling cliff-face.

10. As undeniably impressive as it is to lower yourself upside-down from a branch and throttle someone with jump leads, it might be easier (and a lot more effective) to simply shoot them.

As you've probably guessed, Preservation is one hell of a dumb film. It's also extremely predictable, writer/director Christopher Denham opting to take the path well travelled rather than risk going off the beaten track. The film borrows heavily from numerous other survival horrors, most notably UK hoodie horror Eden Lake and French home invasion flick Them (AKA Ils), and its commentary about society's lax attitude to media violence and our over-reliance on technology is both trite and ham-fisted. Technically, the film fares well enough, with accomplished cinematography and editing, and decent performances, but with such a weak script, Preservation proves positively pitiful overall.

I'm confused

[liquidrawhide · 5/10 · 6 August 2014]

Preservation opens with a series of shots trailing an old 4x4 making its way from suburbia into the wilderness. Eventually we move inside the cab of the truck to eavesdrop on the conversation of the driver and his companion in the passenger seat, who comes off as a sociopath giggling at an online video of a cat being flushed down the toilet, and recalling how he knocked over an oil can as a kid and splashed the contents all over his father, but thankfully the driver - his big brother - protected him and always had his best interests at heart.

So let's stop right there and see if you're with me up to this point, four or five minutes into the movie. Knowing only a few details about the plot coming into this, we can safely assume these are going to be the killers who stalk the nice people, right? Especially when they take guns out of the car and reminisce about shooting small animals when they were younger, correct? In fact, no! These are your central characters/protagonists, ladies and gentlemen, which takes what would have been a fairly pedestrian thriller down a few notches to fail territory, in my view. Preservation features such largely despicable characters that you in no way root for anyone in the whole affair, be it these two aforementioned brothers, the wife of one of them whose attraction to such a loser you can simply not fathom, nor the eventual real antagonists who make their presence felt with an incomprehensible combination of stealthy brilliance and clumsy stupidity.

There is a critic review floating around here somewhere that compares Preservation to Adam Wingard's You're Next, suggesting each one may have its merits but that Preservation is ultimately the superior, more intense film. Let's put that notion to rest right now: You're Next might not be everyone's cup of tea, but it is miles more accomplished than Preservation, a derivative, illogical, and ultimately lazy effort whose script is about as subtle as a swinging butt of a rifle to your head.

When paintball no longer satisfies...

[planktonrules · 4/10 · 22 January 2015]

If you decide to see "Preservation", there is a strong likelihood that you'll find the plot familiar. That's because it dates all the way back to 1924, with Richard Connell's story "The Most Dangerous Game". A few years later, the story would be brought to the big screen in the classic story by the same name, starring Joel McCrea and Leslie Banks. Since then, the story has been re-written time and time again--appearing in television shows (such as "Get Smart", believe it or not) and various movies. So, you cannot exactly give this film many points when it comes to originality.

Like the old story, someone likes hunting. But instead of animals, their quarry is people. The only huge difference here is that you really don't know who the killer or killers are until the end of the film--whereas in the original story is was some twisted Russian aristocrat. Otherwise, the three victims spend more than half the film on the run--trying to avoid being someone's trophy. There really isn't a whole lot more to the story than this.

On the plus side, the film is very tense. Some of the acting is pretty good and despite a small budget, the movie looks good. I also liked the identity of the hunters--this was an interesting twist. On the negative, the film isn't exactly fun to watch. After all, folks are getting butchered and there isn't a whole lot of subtlety about it. I also was irked by a cliché that I often see in films---someone disables their attacker and instead of finishing off the killer, they almost immediately turn their back on them so that they can be murdered. I don't know about you, but if someone is trying to kill me, I don't beat them up and then turn my back unless I am 110% sure that they are truly dead. Overall, I don't consider it a bad nor a good film but there isn't enough about it that would have me recommend you go see it. If you hate violent films, there's also another reason to avoid this one.

I saw promise in this film. In the future, I'd like to see these actors and filmmakers do a more challenging project--something with more originality and which allow them to expand on their skills.

could have been OK, but wasn't

[ddcharbon · 2/10 · 22 April 2015]

OK, teens as killers who communicate with one another only via text and violence. I can dig that. (One reviewer complains about how the heavy handed "messaging" of having them text when they're sitting right next to each other, but I've seen that happen, so I think that's a fair comment on our techno-generation.) But the character development of the three main protagonists is incredibly weak and the first two kills are ridiculous as protagonists, including a combat-hardened veteran who manages to best an armed and towered sniper with a stick lashed to his hand, decide to turn their backs on their antagonists without verifying that they are actually incapacitated or weaponless. WTF! Also, once we see the size of the teens in question (one of them a wheezing asthmatic), the idea that they could go mano a mano in physical combat as they do with two big strapping grown men (did I mention that one of them is a combat veteran?) is also absurd. If you're gonna make your killers beanpole teens, you'd better give them better strategies for killing grown men who see them coming than hand to hand combat and playing possum, if you want to keep any credibility as a thriller. Too bad, because the movie does have some good scenes--the lead killer almost drowning one of the other killers to make him not run home to mom, his face vibrating with sadistic delight behind his skull face mask, is effectively chilling. A little more thought given to the script and the choreography of the kills could have improved this flick a lot.

Lame...

[zz430 · 1/10 · 23 September 2018]

The writing sucks, the acting is mediocre at best, and this movie is predictable. How can 3 adults (including a former soldier) be so stupid?? Turn your back on someone you just beat in the head without knowing if they are unconscious?? A soldier would do this?? Unbelievable.

Walk right up to your water that was stolen that is now hanging in a tree without suspecting a trap?? So dumb.

Beat a guy up in a porta potty and then DON'T take the gun?? Brainless.

Again, turning your back on someone you just fought with when you don't know if they are unconscious?? That is the epitome of stupidity.

Do yourself a favor and don't waste your time on this lame movie. Perhaps in the hands of a competent writer and director, it MIGHT be okay. But this one is just a waste of time and money.

terrible waste of time

[epollock1981 · 1/10 · 28 January 2015]

WHERE OH WHERE DO I BEGIN WITH THIS LOAD OF ROT...... This was the worst movie I have seen in a long time, the acting was below sub standard on all accounts, the storyline well NONE of it was at all believable and the antagonists were badly portrayed . I mean seriously psycho hunter killer children who ride push bikes and call their mommies about soccer practice....who by the way were all taken down by a small woman.....yet somehow an ex military soldier was unable to do so....Argghhh O.K HIGHLY BELIEVABLE...I would give it half a star, but that is not allowed, the half star would be for the few moments of comedy I got from it in certain places that were just utterly ridiculous. I have never ever written a critique on any forum regarding a movie, but this one prompted me to do so.

Enjoyable Horror Film That Keeps A Good Pace

[HorrorOverEverything · 6/10 · 9 January 2015]

Wasn't expecting much going into this one but was pleasantly surprised. It's well shot, the acting is solid, and the story (while not very original) is interesting enough to keep you watching. It combines aspects of a lot of other horror movies and molds them into one pretty watchable romp in the woods.

I saw someone mention that the protagonists are unlikeable, I would have to disagree with this. The two brothers aren't exactly the greatest people in the world but they were realistic characters imo and I found myself rooting for them despite some of the vulgar stuff that was said by them. I really like how they portrayed the antagonists as well.

"Preservation" is a pretty decent horror flick, it's not super original or overly gory but it does manage to be entertaining through out and provide some pretty tense scenes. I suggest checking it out if you enjoy horror films, we get mostly crap nowadays so when a decent flick comes around it is worth it to check it out.

6/10

Another waste of time

[iamtherobotman · 1/10 · 24 October 2015]

Holy Hell!! Where can i start with this one? Well, the start of the Film was OK! up until our Protagonists awaken to find all their stuff (including the tent around them) gone. From that moment it's as though the writer just gave up on the project. They decide to head back to the car but don't know where it is at which point the Combat vet essentially decides they should follow the Sun and that having no car keys isn't an issue as he can hot wire a car. After walking part way with the happy couple of the trio he then decides that he's going to go back and find his dog that also went missing during the night....so who's going to hot wire the car? The Kills are terrible to say the least - Combat Vet in particular is a pretty awful Kill and more fitting to a Man who hasn't seen any Combat or indeed (lets take this to a base level) Films in his life, turning his back on the Masked Killer ( after having bludgeoned him with the butt of the rifle mind you) before turning to face a perfectly with it Killer, who promptly dispatches our Combat Vet. Once she is left alone and preps herself Rambo style things really do go from the absurd to the outright ridiculous. In one scene she sets off a series of smoke flares creating a screen of smoke over a relatively small area, however it seems sufficiently large enough to completely separate our Trio of Masked Killers so none are actually in the same vicinity( and i wonder if they're in the same State to be honest). These Killers who up until this point have worked as a cohesive team, dispatching two Men( one a Combat Vet ) with such ease, now struggle to dispatch a lone female who by her own admission can't climb a rock face(which i'll come to in a moment) or hot wire a car or indeed kill anything since she's a Vegan. Now, this Rock face which she HAD to climb in order to get out seemed to be bypassed by our (now obviously Teen) Killers riding Mountain Bikes. The Film had no cohesion, no sense. It seemed almost every scene you notice another glaring error. I didn't particularly go into this with any great expectation but i came out it absolutely numb. I feel i lost IQ points by watching this utter drivel and were i to discover it was written by a Child in Primary School i honestly wouldn't be overly shocked or stunned by that. There were one or two semi decent parts....well one, the beginning was OK as mentioned earlier but there was no Character development, no sympathy with the Protagonists. The Killer Kids NEVER spoke to each other which had me believe they were Mute until the eldest got a Phone call from "Mom". The Female lead went from Rabbit in the headlights to Deranged, determined for retribution in the blinking of an eye when in all honesty she could've made her way to the Main Road hitched a lift and informed the Police of the Brutal Murder of her Husband and Brother in Law. I could go in with faults but i'll let you decide for yourself should you be brave or bored enough to sit through this, which, please for the sake of the Children, don't!

Way better than people make it out to be

[hannah-mae91 · 7/10 · 10 April 2015]

Really I would rate this movie at about a 5.5 or 6 but I felt compelled to level out the strangely low ratings for this flick.

This is a solid movie. Good acting, well paced, artfully shot. Was it all that original? No, not really. It deserves to be compared to films like "Eden Lake" and "The King of the Mountain" as the plot is startlingly similar. Sure, both of those are far better - more disturbing (to say the least) and ahead of their time in terms of plot - but I also can't complain about a single thing in this movie.

So if you expect to be blown out of the water, this isn't your jam. If you require horror to be gory or over the top, look elsewhere. But if you're avoiding a research paper (or three) and need a good horror movie to break up the dreck which so often populates this wonderful genre of ours then this isn't time wasted.

It's next

[kosmasp · 5/10 · 15 October 2014]

I read from another reviewer that this was compared to "You're next" by a critic and was even rated better/higher than that. Let me back his opinion up: You're next is way superior than this, but it's also a different cup of tea and you shouldn't compare it. Since we can't see who's doing what for a very long time in this movie, this can be compared to the Spanish "King of the Hill" ... you can also mix a bit of Eden Lake into it (as there was a female lead character in that too).

Unfortunately the movie is letting one down after a rather strong beginning, which is a shame. A friend of mine felt that it was stronger (the survival instinct, the title is suggesting). Some things you have to figure out for yourself, but this movie has too many holes to be really great in my book. Still decent though

Entertaining!

[lchr-539-418463 · 9/10 · 14 January 2015]

I don't write movie reviews very often, but I felt compelled to here as I just don't understand why this movie has such a low rating! I have seen plenty of horror films, and I especially LOVE a good independent horror film, and while this is not an original premise, I thought it was well written, well paced, and well acted. I do not get the comparisons to You're Next, but it did remind a little of Eden Lake. And while Eden Lake is a superior film, I still thought this was very, very good. I was entertained throughout. Give it a chance, yall!! Ignore the IMDb haters this time - I would give it a 7 out of 10, but bumped it up a few notches to compensate for all of the unfair reviews - IMO.

Decent Eden Lake copy

[jhmoondance · 7/10 · 9 November 2021]

This movie was reminiscent of EdenLake but a tad more inferior. A decent story n plot n the acting was good. The characters were also above average.

There was some suspense but it was predictable.

All the way through the movie was also predictable n has been seen many times.

The ending was also forseen n predictable.

A decent movie if you like menacing chase n hide films.

Brilliant thrillride into a mad world

[aussiesurfer70 · 1/10 · 24 June 2015]

Wow what an incredible movie. An absolutely absorbing and realistic journey into the world of 3 resilient and resourceful young Americans who find themselves matching wits with masked killers in an incredibly beautiful setting.

OK seriously what a load of crap !

We are supposed to believe these idiots are asleep in the woods and wake to find the tent they were sleeping in is gone. As is there boots , cell phone and wait for it German shepherd. Mind you the brother saw them but still managed to get a cross painted on his forehead. My favourite part was when the brother who is a big guy smashes one of the masked kids head in with with a rifle but about 5 times. Somehow the masked kid stealthily gets up and coolly puts a knife through his chest. Let's ignore the fact he should be dead , brain dead or in a coma . I actually checked the genre at this point positive I was watching a sci fi and he was some kind of robot or terminator. The scene where the guy hides in the porta loo was ridiculous, why hide in a massive forest when there is a porta loo handy. Then he manages to escape through the roof unseen and land a few blows with a steel pipe he rips out of the toilet. I enjoyed the bike riding scenes though, some of the jumps looked cool and the masked killers looked to being enjoying themselves. This made me feel good . Please don't watch it you will feel dumber and angry.

Quality horror-in-the-woods ruined by stoo-pid implausibilities

[Wuchakk · 4/10 · 15 January 2018]

RELEASED IN 2014 and written & directed by Christopher Denham, "Preservation" chronicles events in the forests north of Los Angeles when two brothers & one of their wives embark on a camping trip in a closed preservation. Horror ensues when they are literally marked by some creepy pranksters... or is the culprit one of them? Pablo Schreiber & Aaron Staton play the brothers while Wrenn Schmidt plays the wife.

This is a competently made slasher-in-the-woods flick with a fairly engaging story, convincing actors, nice locations, a professional score and all-around effective filmmaking. It doesn't hurt that Wrenn is easy on the eyes. There are predictable aspects, like the red herring in the latter first act, not to mention obvious elements borrowed from similar films, like "Deliverance," "Eden Lake," "Rambo 2," "I Spit on Your Grave" and even "Book of Shadows: Blair Witch 2." Yet these things don't really harm the movie because they're pretty much par for the course in low-budget independent horror like this.

Unfortunately, the film is ruined by constant "Yeah, right" moments, like a character turning his/her back on a wounded adversary, which I counted happening four times (!); and what occurred at the campsite is absurd. Another example is the way people constantly do noisy things in the quiet of the woods without the other person(s) hearing, like climbing on top of a porta potty. Why Sure!

The director is clearly a professional-class filmmaker, but he needs to learn to work out implausible kinks in his screenplays, which just cause any viewer over 12-13 to roll-their-eyes. Maybe he should hire a writer, at least for fine-tuning scripts. It's a matter of using more imagination. The reason "Deliverance" (1972) is still talked about today is precisely because everything in it was BELIEVABLE. Nevertheless, there's a lot of good in "Preservation" and I encourage fans of the horror-in-the-woods genre to check it out.

THE FILM RUNS 1 hours & 27 minutes and was shot in Santa Clarita & Los Angeles, California.

GRADE: C/C- (4.5/10)

Bad direction. 3 out of 10 stars from me

[kheffern-14667 · 3/10 · 6 December 2015]

First off I'd like to say that the actors did a real good job. That being said ,the directing had some major flaws. It really took away from what this movie could have been. SPOILERS AHEAD. The first brother was supposedly military trained , was smart enough to sneak back to the shooter In stead of run away and get gunned down . Then overpower him . That's where his intelligence stops. This guy turns his back to the man trying to kill him. Stupid movie. Didn't end well for him. Not realistic on the directors behalf.

The second brother out smarts another assailant in a "johnny on the spot" . Overpowers him . Guess what? This brother also turns his back on the man trying to kill him. Another very stupid move, and once again very bad directing. Not realistic.

The woman decided to climb the cliff in order to avoid the killers . That's was a smart idea. It was a very dumb idea to climb the highest point of he cliff when 2 meters to either side was so much easier and faster to have scaled. So very unrealistic. Then later on towards the end the woman traps herself inside a playground tunnel when she had so many more viable options . Completely unrealistic. However I don't blame her actors. They played there roles well. Just bad directing.

Riddled with plot holes, implausibility and bad life decisions in general

[quincytheodore · 5/10 · 6 April 2015]

Preservation is meant to deliver a strong message for a thriller movie, it could have done so if only the narrative made a lick of sense. There is a good set-up for horror as the direction is bizarre yet it's occasionally eerie. The worst obstacle for this film is logic, characters would to the stupidest things only to be granted plot armor at later scenes. It has little to no consistency on how the sequences actually play out as though the movie presents obscurity for the sake of being edgy or meaningful and ends up accomplishing none of them.

Three people go into the woods for a weekend of hunting spree. Sean (Pablo Schreiber) is a war veteran with dark past, he goes to the hunting trip with his brother Mike (Aaron Staton) who brings his wife Wit (Wrenn Schmidt). After a night, it has become clear that they are being hunted by unknown individual or individuals. The first half is about life philosophy lecture of hunting or being hunted. It's presented with cliché remarks and not quite appealing.

The three main actors are mainstay for TV series and supporting roles, they are pretty good for setting up the tone. The movie picks up pace very quickly as the trip turns grisly. Sadly, the scenes don't have much clarity. At some points the protagonist would do highly questionable acts, ones with little chance of surviving, then it's the protagonist's turn to be dumb. They would have a hard time engaging the prey even though they are portrayed near unworldly just five minutes earlier, Jason Vorhees level of unworldly.

There are so many strange occurrences, such as its convenient traps, sudden manifestation of characters from thin air and steroid induced change for the protagonist. I understand it wants to display the incomprehensible nature of human and how a devastating event could change people, but the execution is all over the place. Whatever message it wants to convey would get lost if audiences struggle to digest the absurd plot devices.

It has a good concept to begin, but ultimately the poor execution baffles audience in the wrong way.

decent, but with some silly decision making

[JUICEZ-49ers · 7/10 · 15 May 2020]

I agree with other reviewers about the brain dead mistakes made, ie turning backs before you know they are dead ect. Kids over powering adult men. But I have given it 7 because I enjoyed it. I liked Pablo Schreiber in Den of thieves I think without his short part in the movie it would lose a star. It is a toned down version of Edan lake, but Edan lake is British and british is brutal. So all in all I enjoyed it. Job done

A true contender... for worst movie released (outside of festivals) in 2015

[Seth_Rogue_One · 2/10 · 2 March 2016]

You know that your movie flops when the only likable character in your movie is a German Shephard dog.

Not only are the characters annoying and as if taken from a soap-opera, they also decide to set out torturous bear-traps frivolously in a nature reservation as a hunting method (anyone who does that, clearly deserve to get what's coming for them).

Now, it is still possible to make a good movie with solely unlikable characters, however only if the characters are interesting and script is good.

Which really is not the case here and it takes 35 minutes before even something gets going, again had the characters been interesting or likable that would have been a non-issue but as they aren't this is tiring.

I will say one positive thing though, the cinematography is perfectly fine so it's not completely without merit.

Watch something good instead like 'EDEN LAKE (2008)' or 'I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE (2012)'or 'BACKCOUNTRY (2014)' and gives this a skip, I wish I would have.

Beware of redheads

[urbanswami · 6/10 · 28 April 2021]

Another hunted-in-the-wilds horror. It's bit of a social commentary as well. The cinematography is bad, the acting is lackluster, the saving grace of this movie is the eerie soundtrack and Wrenn Schmidt meting out some serious punishment. The closing scene is priceless. There's nothing new or original about this movie, but it's still worth your time.

Meh

[dallasmeddel · 3/10 · 1 January 2016]

Okay, I'm not yet done with the movie but I feel like this is already a somewhat not horrible horror movie. So far, my feelings are eh. The dog dies, so yes, I most likely won't like the rest of the movie. Then, the brother "kills" the first one, or one of the three killers. He turns his back, which is a BIG mistake. At least knock him out? The husband, is an idiot for taking the suspended water to a tree when the water bottles were stolen, and then stepped into his own trap?? Don't take suspended water from a tree. The wife, she gets unconscious from hitting that rock, then gets up rather quickly? She tries to hot-wire the truck, of course, but couldn't so she gears up and goes /back/ into the woods?? You don't do that..? You go away from the woods and get help, like she said she would??

Simple reasons why this film worked

[DuskShadow · 8/10 · 11 January 2015]

Pre Script: the system is not allowing me to correct the way the sentences are formed, hence all the weird spacing and whatnot. Plus I put spoiler alert just to cover myself, just in case there is some kina spoiler for those that are really intuitive. The options there, so I covered myself.

Now as most people always know or choose to believe, all that is written here and just about anywhere that a review is made, is an opinion. IM fine with folks thinking whatever they want if thats how it goes, but as for my feelings on this movie...I was pleasantly surprised with how good it was.

Now let me clarify for those types of folks whom are fans of the first person, cloverfieldy, paranormal whatever genre of horror...this is not that, nor is it blair witchy or like Your next.

To put it plainly, this film was a sorta cross between the strangers, most other woodsy stalker films and even had a kinda Bunnyman feel to it, but all done in a very realistic, not over the top, uber- Hollywood, tons of FX sense. It was just done as if a normal camping story and whats done was done well.

I enjoyed the characters and felt like I got to know them very quick considering how short a film this was, and it helped pull me in. Empathy is a big must for horror, let alone any genre of film. So I give it an 8/10, but perhaps somewhere more along the lines of a 7.5/10 juuust cause I liked it too much; one must also be their own harsh unbiased critic =p. CIAO kiddies!

Not so bad -- good 3rd act

[badland · 7/10 · 28 April 2015]

I was working on a project and found this similar and decided to have a look. I'm not one of those "it's the worst movie ever" types as those people don't really know what they're talking about, more about understanding something more clear. I didn't know anything about this movie, watching it on streaming netflix. I wasn't crazy about the two male actors, they really don't have the chops to carry their characters but the woman is good as most of the women seem to be when cast right.

The first part, or act, is pretty lame and not much to talk about but when things change. It's the same old story in some ways, incidentally I watched Sam Ramii's Evil Dead which is sort of similar and way better, in it's time, and found some resemblances. So the first half is basically "how we got into this trap." When the bad guys show up it was interesting, but when they ride bikes I was really curious... and this led up to the 3rd act and a real surprise for me and they had me from this point to the end. I never really expected the twist; ie: the bad guys. Would never have suspected it and that's why I think it's a worthwhile view.

It was perfect, a total new take on evil from a complete new generation. There's lots of comments on the director and the corny script, and I agree with some of it, but that third act works for me. Clever, very clever, loved the scene where one of the bad guys (spoiler)is about to kill the girl but has to talk to mom on the phone. Brilliant. The bike pay-off was another lead to the bad guys in a really surprising way.

Certainly not a great movie but the third act pays off in a surprising way.

I hate movies that are unbelievable

[jmurdaj · 2/10 · 19 June 2015]

This contains serious spoilers so don't read it if you want to know nothing about the movie. So you have this ex military bad ass, his brother, and his brother's wife. They are going camping and wake up to find that they are being hunted by 3 kids. How the hell does the ex military guy get killed off after he brilliantly tracks these ppl, and actually almost kills one. He beats 1 up, turns his back on him to get a gun, and when he turns back around, the guy stabs and kills him. So not logical that an ex military guy would be smart enough to track the killer down but stupid enough to turn his back on the enemy.

So whatever he dies, the brother dies, and the wife tries to escape. All of a sudden she goes from helpless pregnant doctor, to a trained killer. She tracks down the rest of the kids and kill them 1 by 1. At one point, she hits one with tire iron thing, and can't bring herself to finish the job and hit him in the head. Your husband and brother in law were just murdered, he tried to kill you, but you're going to let this kid live? So stupid.

The best part of the movie, 1 kid is about to kill the girl. He literally thrusts the knife down to stab her and as soon as it almost punctures her stomach, his mom calls!!!! He answers and is like no mom I'm just at soccer practice. Dad didn't pick me up so I took my bike. I love you too! That was hilarious.

Would have been an amazing movie if the military guy used his skills to track them all down and kill them before they could kill his fam.

Shamefully bad!

[john-monne · 1/10 · 29 July 2015]

I really don't get why makers of films such as these simply ruin it.. Its clear that this is a low budget movie but it had good camera work and decent actors so why ruin it with really bad character building and dialogue and then completely ruin it with completely implausible story events??? I really don't get..sigh!! It was simply ruined by something that normally could make a low budget film shine.. the story and characters!

I will give you an example (and i will just ignore all the ridiculous impurities before or after) ..the main characters are supposedly completely lost in a nature park and when the couple (husband and wife) get their first contact (in a rangers cabin) with one of the psychos and at this point they don't know the dog was killed and hung, that the brother was killed nor if they are dealing with murderous psychos or just a bunch of kids that pulled a "lets steal their camping gear" prank on them. So the logic conclusion for them is to say farewell as the husband does the honorable and goes out of the front door to distract the psycho and the wife goes on a supposedly very veryyy veryyy long hike out of that park (they got lost remember?) and climb a treacherous steep cliff to reach the car (for which she just got a 2 second speed course in hot-wiring)..

So the event is set in motion. Wife out the back window on her life changing track and husband out of the front door. Some scenes later of husband running and hiding and wife climbing we get to that conclusion.

The husband is killed in really stupid conditions and the wife triumphantly reaches the end of her mount everest climb (which was well performed by the way!!) and lays down to have the final and last talk with her husband who speaks his final words.. We then for the first time see that it is actually 3 psychos on bikes and they of course go after her (this is all in continuity)...but what happens? Not even 30 seconds later the three bikers reach the location of the wife and manage to bike up the cliff and reach the wife.. ... ....? Huh? So the way out of the park is a 30 second bike ride on a very clear wide sand road? and this ladies and gentlemen sums up what ruins the movie as the whole movie is like this.

Good camera work! Decent Actors! Horrid, HORRIDLY DUMB, script and story... what a shame! and what a waste!

I loved it

[raven-sirius · 1/10 · 4 September 2017]

Right up until the point returning PTSD soldier boy turns his back on the bad guy. Stupid! Lost all credibility. Then when the husband does it too I went and did the dishes while it played in the background. It's a good example of when movies should be vetted prior to public release. I'm sure it was a stupid producer who forced the decisions, no one capable of the idea of this film: "It's closed! How can they close a state park?" would be so blind as to write those scenes.