A weekend of camping intended to break Scott out of his post-breakup depression quickly turns into a weekend of bloodshed, as his friends are picked off one by one by the urban legend that haunts the very woods they’re in.
Sean S. Cunningham’s 1980 horror classic “Friday the 13th” didn’t just launch a new era of horror—it set the template for an entire subgenre. Assemble a group of teenagers, have them set up camp somewhere in a forest far away from civilization, let them indulge in premarital sex, drinking, and marijuana, then introduce a masked killer who dispatches them one by one. While there have been some good ripoffs: “Sleepaway Camp,” “My Bloody Valentine,” “The Prowler,” “The Final Terror,” and most famously, Tony Maylam’s “The Burning,” for every good imitation, there are countless uninspired copies.
And “Deathwoods” falls into the latter category. Directors Jake Kopronica and Deryk Wehrley were obviously inspired less by the original film than by its superior sequel, “Friday the 13th: Part 2,” which just happens to be my personal favorite of the entire series. Steve Miner took over directing duties from Sean S. Cunningham for Parts 2 and 3, but Part 2 is most certainly the best. It’s also the film that introduced us to burlap sack Jason; hockey mask Jason wouldn’t appear until Part 3.
Part 2 works so well because writer Ron Kurz and director Steve Miner let the counselors-in-training interact with an easy, lived-in camaraderie throughout the film, making them feel like people you would enjoy hanging out with. The script gives the characters a baseline charm and maturity, avoiding the mind-numbing stupidity written into later entries in the genre. With “Deathwoods,” Kopronica and Wehrley completely avoid these elements and just present us with a group of teenagers who we know will all meet a grisly demise. Granted, they try to give some of the characters a little more depth and backstory, but ultimately, it is clear their primary interest lies in staging increasingly gruesome deaths.
The film is set in the thick woods outside of Old Hickory, Tennessee. Years after a horrific murder-suicide destroyed the Wallace family and resulted in tales circulating about a monstrous creature wandering through the forest, a group of friends sets up camp for the weekend, choosing to ignore the stories and have fun. But gradually, one by one, they begin to disappear, and the group soon realizes that the creature might actually be real.
While it is understandable that Kopronica and Wehrley would pay homage to “Friday the 13th: Part 2,” what is far less forgivable is their decision to replicate one of its memorable scenes almost verbatim. Early on in “Friday the 13th: Part 2,” Paul Holt, the chief coordinator of the new camp, gathers the new camp counselors around the fire to tell them the grim legend of Crystal Lake, culminating with a counselor jumping out wearing a mask to scare the group. In “Deathwoods,” the exact same scene takes place. The friends are gathered around a campfire while the leader tells the story of the gruesome murder-suicide years earlier, and then a masked friend jumps out and scares the group. Paying visual homage to a film you love is one thing, but stealing a scene, and then passing it off as your own is cinematic plagiarism. There is nothing original about it, and it literally sticks out like a sore thumb.
The other disappointing aspect herein is the acting. Or lack thereof. While a few actors seem to give it their all, most of the cast delivers stilted, uninspired performances. And as Harrison Ford famously said to George Lucas about his dialogue in STAR WARS, “you can type this shit, but you sure can’t say it!” Even the most talented actor would struggle to breathe life into such pedestrian lines. The filmmakers try to redeem it with a last-minute plot twist, but by then, the movie has already lost any claim on the viewer’s attention. As an indie filmmaker myself, I know just how difficult it is to write, produce, direct, edit, and then promote your film, but at the same time, when you produce a film and put it out there for the whole world to see, it must stand alongside the output of major studios and is fair game for criticism, whether positive or negative. I wish I could say that “Deathwoods” offers something to recommend it, but sadly, it gave me nothing to be optimistic about, except the closing credits.
Streaming exclusively on SCREAMBOX, Tuesday, September 1st
10k
20k
1.5k
2.2k
Shot for shot? The campfire scene is nowhere near shot for shot. Not only does Deathwoods show the actual backstory that’s being told, the set up is entirely different. Everyone is spaced out and It shows the different characters faces reacting to the story while Friday the 13th part 2 shows everyone closed in on Paul while the camera slowly moves in on him while he’s telling the story.
If anything, it’s a good nod to Friday the 13th.
I’ve seen Deathwoods twice now and it definitely pays homage to some great movies but also has its on thing. A unique looking killer and a good story to go with it. And the acting for what was probably a small budget was decent and great in some moments. Especially when there were well over 15 people that had speaking roles.
It seems like you went into the movie looking for reasons to hate on it vs. Looking at what it actually is.
To each their own, Greg. The acting, for the most part, was not “great in some moments,” it was subpar at best. You have your opinion, I have mine.
Opinions are one thing. Commenting that something is copying another movie when it’s not is another.
I was actually impressed by the acting considering this film was super low budget and only filmed in a few weeks. A lot had to come together just right for this to happen and I believe any further work from Scott is going to be that much better. The last seen with MacKenzie Lee was pretty good. Some of the scenes I believe were I believe were intended to be a little cheesy but that is okay because if you represent Indie-Films like you say you do you wouldn’t have been so harsh in your criticism. You have a right to your opinion but this feels like a hit piece or some sort of a vendetta. I don’t feel you did your research well to get a whole picture of the production.
I find it interesting that people like you will come to a site like mine and criticize my point of view, simply because it doesn’t align with yours. You feel the way you do about the film, and I feel the way I do, and that is the end. I watch all movies, big and small, with an open mind, and DEATHWOODS was a movie I didn’t care for. It’s not the worst movie ever made, but it’s most certainly not one of the best. I feel like you and your buddy Greg worked on the movie and feel threatened because my review wasn’t positive. I have had many of my own films criticized, some very unfavorably, but I don’t go to a movie critic’s site to call them out simply because they didn’t like it or give it a favorable review. In this industry, you need a thick skin. And I don’t need to research a film to review it; as a movie critic, my job is to simply watch it and then critique it, and that is what I did.
I thought it was good. This fits right in with all those old 80’s slashers. This is one of the first attempts at making one in the modern day that actually understood what to do. Most that I’ve seen are literally unwatchable. This wasn’t bad at all.