User Reviews

Ever since Tarantino and Rodriguez made GRINDHOUSE, their double-bill tribute to the exploitation cinema of the 1970s, B-movies have been emulating their style. To this end they'll add in effects to make it look like the film is scratched and damaged and throw in old-fashioned 'coming attractions' titles and the like. That's the case with IF A TREE FALLS, an absolutely dreadful addition to the horror genre that comes from Canada.

The film's simplistic narrative is about a group of teenage friends who venture out into the woods and are assailed by a gang of masked attackers. Plenty of bad taste stuff ensues, including cheap and lousy gore effects and lots of screaming. The film is near plot less and the acting very poor with irritating dialogue and horrendous shrill screaming and the like. I found the movie to be pretty sleazy and unpleasant but never powerful in the way a film like LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT was genuinely powerful. Instead it's a complete waste of time.

The film has a number of different elements that never quite come together, almost as if several directors made their own versions, then a complete stranger made a film from bits found on the cutting room floor.

The set-up does enough to establish who's who but introduces characters who are distracting. Of the four main characters, one smokes cannabis away from the others. One of these irrelevant bit parts ask the rest of the group if he can buy some, but never asks the person who has it.

There is an interlude at a lake. Sometimes the group are the only people there; at other times there are incidentals all around. There is discussion about how it is illegal to camp, but they make no attempt to hide their car.

When the violence begins, there are clips of grainy video. Did they plan a found footage film but change their minds?

The attack itself is shocking and brutal, intended to disturb, but I was distracted again by the lack of any obvious motivation. The violence seemed random, the killings more so, but why did the assailants bother?

A character is hit with an axe but receives a wound that looks like a long but not deep cut. One is burned, but this seems to puncture his abdomen without damaging his shirt. Despite overwhelming numbers, most of the group escape. Only later do we discover one has died (no spoiler, considering the theme), but not really how.

The final act teases some hope of an explanation but ends up adding to the confusion (for me, at least). A video tape exists, but does not provide resolution or detail. The theme of being lost in a vast country is overturned, as is the idea that the first group were simply in the wrong place at the wrong time.

There are good building blocks, but they are not from the same construction set. I was left baffled by the motivation of the characters, good and bad, the blind alleys of plotting that were abandoned before we even reached the dead end, the dialogue involving the assailants, the remoteness of the area. There is violence and blood, and there is tension; they simply don't gel together. The best bits are still on the floor, waiting for an editor with vision.

This is another of those super low budget horrors churned out ten to the dozen. The start is a little unsettling but unfortunately that's as good as it really gets. As per most low budget horrors the acting leaves a bit to be desired and you don't really get the chance to empathise with any of the intended victims.

The film doesn't offer anything new, young adults are terrorised on a camping trip. You pretty much know what to expect and it's an all round unpleasant viewing experience certainly not one you'd want to watch again.

The film is quite disturbing in places but I didn't really see much point in it, it almost seemed violence for violence's sake, unless the message is there are a lot of sick people out there. Yes I think we all know that. You don't get to know anything about the perpetrators which pretty much leaves you in the dark.

This isn't the worst film I've seen as it is quite unsettling and does at least hold your interest however it really is just film to be watched by fans of low budget horror. For anyone else this is just a waste of their time.

If A Tree Falls is a throwback to the exploitation genre. A genre that I like for several reasons. Mostly the quality of editing and the use of cheap reel results in a lot of hiss and noises in the sound and a lot of scratches in the picture. A thing that was done here by editing but this flick do has it's problems.

If you want to go back to the exploitation genre than you also have to look out for clothing or the way you use the camera. Piercings weren't done back then in the seventies and that's something people will have problems with. But being a low budget the director Gabriel Carrer tried to hide that by using shaky shots when the attacks are being done. And that annoyed me a lot. You never can see clearly what is going on. When he is not using the shaky camera then things happen off-camera. Things not done in the exploitation genre.

I found it not scary at all and even not suspenseful. There is a lot of red stuff but gore is left out, I admit, intestines are shown but it was too late. As so many flicks it started so good and brutal before the opening credits but once they passed it moves away from the exploitation genre.

What they did in post production with the effects to make it have a exploitation look didn't bother me at all and it worked but why o why did he have to add shaky camera's into this flick.

The acting was rather good and believable. this shows that red stuff and some pieces of gore doesn't make a good flick.

Gore 2/5 Nudity 0/5 Effects 2/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5

Whoever wrote, filmed, directed, especially casted, and then watched this after making it and thought yeah this is great.... needs to be locked in a mental institution for mental illness. Complete garbage and a waste of everyone's time.

A group of generic teenage, slasher victims go into the woods. There's a little more given for the plot but that's about all that really matters. What you get beyond that is a sad attempt at a grindhouse throwback with a couple of musical bars that sound vaguely 70's and a title card that features 70's style font. Rather then providing a feeling of grit from having been shot on cheap film like it's grindhouse fore bearers; it's shot on a video camera and a cheap grain filter is applied in a sad attempt at appearing authentic. The gore is not only cheap but mostly non existent. Even cheapies like Blood Freak or I Drink Your Blood had better gore effects then this.

Steer clear of this one!

Disappointing.

I really wanted to like this. I knew it was low budget and forgive them for many things due to this.

The acting is passable, some stronger than others. Dialogue is pretty poor and unrealistic and desperate to appear natural.

Started strong. Opening scene with a beautiful women tied up and blindfolded. So far so exploitation right.......after the opening scene which gave me hope it starts to drag with the new characters taking ages to get to the woods. (After a cringe inducing scene in a cafe with a gun chewing idiot who couldn't act his way out of a paper bag.

Then scenes are just dragged out far too long and nowhere near as shocking as they think it is. A small amount of blood but no real gore effects as sleeve promised. I think the director thought he was being shocking with the scenes but they were really tame. Zero real threat or torture. No sexual assault or real torture at all except a few weak slaps.

The director thought he was making a powerful scene which blatantly stole from The Last House on the Left (itself an overrated mess of a film) but with about 1% of the threat or atmosphere of that infamous one scene.

The film needed better threat, better torture, some gore. More scenes like the start and end. Hey......maybe a plot? Ha ha Better camera work (bad shaky cam here folks) and less of the faux scratched film filter in it to try to be grindhouse. Ha ha Ends strong but about 35mins is just padding.

Watchable if nothing else but I wouldn't rush.

Luckily got it really cheap.

A film with no redeeming features, The acting.....isn't, the characters are unlikeable, but worst of all is the pacing- there isn't any. Virtually every scene is at least about twice as long as it needs to be. Thrill!, as people walk down a road in slow motion. Be enthralled by the witless character's tediously mundane conversations. It might have made a 25-30 minute short if they took all of the extraneous padding. Not a good one though.

Nothing about this will entertain, interest, or horrify you. Oh, it threatens to be more lurid than it can ever- or even try to-deliver. But it's as if the director's sweet old grandmother kept popping in during the editing process. She should have done me and him and the world at large a favour and told him not to bother.

The style of 'If A Tree Falls' marks it out as something different from the oft-tread woodland slasher genre. Stuttering camerawork, grainy inserts, imagery that momentarily obfuscates what we are seeing. Certainly Gabriel Carreris a director determined to make a mark - and most of the time, he succeeds very well.

The characters in Ry Barrett's story, Brad and Lisa Carpenter (played by Barrett and Jennifer De Lucia respectively) and friends Will and Vanessa (Daniel Zuccala and Breanne TeBoekhorst) are well-played and fairly likeable, although they are hardly flawless. Such depth, it could be argued, makes them more interesting to watch. Certainly, we, see them suffering at the hands of masked assailants and are moved by the motiveless brutality of it all.

A slasher film with a difference, I found 'If A Tree Falls' thoroughly entertaining in a violent, bloody kind of way. Directorial flourishes ensure that visually, things are always interesting. My score is 8 out of 10.