It's not a terrible film. Starts off too slow, and too many upbeat love songs thrown in over long hiking montages. It does pick up and you start to get the creeps as soon as the baddies show up.
But, the ending leaves you scratching your head. No revenge. No pent-up rage coming forth. Bad guy #1 got pushed into the mud. Bad guy #2 got his leg cut. Huh? Where's the justice??
Not a great film either. :) The music...ugh. I'd downloaded this from
archive.org, IIRC, and played those montages at double and triple speed to get past them and even *that* didn't make that awful 70s music bearable.
The ending makes me wonder what on earth they were going for. If it was supposed to be a revenge flick (I Spit On Your Grave, Last House on the Left, even Straightheads, etc.) it certainly got it wrong.
If it was supposed to be a love story, why'd we need the drooling hillbillies?
If it was supposed to be an anti-violence movie, the new boyfriend didn't get violent enough to learn a lesson about it.
Re: the poster who said that people visit their friends, blah, blah, blah. They don't usually show up unannounced, especially when they haven't seen the friend in question in who knows how long and don't know if he's even still alive. It wouldn't have been out of line to contact him first and make sure he was still out there. 'Course, since they wrote him off the grid, getting in touch with him would have made the movie even longer, and those hiking scenes were certainly long enough.
Felt like I was watching the worst possible outcome of the Brady Bunch episode where they went to the Grand Canyon.
reply
share