Nigel P Not to be confused with the 2011 Earth Liberation Front documentary of the same name, this very low budget horror treads the kind of woodland ground previously visited by the Wrong Turn films, and similar. As far as I can tell, there is no direct reference to any time-line, but the appealingly grainy imagery and hallucinogenic interruptions of colour suggest either a 'found footage' approach (a genre which this film doesn't exploit) or a story set in the 60s/70s (modern day trappings would indicate this isn't the case either). So, the scratchy, stuttering film-work is an artistic decision, it seems. I think it works very well on two levels. Firstly, the approach deliberately obfuscates some of the more graphic moments so you can't quite see what manner of violence is being inflicted on the four hapless travellers, and secondly, it makes things more visually interesting than they might otherwise have been.Such a style of suggestion also helps mask the lack of budget. The six assailants that terrorise the travellers on their road-trip, all wear stocking masks. The rips in the masks suggest some deformity beneath, leading to speculation they are inbred outcasts, or the result of some failed genetic experiment. This is not elaborated on. Still, the effect is successful.The travellers – Brad, Lisa, Will and Vanessa – are hardly flawless, and have their own secrets to tell, but are fairly likable, and certainly don't deserve the bizarre treatment they are subjected to. Describing themselves as 'the ones who can't be found', the attackers treat their victims with a sick mockery of fascination and torture – followed, without warning, by death (at least for most). Whether these outsiders are looking to increase their army by torturing 'normal' people into joining them isn't made clear, but feint rumours of a sequel promise to expand on this. The story may not be hugely original, but the execution of it certainly is, and I would welcome a revisit.

MattyGibbs 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.

Mrssmiff I always try to find something to like about every horror film I watch, being a huge fan of the genre, and I am usually able to find something that justified the 90 mins or so spent on a movie. However, having just watched this film I am at a loss as to find any redeeming qualities about it. I'm no expert, just a movie lover but this has honestly got to be one of the worst films I have ever seen.I quite like the grindhouse feel to movies, with the crackling film reels etc (told you I'm not an expert)and was quite taken with the opening ten mins or so, purely on the way it was filmed. But I have to say, I have no idea whatsoever what this was about, other than four people in the woods being terrorised by some blokes with tights on their heads.... The dialogue was awful, the acting a hundred times worse, but for me, being left with no clear idea of what I had just watched, left me very disappointed. My mind may have wondered slightly and I missed the whole explanation to the whole thing, but the audio quality was all over the place also, so that maybe explains it. I give this 2 out of 10 and the 2 is purely for the grindhouse look to the whole thing.

trashgang 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