Thursday, July 30, 2009

The Wild Man of the Navidad (Review and Mysterious Comments?!?)

The Wild Man of the Navidad

The Wild Man of the Navidad (2008)

Directed by Duane Graves/Justin Meeks

[this was a review I wrote for]

Buy if: love old, 70s grindhouse faux documentaries like The Legend of Boggy Creek and the Last Broadcast like Texas style, beer and moonshine guzzling rednecks getting slaughtered by an unseen "monster" in the Texas backwoods dig those Nimoy hosted "In Search Of" Time Life book shows and paranormal Unsolved Mysteries episodes

Pass if:'re not a fan of blurry monster shots and cheesy gore effects complete with blood splatter on walls and sliced intenstine carnage hated the Texas Chainsaw Massacre and despise shots of decaying animals and sunsets're not a fan of bad acting and dialogue that makes you go to sleep

Read the rest of the review here.

Here is where it gets weird. After the review was published yesterday, a user by the name of "bisforbest" posted a comment. He defended the filmmakers for bring back the old grindhouse feel but questioned why I brought up the budget of this film (it was shot on a shoestring).

I love replying back to anybody responding to any of my reviews. I commented back just explaining in more detail what worked well and what didn't. I also said the budget would have helped in better talent, FX effects, etc. Well nothing weird about that so far.

But thanks to Evil Adam who is an editor at, did some Encyclopedia Brown-ing (via some Google detective work) discovered that this user *gasp* may or may not be the director of this film, a one Mr. Duane Graves. You can check out the rest of the comments here.

Hmmmm. Well this is getting way too fuckin odd.

Would this director actually cloak himself and pretend to be a "fan of his own movie"? Really? This is some classic cloak and dagger shit which I think is truly unneccesary.

Well you might be asking for some proof? Well Evil Adam discovered that a particular e-mail address is being used by this poster and this e-mail addy can be found all over the web for posts in response to the works of Meeks and Graves (the co-directors of the film).

Coincidence? Hmmm. You decide.

Let me just say that I didn't hate the film (though I gave it a C grade). It's really a great homage to the old flicks of old grindhouse horror docu-style Bigfoot like movies. But due to the acting (locals were used), subpar gore/splatter effects and too many scenes of moonshine drinking, it turned out a little cheesy.

My review echoed the tone of many others from Fangoria, Bloody Disgusting and Dread Central for sure.

If the director is masquerading as a "fan of the Wild Man of the Navidad", that's some sly internet hype scheme he's working. But seriously, no need to do that. The movie has gotten good to great press from the horrorsphere. Just comment on the reviews and thank them for the coverage and press.

That's all I'm looking for.


-Johnny over at Freddy in Space posted his 2 cents about this whole thing. Go ahead and check it out.

-I've been doing some IMDB and Facebook investigating. More to come.

-And if somehow I'm 100% wrong about this. I apologize. Evil Adam though, he's not going to apologize. He'd wait until 2012 and the apocalypse before he would say he was wrong. So tough luck.

Bookmark and Share


  1. Glad you decided to post about this on here and out this clown. I posted about it on Freddy In Space too. This kind of thing can't be tolerated!

  2. Dude awesome post. Thanks for adding your 2 cents on this as well.

    OK I've been digging and checked out the IMDB page for this. This user seems to be giving lots of praise to this flick as well. Hmmm who could that be?

    What the hell is going on here?

  3. It's so weird because this movie has gotten pretty good reviews across the board. Why would this dude feel the need to pull shit like this? He's gonna totally ruin any and all credibility he has, if he hasn't already.

  4. Stop it, it's cruel and unnecessary. Big deal, he bigged up his own movie. Leave it alone.

  5. Bigging up your own movie is one thing, denying who you are, even when faced with diehard evidence is just ridiculous. This is like that damn Obama birther bullshit, with people denyting that he was born in the USA, even when they show them a birth certificate.

    You have a better chance of getting respect if you just face the music and be open about it. If he can't handle any negative criticsm at all, he should not be in any business that requires you to put yourself or your work out there.

  6. Bigging up your post is one thing, but claiming to be someone else, when you're the director, even after being presented with undeniable proof, is ridiculous. This is like the whole Obama birther thing, where people are denying he was born in the USA even when shown a damn birth certificate.

    Just fessing up to this would land him more respect. If he can't handle any sort of crticism, in a business that requires you to put your work or yourself out there, then he should be part of that business.

  7. OK I'm adding a few more quirky inconsistencies and !?!?.

    First check out the Wikipedia entry for Wild Man.

    It's a tad biased don't you think?

    Also, some comments from this horror site seem similar to the product page.

    I'm just saying. It looks odd and very weird. The same exact comments??

  8. Man.. I missed out one some quality ass horror drama..

  9. One more update. More hijinks from freeads (aka the director) On this review, he hypes up his movie with more praise. Good job Mr. Graves.

  10. I saw this film because it claims to hearken back to the early
    Seventies cult gore fests. They accomplished that. The film looks
    exactly like it was shot in 1973. They mainly accomplished this with
    poor quality film, bad lighting, bad sound and poor scripting. But it
    looks exactly like an early Seventies slasher film.

    Bacically, there's this Sasquatch-type creature living in the river
    bottom near this Texas town. The dumb Mexican loses his job and begins
    opening the "bottoms" up to hunting. The creature gets shot by this
    moonshine guzzling redneck. It survives and goes on a rampage.

    First, the creature looks really bad. Basically, they hung this guy
    with animal skins and gave him two deer antlers to use as weapons. He
    guts people with them and heaves their victles out of their bodies
    onto the dirt. But he looks like some guy hung with deer hides.

    There's lots of unnecessary perversity. Like, there's this wheelchair
    bound woman who cannot speak. The Mexican helper-person likes to
    strangle her until she's unconscious and molest her. I can'gt see
    where this savagery fits into the story. It sure is disturbing to
    watch though.

    I shut the film off about 2/3 of the way through. I shut it off right
    when the townspeople were getting ready to "clean out" the bottoms.
    They had all kinds of guns, dogs and moonshine. I couldn't watch any

    I LOVE Seventies cult horror films but avoid this piece of sheeeeeit.
    It looks like they shot this film for about ten grand. Then it gets
    released onto video? These guys are laughing all the way to the bank.
    Don't get suckered in.

  11. Too late. I already saw it. The movie is ehhh. The fact that one of the directors of the film has to "plant" comments on reviews goes to show you they want everybody to trick people into thinking how you thought it was...a 70s gore cult fest.

    But it's just a dude covered in furs.

  12. i was one of the acters in the movie and i have to say it was a film that was well produced. on the budget that was set for its production. the people on the location and in the film where all from the location. in which the movie was made and it was all handled very well.and i like to thank .justin meeks and duane graves for giving my family a chance to make apart of history. that my family and grandchildren can enjoy later in life. gary houser &family

  13. Big deal, he bigged up his own movie.

  14. I already saw it. The movie is ehhh