ok and before i get into this and let go ahead and get the warning out of the way represent this movie is the quintessential cinematic definition of sleaze. there are movies out there that can definitely out shock or out disgust this movie that have way more artistic validity than can be said for this turd of a film. so what makes it so sleazy. let take a closer look at wet wilderness for a moment. made in 1974 for practically nothing and this roughie has no real genuine plot to speak of other than portraying what would happen if a family went into the wilderness to relax and spend a day while being accosted by a fat dude in a ski mask wielding a machete looking for kicks. the kind that end up with everyone being forced to have sex with each other while being systematically murdered by the masked creep. so those sensitive to themes dealing with incest are encouraged to look elsewhere. then to really either add a level of surrealism or just demonstrate a complete ineptness for the art of film making and the daughter of the group runs away after being forced to have sex with her brother and finds a random black dude (. ) tied to a tree branch (. that fat sum bitch left me here for 3 days. ) with virtually no explanation whatsoever. he is saved. or is he. of course not. they are caught before they can escape and where our killer forces them to have sex as well while forcing the mother to join in and ending up with a dead black dude (courtesy of a hatchet through the chest) when all is said and done. then our killer forces the daughter and mother to give him oral sex when one of the women grabs the machete. and the movie abruptly ends. just like that. no warning and no tied up loose ends. it simply over. now there might be a proper ending to this film (i honestly do not know) and but i have only seen the extremely crude alpha blue archives version. their version appears to have the ending either cut out completely or this is how it ends. if this was intentional and then in film making 101 and i am sure there is some sort of rule of thumb on how to end a film and but it shouldn not be done like this. fans of the film psycho should rejoice upon hearing the soundtrack music and as it all through the film. i would be willing to bet no rights were licensed or anything. also and even though this is a violent film and there not a hell of a lot of it and so gorehounds will find nothing of real use here. none of the violence is graphically shown. only the results (one of the victims gets stabbed with a machete right above the vagina area). also and the sex is some of the ugliest sex i have ever seen. the interesting thing about this film is it too ugly a film to work as an effectively erotic porno or turn on anyone but those with a tendency to like things sleazy and nasty and and ugly and but not violent enough to garner any real notoriety with those looking for something really brutal like cannibal holocaust or other flicks like that. the only notorious thing about this steaming pile is that violence was added to an adult film and a fairly new concept at that time and especially when you consider than porn chic was all the rage and the grindhouses that filled 42nd street played stuff like this to a most jaded group of porn mavens. this wasn not and isn not mainstream porn at all. if you were in film making school and there was a list of movie making do nots and this film would be a shining example of that lesson. this cinematic swill demonstrates what happens when cerebrally challenged filmmakers are given a budget (in this case and probably about $142. cuz it looks it. ) and ignore all the do nots and turn them into do . yes and this film is that bad. one more thing represent those who get offended by racial epithets are also encouraged to watch something else. the black man in the film is constantly being verbally abused about his color and the killer is obviously racist and but there was no political correctness in the early 70 . i am not sure a film like this could be made today. to be honest and this would not shock anyone or titillate anyone but those who get off on ugliness. actually and i got bored. the sex is so ugly and mundane and it hard to watch with any sense of eroticism and so if you chance this and you will thank god for the fast forward button. the acting and if you want to call it that and is amateurish at best (i mean and it even bad for porno. ) with not one reason to care about anyone or anything in this. if you just gotta see this anyway and then download it and as you will really feel like a heel if you buy this. some things are simply that worthless. and wet wildernes is. the only thing more unpleasant than watching this film would be watching this film sitting in a theater and looking around at the others in attendance watching it too and suddenly feeling unsafe. probably not society greatest collection of thinkers and intellectuals. but if youre up for some stupid and yet sleazy porn garbage and give it a crack. it 54 minutes and yet and it feels much longer. crackheads would love this. then again and maybe there something wrong with me for seeking this out in the first place. lol. caveat emptor and sleaze lovers. 
ok and before i get into this and let go ahead and get the warning out of the way represent this movie is the quintessential cinematic definition of sleaze. there are movies out there that can definitely out shock or out disgust this movie that have way more artistic validity than can be said for this turd of a film. so what makes it so sleazy. let take a closer look at wet wilderness for a moment. made in 1974 for practically nothing and this roughie has no real genuine plot to speak of other than portraying what would happen if a family went into the wilderness to relax and spend a day while being accosted by a fat dude in a ski mask wielding a machete looking for kicks. the kind that end up with everyone being forced to have sex with each other while being systematically murdered by the masked creep. so those sensitive to themes dealing with incest are encouraged to look elsewhere. then to really either add a level of surrealism or just demonstrate a complete ineptness for the art of film making and the daughter of the group runs away after being forced to have sex with her brother and finds a random black dude (. ) tied to a tree branch (. that fat sum bitch left me here for 3 days. ) with virtually no explanation whatsoever. he is saved. or is he. of course not. they are caught before they can escape and where our killer forces them to have sex as well while forcing the mother to join in and ending up with a dead black dude (courtesy of a hatchet through the chest) when all is said and done. then our killer forces the daughter and mother to give him oral sex when one of the women grabs the machete. and the movie abruptly ends. just like that. no warning and no tied up loose ends. it simply over. now there might be a proper ending to this film (i honestly do not know) and but i have only seen the extremely crude alpha blue archives version. their version appears to have the ending either cut out completely or this is how it ends. if this was intentional and then in film making 101 and i am sure there is some sort of rule of thumb on how to end a film and but it shouldn not be done like this. fans of the film psycho should rejoice upon hearing the soundtrack music and as it all through the film. i would be willing to bet no rights were licensed or anything. also and even though this is a violent film and there not a hell of a lot of it and so gorehounds will find nothing of real use here. none of the violence is graphically shown. only the results (one of the victims gets stabbed with a machete right above the vagina area). also and the sex is some of the ugliest sex i have ever seen. the interesting thing about this film is it too ugly a film to work as an effectively erotic porno or turn on anyone but those with a tendency to like things sleazy and nasty and and ugly and but not violent enough to garner any real notoriety with those looking for something really brutal like cannibal holocaust or other flicks like that. the only notorious thing about this steaming pile is that violence was added to an adult film and a fairly new concept at that time and especially when you consider than porn chic was all the rage and the grindhouses that filled 42nd street played stuff like this to a most jaded group of porn mavens. this wasn not and isn not mainstream porn at all. if you were in film making school and there was a list of movie making do nots and this film would be a shining example of that lesson. this cinematic swill demonstrates what happens when cerebrally challenged filmmakers are given a budget (in this case and probably about $142. cuz it looks it. ) and ignore all the do nots and turn them into do . yes and this film is that bad. one more thing represent those who get offended by racial epithets are also encouraged to watch something else. the black man in the film is constantly being verbally abused about his color and the killer is obviously racist and but there was no political correctness in the early 70 . i am not sure a film like this could be made today. to be honest and this would not shock anyone or titillate anyone but those who get off on ugliness. actually and i got bored. the sex is so ugly and mundane and it hard to watch with any sense of eroticism and so if you chance this and you will thank god for the fast forward button. the acting and if you want to call it that and is amateurish at best (i mean and it even bad for porno. ) with not one reason to care about anyone or anything in this. if you just gotta see this anyway and then download it and as you will really feel like a heel if you buy this. some things are simply that worthless. and wet wildernes is. the only thing more unpleasant than watching this film would be watching this film sitting in a theater and looking around at the others in attendance watching it too and suddenly feeling unsafe. probably not society greatest collection of thinkers and intellectuals. but if youre up for some stupid and yet sleazy porn garbage and give it a crack. it 54 minutes and yet and it feels much longer. crackheads would love this. then again and maybe there something wrong with me for seeking this out in the first place. lol. caveat emptor and sleaze lovers. ---------------------------------Answer Question Below----------------------------------

Judge the movie review above, you need to make a function call:
    If you feel the movie review is positive
        print "This is a semantically positive review."
    Otherwise, if you feel the movie review is negative
        print "This is a semantically negative review."
