Hobbs End

A woman in an isolated farm house takes in a man under the assumption he's her new handyman.

Before I say anything else, I should say that "Hobb's End" feels like it could have originated as a stage-play (it could have been successful on the stage)... or '70s movie-of-the-week. To say that it's slow and talky is an understatement.

This film seems to have gotten a horrible rap, mainly due to the fact that it was marketed to the wrong sort of audience. Not that there's a huge audience for this sort of movie. The packaging depicts a man with a bloody chainsaw (no chainsaw is even used in the film) and the description on the back blatantly gives away the twist. The body count is low, the gore is barely seen and the film crawls along from start to finish. Not exactly the slasher film that the box leads you to believe it is. And to boot, the audience is enticed early on with a tale of a "curse" that really has nothing to do with the plot.

The film fits into more of a "Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf"-type psychological-drama category, but there are many factors (revealed late into the film, but disclosed on the box) that push it into the horror genre. The story unfolds at a slow pace with lots of twists and distractions, and a good chunk of the dialogue has a payoff of some sort or another.

Taking into consideration what sort of film it REALLY is, it's quite good. Catarina Conti gives a fine performance as the heroine. At times she comes off sort of wooden, though it's because of the character and not her performance. Brennan Elliot gives a very layered performance as a psychopath that's really quite intriguing if you're up to going with it. The production values are modest at best ('70s TV-movie really does come to mind) but it's well-filmed with some beautiful snowy scenery. Perennial soundtrack band Wild Colonials provide the songs in the film, beginning with an infectiously goofy ditty called "Quarrel-Tet" that plays over the opening titles (a song that it's hard to shake from my head once its in there).

The film is not for most tastes, but it's a good risk for lovers of plays or those up to taking a chance on a film that's more talk than action.

The first half of this movie is like a big black hole. It left no impression on me at all. It's neither bad nor good, but exists eternally in a sort of quality limbo.

Fortunately, the second half picks up, and it gets bad enough to provide a few laughs.

Another problem is that the effect of the film's first big surprise is somewhat mitigated by the fact that the copy on the DVD box gives it away completely. On the other hand, it was a pretty lame attempt at a surprise anyway.

One can see why this one sat in the can for over a year (copyright 2000, released 2002) before finally being dumped to video.

It's hard to express sometimes just how bad a motion picture is. I mean after all, haven't we ALL had someone come up to us and say, "It's the WORST motion picture I've ever seen?" After a while, the term really doesn't have much meaning anymore.

While I can't quite say that this is the worst horror film I've ever seen (after seeing literally thousands of them, that honor I give to "Rat Man" with "Beast in the Cellar" ranking a close runner up), it certainly does rank up there in the top bracket of lameness which I usually reserve for older films (for some reason I expect modern day direct-to-video horror movies to suck).

So what's wrong with it? Well, first of all it fails a usually sturdy horror movie concept (self-reliant woman fights for her life in an isolated rural setting against one or multiple assilaints). Here we get an endless 100 minutes of an unappealing actor trying to hide he's a psychopath (a character as supposedly smart as the woman in this movie should have been able to tell after her first conversation with him, but like the rest of the movie, she remains stone still with a concerned look on her face while he has any number of freak outs), mixed with clumsily directed murder scenes, and an ridiculously repetitive and drawn-out final twenty minutes.

oh yeah, and there's some stuff about this guy being a shape shifting, mind-reading serial killer who may be possessed by the spirit of some kind of dead prospector who has cursed the valley. Oh man...

For better entries in this sub-genera (I'm picking more obscure ones) try, "Death Weekend," "Fortress," or even "Rituals" even though that last one is more of a "Deliverance" copy than anything else.

Hi. I just purchased the "Hobbs End" DVD this morning and I love it! The movie is some what a normal who done it with a little twist. You have to watch the movie to fine out what I mean. But what I love about the movie is color scheme for the inside of the house. This is my forth viewing of the movie just to see how the shades of greens, browns, and earth tones colors are coordinate throughout the house.

There's more to learn from a movie than just the plot. There is the sitting and visual art just to name a few. Watch the movie to fine out what happens to the two main charters in this isolated cabin located in a forest of snow.

First off, this is not a slasher movie. It's not even a horror movie.

As another review mentioned, this is more of a stage play featuring a single location and only two major characters.

I'm having a hard time judging this movie as I feel it is a bit unfair seeing as it was mismarketed and it isn't the filmmakers fault. That being said, it is NOT a good movie even for what it is trying to be.

The two leads are irritating, the soundtrack is very annoying, especially the stupid duet that plays over the credits. There are multiple plot lines that go nowhere.

In short, those watching for something akin to the cover will be upset, and those wanting a lifetime style thriller won't watch because of it (nor is it even worth it).