Hack!

This movie delivers a decent amount of gore, but will not scare you. It's more of a comical horror movie than anything else. Sometimes in horror movies I like to make fun of certain parts of the movie that look cheesy and corny. This movie simply does it for you. Several references to classic horror movies and spoof about these movies. Pay attention and catch ALL of the references they make to the horror industry. It's a fun movie to watch if you don't mind a little blood and gore. Gabrielle Richens gets topless in three different scenes, who is just stunningly hot. Danica McKellar (Winnie from The Wonder Years) is also quite attractive as a "book worm" role and her other role as well in the movie. Definitely recommend it if you like comedy horror movies.

No it's not groundbreaking in any ways shape or form and yes the characters are all stereotypes and yes the acting is a bit dodgy and yes it's riddled with clichés.

But, that's sort of the point, it's meant to be a spoof on the genre.

Now I'm not saying it's a great film (or maybe even a good one) by any means but personally I think it's more entertaining than for instance the 'Scary Movie' films. At least this has a fairly coherent plot and does not rely solely on stealing scenes from other movies and putting a funny twist to them but deals more in terms with homages.

It's a comedy first and horror second, and although some of the jokes are a bit on the cheap side (well most tbh) and don't always work overall it does fairly well at entertaining the 80 minutes it's on.

With some decent kills as well as some overthetop twists, twists that had this been a serious movie one would have rolled their eyes over but as this is not it works at poking fun on the genre.

Best bits are the scenes with William Forsythe as a good ol Scottish laddie, they are just a couple but they are pretty hilarious.

No, it's definitely a B-movie, but it has a few things going for it. First, it has decent production values and an acceptable look. This is not some film school project or extra-low budget screamer. Second, the plot, while rickety, is serviceable. Third, the acting (with the exception of two of the main characters) is really not bad. It's not great, but it's not the amateurish stuff that shows up in so many direct-to-video features nowadays. Fourth, the gore level (and nudity) is acceptably high.

The biggest problem with this film is a combination of the script and the direction. You just never feel like any of the characters could be real people. This is especially true of the college students. (As an aside, I might mention that I'm a cranky old guy who thinks that young whippersnappers have things too good and are being coddled to the point of absurdity. But it seems like whoever makes movies like this one thinks that all college students are complete and total sociopaths. In just about every movie I've seen recently that deals with college students, they are all just complete and total jerks. I'm beginning to feel sorry for them.) Anyway, it's hard to identify with the students/victims and that makes it difficult to get emotionally involved with their fear. Everybody in the film is just plastic.

Overall, though, watching this film is not a COMPLETELY terrible way to spend your time.

It seems like the writer is a big fan of horror movies with the countless references to many horror classics. I don't think that the actors are the problem of this film, but more so the dialogue. Some of the actors are actually really good, but not in this film, a lot of the dialogue just makes them sound stupid. The writing is really horrible in this. There is no investment in the characters, you don't really care about any of them.

It seems to me that this film is trying to be a homage to horror films, but instead looks like film saying "Hey, look at me, I like horror films." This isn't just a bad horror movie, it's a bad attempt at a horror movie.

Some things, despite being good, should never have happened: N. W. A. Caused the creative hip-hop of the 80s to be buried underneath hordes of unpleasant gangsta rappers; Disney-Pixar's magical films have replaced the charm of hand-drawn animation with sterile CGI; postmodern horror classic Scream launched a thousand dull horror films that thought they were clever. Which brings me to Hack!, a film that very much follows Scream's template, with a touch of (underdeveloped) reality TV satire. Seven students and their teacher come to an island for a biology project; soon, of course, they are being hacked apart. Hack! Tries to freshen up its slasher clichés by introducing a snuff twist, but it adds nothing to the film other than some annoying shots through an old-fashioned, wind-up camera, while the way the film tempers its classical horror references (The Birds, Psycho, Texas Chainsaw Massacre) with more modern phenomena (Saw, cult TV series Desperate Housewives, reality show Survivor) feels like a desperate bid to be hip.

Technically, this film is a mess. Shots slip randomly in and out of focus: some are a few seconds long, some scenes continue long after their apparent end; continuity seems to have been deliberately disregarded, the music seems to be totally unrelated to what is happening on the film; in one scene, it is so clear stock footage is being used that you feel a bit embarrassed.

The script fares no better: moronic characters spout film references with such unsubtlety that every gentle nod is a headbutt, every playful nudge an elbow in the ribs. The acting is appallingly inane (other than the always-lovely Danica McKellar's turn as Emily) and plot holes gape at you at every moment: characters act with no motivation, every boy and girl couple up despite having nothing in common. In spite of all its flaws, however, there is something likable about Hack!. I can't for the life of me place what it is, but it's there. This is a film, bless it, that really tries hard, but it ultimately fails. It fails because it wallows in its own stupidity while trying to be all clever-clever with the audience, it fails because it believes that pointing out that it is full of clichés prevents the clichés from being boring, and it fails because its constant self-referentiality soon becomes a drag. People, it's been eleven years since Scream; surely it's time for a new horror bandwagon?

In the end, while I would sincerely like to declare this film a cult classic, I cannot possibly score it in the upper half of scores - so it gets a 4, the highest score a bad film can get.