Hatchet

I went to see this film in part due to praise heaped on it by previous reviewers who had described it as clever and a fresh addition to the genre.

And it was .. for at least the first ~45 minutes or so.

I was immediately drawn in, the dialogue was notably above par for the genre, full of witty quips and more subtle bits of humor that reference horror classics. In the opening scenes we see notable cameos from Robert Englund ("Nightmare On Elm Street" series) and Tony Todd (of "Candyman" series fame). A respectable flashback sequence is included to introduce the "Hatchet" back story.

And so the movie takes off running, seemingly quite well. Fresh and unique, forging a new path through the wastleland of redundant slasher flicks as "Sean of the Dead" and "Scream" had done in previous years.

Unfortunately about half way through, this movie does a complete about-face. The witty banter is replaced with idiotic dribble more reminiscent of "I Know What You Did Last Summer" than the first half of the film. It's almost as if they fired an adept writer halfway through the script and replaced him with the proverbial thousand monkeys on a thousand typewriters.

At this point the dam breaks, and the tired clichés pour through in droves. We are treated to a prolonged scene of foliage inspection and other such nonsense to fill the reel between death scenes. The characters repeatedly wait to flee screaming in panic until *after* they have disabled or incapacitated the title baddie. The only dread anticipation built in the second half is whether this film will be the schoolbus that was hit by the train, or the one that managed to avoid it.

Once the gore fest begins, it is eerily reminiscent of early "Troma" titles, over the top and fatuous. The "Hatchet" character even seems like it might have been modeled from the "Toxic Avenger". I can appreciate the merits of a lawn sprinkler arterial spray or projectile vomiting, on occasion, but modern film gore effects really have no excuse to still be of that "BrainDead" visual quality.

Despite the dual personalities of this film, I think it still manages to hack out a few good parts.

• 5/10 -

This review is after I saw a viewing of the uncut/unrated DVD version at the Horror Hound convention in Indianapolis on Nov. 16, 2007.

The movie to me, is pretty much a variation of "The Burning" in my opinion. There are a lot of things similar in the plot department. The basic story is some people want to go on a haunted tour in the New Orleans swamps, and they get their wish along with a story about the spirit of a Victor Crowley who was hideously deformed at birth, and accidentally hit in the head with a hatchet by his Father when their house caught fire, the Father was trying to save him. So the Father has long since died from grief, but old disfigured hatchet in the face Victor is supposed to still be around there in spirit. The boat the people are taking the tour on hits some rocks and starts to sink, so they have to go to land, and that's when they come up on Victor's former house. It's not long until Victor shows up, and he's portrayed by Kane Hodder with some pretty fair makeup. It's slicing and dicing time with plenty of blood and some excellent gore, that I'm afraid people going to see the theatrical version will miss. There's nothing original and all that great about this movie, it's basically just another slasher film with some obvious humor, and excellent gore effects. The main thing myself and what I heard from other people after it was over, is the ending really sucks. I won't say anymore, because I know many out there haven't seen it yet, but this first "Hatchet" almost seems like an introduction to the sequel, which is already in the works. Now get this, "Hatchet" is being released next month on both DVD and in the theaters, and all ready, the sequel is pretty much ready to start. So I guess, Victor is supposed to be the new Jason, Freddy, and Michael, all rolled up into one. All I have to say about that, is bullshit. Don't end a frigging movie like they did, totally setting up a sequel. For that reason, I came away with a rather negative feeling, even though I loved all the blood and gore. I think "Hatchet" is being over-hyped, in fact, WAY over-hyped, and a lot of horror/gore fans are going to be a little let down, especially with the awful ending.

Trying to get over his girlfriend leaving him, Ben (Joel David Moore) joins his friends in New Orleans for Mardi Gras, where there are plenty of women to go around. But Ben doesn't want women, he wants adventure, so he goes off on a haunted swamp tour... but as luck would have it, one of the haunted tales has a grain of truth to it: Victor Crowley is prowling the swamps!

Is Moore the new go-to guy for horror? While he's more memorable in "Dodgeball", he seems to be making more appearances in horror ("The Dead One"), and I welcome it. Writer-Director Adam Green picked a good leading man. I also love that Tony Todd and Robert Englund appear as minor characters and Kane Hodder appears out of makeup or without a mask (at least part of the time). Between this film and "Leslie Vernon", it seems like there's an effort to move the main horror veterans of this era (the 1980s-1990s) to the background and bring in new faces. And if these two films are any example, it's working.

This film is working in the 1980s style: it's just plain fun. Some level of plot development is here, but not really any more than is needed -- the focus is strictly on the slashing of the heroes and on showing excessive blood spray. We have a hero (actually a heroine) who sort of knows what is going on and henchmen who just die (think "Evil Dead II"). And for the beginning of the film, we have humor and nudity. Hooray! (Actually, there's nudity here and there throughout the film.)

The best part of this film -- the blood -- is also the worst part. If you want something more than brainless slasher, you have the wrong film. There's no deep thinking here, and the background of the monster doesn't make a lot of sense. How does he survive attacks and fire? Who knows? And even as the film progresses, there's no shift to moving the plot forward... don't expect some big revelation or anything, because you won't find it in this film. Just kids running in the woods.

Listening to the commentary is a great way to learn how to make a film with no budget and how to set it in New Orleans when there is no New Orleans -- reuse extras as much as possible, shoot scenes with doors in other cities so the actors don't have to travel... and many other little tricks. Adam Green may be a genius in this regard, pushing low budget to its most beautiful extreme.

This film was given to horror fans as the answer to the drought in horror goodness, and I think they may have over-hyped it. I know it won a variety of awards at film festivals, and I'm not going to say it didn't deserve them. But this also isn't going to be the best film you'll see all year, so if you've been holding out for a hero, this won't be the film, probably. Sorry, Bonnie Tyler. But it is good... very good, for what it is.

A bunch of the usual idiots are in a boat going through a swamp in New Orleans. Naturally the swamp supposedly has the ghost of a deformed maniacal man. Naturally the boat hits a rock and everybody has to get ashore. And naturally the maniac is alive and well (somehow) and goes after all of them.

As you can see this is totally by the numbers. There's no explanation of how this thing is still alive after so many years and he seems to be able to teleport to exactly where the victims are--there are at least five instances where he appears someplace that it was impossible for him to get to. Hasn't this insulting cliché been played out already? And nothing kills him (of course). All the passengers are the same clichés we've seen before--there's the slutty girls, the horny older guy, the nice guy, the nice girl, the elderly couple... I was actually getting pretty annoyed that these were trotted out again in a movie.

In some ways it'll give the undiscriminating horror fan what he wants--blood and boobs. Before the opening credits two people are literally torn apart (one is amusingly played by Robert Englund) and there's at least 10 pairs of nude breast shots in the first 15 minutes alone! This gets a 5 because it wasn't unwatchable. It moves fairly swiftly and the cast were actually pretty good. They're not going to win any awards but they pulled off their roles. The script has some purposely funny lines and I did laugh a few times. Also the gore was pretty explicit. I'm not surprised that it was cut for an R rating.

So, if you're a horror fan, you've seen this before. But if there's nothing else at the video store or on TV this is an OK time waster.

Anyone whose a regular on sites like Ain't It Cool News has no doubt caught the massive hype campaign for Adam Green's Hatchet. Well, to get straight to the point, don't buy into it. Certain people would have you believe that this is the second coming of the horror genre (just like Hostel part II right?). What movie did they see? I saw a very by the book slasher flick with no surprises or real twists on the genre.

The plot concerns a tour group in the NOLA swamps that begin to be picked off one by one by the deformed Victor Crowley (wow what an original name). Crowley looks like the Elephant Man on steroids and of course, possesses super human strength. For a character whose been called the next horror icon, I just can't help but be underwhelmed. The big reveal of the grown up Crowley is so ineptly handled I actually said "that's it?" to myself. He sorta of just strolls onto screen. Movies like The Descent and Feast handled these kinds of reveals so much more memorably.

I'll give credit were credit is due though. The kills in this movie are delightfully over the top and gory. They're definitely the highlight of the movie. But, it's at odds with the acting, which for once is actually pretty good. The actors in this movie for the most part play it straight and do a convincing job. I really liked Joel Moore, who I'm eager to see more of. But it's too real. I know that's an odd complaint but bear with me here. The actors are so convincing in places and seem to behave like real people probably would in this situation, but then Crowley rips someone's arms off or appears, literally, from out of nowhere. This disparity hurts the film in the long run. Either it really should have gone for all out splatstick zaniness, or it should have toned down on the sillier moments and played it more for real scares.

The score isn't doing anyone any favors either. It's the all too typical, crappy sounding MIDI highlighting and underlining every cheap scare with a big sting. I am so sick to death of this type of horror score. If you don't have a budget, forget the MIDI and go for creepy minimalism.

I wish Adam Green the best in his career because there is potential here, but he's still green. Maybe next time Adam.