patrickbowman-75435

Ahhhh... the title of the film cheapens it so much.

I watched this largely because the BFI endorsed it and I was looking for a cheap, silly 70s horror, much in the vein of Dario Argento. By and large, that's what I got. Great.

I was however, pleasantly surprised, that it tried to be a bit more than just a slasher/vampire film. There was a story to it but unfortunately, that story was a bit incoherent and ill thought through to really appreciate. It had roots but just, didn't exactly sprout.

A film with potential but in the end, I think they just accepted their place among the vast collection of horror B-Movies of the time.

Worth a watch at 1 in the morning but not a main feature film.

I've seen multiple comparisons to Fargo in the comments section, which I do understand but in a very simplistic level. Tbh, I reckon the Coen Brothers would run into the icey wilderness of Minnesota than attach their name to this.

Bill Paxton seems terribly wooden, Billy Bob Thornton is just slightly silly. I cannot work out if he is playing someone who is simply uneducated or is supposed to have a mental health condition. Bridget Fonda's character is not necessarily unbelievable but I just don't believe how readily she turns. I don't know much about Brent Briscoe's work but I found him the most compelling.

Apparently, this is a book adaptation. The story has serious promise. This is the only reason it gets a 5 from me. Maybe check that out instead.