HATCHET (2006)
I’ve heard alot about this film so the hype was built up. No remake. No sequel. Just good old school horror. That was what I was reading anyway.
HATCHET, is basically a mishmash of movies rolled into one. Its farcical, scary and even downright F movie combined. At times, I don’t even know what type of movie its supposed to be. The film’s writer and director, ADAM GREEN, being relatively new on the field, is showing his weakness in not willing to choose a side of what this movie is supposed to be.
The acting is passible, and defiantly over the top. The box art and more suggests that you are getting top notch talent and acting, but the film proves otherwise. At times, the characters are completely boring and unwatchable, save for a few bits of fun dialog here and there.
There are no new concepts in this film. Its a classic story set in a classic stage. Lost in the woods, unkillable evil. the kills themselves are spectacular. Gory and over the top. Not like DEAD ALIVE, but in the best JASON VOORHEES kills times 10. so the film has that going for it.
Also on the positive side are numerous horror film cameos: Robert Englund (Nightmare on Elm Street, natch), Joshua Leonard (Blair Witch), Tony Todd (Candyman, Night of the Living Dead remake), and of course, the talented KANE HODDER, so gets to do a lot of work on the screen this time as two characters.
I think this film will play well for fans of classic 80’s horror elements. Its got the evi, the no escape, the tits (and plenty). but no redemption is made. So, some THEMES are missing.
Where I think the film falls short is its technical aspects. Shots not matching, sound editing is totally out of wack, the films “score” loses the feel of the scene and whats going on therein, thus throwing you out of the picture. Its completely noticeable. It doesn’t ACCENT, as it should. It overpowers. That is bad form. Of course on a limited budget, its easy to overlook these and hope that Adam Green knows what he messed up and that he can correct it next time.
There’s enough fun in the movie to make it worth a rental, but in the end, I don’t think it was that great. Kind of forgettable. Nothing new said. Nothing going back in a post modern type of way. It just is. And with its technical flaws and actors who have no chemistry and obviously weren’t into it that much, I don’t see how this movie would warrant a franchise.
Now, I am a huge fan of crappy films. Plan 9 from outer space, etc. But what makes those films appealing that way is that we look at it from our modern eyes and pick out the flaws. D movies are built with flaws and embraced as such. This film has flaws in its technical aspects, but really strives to ignore them. Thus, it makes the film seem as though they wanted it to be something its not. It throws it off the balance and makes it embarrassing.
It just tries for mainstream look and feel. It should try to be less than it wants to be. Like a TROMA movie. At least they know its crap so they treat it as such and not try to show you what they WISH it could be.
GRADE: 2 Fun bus rides out of 5
I think Adam Green is on the right track. So onward and upward sir.
Question is: why in the hell was Tony Todd in this film? Paycheck. You can tell.
For more from the author ADAM TALLEY, including a look at his independent comic book work, visit http://www.idiothead.com
Raised primarily in central Michigan all his life, Adam is a successful writer, artist and self publisher. He is best known for his comics: PLEASANT LIFE, THE EXPENDABLES, WISE INTELLIGENCE and the upcoming ANNA POCOLYPSE. He also wrote a free online how to book called "IN THE TRENCHES: HOW TO SURVIVE AS A SMALL PRESS COMIC BOOK PUBLISHER." He also has done some pinup work for ANTARCTIC PRESS and logo designs for many other clients. He has been featured on web sites, newspapers, television and magazines talking about his work and travels around the country promoting it. He resides in Southwest Michigan. 
