Reviews

This is a disturbing, thought-provoking, well-made film that has a huge fatal flaw to it. The characters are incredibly underwritten. This is a film that exemplifies the need to examine the characters life before the disaster occurs sending their life into a tail-spin. Unfortunately this film starts at the disaster, a nuclear explosion, before hinting at some of the characters pasts. And these are the only characters that we come to slightly know and care about. That is about 5 characters in a film where 9 characters play pivotal roles. And you only get to know those 5 characters slightly. The problem here is that 2/3 of the way through the movie is that the movie doesn't connect us with its characters. Its intention is to show the moral ambiguity of these characters and how they turn from civilized human beings to a "Lord of the Flies style group cannibalizing on the weaker members. And that's fine. I love "Lord of the Flies". But the director avoids allowing you to know the characters fully and that is a problem. If you don't know what the characters were like before hand, how can you be emotionally involved in where they end up? The director doesn't present the full spectrum here. Those who are given a slight backstory are very well played, especially by Rosanna Arquette as a mother who allows herself to be degraded to the worst possible degree in order to survive. But some of the characters are so thinly written that they begin psychotic and end up psychotic and you have no idea of what their connection is to any of the others or why they are there in the first place. And that is what hurts this film. You end up asking "Who are these people" 2/3 of the way through because you are not allowed to know them. It's a well made, well-acted film that trods along familiar lines but does so with intelligence. The problem is it doesn't want you to connect to it.

I just watched this film online and I read the positive reviews of people who claimed that people who gave this film negative reviews hadn't seen the film. I have seen the film and it isn't very good. Apparently Ray Common doesn't understand how to write things realistically. There are so many problems in this area that I have to be explored. 1. Everyone reacts to the character telling them he's a Christian with either discomfort or anger. Apparently Ray doesn't understand that most people in our culture (including those of us in the LGBT community) are Christian. This, btw, ignores some of the interviews presented in the movie itself in which people, gay and straight say they are Christian and don't treat Ray Comfort with any hostility whatsoever. 2. Anything and everything happens to the two main characters. (Cancer, store hold-ups, a car getting stalled on a railway as a train is coming, though how she doesn't hear the train is beyond me). These instances are used to present messages in such a sledgehammer of a style that they are not subtle at all. 3. The dialogue and actions are atrocious. This just isn't reality guys. No one speaks like this or acts like this. They just don't. Now there are some positives. 1. It does show some gay people in a positive light, which I thank it for. It does condescend to them in some of the interviews but I am not going to expect perfection here. 2.It raises some issues experienced by the LGBT community But as soon as it does so, it drops them like a hot potato. And that's what the main problem of this film is. Instead of exploring the issue in depth, it takes a simplistic approach to the issue of the LGBT community, religion and religious beliefs. Most of the people in the LGBT community are religious. We, just like very other Christian, have different interpretations of the Bible. Instead of examining this issue deeply, the movie wants to put forth its own moral belief only without fully examining the other moral beliefs connected with Christianity and the LGBT community making the film rather simplistic and short-sighted. It's own need for literalness doesn't allow for a deeper examination especially of the connection between religious beliefs and the LGBT community. And that is it's main problem. it views things in such a simple black and white way that it doesn't acknowledge the complexities that God Created us with. As for the technical aspects of the movie, they are all subpar, especially the writing.

There have been many sub-genres of the slasher movie throughout the ages. From the madman next door to the campfire tales of the local psychopath, slashers have popped up in various forms throughout the ages. One of the least successful, surprisingly enough, is the variation on the Jack the Ripper theme. While there have been good examples of this( "From Hell", "Jack's Back", "Out of the Dark" to an extent. and yes a couple of guilty pleasures for me "Fear City" and "Edge of Sanity")most films portraying a psychopath stalking a stripper/prostitute have not been able to combine the necessary exploitation elements successfully. "Hatchetman" personifies this trend in all of it's failures.

Managing to be both dull and inept, "Hatchetman" is one of the worst examples of this sub-genre! It's your standard psychopath stalks strippers movie, only done with a lack of suspense and talent. Stultifyingly bad in almost every department, this movie is poorly acted and limply written, with all the clichés present. The mystery is so simplistic that you figure out the identity of the murderer five seconds after you first meet him. And, as is required for this type of film, all characters act like complete, blithering idiots. In fact both the writers and the actors seem to have no sense of character development or motivation. All of the situations that should seem normal to each individual character, feel false. Even the dialogue feels forced.Which leads me to ask this question. Why do conversations in movies like this always feel as if they would never happen in the real world? Is there no writer competent enough to make these characters sound and act like normal, intelligent beings? But I guess that's besides the point. I mean , what do expect in these movies except a fair amount of gore, and a bevy of naked bodies. Yet the director doesn't have enough talent to make even that interesting. In fact this movie suffers from the one sin that most movies never recover from. It is incredibly dull!!! The only things that liven up this movie are the crappy but fun fake gore scenes and the beauty of the ladies themselves. And, too often, even that doesn't work.

So what have here is a mess of a movie, one that was made in an attempt to cash in on two exploitation elements that should go hand-in-hand with each other. Still, it can't even get that right. So it ends up creating a new low for this genre of slasher films. And believe me, that is truly horrifying.

I must admit I had never seen this movie before and was expecting a movie that was so mind numbingly awful that you couldn't help but enjoy it. Instead, what I got was this. A movie that starts out as cheesy fun but ends up excruciatingly dull with the tedium only relieved by the hilariously bad monster effects. Unfortunately, this film is nowhere near as much fun as its so bad it's good reputation suggests. You see this film was originally made back in 1959 as "Teenagers Battle the Thing". It was re-released in 1976 with new footage under it's current title. It starts out well with a typically entertainingly kitschy early 70's ripoff/pastiche of "Night of the Living Dead" and Bigfoot movies involving a Bigfoot zombie(!), a hippie teen, and his hilariously confused dog. In fact, the dog looks so confused, he seems to be pleading for the director to give him some sort of command so that he can get an idea of what his motivation is supposed to be. As it comes to an entertainingly silly end, this vignette is revealed to be a Hollywood movie being screened by a High School Mythology teacher (!)and his students, who seem to be incredibly stoned. The teacher goes on to discuss supposed real-life encounters with Bigfoot leading to the obligatory reenactment scenes that were so common in 1970s b- movie docudramas. This does provide some low-brow entertainment value. However, the film quickly goes downhill once the teacher introduces a former colleague of his who has had a traumatic experience with the creature thus bridging the new footage with that of the 1959 movie. The movie thus begins to turn into something of a snooze-fest as we travel back to the remembrances of the elder colleague. It's never a good sign when the newer footage is vastly more entertaining than the older footage, guys. But, that's what we get here as the movie morphs into a completely different film about the colleague and his archaeologist students discovering an ancient mummy and accidentally bringing it back to life. Only the colleague and the hilariously awful creature costume remain the same. In fact, the only entertaining moments in the second half come from the truly terrible creature costume and the overripe acting by much of the amateur cast. This is because the director literally kills the film with his leaden pacing and ham-fisted technique. It leaves you with more yawns than yucks. Which is sad. Because, if this film had more energy, it could have been up there with "Plan 9". Entertainingly bad, but entertaining nonetheless,

Back in the 80's, when heavy metal music was king, movies containing ready-made music videos were a-dime-a-dozen. MTV was cool beyond all reason. And every exploitation film wanted to play to its base. Thus, the heavy metal horror film was born.

In fact, it was( and still is) a whole sub-genre of horror films. The concept is simple. Combine the storyline of a horror film and a music video, making the group or the rock star himself, the heroes. Cast actual musicians( such as Alice Cooper, Ozzy Osbourne, Gene Simmons, or the low budget version, Jon-Mikel Thor) or hire actors with some musical talent( ala The Monkees) to play the leads and you have the makings of a version of this type of film. In fact movies from "Night Train to Terror" to "Blood Dolls" fall into this category. Which brings us to this film.

"Hard Rock Zombies" is a true incarnation of the eighties. From the "KISS"-like hard rock band( they even wear their style of makeup when they turn into zombies) to the teased hair to the muppet character, this has all the earmarks of an independent 80's film shot directly for video. The fake gore, the gratuitous nudity, the inept acting, you get it all in here. The plot, such as it is, is about a heavy metal band who agree to do a regional concert in the hopes of landing a major record deal. On the way there, they pick up a beautiful hitch-hiker, who convinces them to stay at her family's mansion while preparing for the concert. Needless to say, the family is a group of oddballs whose actions eventually lead us to the title in question.

There are no real surprises in this plot. Nor is the characterization that deep. But , there is a certain amount of imagination at play here. For a movie that looks like it was made for all of $1.35 you get Nazis, she-wolves, muppets( I'm sorry, I love muppets), cannibalism, legendary Hollywood stars, and, of course, Phil Fondacaro, in a very early role. Unfortunately what you also get is lousy music, horrendous acting( with the exception of Mr. Fondacaro who seems to be having a great time) and some very amateurish work from behind the camera.( The technical gaffes are numerous.)

Still the movie has more than a few genuine laughs and the director shows some surprising comic timing. This movie, in fact, has more intentional laughs than some of the comedies I have seen recently.( Note that I said "some".) And for all of the jokes that fail( and some do embarrassingly ), the ones that do work, work very well. The scenes involving the legendary Hollywood performers, in particular, should get a few guffaws from those who look with fondness upon classic movie and music stars, and the culture of the 80's in general. Also, there are some great one-liners interspersed throughout the movie. And the film has fun with it's monsters(even thought the make-up fx are noticeably cheap) and muppets.

So, all in all, this movie isn't too bad. Sure, the acting, music, and make-up fx are lousy. But, the gore fx are better than what you might expect. The film has a fairly good sense of humor. And there is some genuine fun to be had here. Fans of cult cinema, or cinema of the absurd, should enjoy this, to a degree. As for the rest, well, you know what you're getting into. And if you don't like it, speak to the muppet.