FrightFest 2012: Hidden In The Woods
This Chilean film is based on a true story. And, as Richard Littlejohn says, you couldn't make it up. A drug dealer drowns his wife in the sink and subsequently turns to his two young daughters for 'comfort', siring upon one of them a retarded and deformed son (Manuel), who they keep in a shed. When Daddy, in an unguarded moment, chainsaws two police officers to death, the kids go on the run, hiding out in a remote shack, where thugs sent by the kids' drug baron uncle soon arrive, seeking the location of some drugs Daddy was looking after. Fortunately - though up until now they have been portrayed as innocent, even sentimentalised, victims - they also turn out to be enthusiastic cannibals, and not the kind who bother with a knife and fork either. Having gruesomely dispatched the drug dealers, plus two sleazy male back-packers, the girls and Manuel decide to pay a visit to their Uncle. And kill him.
During the course of the visit, the Uncle reveals that he is in fact the father of one of the girls, I forget which one, and as they are soon all lying on the floor drenched in gore, it's academic really. There is some doubt as to who, if anyone, survives and - this being a 'true story' after all - I was expecting some kind of 'catch-up' in the closing credits. 'Manuel now runs a coffee shop in Santiago', that kind of thing. This was not forthcoming, but the director was present to fend off questions. A number of audience members seemed to find the film funny. Perhaps I'm losing my sense of humour when rape, cannibalism and child abuse no longer do it for me, but there was some amusement to be gained from the subtitles, clearly written by someone who wasn't especially familiar with the English language. 'Where the drugs are', cry the thugs torturing the girls, over and over again, 'where the drugs are'. Making me wonder if the girls' lack of response was down to their uncertainty as to whether their torturers were asking a question, or beginning a statement.
Might make a good slogan for the Chilean tourist board though...
This is a crude film in every sense of the word. If it occasionally achieves a brutal intensity, this is down to the content rather than the talents of the people involved. The director got funding by claiming that he was making 'a social drama'. That got a laugh.
Perhaps it's one redeeming feature is that in the movie we are siding with what in other films would be 'the monster'. And so vile are all the men in this (except Manuel, who in any case more resembles a dog) that it could almost be called a feminist film. Although before anyone embarks upon a thesis to that effect, they should perhaps take into account the fact that the (boyishly excited) director referred to his lead actress (not present) as 'the one with the big tits'.
Post-feminist, then.
During the course of the visit, the Uncle reveals that he is in fact the father of one of the girls, I forget which one, and as they are soon all lying on the floor drenched in gore, it's academic really. There is some doubt as to who, if anyone, survives and - this being a 'true story' after all - I was expecting some kind of 'catch-up' in the closing credits. 'Manuel now runs a coffee shop in Santiago', that kind of thing. This was not forthcoming, but the director was present to fend off questions. A number of audience members seemed to find the film funny. Perhaps I'm losing my sense of humour when rape, cannibalism and child abuse no longer do it for me, but there was some amusement to be gained from the subtitles, clearly written by someone who wasn't especially familiar with the English language. 'Where the drugs are', cry the thugs torturing the girls, over and over again, 'where the drugs are'. Making me wonder if the girls' lack of response was down to their uncertainty as to whether their torturers were asking a question, or beginning a statement.
Might make a good slogan for the Chilean tourist board though...
This is a crude film in every sense of the word. If it occasionally achieves a brutal intensity, this is down to the content rather than the talents of the people involved. The director got funding by claiming that he was making 'a social drama'. That got a laugh.
Perhaps it's one redeeming feature is that in the movie we are siding with what in other films would be 'the monster'. And so vile are all the men in this (except Manuel, who in any case more resembles a dog) that it could almost be called a feminist film. Although before anyone embarks upon a thesis to that effect, they should perhaps take into account the fact that the (boyishly excited) director referred to his lead actress (not present) as 'the one with the big tits'.
Post-feminist, then.
posted by martin at 10:23 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home