In a Violent Nature is Friday the 13th from the perspective of Jason Vorhees and you’ll either love it or hate it.
It’s not literally Friday the 13th, as in, it isn’t a licensed film in the franchise, but the inspiration taken from the classic slasher from 1980 is not subtle. In a Violent Nature, written and directed by Chris Nash with cinematography by Pierce Derks and edited by Alex Jacobs has been marketed as a horror film “from the perspective of the killer”. This isn’t inaccurate, but it’s not entirely the truth, either. It’s certainly the easiest elevator pitch to get across the point of the film and, for the most part, that’s what you’re getting here.
The influences are obvious. The killer’s design is basically Jason Vorhees – complete with a mask, though it’s an old-school fireman’s mask instead of a hockey mask. The setting is a forest – complete with a lake in the middle and some cabins surrounding it. It’s not labeled as a summer camp (à la Camp Crystal Lake) but it is noted as a hotspot for college kids and teens to go camping. There’s even a backstory for the killer that is not entirely a rip of Jason, but it’s not too far off either. So, again, this movie’s basic premise is “What if Friday the 13th was told from Jason’s perspective?” – and yes, I know, in the original movie, it wasn’t Jason doing the killing, but the point still stands.
Can a movie succeed on what could be argued as a gimmick that would be better suited as a short-film experiment? For my money, yes. It comes down to two things. The first is execution. It’s in how technically precise and well-made the finished product is. The second is whether or not you’re the type of audience member who vibes with what the movie is going for. This movie is going to be hit or miss for audiences. I suspect the people who love it will really love it (spoiler alert: I’m in that camp), while the people who dislike it will find it interesting in concept but boring in execution and check out after fifteen minutes.
It’s important to note that “from the perspective of the killer” doesn’t mean it is literally a POV shot film where audiences see through the killer’s eyes. It’s more that the killer is the protagonist of the movie, and a solid majority of the shots are following him around the forest as he makes his kills. If you’ve seen the trailer you know what you’re in for.
It’s here I’ve got to gush about the cinematography for a moment. The film is shot in a 1.33/4:3 aspect ratio (square) so if you’re watching on a widescreen TV – or in the movie theater – the black bars (letterboxes) will be on the left and right side as opposed to the top and bottom. I know this is an instant turn off for a lot of people, but I’m a big fan. It forces the composition of each shot to be thought about differently, and can create some striking and unique images as a result. The film was shot on location in Northern Ontario and the location is a huge component of the film.
The lighting is mostly natural to preserve the feeling of the location the film was shot, and it goes hand in hand with the overall vibe of the film. There’s an innate voyeuristic quality to the movie. Audiences spend the film following the killer around as he navigates the environment and stalks his victims. There’s a mixture of close-up to middle range shots following the killer, wide shots of an environment as the killer moves through it, and ultra-wide landscape shots. The atmosphere of the film is a huge selling point. Of course, there are also times when the camera moves in ultra-close for moments of intense gore and shock.
The cinematography and sound design are genuinely stunning. The camera moves up and down slightly when tracking behind the killer – avoiding a Steadicam feeling but also not quite moving into shaky, found-footage territory. It’s a decision that makes the audience feel like they’re right there alongside the killer, planted into the woods. The sound design is another major element that brings immersion, with the crunch of the killer’s boots acting as a measured beat for almost the entire runtime.
Overall I think this is an experiment well worth seeing.
So, what about the horror? This is a slasher, after all. As far as kills go it’s got some of the most inventive and brutal that I’ve seen. There’s one in particular that is an instant all-timer. It doesn’t shy away from gore, and it treats the murders with an almost casual disregard, which comes with the territory of this being from the killer’s perspective, this is just normal for him.
While being with the killer gives this film a unique angle, it does take away some of the suspense. Part of the suspense in slasher flicks comes from anticipating when and where the killer is going to appear, that’s not an option here, we’re always with the killer. That doesn’t mean there’s no suspense, there’s some baked in anticipation that comes with following him on his path of carnage, but it’s not the same type of suspense you’ll find in most horror flicks. This will be a deal-breaker for some, but for me the trade-off in suspense is worth it for the overall direction the film is going for. That all being said, the final 15-20 minutes bring a nail-biting level of suspense in their own right. I was legitimately on the edge of my seat.
Geek Network is giving In A violent Nature a 3 out of 5. A very solid watch slightly marred by its niche appeal in the wide realms of horror.
Overall I think this is an experiment well worth seeing. As I said at the beginning, it’s certainly not going to land for everyone, but I think for the audience it does connect with it’ll go a long way. There’s some impressive creativity here. It’s a brutal and voyeuristic examination of the typical slasher villain from a refreshing angle. In a Violent Nature delivers kills and chills in a distinct presentation.
Leave a Reply