Nyhed: "Hey homie, har du tjekket den der blog..."

Facebook er jo begyndt at ville ha' en masse klamme $$$ for booste FB-sider. Til det har vi kun at sige "fuck af", så er du glad for 'Sørensen Exploitation Cinema', så share os endelig med dine venner! Du finder os på facebook ved at trykke her. Word of mouth is the way to go, baby! God weekend derude.

Anmeldelse: Eaten Alive.

Årgang: 1977
Tagline: “You Check In Alive... But Check Out Dead!”
Instruktør: Tobe Hooper.
Runtime: 91 minutter.
Medie: DVD.
Udgiver: Another World Entertainment.
Link til filmen på IMDB.
Se trailer her.
Se også: 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' (1974), 'Killer Crocodile' (1989)

Anmeldt af Mark S. Svensson.

'Eaten Alive' er venligst stillet til rådighed af Another World Entertainment.

The Starlight er et faldefærdigt hotel, der bestyres af Judd (Neville Brand), har kun få kunder. Måske skyldes det beliggenheden eller ejerens voldsomme humørsvingninger. Eller også kan det skyldes den store krokodille, der lever bag hotellet. Men en mørk aften får The Starlight besøg, da en prostitueret (Roberta Collins), et ungt par (Marilyn Burns og William Finley) og deres barn (Kyle Richards), en far og hans datter (Mel Ferrer og Crystin Sinclaire) samt den sexgale Buck (Robert Englund) melder deres ankomst.

Det er ikke så få, der vil pege på Tobe Hoopers ‘The Texas Chainsaw Massacre’ (1974) som værende blandt deres absolutte favoritter, når det kommer til film, der er skabt til at ruske op i sin tilskuer. Med ‘Eaten Alive’ er Tobe Hooper ude i samme ærinde, som han var det med sin beskidte klassiker om den menneskemaskebeklædte motorsavsdræber Leatherface. Hoopers tredje spillefilm var eftersigende præget af problemer i produktionsfasen, hvor uenighederne mellem instruktøren og producerne skulle være blevet så store, at filmens fotograf eftersigende skulle have instrueret flere sekvenser i Hoopers fravær. Marilyn Burns fra TCM er tilbage i en mindre rolle, og derudover medvirker Robert Englund i en herligt slesk rolle. ‘Eaten Alive’ markerer også en forkærlighed for krokodiller, som Tobe Hooper lader til at have, og som han yderligere har dyrket i Crocodile (2000).

“Det smager af kirsebærsaft!”

Som nævnt er det ganske tydeligt, at ‘Eaten Alive’ bærer præg af en Tobe Hooper, der forsøger at vandre i sine egne fodspor ved at lave endnu en surrealistisk mareridtsfilm med et særpræget “larme” soundtrack samt en knivspids mere splat. Omgivelserne er de samme, hillbillyerne (eller i dette tilfælde primært en enkelt) er stadig skumle, og alt burde for så vidt være ved det gamle og deri ligger sandsynligvis problemet. Havde filmen afveget mere markant fra Hoopers foregående film, kunne han meget vel have undgået den sammenligning, der, som tingene står, er svær ikke at foretage. Det føles som om, at filmen er en smule desperat i sine virkemidler. Hvor TCM lever næsten udelukkende på sit udtryk og nærmest totale fravær af plot, lander filmen her mellem LSD-trip og traditionel gyserhistorie. Men skrigene er ufrivilligt skingre, tempoet ujævnt og tilskueren efterlades upåvirket. Udover at fortælle en historie om en familie, der fanges i et hus med en psykopat, hvilket har fungeret fint så mange gange før, og som Hooper er mesterlig til, har filmen også en sideløbende historie om dem, der leder efter de tilfangetagne, og disse scener trækker aggressivt filmen ned.

Judd er løst baseret på barejeren Joe Ball, som havde en krokodille, han blandt andet benyttede som underholdning for sine gæster.

Det er på mange måder en skam, at filmen ikke viser sig mere fængende, idet Neville Brand er en overbevisende enspænder, og hans karakter Judd er ganske seværdig. Han er tosset på den måde, som Rob Zombie har brugt det meste af sin karriere som instruktør på at dyrke. Ligeledes er Robert Englund underholdende ud over alle grænser i sin ondskabsfuldhed, der er så karikeret, at det er svært ikke at synes om. ‘Eaten Alive’ tager sig selv ganske alvorligt. Det er en grynet, rå film, og undertiden kan man sågar mærke Tobe Hoopers fornemmelse for spændingsopbygning og atmosfæriske billeder. Filmens effekter er sågar også fine et stykke ad vejen, men så er der lige den der krokodille... Skønt filmen er to år yngre end Spielbergs ‘Jaws’ (1975), og den forsøger at benytte sig af lignende tricks ved ikke at vise “monstret” for tidligt, er det katastrofalt for en film, der tager sig selv så seriøst, at dens irrelevante reptile islæt er så kluntet udført. Det havde klædt filmen helt at holde denne figur i mørket.

“Name's Buck... and I'm rarin' to fuck.”

‘Eaten Alive’ er svær ikke at have et lidt ambivalent forhold til, fordi den er så inkonsistent i sin tone. Det ene øjeblik emmer filmen af stiliseret grusomhed, og det næste er de stemningsmættede billeder erstattet af kønsløse detektivsekvenser, som hverken er velskrevne eller synderligt underholdende. Tobe Hooper har været en meget aktiv herre fra denne films fremkomst og helt frem til 2005, og selvom der er langt værre og mere udskældte film på hans repertoire, er der bestemt også langt bedre.

Score:

Anmeldelse: Stitches.

Årgang: 2012.
Tagline: "You'll Die Laughing."
Instruktør: Conor McMahon.
Runtime: 82 minutter
Medie: DVD.
Set på: 64” Plasma.
Udgiver: Another World Entertainment.
Link til filmen på IMDB.
Se trailer her.

Se også: 'Shaun of the Dead' (2004), 'Student Bodies' (1981), 'Evil Dead II' (1987) 'House' (1986).

Stitches er venligst stillet til rådighed af Another World Entertainment.

Anmeldt af Michael Sørensen.

Den stærkt alkoholiserede og generelt usympatiske klovn Stitches, bliver udsat for et mareridt af en børnefødselsdag, da en flok uopdragne børn overtager løjerne fra den meget uengagerede klovn. De saboterer forestillingen for Stitches, der i sidste ende dør en brutal død som følge af en drengestreg. Seks år senere holder samme dreng fødselsdag. Han er i mellemtiden blevet teenager, så vennerne beslutter sig for, at udvide gæstelisten med samtlige elever fra skolen. En enkelt gæst mere har dog sikret sig en plads til festen. En gæst der vil have hævn. En blodig hævn!

Everybody Happy….lidt endnu.

Gysergenren har altid haft et godt makkerskab med elementer fra komikken. En sjov kommentar, en skæv scene eller slapstick har fungeret som et åndehul i en form for parløb mellem blod, indvolde og gru – og oftest som en slags pausenummer inden det for alvor er gået løs med grusomhederne. De bedste instruktører bruger komikken som en slags distance til forfærdelighederne – en ying til en blodig yang, som tryllebinder den menneskelige psyke til forestillingen om, at man er sikker og tryg….lidt endnu. I de glade VHS dage sneg de første gysere bygget op som komedier sig ind på reolerne – og selv om de ligesom deres ophav, gyseren, måtte se sig forvist til de mere støvede hylder – så opnåede de en helt særlig kultstatus blandt teenagere i firserne. En kultstatus, der den dag i dag, bærer nye film som Stitches på deres ryg, for det er med sikkerhed film fra den bagerste hylde i videobutikken, som Conor McMahon har fundet sin inspiration fra.

De fleste ulykker sker i hjemmet.

Stitches har alle elementer fra gysergenrens teenslasher på plads. Et stk. klovn, der i sig selv er en uhyggelig satan historisk set. Et helt hus af promiskuøse og storbarmede teenagere, der drikker sig i hegnet samt et nervevrag af et fødselsdagsbarn, der aldrig har sluppet Stitches død – og til stadighed har mareridt om den afdøde klovn med hård medicinering til følge. Ingen forældre i nærheden og frit slag til Stitches, der en efter en får indhentet og hævnet sin død med de sygeste virkemidler, som kun en klovn ville kunne finde på.

Stitches forbereder sin næste trick som klovn. En rigtig hjernevrider.

Elementerne af gys og humor hænger godt sammen – og kan man acceptere, at Stitches er en blanding af klovn og massemorder, er plottet som sådan fint sat sammen med en historie, der jo nærmest giver sig selv. Skuespillet fra de irske teenagere er tilforladeligt, men komikeren Ross Noble tager kagen som Stitches. Her er en komiker, der forstår at spille på alle strenge, således at den fysiske komik hænger sammen med resten af filmens selvforståelse, uden at blive pinagtig eller alt for plat.

Tarm to say goodbye.

Alt i alt er Stitches en underholdende affære, der aldrig prøver at være andet end blodig, klam og morsom på en og samme tid. En mission, der sagtens kunne have været præsenteret som forældet og meget langt fra tidens trends. Det er den ikke i dette tilfælde, for indpakningen af Stitches er en slags tidløs homage til VHS tiden, som for mange af genrens fans er guldalderen for præcis denne type splatterkomedier. Det slipper man overordentlig godt af sted med - og derfor lander Stitches i den pænere ende af skalaen.

Score:

Anmeldelse: Stalled.

Årgang: 2013.
Tagline: “He's in the perfect place to be scared shitless... ”
Instruktør: Christian James.
Runtime: 84 minutter.
Medie: VOD.
Udgiver: Netflix.
Link til filmen på IMDB.
Se trailer her.
Se også: ‘Braindead’ (1992), ‘Shaun of the Dead’ (2004).

Anmeldt af Mark S. Svensson.

En pedel (Dan Palmer) befinder sig som en del af sin faste lidt atypiske rutine på dametoilettet, mens resten af arbejdspladsen holder julefrokost. Mens han er derude kommer to kvinder ind og i deres lettere beduggede tilstand begynder de at kysse på hinanden. Snart udvikler den hede udveksling af kropsvæsker sig til et decideret angreb, da den ene kvinde tager en bid af den anden. Pedellen overværer alt dette, og badeværelset fyldes snart af kødædende zombier, der hungrer efter hjerner.

Hovedrolleindehaver Dan Palmer er også manden bag manuskriptet til ‘Stalled’, som jeg med et vist forbehold vil sammenligne med den eminente ‘Shaun of the Dead’ (2004). Ikke fordi førstnævnte helt kan leve op til Frost og Peggs fremragende zombiefilmen, som formår både at spoofe og beundre zombiegenren, men fordi Palmers spil og manuskript til tider vækker mindelser om landsmændenes finurlige humor. Christian James’ anden spillefilm viger ikke bort fra at fedte sin seer ind i kaskader af blod, men ønsker samtidig også at have en smule på hjerte, og det er prisværdigt. Ikke mindst når man trækker sammenligninger til ‘Evil Aliens’, som Dan Palmer også medvirkede i, og som helt i modsætning til ‘Stalled’ har så travlt med at være fjollet, at den fuldstændig glemmer, at der er et publikum, der skal finde, hvad der foregår på skærmen, blot tilnærmelsesvist interessant. I øvrigt må man ikke glemme, at filmen jo er en julefilm! Den kan være en praktisk undskyldning for at smide zombiefilm på til juletid, hvis man har brug for sådan én. Og julen er faktisk del af plottet... på en måde.

Det er en zombie! Som er en nisse! Som er en dværg!

Der har været alenlange diskussioner om zombiers hastighed. Må de løbe? Eller er det skræmmende ved filmmonstret ikke, at det er et slentrende, sløvt væsen, der er centrum for klaustrofobiske og foruroligende filmværker? Jeg synes, at det er mere relevant at diskutere en anden hastighed, nemlig den som man vælger at fortælle zombiefortællingerne i. Med film som ‘Day of the Dead’ (2008) var der en bred vifte af problemer at tage fat i, men ikke mindst var det ødelæggende for dén film, at den var klippet i musikvideo tempo og uden fornemmelse for stil eller historiefortælling. Hvad jeg derfor syntes er på sin plads at rose ‘Stalled’ for er filmens evne til at variere tempo. Filmen foregår i meget begrænsede omgivelser gennem en stor del af dens spilletid, og det fungerer i kraft af Palmers manuskript, men i særdeleshed også grundet nogle skarpe valg fra instruktøren, der gør, at filmen kan bære både intensitet, oprigtighed og fjollet overgearet humor, der til tider kan skabe mindelser om film som Peter Jacksons ‘Braindead’ (1992).

Kø til dametoilettet...

‘Stalled’ besidder en kærlighed til sine karakterer, som tit går tabt i komedier såvel som gysere, og det er glædeligt, at det er med denne kombination af de to genre, at det samtidig lykkedes at holde fast i filmens figurer. Humoren bliver aldrig for alvor på karakterernes bekostning, men den falder til tider på den platte side, og det tynger en smule for en film, der er så afhængig af sine samtaler og pointer. Måden, som historien former sig på, bliver undertiden en smule kluntet med nogle lidt pludselige skift i dramatikken og lige så godt dette greb sine steder i filmen fungerer, lige så forfejlet fremstår det til andre tider. Det skaber en ujævnhed, som tager en smule af styrken fra ‘Stalled’. Fra filmens bedste til dens værste takter er der alligevel en ret tydelig fornemmelse af, at udgangspunktet for historien har været de personligheder, som befinder på det lille badeværelse og i stedet for at fremstå banalt eller klichépræget, fremstår det, vi undervejs lærer om hovedpersonen, som et forsøg på - atter engang - at gøre zombierne til et symbol på den omverden, som ikke har plads til udskuddene og særlingerne. 

Man forlader ikke apokalypsen uden blod på hænderne.

Christian James’ film kunne snildt have været faldet med hovedet først ned i toiletkummen, men lykkeligvis er det ikke sådan, det er gået. Dan Palmers historie og portrættering af en noget bitter mand, der ikke lige huskede at få levet op til sit potentiale, er medrivende, og undervejs sågar oprigtigt følelsesmæssigt engagerende i sine karakterøjeblikke. Havde filmen holdt tungen lige i munden og balanceret humoren en smule mere ligeligt med menneskeligheden, kunne ‘Stalled’ ligefrem have været mesterlig.

Score:

Anmeldelse: The ABCs of Death.

Årgang: 2012. 
Tagline: “It’s not educational” 
Instruktør: Xavier Gens, Ben Wheatley, Anders Morgenthaler, Ti West, Jason Eisener m.fl.
Runtime: 123 minutter. 
Medie: DVD. 
Set på: 51” Plasma. 
Udgiver: Another World Entertainment
Link til filmen på IMDB. 
Se trailer her. 
Se også: 'Black Sabbath' (1963), 'Creepshow' (1982), 'V/H/S/2' (2013).

The ABCs of Death er venligst stillet til rådighed af Another World Entertainment.

Anmeldt af Mark S. Svensson.

I 26 kortfilm beskæftiger genreinstruktører sig med døden og en række af horrorfilmens undergenrer. Antologifilmen besidder som sådan ikke nogen rød tråd, hvis man ser bort fra en humor, som løber igennem en del af filmene.

Ant Timpson og Tim League har produceret ‘The ABCs of Death’ og samlet holdet af instruktører, som er ganske imponerende. Fra danske Anders Morgenthaler til kontroversielle Srdjan Spasojevic - manden bag ‘A Serbian Film’ (2010) - er det filmens formål at dække et bredt genremæssigt spektrum og give fans af genren en forsmag på, hvad fremtiden kan bringe. På den måde kan man, uden at tage nærværende films overordnede kvalitet med i sine overvejelser, tage hatten af for producernes evne til at grave de lidt mindre og mere skæve instruktører frem, flere af hvilke vi allerede tidligere har beskæftiget os med her på bloggen: Adam Wingards ‘A Horrible Way to Die’ (2010) fik eksempelvis en hård medfart i min egen anmeldelse herinde, mens vi var glade for Jason Eiseners ‘Hobo with a Shotgun’ (2011), som Hr. Sørensen selv fejrede tilbage i filmens udgivelsesår.

Prutteland (fra ‘F is for Fart’).

Her følger en anmeldelse af 26 film: 26 historier, der udfolder sig på deres respektive præmisser. 26 aspekter af en genre, som har plads til radikale idéer og eksperimenteren. Når det så er sagt, eksperimenterer ‘The ABCs of Death’? Kortfilmsformen giver mulighed for at prøve små idéer af i ekstreme rammer, og i film som Nacho Vigalondos ‘A is for Apocalypse’ udforskes der på kort tid en bizar og makaber lille historie, som giver et lille indblik i et univers der føles langt større. Bredt set kan man sige om filmens instruktører, at de alle har en visuel bevidsthed, der i det mindste er bemærkelsesværdig. Enkelte er mere markante end andre, som Thomas Cappelen Mallings ‘H is for Hydro-Electric Diffusion’ surrealistiske indslag, der har en naziræv i centrum eller Lee Hardcastles ‘T is for Toilet’ der er claymation og slående i sin eksplicitte splat og ubekvemme skildring af et barns mareridtsverden, der smelter sammen med dets virkelighed. Samlingens mest sprudlende visuelle stykke arbejde er Bruno Forzani & Héléne Cattets ‘O is for Orgasm’. Det lille værk er en symbolsk ladet sensuel fortælling, som ikke er nogen omfattende historie, men som med begrænsede midler visualiserer en seksuel tilfredsstillelse. Seksualitet beskæftiger flere andre af filmene sig også med i forskellige former. Ser man på ‘L is for Libido’ og ‘Y is for Youngbuck’ beskæftiger de sig begge med de mørkere sider af sex, på hver deres ubekvemme måde, mens ‘X is for XXL’ beskæftiger sig med samtidens kvindeideal.   

“Held og lykke med masturbationen kammerat!” (fra ‘L is for Libido’).

Et problem, der imidlertid løber gennem en lang række af antologiens historier, er humoren. Mens der er enkelte af indslagene, som tager sig selv alvorligt, er den langt overvejende del af filmen domineret af en eller anden grad af humor. Bundniveauet er utrolig lavt, og det er perfekt eksemplificeret i ‘F is for Fart’, som er Noboru Iguchis tilføjelse, og som er rystende plat og barnagtig i sin pruttehumor. Danske Anders Morgenthalers indslag bevæger sig i samme område, men som det er typisk for tegneren, er der en vis satire at skimte i hans lille historie, omend det ikke er nok til for alvor at gøre den til noget der kvalitets- og indholdsmæssigt hører hjemme i denne samling film. På samme vis hiver Andrew Trauckis ‘G is for Gravity’ filmen ned, fordi den, ligesom andre film i antologien, giver indtryk for en enorm ligegyldighed og et manglende engagement. Instruktørerne har fået kunstnerisk frihed i arbejdet med indholdet af deres film, og det har for nogen udmøntet sig i kvalitet, mens det for andre tydeligt har ledt til for nemme løsninger. Det eksemplificeres endvidere i ‘W is for WTF!’, som lægger ud som en leg med den kreative proces, men som hurtigt udvikler sig til noget af det mest rodede og kedsommelige, som samlingen byder på.

Frau Scheisse (fra ‘H is for Hydro-Electric Diffusion’).

Der er virkelig langt fra den ringeste af ‘The ABCs of Death’ segmenter til det bedste. Det gør den selvsagt svær at give en overordnet karakter. Derfor har jeg valgt at tage gennemsnittet af mine vurderinger af de enkelte film og give den overordnede film denne karakter. Med det sagt vil jeg våge at påstå, at der for den tålmodige seer er godbidder, der er værd at vente på i Timpson og Leagues samling af film, men der er langt mellem de uhyggelige eller virkeligt morsomme momenter.

Score:

Horror-Unrated Retrospekt #2: Et interview med instruktør Patrik Syversen, Courtney Hope og After Dark horrorfilmen 'Prowl'.

Efter 4 år har vi valgt at lukke og slukke for Horror Unrated. Med tiden fik vi hevet en hel del spændende og dybdegående interviews i hus, fra de store kendte horror stjerner til ukendte independent filmskabere. Personligt er jeg meget stolt over den række af interviews vi endte med at få på Horror Unrated, og enkelte står stadig som nogle helt unikke. Bl.a. interviewene med instruktøren af 'Don't Go in the Woods', James Bryan og David Winters - manden bag 'The Last Horror Film', som begge velvilligt satte sig til at scanne gamle billeder filmpris-certifikater ind til os som vi kunne bruge i artiklen. Og danske Heini Grünbaum som i 1999 lavede 'Flænset', gav sig rigtig god tid til virkelig at gå i dybden med sine svar. Den dag i dag er det så vidt vi ved, stadig det eneste interview der findes med ham på internettet.
Af forskellige årsager valgte vi at lukke for Horror Unrated d. 12. november 2013, og da undertegnede tidligere har været skribent for denne fantastiske blog, Sørensen Exploitation Cinema Proudly presents, valgte jeg og bloggens ejer at flytte de mange interviews over på bloggen så de kunne få nyt liv, og forhåbentlig blive læst og nydt af nye læsere.

- Claus Reinhold.

HORROR UNRATED: Patrik and Courtney - welcome to Horror Unrated. It’s great to have you both with us and we’re going to talk about your latest movie Prowl which is part of the After Dark Originals. Patrik, let’s start with you; how did this start for you and how did you get involved in this project?

PATRIK SYVERSEN: Thanks. I got the script from my reps, and really responded to it. It was a lean and straight forward survival horror, but with a strong central character at it's core. Dobré Films took the project to After Dark Films, and then it started moving pretty quickly. Thankfully, the producers involved liked my previous film so within weeks the project was set up and good to go. I think we got word in May 2009, so casting started right away. Then we started shooting in July. Our film was the first of the bunch to be produced, so I'm really glad they're all done and good to go. I can't wait for it to come out.

HU: And you Courtney? How did you get involved in this project, was it through a regular casting process?

COURTNEY HOPE: Yes, I was brought in by Mark Teschner, who I've been in front of for General Hospital many times. He became the casting director on Prowl, read the break down and said he had to bring me in. I read the script and loved it, then met with Patrik and everything just kind of moved on from there.

HU: Correct me if I’m wrong, but this is your first horror film right? Did you have any concerns about that and was it very different from what you have previously done as an actress?

CH: Yes, this is my first horror film. I was so excited about doing a horror film. I knew it was going to be something new and different from the other projects I have worked on so I couldn't wait to get started.

HU: When I first heard of the new Patrik Syversen movie, I thought it was a vampire flick in the vein of 30 Days of Night, but I was definitely proven wrong. So in your words, what sort of film is Prowl?

PS: I like describing it as a coming of age survival horror. It's an intense, character driven horror film about running away and finding your true self through trying times. I wanted it to feel personal, yet tap into very aggressive and primal feelings. Hopefully we pulled that off, so the film works on two levels - a thrilling horror that hopefully taps into some emotional aspects as well.

HU: Courtney, you play Amber, a young girl who wants to escape her sad surroundings and therefore leave for Chicago with her friends. Can you tell us about the character - how you see her and how it was to play her?

CH: Portraying Amber was great. She’s a bit shy and very closed off. She is coming into her own as a young woman, when at the same time her whole world is kind of just falling apart right in front of her. She has a certain drive about her to change the direction that her life is taking that is very humbling. Amber is a very genuine and honest person, what you see is what you get. She isn't afraid of failure, and would do anything to protect the ones that she loves.

HU: So how was it to work with Patrik? How was he as a director and how did the two of you work and collaborate on your character?

CH: Working with Patrik was a blast. It was very interesting. He is so smart and extremely talented. He definitely has a different way of directing than I had ever experienced before. He knows what he wants and it will get done. When we got to Bulgaria, we sat down and talked about what we wanted out of the character and the film and how we were going to make that happen. We each tossed our opinions and ideas out on the table and just kind of worked from there to create what you see in the film.

PS: As the project moved pretty quickly, we had limited rehearsal time. That meant a lot in the casting process, so finding the right actress with the right tone was key. Courtney had a lot of the sensibilities and the same naive approach to things as Amber, so that really kickstarted things. Finding a personal approach is important, and Courtney was 19 at the time, and you can't fake that look in her eyes. So we talked a lot, about her and her character, and tried to find a common trust, and a way to incorporate her personal experiences into the character. For example; the film was shot in Bulgaria, and Courtney had never been out of the US, so she sort of opened her eyes to a new world throughout the shoot. We tried to shoot the film almost chronologically, so I guess she sort of grew through the process, which was important for the film. The last scene in the film was the last one we shot, and I think it shows. She's been through some heavy shit. At times I pushed her hard, and it was pretty draining during certain scenes, but it paid off. We're good friends now, but we went through lengths to push her into the emotional state she was in.

HU: Okay, so this was your first time in Europe, Courtney?

CH: Indeed it was. It was fantastic. I was sad that I didn't get to explore much around Bulgaria, since we were on such a tight shooting schedule, but from what I did see it was very eye opening. It has really beautiful scenery there with all of the rolling hills and old factories. I think it made that much more of an impact on the film and the characters, since it was so foreign to us. Especially to me being one of the only ones from America. We had ADR in London, so I stayed there for a week and explored where the rest of my cast mates were from. It was incredible, and made me want to travel a lot more.

HU: Patrik, in the first act, the film is very dedicated to the focus on Amber as a person – who she is and how her life is, and we’re also introduced to her mother etc. I mean, we really get to know her and the first act has more of a drama-feel to it – something you rarely see in horror films. Was that important to you to do this and to get more into the life of the protagonist?

PS: Yes, setting up the characters in the beginning was definitely important. The main reason I wanted to do the film was that I felt that it was a very direct coming of age story that I could relate to. Being a survival horror movie, it's intense and scary, but still I wanted it to be close to home and heartfelt. Plus, when you set up characters, you want the audience to root for them and go through the same things as they do. The better you try to set them up, the more impact the inevitable terror will have. And in the end it's all about engaging the audience on a primal level without intellectualizing or underestimating them. Hopefully we pulled it off; making the film scary and horrifying, yet keeping the audience engaged in the arc of the central character.

HU: I totally agree. You know, even though I love movies like Friday the 13th and Don’t Go in the Woods, the characters are always just there without any background story or any insight into who they are and what their dreams and goals are. They seem to serve more as disposable bodies for the killer to slash up. But in Prowl and with Amber, you went the opposite way and really gave the audience a character to identify with.

PS: As mentioned before, identifying with the character means you care when they are in peril, and that is key. It means you want them to survive, and that you're in their shoes, instead of observing. As much as I love straight forward slasher films, I feel the best horror films are those that express something, and tell a story. It doesn't have to be complex, but a good story is always about the themes and the lead characters arc. The actions in a horror film are means to expressing those themes.

HU: Courtney, I’m guessing that it was also great for you as an actress to be able to portray a well-written character and be able to act on more levels?

CH: Absolutely. It definitely gave Amber a lot more dimension and gave me a lot more to work with. She has somewhere she's trying to get to, and a true passion for why she is leaving. It lets the audience see her in a different light and as a real person, which allows them to connect with her better and truly care for her. And it definitely makes her evolution to the person she becomes in the end, that much more powerful.

HU: Yes indeed it does. When I saw Prowl, I remember thinking to myself that the acting performances, and especially the ones by Courtney and Bruce Payne, were extremely natural and realistic, and I had the same feeling back when I watched your first movie, Manhunt. Is it a gift of yours or one of your forces as a director to get these very realistic performances from the cast, or are you just lucky to get the right actors?

PS: Thank you so much! Whether I do a good job is up to others to decide, but I put a lot of effort into casting and finding actors who have the right chemistry, with both me and the other actors. I always approach a project based on themes or characters, so it's important to me to tap into that before the shoot, to make sure we're all on the same page. All fundamental questions have to be answered before you're on set, and by doing that, you have more time to talk about nuances and the details. You also get some space to play around, and that makes for some interesting interactions if the characters are clear enough. So, we talk character, find different approaches, and try to make it feel organic. I like shooting what's written first, and then stray away somewhat while still keeping the same momentum and structure of the scene. By doing that, you get organic reactions, and hopefully that pays off in the final film. I also like to tweak a bit with the dialogue to make sure it fits the actors’ mannerisms and energy.

HU: Now, we were speaking of drama just before and I noticed you also incorporate these dream-like, maybe even subconscious images several times through out the film where we see Amber running in slow motion – escaping. Again, this is a very different touch from the average horror flick. How did you come up with this, and what’s your idea and interpretation with these scenes?

PS: I wanted a recurring motif that sort of crystallized the entire film, so we did some shots of Amber literally running away. She's always on the move, always escaping. Getting back to that in certain key scenes, meant we could follow that red thread. It also gives the film a subjective approach. The film has to be Amber's story from the get go, and we tried to make her relatable and accessible.

HU: Okay, well it certainly works well. We also have to talk about these fierce and bloodthirsty creatures. How did you come up with their look and is there any deeper meaning behind the way they look and move?

PS: The creatures were initially written differently, but we had lots of restrictions in both time and budget. The film was always intended to have a realistic feel, even though it's a creature film, so we decided to go with a simple and straightforward approach. Stripped down, raw and in your face. Sharp fangs and rapid movements were key elements, so focusing on that, and making sure you hold back on how much you see them was important to make the creatures and situations seem plausible in the universe we established.

HU: So how the shoot go in Bulgaria?

PS: We shot the film in 19 days in Bulgaria, with an international crew and UK and US actors. I'm Norwegian and so is my DP, so it was a special experience. It was a pretty tight schedule, 109 pages in that short amount of time, so it was pretty harrowing at times. We shot a lot of the film in an abandoned steel factory, a lot of nights and effects and emotional scenes, so it was both draining and rewarding. Two hours of sleep at night, working on shortlists, meetings with the departments and shooting the rest of the time. It was a crazy three weeks, but it really makes you focused on what you're doing, because you have no choice, and there was no way we were going over budget. It really forces you to stay true to your intentions, yet be creative if things don't work out the way you thought. Everyone was really dedicated, and I'm really thankful for that.

CH: Yes, it was very fast paced and very long and exhausting days, but I think it worked with the film. The more tired and drained we all got, so did our characters. The places we shot in were very extreme and crazy as well. By the end of the shoot we had all night shoots, and would sleep during the day. This made it really fun for the cast and crew walking around these creepy places at night. We would play a lot of pranks on each other walking through the dark factory or across the fields at night. Getting the creatures to jump out at people and scare them, and having all the stray dogs that just run around everywhere. It was so fun.

HU: This is you first English language film. How was it to direct and communicate in another language than Norwegian?

PS: Doing a film in another language was surprisingly easy. In the end it's all about personal chemistry and communication with the actors. Casting is important, and finding a tone and sticking to that has been key. All the actors and crew have different sensibilities, no matter what language you talk, so it's all about making sure everyone is making the same movie. You sort of adapt to these feelings. Some people need one key word or just a look. Some need a more detailed breakdown of my vision. But when it all boils down to one thing, it's the universal language of emotions. And the technical stuff of course.

HU: Courtney, I’m guessing you had to tap a bit into your violent side when it came to the brutal and gory scenes, which are not for the faint of heart I might add. Were you OK with these gory and violent scenes and what’s it like to act out such extremities?

CH: Absolutely. I am not a really angry or violent person at all, so this was a stretch for me. It was great once I connected with the feeling I was trying to achieve. It was a place I rarely ever go inside of me, so once I got there, I just let it all go. It was so real to me that it became very gut- wrenching.

HU: Trust me – that shows on screen. So what are your thoughts on the film now that it’s done? And are you open to do more horror in the future?

CH: I think the film looks fantastic. I would absolutely love to do more horror films. They are just so different and require tapping into a lot of emotions that most people don't connect with everyday.

HU: What about you Patrik, I know you’re working on a couple of new films which are far from the horror genre. Does this mean you are done with making horror movies?

PS: Definitely not! I love horror, and I’d love to do more. Hopefully my next project is another horror film. In the end it's all about telling a story or conveying some sort of emotion, and after having done a comedy and a drama, I'm more than ready to make bigger and better horror films.

HU: Okay great – that was it from me. Thank you both so much for your time and the best of luck to you both with future projects.

PS: Thank you! And thanks for the kind words. It means a lot that you liked the film.

CH: Absolutely. It was great talking with you!