In a Violent Nature

It is so ruthlessly, mercilessly, casually, relentlessly, violent that it will deter lots of viewers, which is understandable but unfortunate for the director because I think he is making a point about the slasher movie genre.

It is beautifully shot and deeply considered. But it’s an approach that won’t work for everyone.

The hook, this time, is that debut feature director Chris Nash uses some formal arthouse devices to reframe the horror movie antics we’ve repeatedly witnessed...

This is the trouble with nihilism as a foundation for horror: it can’t quicken the pulse, drum up scares, or elicit any fruitful response from the viewer at all.

If you’re looking to get your nerves actively shredded, you might have to seek out other men in masks to accept that particular mission. But from a horror fan’s point of view, this is an absolutely fascinating experiment with form.

It's a really interesting visual stunt for a while, but the problem here is that the plot is just as dumb as all the other [slashers].

Nash has managed to flip the workings of the slasher flick on its head.

This is a hugely cine-literate work, made with a palpable love for the genre and actively rewarding the viewer for interacting with the action the way they always have done.

The characters are a bit thin, but this is a slasher tradition. The change in point of view is one of the strong points here.

Form without substance is pure gimmickry, and while Nash plants some ideas about the unflinching amorality of nature, he fails to dig deep enough to make them germinate. [Full review in Spanish]