Directing: B
Acting: B-
Writing: B-
Cinematography: B+
Editing: B
Special Effects: B

Here is a title that believes in truth in advertising: unlike the bemusing Evil Does Not Exist, which is not a horror movie, In a Violent Nature very much is. This is a title you can take literally, on multiple levels: it’s about a reanimated man with a “violent nature” (to say the least), and it’s a movie in which a ton of entertainingly grotesque violence happens exclusively in nature. To be more specific, the forest near Sault St. Marie, Ontario, which is about 300 miles northwest of Toronto, across the St. Marys River from the Upper Peninsula of Michigan.

Sault St. Marie also happens to be where writer and director Chris Nash is from, and In a Violent Nature has a very “do it yourself” vibe to it. Whether that’s an asset or a liability depends on your point of view. On the one hand, this is arguably the prettiest cinematography ever seen in a slasher film—this was a big reason I even went to see it, as I normally don’t go see horror movies. I heard on a podcast that it was “like Friday the 13th shot by Terrence Malick”—an influence Nash openly admits to—and suddenly I thought: in that case, I’m interested!

It’s not often you see a slasher flick that is also a mood piece. I find myself wondering how audiences respond if they don’t know to expect this going in. I have a tendency to prefer being surprised by movies, but I was glad to have been armed with this knowledge beforehand: that nearly the entire film is told from the point of view of the monster killer; that there are long, unbroken shots from right behind him walking through the forest; that there is no film score in the film whatsoever. Instead, the soundtrack consists of the ambient noises, rustling of branches or sounds of animals and insects, in the forest. The couple of times you do hear music, it’s only because there happens to be a radio playing.

As such, it would be fun to watch someone else respond to this movie if they went in completely cold—not that it’s possible for you to do that now that you’re reading this review (sorry!). They might take some time to even register the genre of this film, as the first kill happens after several scenes of this giant man in torn clothing walking through the forest.

This is all fertile ground onto which to plant a premise. Nash directs it competently, clearly knowing what he wants. I’d love to have seen this movie directed by him, but written by someone else. The monster killer we follow through the forest comes upon a secluded house where we hear a father and grown son arguing; later he finds a cabin and camp fire where the requisite group of young men and women we know intuitively will mostly become victims. None of the dialogue between these characters ever quite flows naturally, like real people talking. There’s always something slightly off about it, and not in a way that feels deliberate.

Furthermore, we actually do get an explanation of sorts, for why this killer has re-emerged from his grave, as well as his connection to a “massacre” that occurred in the area ten years before. This is all pretty standard stuff for a movie so clearly inspired by Friday the 13th, but even within that context the contrivance gets stretched a little thin.

What this means, ultimately, is that In a Violent Nature falters in both its script and performances, but has a premise and overall execution that goes a long way toward making up for it. The kills themselves get increasingly creative—and, to me, funny. Admittedly I was the only person overtly laughing at this stuff, but then, I also had a great time watching last year’s Cocaine Bear, which qualified as a comedy only insofar as it had ridiculous violence in it. That and In a Violent Nature share a couple strands of the same DNA, although this movie leans much more toward a uniquely ambient tension. When the kills do occur, though, it’s all old-school practical effects; by all appearances, there’s not a single shot using CGI.

I’d have loved for any of the characters in this film to have even remotely dimensional personalities, but to be fair to Chris Nash, the nature of their expendability is very much the point. He’s taking a clear love of eighties and nineties slasher movies and giving it multiple twists. As to which of those twists really work, your mileage may vary. There’s an extended scene at the end, with a conversation between two women in a truck, that skirts of the edges of philosophical, but it feels slightly incongruous to the rest of the film and the philosophy doesn’t quite crystalize.

You could say that about In a Violent Nature overall: its philosophy never achieves clarity, but its premise is an undeniably compelling exercise.

*On the upside, none of the people murdered are anyone you’re going to miss.*

Overall: B