Bloody Hell (2020)

Bloody Hell is a 2020 independent horror comedy from director Alister Grierson and writer Robert Benjamin. It is based on an idea Benjamin came up with while at an airport and is his feature film debut. The film stars Ben O’Toole and Meg Fraser (Also making her debut). Support is from Caroline Craig, Matthew Sunderland and Travis Jeffrey (Playing twins). The movie is mostly set in Finland, even though none of the main actors are finnish and most of the movie was actually filmed in Australia.

Rex (O’Toole), is an ex-military man that has just been released from jail after his heroics in taking out a gang of bank robbers cost the life of an innocent woman. He is seen by some as a hero and others as a villain. Either way his celebrity status is too much for him and so he opts for a fresh start… in Finland. Unfortunately for him he is immediately kidnapped by a family of cannibals and wakes up tied to the ceiling in a basement and missing a foot. Fortunately he is tougher than he looks and he has an ally… the voice in his head.

Hello Me

There are many different flavours of horror comedy around. Some are dark and twisted, others are so heavy on the laughs they barely count as horror. Some lean heavily into B-Movie effects and aesthetics and others are more realistic and rely on fluke and idiocy to create mad situations. That last group is where you’ll find “Bloody Hell”, but it’s a specific sub-flavour of that because it relies on the protagonist being quite unhinged himself. The situation in which he finds himself in should by all rights be terrifying, but because he is talking to an imaginary version of himself that is calmer and more in control, the situation actually becomes a comedic one. It’s quite a clever idea conceptually.

One of the things I noticed with this film is how fast the time went by. In actual fact the protagonist spends most of the film strung up in the basement, but it doesn’t feel like then while you are watching it. Other things go on around him, including flashbacks revealing what happened at the bank. These help break it up, but in actual fact most of the movie is one character talking to himself. We see the voice in his head as a physical manifestation so the scene feels like a genuine conversation. This works surprisingly well and then when the final act kicks off and he breaks free, the action is swift and clever. The pacing is pretty much spot on.

Finnish Him

It’s impossible not to see the influence of Deadpool on this movie or perhaps more accurately Ryan Reynolds. In many ways the movie reminds me of Reynold’s “Voices” horror comedy, which used a very similar trick. In that Reynold’s is a serial killer but the film is framed through his imaginary conversations. Sometimes with his pets and occasionally the dead bodies of his victims. Bloody Hell isn’t quite as funny as Voices, but it does have the scope for sequels. Indeed the film definitely hints at more to come and I hope we see it. O’Toole doesn’t have Reynolds natural wit and charisma on screen, but he does and pretty good job of impersonating it. This was Meg Fraser’s feature debut so her performance was very impressive. It’s worth noting, since none of the cast were actually Finnish, so they had to learn to speak the dialogue for the role.

Overall, this is a smoothly put together movie that works pretty well for what it is. It isn’t overly funny or particularly scary but it keeps you entertained. The protagonist is likeable despite being a little crazy and the action scenes, while minimal, are fun. I imagine the film would drag a little on second viewings but it’s definitely worth watching once. This is a solid 6/10 and a recommendation. Apparently a sequel is being considered, I’ll be there for it!

Rating: 6 out of 10.

Hannibal Rising (2007)

The big debate about this film is if Hannibal Lecter should ever have had an origin story/prequel movie. The answer in my view is: Probably not. That said, an origin for the character is absolutely consistent with Thomas Harris’ writing style. Every other character in his novels have their motivations and psychology examined closely. Often, by Dr. Lecter himself. Harris style of writing largely relies on the realism of these characters. What made Hannibal stand out so well was because he was the enigma, the one unexplainable evil. Harris edged into explaining a lot of Lecter’s thought processes in “Hannibal”, his third novel. That novel was less warmly regarded and the film adaptation skipped most of those elements. To be fair, it’s hard to show thought processes on screen. For this reason, they were correct not to have Clarice take Hannibal up on his offer and go off with him.

But if you have read the novels, it was always clear that Harris wanted to explain Hannibal to us. He just wasn’t sure if he should and I have heard that he did need his arm twisted somewhat to finally set to work on a full origin story. Supposedly it was producer Dino De Laurentiis who told Harris that if he didn’t write the origin story, someone else eventually will. Horrified by this prospect, Harris set to work. As I mentioned though, if you read the books you know Harris does try and help the reader to understand Lecter. He’s not entirely the enigma he is in the movies. To make sure his message wasn’t lost this time he insisted on writing the screenplay to the eventual movie himself. For better or worse director Peter Webber has provided a fairly faithful adaptation of the source material.

Dark Origins

The film begins with a young Hannibal (Played by Aaran Thomas), with his loving family and young sister Mischa (Helena-Lia Tachovská) living in a castle in Lithuania. This is not a good time to be in Lithuania though as the Nazi invasion of Russia has turned the area into part of the bloodiest front line in World War Two. As Hitler and Stalins forces clash, the Lecter family is caught in the middle. The parents are killed and Hannibal and Mischa are left to fend for themselves. Matters get worse as a group of ex-Nazi’s now just trying to survive as Russian forces take over the region hold up in their castle. With it being in the thick of winter and no food available they take drastic action.

Many years later, the story picks up with an adult Hannibal (Now played by Gaspard Ulliel), who has made his way to his last surviving relatives home in France. After settling in, he sets out on his mission to extract vengeance on the people that murdered and ate his sister. Gong Li plays his aunt “Lady Mursaka”, who understands Hannibals drive but can’t stand by who he is becoming. Dominic West (McNulty from the TV series “The Wire”) plays Inspector Pascal Popil, a detective that specializes in bringing war criminals to justice. He too understands Hannibal’s desire for vengeance, but won’t let him get away with taking the law into his own hands. Rhys Ifans plays “Grutas” the head of the gang that murdered Hannibal’s sister.

A Man of Exquisite Taste

The most obvious issue with this film is that Hannibal Lecter is not a character that any actor can play. The gold standard is obviously Sir Anthony Hopkins, who elevated the character into the movie villain hall of fame. Before Hopkins took on the role Brian Cox put in an impressive performance in the movie “Manhunter”. After the release of this movie a third actor, Mads Mikkelsen would take the role and make it his own in a way that arguably even outdid Sir Anthony. With that in mind, perhaps my view of Gaspard Ulliel is a little unfair. However, I was not impressed. It’s not that his acting was bad or anything. It’s just we’re dealing with a complex and chilling character at a time in his life where he is perhaps the most conflicted he is ever likely to be and he felt… generic.

As for the origin itself, it does make a certain amount of sense. Starting out with a trauma that desensitized him and showed him how brutal life can be. Then giving him a reason to pursue and murder those that had wronged him. After that, I guess he just kept going. But this is where the problem lies. Even though Lecter does murder one character simply for being rude there’s not really any suggestion that he will keep going indefinitely with those kinds of murders. The vast majority of his actions were motivated by his revenge. So these elements don’t totally add up. What we do see though is his casual brutality and lack of empathy for his victims. This is balanced by the fact he does not harm the children on one of his victims. So at least here we see something of the man he would become.

A Trail of Destruction

There is another problem too. All these killings are high profile. It’s hard to imagine that no one ever casually looked into Lecters past. Had they done so, he would have quickly become a suspect in Chesapeake Ripper case. In the movie, he fakes his own death too. But then doesn’t change his name after. In the novel at least he is actually arrested, but between the public support (For killing war criminals) and the lack of evidence, he is released. There was an obvious solution here in Inspector Popil. Had the story allowed for Popil to be somewhat sympathetic and realizing that the only way for these men to face justice was for Hannibal to kill them there could have been an air tight backstory for the character. Instead though Popil is totally dedicated to the law, despite his own tragedy. So much so it’s hard to imagine him buying the faked death and not flagging the name globally.

Popil’s actual role appears to be like an early version of Hannibal’s relationships with Will Graham and Clarice Starling. Someone he finds very similar to himself, but just not quite able to see the world the way he does. Sadly though the film doesn’t spend any time looking into this relationship. It’s just sort of there. Another relationship somewhat wasted is Hannibal’s odd romance with his Aunt, Lady Murasaki. We aren’t given a great deal of time to know the character except that she is the one person Hannibal feels close to. Perhaps the idea was for Popil to be a prot-Will Graham and Lady Murasaki to be a proto-Clarice Starling, but in practice neither of them really are that interesting.

Conclusion

As a stand alone movie, this is a reasonable revenge story. As an origin story for Hannibal Lecter though it is a disappointment. It’s not however a complete disaster. Things do, by and large, add up. Even the plot holes can be explained by the fact that in the novels at least, no one suspected Lecter until Will Graham. There was no investigation because Lecter, sensing he’d been rumbled, immediately attacked. While an origin story for Hannibal Lecter was always likely to disappointed, I do feel this one could have been better. Specifically with more to his relationship with sympathetic characters and perhaps a different actor in the lead. I’m giving this a solid 5.5/10. Despite some promise the movie largely just coasts along on it’s predecessors coat tails.

Rating: 5.5 out of 10.