Lumberjack Man

Lumberjack Man is relatively a simple slasher horror comedy with a premise in which had been done several times before. However this film, the villain is a creature who feasts on pancakes but is allergic to maple syrup. It is quite bizarre in that sense.

The characters of the camp students are the typical characters we would see in these type of films. No character really stands. Michael Madsen is possibly one of the highlights. The lead actress isn't bad but isn't exactly memorable.

There are gory kills but a lot which has been done before. One highlight includes the camp lead counsellor's death. Many typical head shot sword kills or head smashes.

The tone of this film is quite silly, more so than expected (there is an extended "food fight" scene. Also a music video type scene involving three characters dressing up fooling around).

Nothing is exactly scary. The lumberjack man's attire isn't menacing, and he doesn't speak or make sounds. When he appears, there isn't suspense. Most the film takes place in the bright day so it takes away any real scares.

Overall, the film is a decent watch but not memorable enough or really worthwhile. Had slightly higher expectations.

"Lumberjack Man" is a weird, boring stab at a horror comedy that is unsuccessful.

Of course it's not funny in the least, but how many comedies are?

The fact is that the comedic moments, if that's what they are, are handled so badly that they merely become confusing.

It's not enough to throw in a joke here and there. There's also the matter of tone which allows a person to actually identify the joke and (maybe) laugh at it. "Lumberjack Man" has no tone. Nor does it really have a sense of place - the "summer camp" setting is a mainstay for both horror movies (Friday the 13th and its infinite number of rip-offs) and comedies (Meatballs, Happy Campers). But the filmmakers fail at establishing it as a believable place. It feels like most of the action takes place a few miles from the camp anyway. This vague sense of place doesn't help.

The movie is, of course, also not scary in the least; it doesn't even really try to be, which is not a problem because no one sees a slasher movie expecting scares. What is a problem is the villain. I don't know what they were going for, but it's one of the least memorable villains I've ever seen in a slasher. It's the typical massive stunt man (and being big does not equal scary) with a face like a block of wood.

The explanation for the killer's presence and how to do away with it is, I guess, where the humour comes in. Michael Madsen gives a monologue, complete with an animated sequence, to provide an explanation so moronically bizarre and out of step with everything else in the movie that I couldn't bare to pay attention. It has something to do with pancakes and syrup?

This is where the problem with the tone comes in: it's nowhere near ridiculous enough to absorb a sequence like this into the rest of the movie. It doesn't make you laugh at the ridiculousness: it makes you shake your head at the weirdness, and then, of course, you wonder what the filmmakers were thinking, or even if they were. You start trying to formulate explanations for how the movie went so wrong.

The ending, where this stupid origin story comes into play, is as badly done as you'd expect. I didn't know what was supposed to have happened, but I did know, with one hundred percent certainty, that it had no hope at all of ever being presented adequately by the people who made this movie.

The movie does have quite a bit of nudity (all breast shots). It does the typical thing of having multiple pretty, likable actresses, none of whom provide the above shots. And, weirdly, when the ladies do disrobe, the movie turns into a sexy music video with different music, lighting, dancing. Of course, this only distracts you.

As for the "kills", one is fairly memorable: the camp manager is cut in half at the waist, and watches his lower body run away from him.

Very like what was said with 'Knucklebones', have an appreciation for black comedy and horror (and just as much when mixed together) and the concept was kind of interesting. So although expectations were far from high, considering the general standard of low budget films seen recently, part of me was hoping that 'Lumberjack Man' would be at least tolerable.

There are definitely worse films than 'Lumberjack Man', of the horror genre and overall, and it is not even close to being one of the worst, let alone the worst, low budget films seen recently. That on the other hand doesn't make it good, it does far too little with the potential it had in the concept and it doesn't even have enough to make it tolerable. There is little engaging and it is cheesy as sin.

'Lumberjack Man's' least bad component was the music. There was something somewhat ominous about it and it does occasionally give a suspenseful touch.

Sadly, that is pretty much the only praise to give. The pace very badly lumbers, which really makes the film dull, and it is not always easy to figure out what is going on because the story is just so thin and tonally weird.

Regarding the villain, there is nothing surprising or sinister. Actually comes over more as silly and cheesy in behaviour and the goofy look. The lack of any atmosphere, let alone tension and suspense, is a hindrance as is the too long by half an hour length.

As is the incredibly bad writing. Very stilted and induces too often some unintentional laughs. There were attempts at dark humour, but it was not dark or sharp enough and was instead silly and clumsy. Madsen's explanation is just ridiculous.

Even worse is the acting, with beyond description terrible performances from the whole younger cast and it even makes Michael Madsen, clearly phoning in and either doing the film for money or as a favour, look bad. The characters are incredibly annoying and far from interesting, there is no development and the way they behave too often is stupid and illogical.

The production values all round look cheap, especially the haphazard editing. The story has nothing engaging, suspenseful or scary, it's just far-fetched to an intelligence insulting degree, incredibly dull due to trying to stretch things out to pad the too long length and just too bland. Anything done to try and spice up the supposedly scary moments came over as overdone and gratuitous.

Overall, very poor in almost every single area. 2/10 Bethany Cox

Maybe you have to be in the right mood with the right taste in comedy to enjoy this movie, which is why I think many other reviews are negative. But dang it if I wasn't in the right mood with the right taste in comedy. That doesn't make it a great movie, but it was just the right amount of blood, boobs, and genuine chuckles that I wanted.

My advice for enjoying it would be not to expect a good horror movie. It's a decent comedy that alternates between self-aware mockery and nonsensical goofiness (though it's not always 100% clear if it's on purpose).

I'd love to hear a director's commentary on this. I'm sure it would be a lot of: "We don't know why we did it this way, but it was funny." or "This didn't quite work, but we left it in." "They didn't have lines, so we let them say whatever."

Some decent kills completely ruined by horrible acting, dialog and lame attempts at humor. Avoid this one unless its just to goof on.