JasonSuave

This film was made for critics and not viewers. In 2011, "Cabin in the Woods" was released. It was a slasher/horror where the characters resurrect an "ancient spirit" by inadvertently taking a trinket from its sacred place. However, that film's premise was a complete satire designed to setup a much broader sci-fi epic, ultimately pointing to the bore-fest that most slashers have become since the 70's and 80's. Flash forward to today and we have "In a Violent Nature" where a group of college-ish people resurrect the kid of an old firefighter - who has apparently resurrected as an adult being - by taking a small trinket from a completely inviting place in the middle of the woods in Canada. Thus, when I read the synopsis for this film, I set the bar to zero. The directors cite, however, that this film is unique in that it follows from the villain's perspective. There's the differentiator, so I gave it a watch. Unfortunately, as many others have said, 70% of this film is long shots or drawn-out scenes of the villain walking from behind. And the ending is so try-hard that it falls on its face and ultimately ruins the film as a whole. Also, as mentioned earlier, the story is paper thin and overdone. With 2x the meat and more flushed out characters/story, this film could've been something, hence 2.5 stars. *Very minor spoilers below* If you get frustrated in movies when characters carelessly don't double tap, leading to scenarios where the villain miraculously comes back to life at the proper time to initiate a counter-kill -- note that this happens not once, but twice in this movie, leading to half of its kills. Thus, while the kills are generally innovative, many are just cheap shots that didn't even require effort on the villain's part. Thus, we have a film that does nothing interesting in actually following the villain!