Quantcast
Connect with us

Reviews

[BD Review] So-So ‘To Jennifer’ Is An Interesting Experiment

Published

on

By Lonmonster

James Cullen Bressack is tearing up the indie horror world. At the tender age of 21, he has already directed three feature-length films, with a handful of other projects either completed or in production. His latest film, To Jennifer, is shot entirely on the iPhone 5. Yeah, that’s right, entirely on a smartphone. As a horror film, it is not all that effective and it suffers from pacing issues, but as an experiment in modern independent filmmaking, To Jennifer is undeniably alluring.

The film is slow to kick off, easing the viewer into a relationship with the neurotic and testy Joey (Chuck Pappas), a man on a mission to catch his long-distance girlfriend, Jennifer, in in the act of infidelity. Along with his friends, Steve (James Cullen Bressack) and Marty (Jody Barton), Joey embarks on a bizarre road trip to Jennifer’s house. Bressak does a commendable job of introducing a variety of obstacles for the guys without offering any real antagonist for the vast majority of the film. The guys encounter a barrage of semi-realistic situations including an anxiety attack on a plane, a sketchy motel room, and a late-night fistfight. The situations build the tension and even bring about some laughs, but they do little to in terms of progressing the story. The motel scene in particular sticks out as mostly unnecessary given how much screen time it takes up. They show up and find a room covered in blood, but decide to stay the night anyway. Why? I’m not sure. There’s a certain suspension of disbelief that comes with horror, but there is a bit too much to bite off here.

I’m a big fan of loosely scripted films, going off the Curb Your Enthusiasm/Blair Witch Project model, especially in found footage. I have no doubt that To Jennifer was loosely scripted. It gives the action and character interaction a sense of realism that you just don’t get with actors memorizing lines. It’s clear that the three leads have off-screen rapport, and the way they play off each other makes for plenty of gags. By the time they reach Jennifer’s house, the lead character’s emotional flip-flops come to the forefront. Joey’s temper makes sense, but it’s also irritating when he starts to yell uncontrollably. James Cullen Bressack gives the best performance of the group as Steve, the camera operator. He’s funny and often keeps the scenes running long after they could have died.

Many found footage filmmakers feel the need to attack the audience from the beginning with jarring camera movements and jump scares. Bressack, on the other hand, takes his sweet time. While the slow burning is a strength of the film, it is ultimately the downfall. The first half drags on far too long in order to get the film to its 74-minute runtime. Without some of the lengthy dialogue scenes that don’t do much in the sake of story, the film would be all the more impactful, especially given the fact that the climax itself is rather tame. There’s no doubt in my mind that To Jennifer would kill as a 30-minute short, but as a feature it suffers from its length.

The action heats up during the final 10 minutes of the film, including the credits. We finally get the twist ending, and the horror kicks in. While the reveal is a bit predictable given some of the earlier scenes, we finally see Jennifer. The climax takes place in Jennifer’s dark house and the lack of lighting provides a sufficiently creepy vibe. Rather than utilizing that green night vision we’ve seen so many times in found footage, Bressack leaves us complete darkness. SPOILERS As the film comes to an end, Joey chases Jennifer through the house, while singing a hauntingly catchy song that I still can’t get out of my head. I hope they release the track as a download on iTunes. END SPOILERS

The most impressive aspect of To Jennifer is that it was seemingly shot without any budget at all, giving it an authentic video diary feel. The lighting, as far as I can tell, is entirely natural, or from the iPhone itself. There’s no score, no special effects, and very little added in post-production except a few title slides. This is a bare bones film and it is impressive that it manages to captivate throughout most of the ride. More than anything, To Jennifer is a message to wannabe filmmakers. It’s a slap in the face that says, “I made a feature film with some friends on my f*cking phone. Get off your ass and make a movie”. While it may not be a great horror flick, To Jennifer is proof that you can make an enjoyable feature film without fancy equipment. And for that alone, it is worth watching.

Giving this movie a rating seems unfair. If you’re genuinely interested in filmmaking and want to see how to make a movie on little to no budget, this is an absolute must. But, if you’re seeking a balls-to-the-walls horror flick, seek elsewhere.

Click to comment

Reviews

‘Hungry’ Review – Finally, a Film Brave Enough to Call Out Hippos for the Monsters They Truly Are

Published

on

Hungry Review

When it comes to the animal attack subgenre of horror, there’s a hierarchy of sorts with the wildlife in question. Killer shark movies are easily the most ubiquitous, while alligators/crocodiles, dogs, bears, and snakes probably lead the rest of the pack.

It’s often worth paying attention, though, when a filmmaker targets a more atypical animal threat, including the likes of Jonathan King’s Black Sheep or Juan Piquer Simón’s Slugs. A new contender rumbles its way onto the screen this month, and while we all grew up thinking hippos are rotund cuties, the truth is far more frightening – this hippo is Hungry.

Sistine (Madison Davenport) and her best friend, Hannah (Olivia Bernstone), are enjoying a vacation in New Orleans, hoping to drown out their troubles back home. They sign up for an early morning bayou tour known for its alligator sightings and are joined by four other tourists and the boat’s skipper, Rodrigo (Michel Curiel). An uneventful trip sees Rodrigo take the group off the beaten path, but when an animal in the water capsizes their boat, the group finds themselves trapped in the swamp by something unexpected and deadly.

It’s a hippo. There’s a hippo in the bayou, and it’s not happy about all these pesky people.

From Joy Houck’s Creature from Black Lake to Walter Hill’s Southern Comfort to Adam Green’s Hatchet, the movies have warned us time and again not to go into the swampy bayous of Louisiana. Those cautionary tales are appreciated, though, as bigfoot, inbred hicks, and undead serial killers are a very real threat. But hippos? In the bayou? Well, that just seems silly.

And yet, Hungry plays its blubbery, big-toothed threat with deadly seriousness, and it’s all the better for it. “But Rob,” I can already hear some of you saying, “just yesterday you reviewed the new shark attack film, Chum, and said it suffered from taking itself too seriously. What gives?” For one thing, you’re misquoting me, but more importantly, the reference there was more of an observation on the animal attack subgenre successes as a whole. The “fun” ones tend to succeed more often than their more serious counterparts, but a dramatic and thrilling time can still be found with filmmakers who know what they’re doing.

Chum may be serious, but it’s also poorly written/performed, lacking in any degree of tension, devoid of personality, and so on. By contrast, Hungry lets its suspense build on the backs of engaging characters, good performances, and believable writing. Only one of its ensemble is obnoxious – a major feat for this kind of film – but even then, their motivations are both well-written and understandable.

The rest of the characters are people you’d be happy to see survive the night, and rather than looking forward to the next kill, director James Nunn and his cast leave us uncertain and nervous about who’s going to go belly up. The nervous business traveler wanting to get back to her kids? The family of three celebrating lost loved ones while on their vacation? Joaquim de Almeida’s Walker, an old hunter, is introduced saying, “The only cute hippo is a dead hippo,” so you pretty much know where he’ll end up.

To that end, the film teases out its hippo’s first appearance until well into the ninety-minute running time. We get ripples and splashes, but it’s only around the midway point that we get our first real look at the beast, and it looks fantastic. Nunn goes on to show the hippo in all its glory, and it’s a convincing antagonist brought to life through practical prosthetic effects and digital work. From the ear twitches to the beast’s giant maw opening wide with awe and malice, the hippo’s presence feels part of the action. There’s a tangible nature to it, something practical effects excel at while digital effects sometimes fail to convince of, and both succeed here with quality work from all involved.

While we get brief exteriors early on and some visually appealing drone shots, the bulk of the film unfolds on what looks to be a highly believable, set-dressed water tank (but could very well be an actual location, in which case, kudos to the team). It’s wholly convincing as a section of the bayou, complete with shoulder-high water and arching, twisting trees emerging into the sky. The film was shot in Malta, which is, coincidentally, where Chum was filmed as well.

Nunn, who also wrote Hungry, is now ten films deep into a fairly interesting career as a genre filmmaker. He’s made four movies with Scott Adkins, three of which are certified action bangers (with 2016’s Eliminators in particular being an underrated gem). He dipped a toe into the animal attack subgenre back in 2022 with the aforementioned Shark Bait, and it’s clear he learned some lessons from that endeavor, as its first hour is an engaging, attractively shot feature that sinks fast as soon as its poorly rendered shark becomes a lead character. Hungry improves on every aspect of that film, with its biggest step up being in regard to the effects.

If there’s an area or two where Hungry lacks bite, it’s in both its gore and its ending. There are numerous kills here, but the nature of the attacks and the choices made by Nunn mean none of them result in gory assaults or outcomes. We’re shown the torn apart corpse of an alligator early on, but most of the human kills see them attacked and dragged underwater, leaving nothing but a blood spill behind. Similarly, while the ending encounter satisfies, it still feels like it should have been a bigger confrontation. Neither of these aspects really hurt the film, but a bolstering of the gore and ending antics would have definitely upped the film’s ultimate entertainment value and rewatchability.

When all is said and done, Hungry is a genuinely solid animal attack film that succeeds in making its creature threat thrilling, entertaining, and, dare I say, educational? Title notwithstanding, the film acknowledges that hippos are vegetarians, meaning the five hundred or so people they kill every year – a true fact! – are slaughtered not out of hunger, but out of spite, self-defense, or a desire to play “land orca” while tossing around us fragile humans like we’re little more than seals in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Characters are grounded and engaging, the film moves well between suspense, character beats, and action, and the effects used to bring the hippo to life are highly effective and never feel like distractions. Drop those expectations of a Hungry Hungry Hippo romp, and settle in for a terrific little survival thriller about an angry, angry hippo instead.

Chomp chomp.

Hungry releases in select theaters today, June 3, before arriving on VOD on June 23, 2026.

3 skulls out of 5

Continue Reading