In A Violent Nature (Basically if Béla Tarr Made a Slasher)
Alright I waited awhile on this, though I had every intention of reviewing it. The reception of this film, leaning more to the side of “hated it,” is curious to me, but Chris Nash’s big failure wasn’t in the delivery, the plot, or the characters. His mistake was assuming horror fans have watched anything else lol. Of course I exaggerate, but the point is that making an auteur slasher film isn’t just bold, it’s dangerous, because unless someone is extremely versed in film technique they’re just not going to get anything deemed even moderately “artistic” about a genre known for synth tracks, over-the-top kills, and gratuitous nudity leading to death in the middle of intercourse. But, hey, it’s possible, sure, and In A Violent Nature proves it. Before you ask if I’ve seen the final 15 minutes, yeah, I did that part too, and I didn’t walk out, or rather I didn’t get off my couch. Why? “The trailer has more music than the film, man,” you’re probably already saying. Let me start my “well aktuawlly” rant with the usual “like, you don’t get it.” I’ve seen a ton of slashers since I was younger, including super obscure ones I need not even mention. Suffice to say, like any slasher fan, I know the tropes. With elements of Michael Myers and Jason Vorhees, Johnny functions as a symbolic force, with tension built through his incessant, lumbering steps to his inevitable victims. But is that all In A Violent Nature is about?
In A Violent Nature takes all the usual and does something unique. I’ve heard this referred to it as POV, but this is technically third person, behind the killer, for a large portion of the film. And it doesn’t create scare through music, but rather uses incidental sound and slice-of-life development with extended shots that can unsettle a modern viewer used to the typical language of film cuts. But it would be a disservice to reduce it to merely technique, because then it would largely be a failed auteur attempt at a traditionally low-brow genre. In A Violent Nature is more clever than that. Without blowing the plot, the killer, Johnny, is supernatural undead, and his story is provided in detail as you see him walking like a beast in the forest, face value. There’s no mystery to what he is, but rather why he is. The deaths will certainly satisfy gore-hungry fans (especially that yoga moment), but the build-up is also deliberate and plodding, much like a predator stuck in “surplus kill” mode. Other than some brief moments of wooden acting, the ending has received the most hate out of anything in In A Violent Nature, with the digression into a conversation between an older woman and the final girl about a bear killing without reason. This point of narrative breaking is intentional, of course, with a clear, symbolic connection to Johnny and the natural surroundings, allowing the tension to beautifully return as Kris (Andrea Pavlovic), in a state of shock and panicking for her savior to continue on the road, stares into the weeds while the viewer anticipates Johnny’s appearance and further violence to initiate an expected sudden-death ending. Does he appear? I won’t ruin it, but in my opinion, the hate directed towards these moments misses what In A Violent Nature is saying. Its big risk was taking an atypical approach to the slasher, for certain, and perhaps the experienced horror fan, unaware of the language being used to craft the plot, simply wasn’t experienced enough and read anything moderately different as instantly “artsy,” which it’s not. If you’re familiar with the work of Béla Tarr, add that to a slasher, and that’s about as simple of an explanation as you’re going to get. There’s more to this one than you probably heard, and when you feel what it’s saying, it’s a great experience.
Gasfire Films (Chris Nash) Official X
Written by Stanley, Devourer of Souls
In A Violent Nature (2023, 2024)
Director: Chris Nash
Distributor: IFC Films, Shudder
4.3 / 5
