Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters Movie Review

I suppose that Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters came about in wake of other dark fairy tale revisions such as Red Riding Hood, Snow White and the Huntsman, and Jack the Giant Slayer. Unlike the others Hansel & Gretel was not meant to be taken very seriously, and indeed it is hard to do so. But even for a fantasy/action/comedy/horror movie that aims for campy fun, it's still not very impressive.

The siblings Hansel and Gretel are left alone in the woods by their father and captured by a dark witch in a candy house. However, they kill the witch and escape. Years later the orphans Hansel (Jeremy Renner) and Gretel (Gemma Arterton) have become famous witch hunters. When eleven children go missing in a small village, the Mayor summons Hansel and Gretel to rescue them. Upon arrival, the siblings save the red haired Mina (Pihla Viitala) from the local sheriff (Peter Stormare) who is accusing Mina of Witchcraft. Soon they discover that the Blood Moon will approach in three days and the powerful dark witch Muriel (Famke Janssen) is responsible for the abduction of the children. She intends to use the children together with a secret ingredient in a Sabbath to make the coven of witches protected against fire. As Hansel and Gretel race against time and fight off powerful witches, they begin to learn some mysterious secrets about their parents.

I have to give this movie a little bit of credit. They took what is ordinarily a short and simple fairy tale and did practically nothing to change it. The whole classic fairy tale is done during the prologue of the movie before the opening credits start rolling. This movie is about what happened afterwards and hints at creative underlying motives of the characters. The fairy tale is not corrupted or reinterpreted; just expanded. I liked that, and it gave Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters some potential to be an interesting and fun movie.

Of course, they didn't actually make it interesting or very fun. The movie starts out with some exciting action scenes chasing and killing witches with ridiculous weapons that would seem at home in a Final Fantasy video game, but then it slows down a whole lot. Hansel develops a romantic interest with Mina and Gretel meets up with a troll. Most of these scenes don't seem to do much for the story overall. I realize a movie like this isn't going to be profound by any means, but during these scenes it's almost like it's flailing around to achieve some deep character development. That's respectable, but seems so perfunctory and not well thought out.

The movie is very predictable. With each character that is introduced, you can pretty accurately predict how each one was going to play out. I was never wrong. I did, however, appreciate that there wasn't an insipid teenage love triangle forced into the story. We have too much of that rubbish already. One inconsequential detail about Hansel's character that I liked a whole lot was the fact that because he was force fed candy as a kid in the candy cottage, he now has diabetes and has to take regular insulin shots. That makes sense, and is not something I had ever considered. It really has no meaningful role in the movie, but it was kind of a neat detail.

The special effects were kind of hit or miss. The CGI lacked refinement and looked very much like it was computer-generated imagery; the blood and gore looked almost silly, but was better than that of Sharknado. The practical effects were decent, though. The aforementioned troll was all animatronics and looked pretty good. Exploding heads and other such nastiness looked good for what it was. It's not exactly my cup of tea, but that's appealing to some viewers.

Hansel & Gretel: Witch Hunters is an interesting genre mash up. The fantasy isn't half bad, the action is ridiculous and hard to take seriously, the comedy usually falls flat, and the horror is more like "somewhat gross" than it is actually scary. There's several F-bombs and other profanity which I didn't really feel was necessary; the profanity and gore gives it an R rating. The story slows in the middle, but the beginning and end is pretty exciting. In the end it's not a very good movie and isn't as much fun as it tries to be. It's little bit better than Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter; it doesn't quite achieve what it's trying to be. It's okay if you just want to watch some senseless violence that doesn't require much thought, and even then it's barely worth the price to rent. Otherwise, don't bother.

I know I've asked before, but what other dark fairy tale revisions would you like to see?

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter Movie Review

Just the idea of Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter (2012) sounds ludicrous and fun. The book was published in 2010 by Seth Grahame-Smith. I read it, and thought it was a remarkably fun and interesting read. It featured real historical events in Lincoln’s life, but shows us how vampires were behind them in very creative ways. Mr. Grahame-Smith went on to write a screen play version of his own novel. After seeing the movie, I have to wonder if he bothered to consult his own book while working on the film adaptation.

At the age of 9, young Abraham Lincoln witnesses his mother being killed by a vampire, Jack Barts (Marton Csokas). About 10 years later, Abe (Benjamin Walker) unsuccessfully tries to eliminate Barts but in the process makes the acquaintance of Henry Sturgess (Dominic Cooper) who teaches him how to fight and what is required to kill a vampire. The quid pro quo is that Abe will kill only those vampires that Henry directs him to kill. Abe relocates to Springfield where he gets a job as a store clerk and studies law by day and kills vampires by night. He also meets and eventually marries the pretty Mary Todd (Mary Elizabeth Winstead). Many years later as President of the United States, he comes to realize that vampires are fighting alongside the Confederate forces, being led by a powerful vampire named Adam (Rufus Sewell). In retaliation, he mounts his own campaign to defeat them.

Abraham Lincoln is easily one of the best Presidents we’ve had in the United States. He’s a republican President that even democrats revere. He led the US through one of its greatest constitutional, military, and moral crises – The American Civil War – preserving the Union while ending slavery and promoting economic and financial modernization. How can one possibly make this admired historical figure better? Make him a vampire hunter, of course. So, we’ve got this secret history that wasn’t recorded in the history books about how Abraham Lincoln also killed vampires on top of everything else he did. I think that everyone alive today is probably so removed from those events that we wouldn’t be terribly offended by Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter. We might feel differently about a movie called “W. Bush vs. Dora the Explorer” or “Barak Obama: Living Up to the Hype” Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter is just about as absurd a genre mash up as you can make. Many presidents have had secret lives, but none more hard core than Abraham Lincoln killing vampires.

What made the book such a fun read was that there were lots of real historical events in Lincoln’s life that were influenced by vampires; they caused his mother’s death, they influenced Lincoln to grow his signature beard, they advocated slavery as a means of sustenance, which drove Lincoln to run for president so slavery could end, and by extension hinder the spread of vampirism, etc. For most of the movie, Abraham is just some young man in the early 1800’s trying to make his way in the world and is bitter about vampires killing his mother. Then,  suddenly, this character is President and the South is secretly run by powerful vampires. This made the movie kind of flimsy in terms of story and character and made me wonder if Grahame-Smith actually consulted his New York Times Bestseller when writing the screenplay adaptation.

The action was pretty great and showed us some grisly imagery. Lincoln’s weapon of choice is a wood splitting ax with a silver head. Not only does this ring true with Lincoln’s brawny frontiersman image as a rail splitter, but it also allows some gruesome violence that any horror movie fan would enjoy. It’s not my cup of tea, but some folks really like that.

Some action scenes were kind of dark and made it difficult to tell what is happening. The movie uses spontaneous slow motion excessively, though. That can be a neat special effect, but when used as much as it is here it loses some of its “special” effect. The climax of the movie features Abraham, Henry, and some other allies trying to defend a train carrying sliver weapons (the only thing that can harm vampires) to Gettysburg to arm the Northern forces against the vampire troops of the South. The train hurtles toward a high wooden bridge that has been set ablaze by a vampire spy from the South. It’s exciting, reasonably well choreographed, and seeing Lincoln take out vampires with his axe-twirling is pretty fun.

Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter was not as good as I had hoped it would be. It’s pretty somber for such a ridiculous premise biography-action-horror genre mash up. Some levity that drew attention to the absurdity of the story might have made it a bit better. The story and characters are pretty weak. There’s some illogical vagueness in the timeline that is distracting if you haven’t already tuned out by that point in the movie. All in all, Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter will find a place among people who enjoy absurd horror movies. It is kind of fun to watch, but very difficult to take as seriously as the movie takes itself. I can’t honestly recommend this one unless you’re in the mood for a movie that doesn’t require much attention or thought on your part. Only then is it worth the rental price.

What kind of historical figure/monster mash up would you love to see? I think seeing Theodore Roosevelt take on some werewolves would be great. Comment below and tell me what you think!