"Hunters" is an extreme horror flick that begins with the disclaimer "The following film contains many scenes of extreme brutality and shocking acts of human depravity." This same sentence is on the DVD cover. I'll say this -- this is an accurate description of "Hunters." It is indeed filled with extreme brutality and shocking acts of human depravity. Unfortunately, that's about all the film is.
The film starts back in 1961. A guy driving along picks up a female hitchhiker. Since this is a horror film, we know that this is bad news for one of them, and in this case it's the guy, as the guy is stabbed and killed by the hitchhiker. For some unknown reason, he drove her back to his house, where his wife and baby are there. The hitchhiker headbutts his wife (a "blink and you'll miss her" cameo by scream- queen Mel Heflin) and steals the baby.
We then jump to 1987, where two brothers wearing masks are torturing a couple (we know they're brothers because they keep calling each other "brother"). After that, they attack a random family, kill the father, and kidnap the daughter and mother (played by Scream Queen classic Linnea Quigley, looking pretty good for being in her mid- fifties). Oh, also, at this time the guy from the first couple (who they apparently didn't kill) is now filming everything. And he is stark naked, with lots of full-frontal shots of this guy.
We then meet up with five twenty-something kids who are leaving to make some sort of movie. We think that now, we're going to follow these annoying kids, but no -- we see these kids randomly throughout the film for a minute or two, but the rest of the time is just the two brothers brutalizing, raping, and torturing people while filming it. The film then tries a "twist" that doesn't really make any sense, and it is really just an excuse to be even more nasty and brutal.
I've seen lots of extreme horror films, and there is a line between "disturbing" and "unpleasant." Unfortunately, in my opinion "Hunters" crosses that line. We don't really care about the victims, and the sadism is so extreme that it just becomes unpleasant to watch. And the filmmakers seem to be obsessed with dicks -- in addition to the aforementioned naked cameraman (who we see a lot of), we have two castrations (one is on a dead guy and for some reason, after he died his member swelled to a gigantic size) and a dildo that is approximately the size of a leg.
I can admire the fact that the filmmakers wanted to "go extreme" and they surely succeeded. But unfortunately, "Hunters" really ended up just a catalog of horrific scenes. I'm not saying to avoid it at all costs -- not at all, if you are into extreme horror then feel free to check it out for yourself. But if you're not sure, then I can't recommend it.
The film starts back in 1961. A guy driving along picks up a female hitchhiker. Since this is a horror film, we know that this is bad news for one of them, and in this case it's the guy, as the guy is stabbed and killed by the hitchhiker. For some unknown reason, he drove her back to his house, where his wife and baby are there. The hitchhiker headbutts his wife (a "blink and you'll miss her" cameo by scream- queen Mel Heflin) and steals the baby.
We then jump to 1987, where two brothers wearing masks are torturing a couple (we know they're brothers because they keep calling each other "brother"). After that, they attack a random family, kill the father, and kidnap the daughter and mother (played by Scream Queen classic Linnea Quigley, looking pretty good for being in her mid- fifties). Oh, also, at this time the guy from the first couple (who they apparently didn't kill) is now filming everything. And he is stark naked, with lots of full-frontal shots of this guy.
We then meet up with five twenty-something kids who are leaving to make some sort of movie. We think that now, we're going to follow these annoying kids, but no -- we see these kids randomly throughout the film for a minute or two, but the rest of the time is just the two brothers brutalizing, raping, and torturing people while filming it. The film then tries a "twist" that doesn't really make any sense, and it is really just an excuse to be even more nasty and brutal.
I've seen lots of extreme horror films, and there is a line between "disturbing" and "unpleasant." Unfortunately, in my opinion "Hunters" crosses that line. We don't really care about the victims, and the sadism is so extreme that it just becomes unpleasant to watch. And the filmmakers seem to be obsessed with dicks -- in addition to the aforementioned naked cameraman (who we see a lot of), we have two castrations (one is on a dead guy and for some reason, after he died his member swelled to a gigantic size) and a dildo that is approximately the size of a leg.
I can admire the fact that the filmmakers wanted to "go extreme" and they surely succeeded. But unfortunately, "Hunters" really ended up just a catalog of horrific scenes. I'm not saying to avoid it at all costs -- not at all, if you are into extreme horror then feel free to check it out for yourself. But if you're not sure, then I can't recommend it.