Manhunt (2008) User Reviews

Loads of stunning makeup and effects, thus thereby utterly disgusting

[knutsindre · 4/10 · 20 April 2008]

The movie received great reviews here in Norway, and I was looking forwards to seeing it. Being a Norwegian production, I guess the critics put on their patriot pants, because this is not that great a movie.

The story we've seen before. Some young people gets captured, are hunted, with blood and gore following in ample amounts. The only thing that differentiates this movie from its many siblings is the betrayal within the group, and the charters being somewhat interesting and real. They lack depth thought, and are quite frankly not that well played or presented.

The biggest exception to this is the villains, and their behavior. Without giving any spoilers, let me just say they are a bit to evil and cold. A tad more insight into them would make the movie allot more interesting.

What does deserve praise is the visual side of the movie, with the effects especially in mind. The movie is well shot, and really drags you into it by virtue of this. The effects look so real it's frightening. So frightening in fact, that it is one of the movies greatest flaws. It's just too much.

Now, I'm not a very gentle soul, and enjoy the odd horror movie without problems, but this movie is not that enjoyable. That said, I'm sure if I went hunting moose this autumn, I'd probably not sleep very well having seen it.

Ugly, scary and outright ultra-voilent? Yes.

Exciting, interesting and progressive? No.

The Møst Dångerøus Gåme.

[BA_Harrison · 5/10 · 2 June 2012]

The backwoods/survivalist horror genre is one of my favourites, but the films do have a tendency to follow the same formula, Manhunt being no exception. A typical example of 'doing things by the book', it starts in time-honoured fashion with four friends travelling through the wilderness in their VW camper-van (the film is set in 1974, a tribute to that classic of the genre, The Texas Chain Saw Massacre perhaps). After the predictable run in with hostile locals at a roadside diner, they do the expected thing by picking up a scared hitch-hiker, inadvisably stop in the middle of nowhere, and, in yet another retelling of The Most Dangerous Game, fall prey to a group of hunters who prefer killing humans to animals.

Despite all of the familiar trappings, this sort of thing can work very well just so long as there are regular thrills and inventive bloody kills, the protagonists are likable, and they don't behave like absolute idiots; Manhunt is suitably vicious in tone and features some reasonable splatter (although it's not as creatively bloody as I would have liked), but sadly its young victims aren't very appealing and act like morons. They constantly bicker with each other, stupidly insult the locals, and repeatedly make ill-advised decisions that only worsen their already dire situation. In short, I couldn't care less if they survived or ended up as trophies lashed to the bonnet of a Norwegian maniac's Landrover.

I've just noticed from the DVD box that the film was set in 1974

[christopher-underwood · 6/10 · 2 March 2012]

I was encouraged to seek this out after having seen it trailed on, I think, the Horror Channel and had the impression that it was probably US independent and most stylish. This was either a misleading trailer or a marvellous bit of editing my the TV people. This is Norwegian, not that the subtitles present much of a problem because after the set up there is not that much dialogue. The baddies don't say a word. The real trouble for me was that the youngsters are such an absolute pain that I can't wait for them to get got. It is not a terrible film and the pacing is good as are the action sequences but it just didn't take me along, I'm afraid. Shows how much attention I paid as I've just noticed from the DVD box that the film was set in 1974. I hadn't noticed it was a period piece, nor know why it was but maybe the director was saying something about youngsters in the 70s and that's why I didn't take to them. But hey, life's too short.

I like plots

[locholmez · 1/10 · 5 January 2008]

And this movie doesn't have one. Sorry.

There's the good guys and the bad guys. The bad guys are trying to kill the good guys, the good guys are trying to get out of the woods so they won't get killed.. by the bad guys. That's it.

I was sitting in the theater waiting for the amazing plot twist to reveal itself and change everything into a complex masterpiece. The story was so empty it just had to happen. "This can't be all there is to it", I thought to myself, "something amazing and unexpected will happen very soon." But it didn't. The bad guys were still doing their thing and the good guys tried to escape. Worthless.

Oh yeah, and the acting sucked.

Was pretty good

[julessimmond · 7/10 · 28 February 2009]

I think the rating for this is a tad unfair. Okay, its pretty unoriginal, and doesn't particularly contribute anything new to the genre, but there was plenty that it did right. The acting throughout was great, especially the first girl. I also liked the 70's Scandinavia feel, it really gave it a tone and an atmosphere that sucked you into its world. It had a lovely texture and aesthetic to how it looked, and I think the contrast of the dated, distressed visuals with the shocking effects and edge-of-your-seat sound design was really brilliant. Yes I must say that I usually prefer a tad more story to get invested in, but it was fast, tense, believable, and I genuinely enjoyed it! Hopefully the filmmakers have more to give than this next time around- they clearly have the technical skills for the genre, lets see what they have to give in the story department. A great debut film.

Damn it !

[andreas-hoddevik · 3/10 · 22 January 2008]

Again ! As I've said before, apparently nobody in Norway are able to make a good movie that works. Hence, this movie disappointed me as so many other Norwegian ones.

I saw this one yesterday. My girlfriend looked puzzled at me as i unaffectedly ate popcorn looking somewhat bored, while a host of girls covered their faces in horror. My calm popcorn eating behavior should not be puzzling; this movie is not scary.

I jumped a few times in my seat, but for the same reason that you would react if someone bang together two frying pans while standing behind you. If a horror movie has to scare the audience in this way, it's not good in my view. While such movies as 'Alien' are gut wrenching and thrilling to watch, 'Rovdyr' goes for the two frying pans approach. It's low budget, and the acting is poor. The dialog, especially in the beginning is straight out of amateur night. There are a few somewhat uncomfortable scenes in it that's not suited for the younger audience. But having seen my fair share of zombie movies, I wasn't to bothered.

And I have a few other problems with it, such as the lack of a little realism, which isn't uncalled for. In one scene a girl is being held by the hair while a hillbilly is using his sawed-off shotgun to fondle her. She has both arms free, and could have disarmed him in less than a second.

In another scene she is shown escaping a camp site. Although two axes, a huge knife and a shotgun are readily available and she has plenty of time to choose from the inventory, she chooses to head into the forest unarmed. Argh ! The logic ! And no, it's not the panic psychology excuse that she can't think straight; she was armed with a big knife in one scene before the camp site, but that knife magically disappears. That should have been one for the blooper reel, but instead it ended up in the final cut.

Finally, all of the hillbillies attacking the campers appear to be super stealthy or close to invisible, as they attack at point blank range from nowhere, even when the persons they attack have close to a 360 degree angle of view. And they move way too fast through the forest grounds, given their out of shape hillbilly physique.

Horror movies, especially the low budget ones, tend to have unsettling logical flaws, but this one is littered with them.

The verdict: Watching it was a waste, even though the popcorn was really good.

Worth a watch.

[sanjid_ccl · 7/10 · 24 November 2008]

Yeah..it was quite influenced by TCM or other survival genre movies but I think it has its moments. Like it almost started like TCM. The same TCM like van..the time period of 70's...the hitchhiker definitely reminded me the Tobe Hooper's masterpiece but when the survival game & blood shed started I began to like it. There were no chainsaw or Leatherface, the villains were attacking with knife & guns in the woods and there was no record or background shown about them. But the question is..."Does it really matters on the way to enjoy a movie?" A group of young people were getting terrorized & killed by some maniacs in the woods and the victims were trying to escape...the simple math, to see is whether any of them in the end able to survive or not.Though the plot was unoriginal but as it pretty successfully able to entertained me so I didn't mind at all. In this days of crap remakes I think we should at least try to appreciate this kinda effort of putting different shade in this popular sub genre of horror.

A lame Norwegian attempt at horror inspired by The TexasChainsaw Massacre.

[tstudstrup · 1/10 · 9 August 2020]

*MAJOR SPOILERS AHEAD*

The movie takes place in 1974. Same yearasTTCM. The couple and a brother and a sister even drives in a Wolkswagen just like in TTCM . Problem one: theyre all one dimensional and all pretty unlikeable. They take a girl with them from a diner. A frightened girl on the run from the badguys. Just like in the 2006 remake of TTCM. At one point one of the girls throw the keys away to the car to punish one of the guys. While they search for the keys, some men show up and kills two of the girls for no reason at all. Later for no reason at all the survivors find themselves tied up in the woods. They manage to break free, another guy is found tied to atree. They free him and split up for stupid reasons I cant remember. Theyre all eventually killed except the hot blonde girl who kills all the men that killed her friends for no reason at all. She is picked by a woman in a car who workedat the diner from early in the movie. When she hears from the girl that she killed all of her friends or family whatever they are she drives off with the girl locked inside the car. And the girl id doomed. The movie ends.

The three major problems are as follows: the badguys in the movie has no lines, there is no reason why they kill and butcher young people travelling through those woods. Theyre not obvious maniacs who takes pleasure in torturing their victims, unlike in TCM, where that part was what made it scary and made it work. The badguys alsdo never laughs or smiles and they are easily defeated and killed themselves, These men are suppossed to be skilled hunters of human prey. Yet theyre not that smart.

Second problem: the movie doesn't have the guts to be really sick. Al though there is lots of gore, most kills happen off camera. You also never see where they badguys live or if theyre related to eachother. There are no furnitures made of human bones and no Leatherface.

Third problem: the victims and especially the hunters remain pretty anonymous throughout the movie. So as a viewer I never cared what happened to any of them.

I recommend skipping this one and watch The oringal 1974 The Texas Chainsaw Massacre instead.

This movie Rovdyr which means Predator in english is so bad that its insulting to have to be compared to The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, which is true horror masterpiece. But the obvious influence makes it unfortunately necessary.

Very simple but VERY effective

[Coventry · 7/10 · 18 May 2012]

This has got to be one of the most rudimentary plotted and primitively accomplished horror movies of the (still relatively young) new Millennium, but personally I appreciated it a lot more than the vast majority of hi-tech computerized and wannabe trendy & intellectual flicks nowadays. And yes, I do realize I sound like an embittered old man! "Manhunt" is a prototypic so-called backwoods survival thriller and, moreover, a straightforwardly obvious ode to the pioneer and granddaddy of ALL backwoods survival thrillers "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". The resembling plot is the most apparent tribute, of course, but director/co-writer Patrik Syversen expresses his respect and admirations for Tobe Hooper's horror landmark through a handful of minor details in particular, like for example the characters' similar minivan and the year in which the events supposedly take place, 1974, the release year of TCM. Setting the film in the early 70's has another great advantage, by the way, namely the elimination of some horrible clichés like the adolescent characters talking about their Facebook account the entire time and – most importantly – the elimination of the phrase: "I can't get a signal on my mobile phone!". Back then, girls also weren't as stupid as to go on a camping trip wearing make-up and stiletto heels, which makes it a lot easier for them to run from their assailants later on in the film. Anyways, so the year is 1974 and this quartet of youngsters – I deliberately refrain from calling them friends – are heading out to the middle of Norwegian nowhere to go camping. They pick up an extremely nervous female hitch-hiker at a roadside diner and this quickly turns out to be a very bad idea. Shortly after, they find themselves relentlessly pursued by a trio of seemingly motiveless but ultimately savage huntsmen. The biggest trump of "Manhunt" is undeniably the tense and ominous atmosphere. The film isn't just set in the year 1974; it often actually feels like you're watching a 70's flick, what with its raw cinematography and nihilistic tone. Another big trump here is the characterization of the villains. I usually prefer to know a bit about the bad guys' background and/or motivations, but the fact that they remain mysterious, vague and silent throughout the entire film here actually contributes to the gritty overall tone and disturbance level. We only know that they hunt down and set booby traps for human beings instead of animals and that they're unbelievably cruel. For example, they use barb wire to tie up their victims instead of regular rope and stab women in the back of their necks without hesitating. Needless to say "Manhunt" can be considered quite shocking and sick. I assume that the majority of the available budget went to the make-up department to buy blood and fake intestines. Money well spent, as the killing sequences are truly a horror fanatic's delight! The filming locations, acting performances and rough editing are also very suitable to the type of film the makers wanted to deliver.

Oh well...

[vegarp · 1/10 · 27 January 2008]

The story is supposed to take place in the summer of 1974, and this is where the problems start. You get absolutely no feeling of being in the 70s, the looks of the characters, their language, clothes and attitude is nothing that resemble the youngsters of the mid 70s in Norway in any way. You get a immediate feeling of being in year 2008, but the director obviously want it to be otherwise.

With such a poor beginning you lose the interest for the rest of the plot, but you continue watching for things that might save this from turning into a total catastrophe. Unfortunately the crap continues.

It goes on into a wrap of blood, gore and chaos beyond any recognition. The bad guys are super-humans in the beginning, but once the blonde starts to repel they act like a bunch of blind idiots with no structure or strategy whatsoever.

On the bright side, the effects and make-up in the movie are absolutely stunning, great actually. Very convincing, and the violence isolated from the rest are good.

But in sum, this is another failure in the line of the new Norwegian gore and slasher movies, like Villmark and Fritt Vilt. This is the definitive worst production so far, but lets take into account that this is the directors debut.

Nice Norwegian splatter!

[ebenestad · 8/10 · 28 June 2008]

Patrick Syversen and Ninni Robsahm must be the most dangerous couple in Norway. Together they transformed the harmonic Norwegian woods into a dark nightmare. When this film kicks in you can either love or hate it, but that's how it should be with this kind of movies.

The title music by David Hess(taken from Last House on the Left) sets the mood and from there on you can just lean back and get scared out of your mind. This is not the sterile dreamy and slightly funny kind of horror that we usually see these days. Rovdyr has taken back the hardcore thrill ride story telling we saw in American and Italian horror movies during the 70's.

I hope Syversen and Robsahm will continue on the route they have started because they are most interesting as makers of Norwegian horror.

A good effort that lacks in execution.

[jhpstrydom · 6/10 · 2 May 2010]

Rovdyr or as I know it MANHUNT, is the third Norwegian film I've added to my collection, the first two being COLD PREY and COLD PREY: RESURRECTION, while I enjoyed the COLD PREY movies very much, this one appeared as if it had suffered a bit.

The makers of this film had the right idea of what they wanted to do, the film was nicely shot, the make up effects were splendid but from what this film suffers from is an inability to build a sufficient amount of tension to keep people on the edge of their seat and this is not because of the lack of plot, the central characters were somewhat undeveloped, sure some of them weren't very likable but believe it or not that wasn't the problem either, the main problem with the characters is that they're stupid, because even in serious situations a complete jackass of a person doesn't have to be a complete idiot he can be dis likable at first and end up being likable at a latter stage.

Another problem is once the film gets started you can already tell where this is going making the film obviously too predictable and that is the main problem for its lack of tension, you can tell whose going to die, you can tell exactly when and where the hunters will strike, it just makes this film an uneventful horror movie experience.

Overall, bearing in mind this the director's first film, this was a good effort nonetheless but unfortunately the major flaws render it as just another cliché driven mess, my idea of a good survival horror however is one that can be as intense as possible, sadly this one isn't.

Thanks for trying

[phj-2 · 4/10 · 15 January 2008]

Let me first of all say that this movie is poor, but that is not my focus. I think it is positive for the diversity in Norwegian film industry that we have room for B-movies, not just boring and excruciating social-realism. This is B-horror which if American, would be found on the lower half of the rental shelves. But that is not to say that it is worse than most of the crap released in the states. But it is however bad, both in terms of acting, but moreover in terms of bad plotting, bad dialogue and ineffective building of suspense. In addition it is a blatant ripoff of several classic hillbilly-horror movies; the initial plot of 4 four youngsters in a 70's Volkswagen picking up a terrified girl is pure copycat of "Texas chainsaw massacre".

That being said, the gore-hounds will press it to their chests, because it is undoubtedly the goriest flick ever to come out of Norway. It is not fun gore either, rather filthy "GORNO" of the most lingering and disagreeable kind. Not my cup of tee, but I'll give it an extra star for excellent gore special effects, the best I've seen from an Norwegian film undoubtedly. The director has reportedly complained about the film's R-rating; funny how directors set out to shock and appall, and then complain about the rating...

Ohno!

[Vooon · 1/10 · 7 June 2008]

I had quite high expectations after overall good reviews in the Norwegian media. And thinking of the excellent movie Villmark, and the rather good Fritt Vilt, I wondered if this was going to top them both.

First of all the acting is embarrassing. The first part of the movie is loaded with cliché dialog, overacting and awkward moments. Especially for the audience watching. The second part is generally an unmotivated slaughter with no plot at all - and very little dialog as far as I remember.

The only positive I can point my finger on is the effects and the sound. The latter is actually the only thing that might be scary, I jumped in my seat a couple of times because of the loud volume. The effects are mostly uncomfortable. On the other hand, the plot is so predictable that it's impossible not figuring out what will happen next. Which makes the movie utterly boring and uninteresting.

At last. One of my biggest problems with this movie is that you never get a clue of why things are happening. It's just unmotivated random violence, which starts out of nowhere.

I don't really recommend this to anyone, it's a waste of time. I don't understand why it received good critics at all. If you want to see a good Norwegian thriller I'd recommend Villmark.

Gore-fest is worth a one-off watch

[Leofwine_draca · 6/10 · 21 August 2016]

MANHUNT– nothing to do with the controversial video game of the same name – is yet ANOTHER entry in the 'survival horror' genre that's flourished since THE Texas CHAIN SAW MASSACRE came out in 1974. More recently, the genre has seen a rebirth with the likes of WILDERNESS, EDEN LAKE, SEVERANCE and many others, and the distinction this film has is that it's Norwegian. Nothing else is remarkable. This is a lean, pared-down, unpleasant little film detailing a bunch of campers who run afoul of some hunting nutters. And that's all there is to it.

The direction is all right, the performances pretty good. Visually, there's a muted colour palette that turns the woodland setting into a drab grey and brown mix, presumably to add to the earthy feel. The atmosphere is pretty good. I enjoy these films that link with the primeval in some way and the forest is always a perfect backdrop for true horror. I don't think any film has managed to surpass THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT yet, but this is another beast entirely. It's a bit like THEM without the set-up and with extra gore.

The gore itself is a big talking point and it is explicit. There are impalings, stabbings, guts, and plenty of blood, as well as one of the most painful gunshot wounds I've seen on a film. Thankfully, it's all shown rather briefly rather than being dwelt upon in detail, but it does leave a nasty taste in the mouth, as was undoubtedly the intention. The sleazy scene in which one of the bad guys forces the barrel of his sawn-off shotgun into a blonde girl's mouth is the worst part of the film, threatening to turn the whole production into a misogynistic mess. The ending is fairly intense, although not a patch on EDEN LAKE's, and the director pays his dues to THE LONG GOOD Friday in a BIG way. So, MANHUNT isn't going to set the world on fire, but it's a perfectly serviceable kind of film that delivers plenty of shocks and gross moments during its short running time. I enjoyed the experience, but I'm not in a hurry to see it again.

Visually great, sadly lacking in originality

[bowmanblue · 5/10 · 1 November 2014]

I'm all for films paying homage to other 'genre-defining' movies, however 'Manhunt' doesn't so much as pay homage to its predecessors like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Wrong Turn, as completely rip them off.

It's about a foursome of young students who go into the mountains, only to be picked off by various redneck hunters. There's nothing wrong with that as a premise, but only if it's done in an original or slightly different way. However, it's just not. Manhunt is basically every other film of that genre, just set in a different country (oh, and there's subtitles for those of you who don't like non-English speaking films).

Unfortunately, some of the teens being stalked are completely unlikeable, one man even going as far as to practically terrorise his girlfriend and physically abuse her BEFORE the rednecks even get them. With characters like that, you can hardly work up much sympathy when they're murdered by the (real) baddies. And those we are supposed to like are just too stupid to relate to. When being hunted they never stop giving away their position by screaming for their separated friends.

Also, the film adheres to every slasher cliché in the book: chased through woods. Check. Rednecks. Check. Camper van and hitchhiker. Check. And so on.

We're never told anything about the redneck hunters and their motives. They don't even speak, leaving us to wonder why they're doing what they do.

Apart from the gore (which is very good/brutal, depending on what you like) and the cinematography (which is also nicely shot, creating a bleak and brooding atmosphere with the use of colour pallet), Manhunt will never be a classic. Just a rip-off that offers nothing new. I know I've slated it here, but actually it's not that bad. It's only real flaw is how totally unoriginal it is. Pity.

Creepy, scary, full of suspense.

[RodrigAndrisan · 7/10 · 2 June 2021]

The script is not great, all is predictable, everything we see happening has no motivation, it's just another film with violence and unjustified bloodshed. The actors' game is not at the highest level either. And yet, the film manages to captivate your attention and keep you tense for an hour and 18 minutes.

Disappointing & hard to follow.

[gruffhousereviews · 4/10 · 16 January 2013]

First thing to mention was that when I began watching this movie, I had no idea it was a foreign film. It wasn't until watching the opening credits and realising that the entire cast was Norwegian that suspicions began to arise. I in fact really like subtitled/foreign horror movies. It means at no point can you take your eyes off the screen leaving you open to every fright and horrific image that the movie has to offer. Also, you can't tell if the acting is worse than Brendan Frasers (in anything but The Mummy Returns and that one episode of Scrubs).

As a survival horror movie, it could be thought of as a bit of a tribute to the original Texas Chainsaw Massacre (the ultimate survival horror movie) – it was even set in 1974 (coincidence, I think not). 4 unwitting "friends" pick up a hitch-hiker (Did I hear Texas Chainsaw Massacre?) at a petrol station as they drive through an ever thickening forest. This leads them into a battle to survive the attacks of a gang of hill-billy hunters (or whatever the Norwegian equivalent of a hill billy is).

I had two real issues with this movie. Firstly, the ending (surprise surprise). Horror movie endings always run the risk of being a disappointment because either another movie has done it, it'll be too subtle that we won't understand it, it can't be a truly happy ending because, y'know, it's a horror movie so they force a "horror ending" or it'll be so cliché that even a bomb, seventeen knife wounds to the chest and a shotgun blast to the face won't kill it. This ending unfortunately falls into the "too subtle to explain what's happened". Did she get away? Was the woman who picked her up in cahoots with the other bad guys? It left a lot of unanswered questions and not in an interesting way.

Which leads neatly into my second issue: the bad guys motivation. Some horror movies are so scary because the anti-hero has no real reason to attack the person they're attacking (e.g. The Strangers) but even then there seems to be some sort of motivation or explanation for why they are doing it. But in Manhunt that doesn't seem to be the case. Are they hunting these people? Why does one guy find them and leave them there to get away? Is it a game? Are they just sadistic redneck Vikings?

On top of this, it's not entirely clear why the four of them were travelling together. 2 of them hate Lassa Valdals "Roger" who, to be fair, was a douche bag of Kanye-West-esque proportions and he clearly hates all of them. Why would they go travelling together in a cramped mini-van (another throwback to Texas Chainsaw Massacre)?

However, it wasn't all bad. It was made in 2008 but set in 1974. Hopefully intentionally, the quality of the film was as if it was made in the seventies except with make-up, blood and guts good enough to make you believe that even the goriest of wounds were real. The camera work saved a lot of this movie including some clever lingering shots of the landscape cementing just how isolated these individuals are.

Very minimalist Norwegian backwoods survival horror flick, nothing special at all.

[poolandrews · 4/10 · 5 March 2012]

Manhunt is set in 1974 in Norway where four teenagers, Mia (co-writer Nini Bull Robsahm) & her brother Jørgen (Jørn-Bjørn Fuller-Gee) together with Mia's best friend Camilla (Henriette Bruusgaard) & her obnoxious boyfriend Roger (Lasse Valdal) are driving deep into the Norwegian wilderness to spend a day or two hiking through some thick forests in the name of fun. The friends stop off at a small gas station to fill their camper van up & buy some food where they meet a girl named Renate (Janne Starup Bønes) who ask's Roger the knob for a lift, since Renate is quite attractive he says yes. As the five drive along the isolated forest roads Renate feels ill & ask's Roger to stop so she can be sick outside, while waiting for Renate to feel better the five are attacked by three men wielding shotgun's & knives. Two are killed straight away while the other's find themselves stranded in the thick forest miles from anywhere being hunted down & killed like animals by the men, but why & can they beat the odds & survive?

This Norwegian production was co-written & directed by Patrik Syversen & is a fairly simple mix of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974) & Deliverance (1972) with it's camper van of teens picking up a strange hitchhiker & then running into trouble deep in the woods as they hunted down & killed at which point the film plays out like a survivalist backwoods horror film that doesn't really stand out from the crowd if I am honest despite it being well made & thankfully short at just under 80 minutes (including end credits). While Manhunt isn't exactly a terrible film by any means it's hardly great, there's no much originality here as virtually every scene, character, concept & idea feels like it has been lifted directly from another film. From the setting to the clichéd teens to the killers to the creepy locals to the final surviving girl who gets to dish out some revenge & stay alive long enough for an ambiguous ending that leaves things up in the air. Manhunt just feels so routine, even at under 80 minutes long the pace is sluggish at times & it's hard to care for anyone involved. The very minimalist nature of the script & concept doesn't help either, dialogue is extremely sparse & after the first thirty minutes barely a word is said for the remainder of the film with the three killers themselves not saying a single word during the entire time they are seen on screen, obviously this means the killers never reveal any sort of motive & as a result it's never made clear what's going on exactly or why. It became quite frustrating actually not to know about anything or anyone & Manhunt does feel empty & shallow as a consequence. It's just the whole film & everything that happens seems almost pointless as no reason or explanation for any of it is ever given or even as much hinted at. Who was Renate anyway? If she knew of the killers why not just contact the police or tell the group? Who was the guy tied to the tree? Manhunt is effective enough in a minimalistic brutal sort of way but don't expect any sort of story or originality.

I do feel that there is a little hypocrisy here as any Hollywood made film so simplistic & with so little plot would surely have been mercilessly trashed but because Manhunt is Norwegian it is praised for it's basic & shallow nature as it makes the audience more detached & the killers more inhuman? I don't think so, Manhunt just has no story or originality of it's own although that in itself doesn't make it a bad film at all. Originally called Rovdyr in Norway (which translates into English as Predator) the international English title is Manhunt (which explains what happens in the film more than the script does...) while it was apparently called Manhunt - Backwoods Massacre in Germany & strangely known as Naked: Booby Trap in Japan. There's some decent gore here, people are tied up with barb wire, people are stabbed & shot with someone's ankle being blasted off & in the films goriest moment a guy has his stomach sliced open & his intestines pulled out. Manhunt is a fairly grim & brutal film, the killer pressing the knife against Camilla's throat & rubbing it against her body as her boyfriend watches along with one or two other unsettling scenes.

Filmed in full 2:35:1 widescreen Manhunt looks nice & is well made with minimal shaky hand-held camcorder camera work & none of that awful machine gun editing that I hate so much. Being a Norwegian film Manhunt is subtitled although there's hardly any dialogue anyway & I think you could probably watch it without subtitles & still figure out what's going on fairly easily. The acting seems alright.

Manhunt is an alright backwoods slasher survivalist horror film from Norway that passes 75 minutes effectively enough bu the glaring lack of any reasoning behind anything that happens annoyed me & it's also quite predictable. I can't say I hated it but I can't say I loved it either, to be honest I will probably have completely forgotten about it by the end of the week.

Great Norwegian survival-horror

[wickenhofer · 10/10 · 30 June 2008]

Wow, this movie is underrated by IMDb users. Just saw this again on DVD, and it still holds up. A lot of people i know really love this movie, so I'll give it a ten just to even things out.

The people who dislike it don't seem to be familiar with the sub-genre it obviously homages. Rovdyr is an exploitation-film in the best sense; a dirty, uncompromising little low-budget gem devoid of pretensions. Hell, it even has a David Hess song on the opening titles! It seems like most people expected a snappy and glossy teen-flick with lots of twists and turns, but what they got was a dirty and gritty horror-film that pulls no punches.

The films style is rugged, and it comes across as a simple and horrific survival-horror. It doesn't focus on plot, this is not a whodunnit by all means, but it's more about the exact situations the characters face and how they react to it, as survival-horrors are supposed to. As always in these films, the prey becomes the hunter and the characters find their inner strength and so on. So nothing new, but it's well done.

The actors are good as well, being both realistic and believable in the beginning, and convincingly portraying real terror as all hell breaks loose. This is actually pretty powerful stuff. It's well shot, with a dirty visual style, almost all hand-held and in close-ups throughout the film. The sound-design is top-notch, and the music by Simon Boswell (who also scored Jodorowskis "Santa Sangre" among others, another cool detail) is surprisingly serious and emotional. It's evident that the folks behind this film love the genre, know the genre and take it seriously. The effects are great and the violence is punishing too; there's some really nasty stuff here.

Sure, we've seen these types of films before, but done right it's always entertaining. It's as if someone made a shameless rip-off of The Texas Chainsaw Massacre in 1975, without any of our modern-day influences, intending it to play in drive-in theaters. There are a few problems in the first act, and sometimes you wish they had been more original, but it's simplicity is also one of it's major strengths, so i guess it evens out.

So, this is not a flawless piece, but i liked it because it was brutal and true to its roots.

I also read somewhere that the director was just 24 years old when they started shooting it, that it was made for an extremely low budget, and that the main crew worked for very little money in order to make this film. Take that into account and it's a pretty impressive little film.

Disposable

[kosmasp · 5/10 · 30 September 2008]

Especially the characters. But it still captures your attention, because it's lean, mean and fortunately short (running time wise). Yes it's not logical, yes the characters are not likable (see above and/or summary line), yes there are plot holes ... but those are things (cliches) that you see in almost any(every) horror movie these days, it's up to you to decide how bad you think it is.

Another reviewer wrote that the whole thing seems to come from nowhere and that there is no explanation for what's happening. For one thing, I'd rather have it that way, rather than some stupid "had rough childhood(s) and this lead to ..." explanation. But if you really look for something, a reason, than the first "meeting" will give a little bit of a clue. For it's low budget heritage it's OK. Not special, but with better written characters, this could've gone a long way :o)

Whoa! Now this is a letdown!

[ElijahCSkuggs · 4/10 · 26 July 2008]

There are times where I re-check myself and realize my train of thought may be a little off. I consistently watch film, all types of film, and in almost every one, if there's a good looking girl with a decent size chest....I feel like the movie should owe it to us and have that girl show us her breasts. Especially if it's a horror film. I've done some soul-searching and I've come to the conclusion.....my mind is fine! When a film like Rodvyr has not one, but two chicks with two nice big racks, and they don't show a bit of skin.....it's damn horror movie blasphemy. The movie can ONLY gain points. Especially when the movie has a story like Rodvyr.

The story revolves around 4 non-assuming kids off to just live it up in the wilderness. Probably camping or some sh!t. They happen to pick up this stupid chick who for some reason is keeping her mouth shut about some serious drama that has just taken place. Anyways, they run into some Norwegian Human Hunters aka NHH, and the flick turns into a survival horror flick. And, a damn average one at that.

Most obviously, this flick suffers from poor writing. Let me just go through a few things that struck me as inadequate. Letdown number 1: You got the douche boyfriend living for far too long. And for some reason, they try to make scenes where you should be feeling tension/dread for this character. Well, only 10 minutes before this scene you were disliking him on all cylinders. He sucked and should have died horribly...which he didn't. Very weak death. Letdown number 2: After some cool initial deaths, they get weaker and weaker, up until the so-so final one. Deaths are supposed to get better not weaker. Letdown number 3, 4, 5.... blah blah blah: More writing related material. Girl who doesn't shut up. No taking advantage of situations. Crying when killing a bad guy and again not taking advantage. Archery scene was f@ckin stupid. Actress with melons bouncing everywhere, doesn't show her tits. Bad guys, who are obviously nuts, aren't horny bad guys??? That's just poor-ass writing right there. Potential was high, and scenes just went flat. Example, scene with the two hiding in the crevice, bad guy sees them after gutting some dude. He then just walks off to tell his fellow madmen?? He should have poured that dudes guts all over them! Wasted potential. The list can go on and on.

After hearing all these stellar comments, it's quite obvious a lot of these dudes are horror fanboys. If it's even slightly entertaining, which this was, it's all praise all day long. Gimme a break. This is average to a T, and it ain't fooling me. I hear it's Norway's first slasher, if that's true, I supposed I commend them on making an average slasher with only one memorable scene. Shotgun ankle was definitely awesome. It's quite obvious I judged the hell outta this flick, and that's the way it should be. F@ck this and f@ck you.

wasted money

[bademeister1989 · 2/10 · 25 March 2009]

oh my god, this movie sucked as hell. it tries to be like one of the good old 70 survival horror movies but fails miserably.

there is not even a bit of tension and the acting is pathetic, the so called actors try there best but it appeals so put on...

the movie reminds me of KING OF THE HILL but does not have any good soundtrack.

to be fair, the movie got some nice splatter effects and the violence looks quite realistic but at the end the movie is nothing but a 78 minutes long sadistic snuff video.

2* out of 10

Nothing specal

[axel335 · 4/10 · 22 August 2020]

This movies isnt really bad but its nothing special either, The actors are ok, the plots is working but it becames a bit boting after a while. You have seen all this before in better movies

This is nothing special really

See a better movie

Backwoods Survival

[scorfield-51711 · 4/10 · 30 August 2016]

'F#*?ing city people'

Syversen's debut follows in a long tradition of horror movies where a group of unsuspecting travellers stray into the unfamiliar territory of a band of murderous natives. Accordingly shot in homage to seventies slasher movies, this Norwegian equivalent to 'Wrong Turn' is set in 1974, and with its use of hand-held cameras and close-ups, together with the haunting notes of a hunting horn, occasionally offers a far more chilling tale of a fight for survival in the backwoods. This more realistic sense of threat is accentuated by the depiction of the hunters as everyday rustic types, much in the vein of 'Deliverance'. The feel of the period is not only provided by the musical score, with the opening track taken from David Hess' soundtrack for Wes Craven's 1972 budget slasher, 'the Last House on the Left', but also by the tone of colour in which the film is shot. At the outset, the four characters, en route to their final break prior to starting their academic studies, offer potential for development which the story- line lets slip. This is especially true of the abusive boyfriend of the lead character, though the audience should still relish when he gets his just desserts. Aside from a genuine early shock at the roadside execution of one of the main protagonists, played incidentally by Syversen's co-writer and assistant director, Nini Bull Robsahm, the story- line's reliance on the common plot devices of this genre eventually detract from the overall impact of the movie. Furthermore, it requires a bit of a leap of the imagination to accept that the main female protagonist can so easily transform herself from a screaming and shivering wreck to a female 'Robin Hood' in terms of her sudden found skills with a bow and arrows. Having passively endured the abuse of her boyfriend, this becomes even harder to accept as credible. In addition, the director in attempting to put their own spin on the commonplace final ploy of whether the final survivor has reached safety or not, offers an inconclusive and tentative ending.