Jeremy Fitzgerald plays a convicted criminal who was sentenced to prison for interfering with a minor (so to speak), and subsequently abused and beaten by fellow inmates. After five years of this, he is released a scarred man, who now wears a creepy mask to hide his disfigurement. He now has only one thing on his mind: Finding the twelve jurors he sees responsible for his current sorry state, and murdering them. Two such jurors are bored small town waitresses Mercedes McNab and Emily Hardy, whilst Nick Searcy plays the town sheriff, and Steven Brand is an out-of-town federal agent investigating the killings (which cross several states).
Please note that whilst I am giving this Michael A. Nickles horror flick from 2008 (but released much later) a favourable score not so much because it’s a good film (though it’s not bad), but more because it does more things right and is more aesthetically impressive than any modern horror film I’ve seen in ages. And that says more about the state of modern horror than it does about this film.
The film gets off to an extremely mixed start, with a bunch of quick-cut images of grisly goings on over the credits before… “Five Years Later”. What? Five Years Later than what exactly? We barely saw anything to begin with! (Apparently we were shown the killer’s crimes, but I could barely make anything out) I also was not keen on the killer’s costume, which was far too blatantly Jason-esque for my liking. But luckily, this annoyance was replaced with rejoice at the subsequent and brilliant shotgun blast to the head, resulting in a whole lotta mess. Better still, the shotgun blast comes from a guy in a truck. In motion. Aimed at someone in a car. Also in motion. I mean, WOW. And whilst the film subsequently failed to live up to this grand gore moment, it certainly maintained a fairly consistent level of watchability. There’s a truly disgusting face/skin removal scene later, showing a whole lot more than I figured they would, too (Given that several other ‘kill’ scenes are strangely kept largely off-screen).
I particularly liked the usage of close-ups (a lost art, in my opinion) on the killer, even if I found the comparisons to horror icons Jason Voorhees and Leatherface a little distracting. The use of composition here is terrific, using every part of the frame. Meanwhile, if this film is shot on video, as I suspect it is, it’s easily one of the best HD-shot films I’ve seen, on an aesthetic level. Cinematographer Mark Petersen has worked out how to use light for a digitally-shot film so that there’s no weird smudging or other problems usually associated with films not shot on celluloid. Even in the darker scenes there were minimal problems compared to most other films I’ve seen shot on HD/Digital video, which is really quite impressive. The film has an interesting use of sound, in a kind of “Blair Witch Project” manner.
The film’s title and the incorporation of it in the film as the killer carves numbers into victims heads was a dumb idea. I mean, did it have to be roman numerals? Couldn’t he just use regular numbers? But that’s just nitpicking, really. Plot-wise the film can be best described as “12 Angry Men” meets “Friday the 13th”, with production design modelled on “The Texas Chainsaw Massacre” or “Jeepers Creepers”. It’s a bit predictable, aside from one surprise early death via vehicular murderslaughter. The only real problem I have with the plot is that it’s hard to believe; a) Hardy actually knows everyone who was on the jury by name- small town or not it’s silly, and b) That her and her best friend McNab were both on the jury, AND her ex-boyfriend to boot. I don’t buy that. Helping things considerably are the likeable characters played by Hardy and McNab, the latter being one of the most gorgeous, voluptuous young women I’ve ever seen. Even when McNab shows some less ingratiating traits, it’s to a much lesser degree than in most modern horror films with their catty female characters.
I also appreciated that a lot of the characters in the film were above the age of 30, a very welcome change indeed. Nice to see veteran character actor Nick Searcy getting essentially one of the leads, and playing perhaps the least obnoxious character of his career.
OVERALL SUMMARY
I’m going to recommend this one. It’s nothing earth-shattering, but the direction and cinematography are impressive, especially by Digital Video standards, and the performances are fine. It’s pretty watchable.
