Escalofrío 3

Slasher movies might try to be cute (see first part of the Cold Prey series or High Tension for that matter), but this is as down and dirty as you might expect it to be. It is also exactly what you think it will be throughout. In other words: It is dire predictable. It's still nicely done and all, you just can see where it is heading (actually you might know where it is heading before it even begins). If you don't let that spoil your "enjoyment" of the movie, you are good to go.

In this case, it is not really necessary to have seen the other two movies of the "franchise". Actually you might be better off not having seen them. Slasher fans will enjoy this (I guess most did enjoy the first one too), but for everyone else this might prove to not be enough of anything to make them wanna watch it through

It was a movie that showed that it was trying not to be cliché. But this were very certain. The characters were cliché but used in contrast. Again the expected action scenes were boring. The end and the idea was nice.

Four years ago I gave a glowing review to the first real Norwegian horror movie ever (unless you count Villmark which was more of a thriller or the DTV crap "22" which was more like a bad nightmare). Cold Prey blew my mind. Sure, to most of you it's probably a mediocre slasher flick but to me it raised the bar for Norwegian movies.

Maybe this is why the first one was a success. The second one was okay-ish. A bit too much action and not enough horror if you ask me but still a solid entry. Now we have the third, supposedly (and hopefully) final entry in this franchise and I have to say with a heavy heart that this was a disappointment to the extreme.

What is supposed to be a prequel comes off as a sloppy dtv-remake of the first one - without the snow - or the hotel. The dialogues seem to be copied and pasted from the first movie and even the characters are similar (only this time we have a bunch of REALLY bad actors without any real characteristics). These actors were so bad that I cringed in the seat as it was so uncomfortable watching them deliver their basic dialogues. The first 5 minutes or so are prequel-ish but the movie really doesn't explain anything. It felt as if the crew wasn't allowed to shoot inside the hotel this time so instead it took place in the woods and in two small houses near the hotel (??????).

This is less Friday the 13th and more Wrong Turn - but without the actual excitement. Imagine Cold Prey meets Wrong Turn meets Manhunt (yes, this could indeed very well have been the sequel to Manhunt aka Rovdyr, that might actually have made more sense as this felt nothing like the first two Cold Prey movies).

I won't go on about it but if you want a very standard DTV slasher from the 80s that somehow was forgotten and crawled onto the big screen 25 years later - here you have it. The mediocre slasher flick that everyone will forget within a year. Too bad, this franchise had so much potential.

"These Norwegians definitely know how to generate the right mood for an atmospheric and nightmarishly intense horror film. When is the last time a slasher actually scared you? There's another entry on the way, apparently a prequel set in the 1980's. I, for one, cannot wait!"

The above quote is actually copy/pasted from my own user comment for "Cold Prey II", written somewhere late 2010, when I saw the first two films back-to-back. As you can read, I was very much impressed with this new slasher franchise – especially part two – and eagerly anticipated the third entry/prequel. Unfortunately now I have to temper my enthusiasm, because I have seen the prequel and it's without exaggerating one of the biggest disappointments in years. The refreshing and genuinely suspenseful format has sadly turned into just another mundane and hugely derivative stalk & slash picture without any added value whatsoever. What made the first two movies so exceptional that is missing here? Well, two vital aspects are missing, in fact, namely an extraordinary setting and amiable characters. The first two "Cold Prey" movies were covered with snowy landscapes and largely took place in creepy isolated settings, first an abandoned skiing resort and second a nearly abandoned hospital, and it was one of these rare cases where the main characters were identifiable and sympathetic people that you didn't necessarily wish they died in such barbaric way (but they nevertheless did, of course). The prequel takes place in and around the same skiing resort, but presumably in a much warmer season, as the teenage protagonists go camping in the surrounding woods and sleep under a clear sky without tents. Woods are a much more commonplace and familiar setting for slasher movies and, even though the Norwegian forests and streams are a lot more astounding than American ones, it's not sufficient enough to excel. Even more unfortunate is the fact that the lead characters have become standard "Americanized" stereotypes, including gun-crazy machos and hormones-overloaded skinny dippers. The script also nearly doesn't take enough advantage out of the prequel opportunities. "Cold Prey II" already hinted at a very fascinating background of the killer, a mentally disabled savage dumped by his parents near ravine in the midst of winter, but the prequel inexplicably doesn't explore the basic events any further. After a brief intro set in 1976, which is the best part of the entire film, the film fast forwards twelve years to the late 80's without giving any more clarifications regarding the killer's persona, so I'm actually not even considering as an authentic prequel. Just a redundant episode between the origins and the later films. Not only does "Cold Prey III" not exploit the advantages of the prequel format, it doesn't even grab the opportunity to make this a genuine 80's throwback movie. There are very few elements reminding us that the story takes place in the 1980's, except for the fact that one of the teenage characters listens to horrible punk-rock music on a prehistoric and bright yellow walkman device. Add to this several more dreadful sub genre clichés, clumsy editing, weak acting performances and unimaginative (again, especially in comparison to the previous installments) cinematography and we've got ourselves a very dumb and unmemorable slasher that even would have looked uninspired in the 80's already. There's a fair portion of brutality and gory effects, but those things you can nowadays even find in average TV-series, so don't bother.

In 1976, in Jotunheimen, an abused boy stabs to death his mother Sigrid and his stepfather Gunnar in an abandoned hotel and the family is considered missing by the local Sheriff Einar (Terje Ranes) and authorities.

Twelve years later, the teenagers Hedda (Ida Marie Bakkerud) and her boyfriend Anders (Kim S. Falck-Jørgensen), Siri (Julie Rusti), Knut (Sturla Valldal Rui), Magne (Pål Stokka) and Simen (Arthur Berning) take a lift with Sheriff Einar telling that they will hike in the woods. However they go to the abandoned hotel expecting to spend the night in the place but they find dust and rats and prefer to stay camping in the woods.

In the morning, Siri and Knut fall into a trap of the eremite hunter Jon (Nils Johnson) and Knut is seriously wounded. Siri climbs the hole to seek for help to Knut, but she is captured by Jon while a stranger kills Knut. Soon the teenagers are hunted down by the creepy serial-killer.

"Fritt Vilt III" is an unoriginal slasher movie with the usual clichés. The only thing different in this movie is the language, since it is spoken in Norwegian. The rest is the usual stupidities of this genre, when the victims always take the most imbecile decision and the serial- killer is indestructible. My vote is three.

Title (Brazil): "Presos no Gelo III – O Início" ("Trapped in the Ice III – The Beginning")