Hanger

"Hanger" is NOT a good movie. It is, in fact, repulsive and low budget and I dare recommend this but for a select few. There are problems galore. The acting is pretty substandard, the cinematography is less then stellar, and the plot is pretty thin. There are HUGE holes in this bad boy... Yet, it does have it's charm. There is a large does of humor to be found, alongside some grotesque imagery and a brave, if not poorly conceived, script. This is a splatter revenge flick with gumption and originality though it's window dressing is of the hand me down variety. There is a liberal amount of sexuality that serves little purpose beyond getting pre- pubescent teenage boys to watch it...so it has it's desperation as well. If your looking to round out your low budget, monster/revenge movie list then by all means look into it with a healthy amount of skepticism. If your looking for the next cult classic...there MIGHT be enough to give it credence. However if your looking for a movie to sustain the weight of it's shocking plot description you will be disappointed. It's a movie that 2 out of 10 will think was "alright".

Like Roger Ebert, I have to give some credit to a film that does what it sets out to do and has no illusions about social value or artistry. That's "Hanger" in a nutshell. Pure exploitation from start to finish. (This review refers to the uncut edition, as though a cut edition would be any better.)

Perhaps one of the most striking things about the film (other than an obsession with genitalia) is the heavy use of facial appliances. There may be two male actors who are not heavily covered with facial appliances throughout the film (and I have my doubts about one of them). Female roles fare a little better, trading "money shots" for not having to wear prosthetics. The whole thing comes off like a medieval allegorical play, with all the players in masks representing their roles.

Overall, not as funny or interesting as "Gutterballs." It is much more extreme than "Run, Bitch, Run," which hardly rose to the level of exploitation anyway. And it's not nearly as creepy as "deadgirl," which is in a completely different class of film-making (i.e., much superior).

The best use I know of for "Hanger" is to show somebody an exploitation film that exists for no other reason than to exploit. Still, you gotta admire honesty.

Not recommended for people with reasonable standards of decency or any expectations of artistry.

Hanger (2009)

* (out of 4)

Hardcore gore about a pimp who discovers that his prostitute is pregnant and when she refuses to have an abortion he decides to take care of the matter himself. In graphic detail, he sticks a hanger up her and pulls the baby out only to throw it in a dumpster. Once there, a homeless man pulls it out, raises it for the next eighteen years and now the deformed adult goes out for revenge. Granted, this film wasn't trying to win an Oscar and it wasn't meant to be some sort of art-house masterpiece but I still couldn't enjoy the film very much. HANGER is a very disgusting film that is so vile that most people would be outraged just by hearing what's in the movie let alone actually being forced to watch it. The film is about as extreme as you can get and is certainly a throwback to a few films from the 1970s, which featured graphic gore, violence and at times porn. This film here features some pretty graphic, in-your-face material and this includes the opening where we see a hanger going into a woman and then (a fake woman used here) the baby being ripped out. If that sort of thing sounds like something that would gross you out then it's best you stay clear because it only gets worse from here. Is HANGER a good movie? Not even close. However, I must admit that if you're into this type of thing then I'm sure you're going to enjoy how depraved, shocking and vile it is. I mean, there's non-stop nudity, an incredibly bizarre rape sequence and pretty much all sorts of violence from head-crushing to the abortion and a few more rapes as well. I will gladly admit that this film went way too far but it did have a certain atmosphere that no one could deny. Director Ryan Nicholson certainly isn't going to win any awards for the picture but he at least knows how to build up at atmosphere and it's clear he's not afraid to cross the line. The biggest problem for those willing to sit through the gross moments is that the film moves way too slowly and is way too boring to really work.

Live Feed was a good gory movie, Gutterballs was better, so i was very excited to view Ryan new movie, Hanger. Unfortunately, it was a let down for me. Don't know why, maybe I'm getting old. Maybe. But Hanger was very boring, i watch the Uncut version, and yes, its hardcore gore, with very good bloody fx and very good looking naked bimbos but its just boring. I hope one day to watch it again and start loving it, that can happen. The first time i watched Live Feed i didn't like it and then it became a movie that i watched easily four times if not more. 4/10 for Hanger but all my support to Ryan Nicholson for always try to deliver the goods with extreme gore

I don't know how many Debbie Rochon movies I have seen, but there is always room for another one.

This is the latest edition in Troma's catalog, and it even features Lloyd Kaufman.

Most will be grossed out in the first 10 minutes after witnessing an abortion by coat-hanger. The baby lives and we join him when he is grown (Nathan Dashwood). Otherwise the movie would be over, as he seeks out the pimp who killed his mom (Rochon).

This movie has all the trash you can imagine: cannibalism, freaks, smashed heads, blood, gore, and things too disgusting to mention.