Hellmouth

This could have been a good flick but the story was too muddled. At the end of it, I find myself asking, what was the point of it?!

The CG / effects are hair better than a typical SciFi channel movie; with a bigger budget, the film's visuals could have been outstanding. As it is, sometimes they're interesting and other times they're almost distractingly bad.

As far as the acting, Stephen McHattie certainly stands out in a good way, but the rest of the cast are pretty standard and not all that interesting. Unfortunately, McHattie can't make up for the film's drawbacks, and ultimately what drags the film down is any lack of coherence or depth to the plot. The teaser "Hellmouth is about a gravekeeper who is drawn into a hell dimension to save the soul of a beautiful woman" sums the film up completely, and sadly, there's not really any depth to the story beyond this statement. This is one of those films that felt like it could have had real vision, but failed due to a lack of focus by the film maker.

This Constantine (2005) meets Sin City (2005) is a mostly black and white, graphic novel approach to hell. It's glaringly stark cinematography adapts well to the horror filled nightmares of children and the black despair and creepiness of hell. Strangely simplistic in its approach, the fifties element of the despondent detective in the form of a aging, dying, close to retirement grave-digger is caught up in a wrenched dilemma of perhaps having to continue dig his own grave on his terrible, nightmarish job until he dies (his dream of more sunny retirement Florida seemingly beyond his reach). This movie may have been much more effective had it been directed and scripted as an R-rated feature film so that its graphic profanity of a hellish nature and sexual emotional bonding could have enriched and enlivened the movie even more so. The somewhat soft ending can be taken either as a cop out or a refreshing little breath of mental sunshine, probably left up to the viewer. Nevertheless, this movie borders on the ranks of What Dreams May Come (1998) and to a lesser epic extent The Lord of the Rings (2001) in an epistemological (inner knowledge or truthful way).

I expected to dislike this movie after the first ten minutes and almost bailed. I'm glad I did not. I am not a fan of the "Sin City" brand of cinematography (short depth-of-field actor shots combined with post-production film noir digitization), and originally was turned-off to see it here. However, the story won me over.

Really, this film is a rather traditional fairy tale or allegory set within a digital landscape: that of the Seeker, a man who does not quite know who he is but has been given one last task--here, the order to fill in for another caretaker at another cemetery--that allows him to journey to find himself. Along the way he meets what he thinks is his real purpose--the saving of a ghostly damsel in distress--only to find by the end of the movie that his purpose is much more complicated than that.

The last twenty minutes or so reminded me quite a bit of Bergman's work--"Wild Strawberries" especially--and were well-done in making their philosophical or allegorical "point." Having said all that, I do think this is a movie that could be hard to follow if you just "watch." The post-production digitization is impressive at times, but can also distract from the story-line. I almost feel that this film could be easily adapted for the stage where it would be even more impressive. It really takes place in only four "locations," and would be easier to follow from a dialogue point-of-view.

At any rate, I highly recommend this movie and am considering a purchase for my collection. Stephen McHattie is simply excellent in the title role. As he is the "straight man" to the otherwise purposely "flat" or characterized acting of the others, his was the role that truly mattered. And he was simply excellent.

Underrated actors... I was not sure about trying this movie at first and it was mainly due to him that I did but I am glad that I did! This was a great little find! As others have said, if you were not a fan how movies like Sin City were done then you may not be fond of this. I actually find that I like this style a lot, and found this movie to be visually stimulating as well as entertaining. Watched it late at night and was glued to it until the end. Yes, the overall story outline was simple but that doesn't mean it wasn't good. I would definitely watch this again and would suggest it to others that can appreciate it as a visually artistic piece of entertainment. The acting was excellent all the way around, they nailed that 50's film noir feel completely! Loved it!

I picked up this movie from my local library without knowing anything about it other than the brief plot synopsis on the back of the DVD case. While it's not one of the worst movies I have ever seen, it's definitely one of the strangest I have seen. And that explains the main problem I had with the movie - it is so determined to be strange and murky that it doesn't give the audience anything to hang on to. The characters are vague; you hardly learn a thing about them. And it doesn't take long for the plot to become all but incomprehensible. As a result, it was hard for me to care about what was going on. Sure, it's visually striking at times, as well as being fairly slick despite what had to be a really low budget. I just wish that the filmmakers had put as much work into the script as they did with the visuals. It didn't come as a surprise when the end credits revealed it was a Canadian movie - it has that Canadian feel as well as pretentious attitude you often get in Canadian cinema. (Though at least the Canadian government's film funding agency didn't waste any of my tax dollars on this particular movie.) Maybe this might have worked as a short subject, but as a feature film it's pretty deadly.