Mohawk
- 2017
- 1h 31m
IMDb RATING
4.7/10
1.8K
YOUR RATING
Late in the War of 1812, a young Mohawk woman and her two lovers battle a squad of American soldiers hell-bent on revenge.Late in the War of 1812, a young Mohawk woman and her two lovers battle a squad of American soldiers hell-bent on revenge.Late in the War of 1812, a young Mohawk woman and her two lovers battle a squad of American soldiers hell-bent on revenge.
- Director
- Writers
- Stars
Jon Huber
- Lachlan Allsopp
- (as Jonathan Huber)
- Director
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Mohawk is a low budget indie with decent acting, good cinematography and sound; but a terrible screenplay. The actors actually do a decent job presenting the characters while overcoming a horrible script with poor dialogue and a ridiculous storyline.
This is a very cheaply made movie and, and it shows. There is a grand total of 18 total cast members, and less than half this number have a screen presence longer than 15 minutes. Costuming and makeup is a joke: The Native American characters wear modern machine-sewn clothing, and the makeup would be appropriate for a modern rock band. The screenplay is awful: Scenes meant to create suspense drag on forever and are never more than simply boring. The story's thread changes themes, and the ending is a metaphysical event that challenges even viewers who are willing to suspend their disbeliefs.
The Producer/Director is obviously interested in armaments (flintlock guns and cutlery - knives, razor blades, and swords) and the effect of these weapons when their projectiles or blades strike a human. Loading, firing and the sound of projectiles is very realistic. Special effects depicting gore are very realistic in this movie. The camera lingers over wounded characters as they bleed to death from various wounds.
This is a very cheaply made movie and, and it shows. There is a grand total of 18 total cast members, and less than half this number have a screen presence longer than 15 minutes. Costuming and makeup is a joke: The Native American characters wear modern machine-sewn clothing, and the makeup would be appropriate for a modern rock band. The screenplay is awful: Scenes meant to create suspense drag on forever and are never more than simply boring. The story's thread changes themes, and the ending is a metaphysical event that challenges even viewers who are willing to suspend their disbeliefs.
The Producer/Director is obviously interested in armaments (flintlock guns and cutlery - knives, razor blades, and swords) and the effect of these weapons when their projectiles or blades strike a human. Loading, firing and the sound of projectiles is very realistic. Special effects depicting gore are very realistic in this movie. The camera lingers over wounded characters as they bleed to death from various wounds.
Seriously? I mean seriously? There is no doubt who ever wrote this crap has no clue about American history, and is probably not an American. And perhaps he just likes to watch Native Americans suffer. That is a whole other issue. If he had advertised it as a sci-fi recreation or something perhaps the lack of proper art direction and costuming wouldn't have made us cringe as much. And dear God man, there are so many good actors out there so why did you hire such terrible ones? Unless they looked great during the auditions and the director imposed his lack of ability on them. Ive seen great actors hamstrung by terrible directors before so...
Maybe I'm being too harsh; maybe there are too many other examples, before and since, that really are better, next to which this pales in comparison; maybe this altogether struggles with various shortcomings generally. One way or another I do like 'Mohawk,' but I'd be plainly lying if I said that the issues I recognize didn't so significantly weigh against it and make it less enjoyable than it could have been. I claim no authority by which to judge the historical accuracy of the costume design, makeup, or weapons, but it does very much seem that there is significantly less detail in these facets than one would hope; what we see comes across as the most basic interpretation. Unfortunately, these facets are representative, for "the most basic interpretation" is rather the key phrase when speaking of most everything here. For example, I love the root ideas of what filmmaker Ted Geoghegan and Grady Hendrix wrote: a polycule of a Mohawk woman and man, and a British soldier, struggling for survival as they're pursued in the wilderness by bloodthirsty, racist Americans against the backdrop of the War of 1812; we also get some measure of conflicts and varied personalities among those Americans. Too much of the dialogue is weak and ill-considered, however, to say nothing of how the Mohawk language is reduced to occasional flavoring amidst a script full of English (quite modern English, at that, with modern accents). The scene writing and characterizations are also great on paper, though there needed to be more dynamics between the Americans to heighten the disquiet; though all too realistic and true to life he might be (past and present), villain Holt is very heavy-handed; and there's just not enough careful detail in the scenes as written to make them pop out.
And, well, then there's Geoghegan's direction, which I think is strangely troubled relative to what we saw a couple years prior with 'We are still here'; too much of 'Mohawk' is orchestrated in a manner that's simple, unsophisticated, and straightforward, and often soft and restrained. Action sequences tend to be robbed of their impact; the violence and even the blood and gore feel diminished. Tension, suspense, and would-be unease and apprehension are rarely felt - only in the last act, truthfully, and even then only in fits and starts. The dark vibrancy and major emotions that the course of events should reflect and elicit are significantly reduced, coming across as only a shade of what they should be were more a more thoughtful, mindful, nuanced approach taken. The forest that should be looming and dangerous seems more like the woods behind our house. This is a picture of action-horror that is so lacking of the desired and required potency that most of the length comes across as a modestly realized short film that somehow expanded to a full-length feature, and where that potency is more earnestly present it's still only in a less complex, intelligent form, and therefore less interesting. The acting is affected in turn, often coming off as dull, forcibly subdued, halfhearted, or just plain meek; the stunts and effects at least look splendid, though any hand-to-hand fighting we see is a tad thin under Geoghegan's direction. Even Wojciech Golczewski's score has me doubtful; I like it in and of itself, but to be frank I think the music is ill-fitting for what 'Mohawk' is, and even more so for what it should have been. Percussion and pronounced beats belong in an action-thriller more in line with those of Luc Besson or Paul W. S. Anderson, and it would have been understated ambient selections that I think would have been more appropriate in this case.
I like 'Mohawk.' I don't think it's outright bad. It's just not the movie it should have been, however, and I'm left wanting to like it more than I do. With more delicate, judicious care the cast could have thrived and made us feel the vitality of every moment; with more delicate, judicious care the atmosphere would have been suffocating, and the violence horrific. Sadly, what could have been a gnawing, grim, absorbing blend of action, horror, and thriller instead becomes a ghost of its best self - all the right ideas, all too little vitality. I appreciate what all involved put into this, and I look forward to seeing more from all in the future; I've no doubt, for example, that Kaniehtiio Horn and Eamon Farren would show themselves to be fantastic actors, if given the proper opportunity. This does not represent that opportunity, though, and I can't help but be disappointed that such superb potential was not borne out in the final product. I'm glad for those who get more out of this flick than I do; I just believe that whatever it is the premise promises, and whatever it is we want out of it, 'Mohawk' is regrettably not strong enough to fully make good on those assumptions.
And, well, then there's Geoghegan's direction, which I think is strangely troubled relative to what we saw a couple years prior with 'We are still here'; too much of 'Mohawk' is orchestrated in a manner that's simple, unsophisticated, and straightforward, and often soft and restrained. Action sequences tend to be robbed of their impact; the violence and even the blood and gore feel diminished. Tension, suspense, and would-be unease and apprehension are rarely felt - only in the last act, truthfully, and even then only in fits and starts. The dark vibrancy and major emotions that the course of events should reflect and elicit are significantly reduced, coming across as only a shade of what they should be were more a more thoughtful, mindful, nuanced approach taken. The forest that should be looming and dangerous seems more like the woods behind our house. This is a picture of action-horror that is so lacking of the desired and required potency that most of the length comes across as a modestly realized short film that somehow expanded to a full-length feature, and where that potency is more earnestly present it's still only in a less complex, intelligent form, and therefore less interesting. The acting is affected in turn, often coming off as dull, forcibly subdued, halfhearted, or just plain meek; the stunts and effects at least look splendid, though any hand-to-hand fighting we see is a tad thin under Geoghegan's direction. Even Wojciech Golczewski's score has me doubtful; I like it in and of itself, but to be frank I think the music is ill-fitting for what 'Mohawk' is, and even more so for what it should have been. Percussion and pronounced beats belong in an action-thriller more in line with those of Luc Besson or Paul W. S. Anderson, and it would have been understated ambient selections that I think would have been more appropriate in this case.
I like 'Mohawk.' I don't think it's outright bad. It's just not the movie it should have been, however, and I'm left wanting to like it more than I do. With more delicate, judicious care the cast could have thrived and made us feel the vitality of every moment; with more delicate, judicious care the atmosphere would have been suffocating, and the violence horrific. Sadly, what could have been a gnawing, grim, absorbing blend of action, horror, and thriller instead becomes a ghost of its best self - all the right ideas, all too little vitality. I appreciate what all involved put into this, and I look forward to seeing more from all in the future; I've no doubt, for example, that Kaniehtiio Horn and Eamon Farren would show themselves to be fantastic actors, if given the proper opportunity. This does not represent that opportunity, though, and I can't help but be disappointed that such superb potential was not borne out in the final product. I'm glad for those who get more out of this flick than I do; I just believe that whatever it is the premise promises, and whatever it is we want out of it, 'Mohawk' is regrettably not strong enough to fully make good on those assumptions.
It's not terrible, it's not good either.
Terribly uneven performances. Ezra Buzzington is pretty good in it. Some of the others are terrible, light southern accent on New Yorkers for instance.
Some of the script is good, sometimes they say "injuin" I've seen a lot of whinging in other reviews about "wokeism.," in all honesty it's not far off from real history.
Heaven forbid these people view a much superior film about Native experiences like Thunderheart they'd blow their gaskets.
Overall the film is an old fashioned cat and mouse pursuit film that ends a total wash, not good enough to really like, not bad enough to really hate.
Terribly uneven performances. Ezra Buzzington is pretty good in it. Some of the others are terrible, light southern accent on New Yorkers for instance.
Some of the script is good, sometimes they say "injuin" I've seen a lot of whinging in other reviews about "wokeism.," in all honesty it's not far off from real history.
Heaven forbid these people view a much superior film about Native experiences like Thunderheart they'd blow their gaskets.
Overall the film is an old fashioned cat and mouse pursuit film that ends a total wash, not good enough to really like, not bad enough to really hate.
It was not a terrible movie, it was actually quite good. The ending lost it 2 stars however. The American soldiers are supposed to be the bad guys which is fine but it is a weak premise. Sure the Americans torture and murder civilians but the whole thing started cause the Mohawk guy gutted 22 Americans in their sleep despite not being at war.
Did you know
- TriviaJon Huber wrestles in the WWE as Luke Harper, a member of The Blugeon Brothers
- GoofsNo one had steampunk goggles in 1812.
Details
- Runtime
- 1h 31m(91 min)
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 2.35 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content