Mohawk

This was listed as a horror movie by Netflick. It is not a horror movie by the "conventional" means of paranoia/ghosts/random asshole murderer, but more along the lines of Heart of Darkness type horror. This is quite obvious by the tone set in the film, and the low-key music constantly throbbing like a nihilistic slasher flick.

what made this film compelling to me was its depiction of American soldiers in the war of 1812. well aware it was a very cynical and exploitative war which did not see the best of America in any real way, and depicting each American character with a hint of ugliness and griminess that is at once artistically driven while also completely believable and realistic. It would likely make more sense for the small group to mostly consist of young men with barely shaven beards, rather than the motley arrangement of human horrors we get.

The scene in which they come into contact with the protagonists, a british agent Joshua trying to persuade a local Mohican group to join them in the war against the americans, and the niece and nephew of some of the leaders, "Oak" and Calvin, who despite another reviewer complaining of Oak having blue eyes, are both played by actual Native American/Mohican actors.

Much of the film becomes a bloody hunt as the tiny detachment of American soldiers try to capture the british agent and have to deal with him and the mohawks with him.

It does get bloody at times, but it was nowhere near the level of gore or blood that would've been expected. We never get any real "gore" until the very end, and even then in a very quick, split-second shot of someone's hand split in half.

Throughout the hunt, we are mostly focused on the Americans rather than Oak and Joshua and Calvin, and as such we get to see them interact privately in a way that drops their initial "Ugly American" bravado and humanizes them in a way which makes their continued actions the more gruesome for their brutality.

but the problem is that not enough of this is actually shown, nor even really mentioned. There's a few references to off-screen massacres that had happened, committed by the Mohawks, followed by a sort of reprisal by the Americans, but we are simply not given enough in the way of building up the "journey" for this group.

They are not inherently evil, yet they are doing some inherently evil acts, and it is clearly affecting them all on a psychological level. Even Oak and her group find themselves becoming hardened to the bloodshed, but not in a way that really crosses over into that realm of "darkness" that could metaphorically push a man to become a beast.

It is a similar sort of "journey" that makes up the story of Heart of Darkness / Apocalypse Now, but there's really just not enough happening in this journey to fully arrive at the dramatic "turning point", so that the events as they unfold start to become repetitive, and the movie goes into its ending without much satisfaction.

After being an #IMDB member for over six years I suddenly chose to write a review of a movie tonight (mostly for practice), yet the sight wouldn't allow me to do that, so I'm forced to practice here. Tonight I saw "Mohawk" for no apparent reason, I simply watch a lot of movies while I work. Obviously I'm pretty lucky to have a job that allows me to do that while I fulfill my responsibilities. I gave this flick four stars out of ten, and I'd like to explain every star. The first star was for Karim Hussain for cinematography. That dude is doing a fine job. He caught my eye with "Hobo with a Shotgun" at first, but later with "Free fire" by Ben Wheatley. He had an opportunity to do some fun shots in a forest in "Mohawk" and he definitely took advantage of those. Of course, he had very little to work with - this isn't a very good movie - yet even in this situation his work at times shines. The next two stars go to Ezra Buzzington. This guy is slowly reaching that dubious status of "I don't know this guy's name, but I've seen him somewhere". There is a bunch of bit roles on his resume, notably "Fight Club" and "The Hills Have Eyes", so he could've been a bit of a princess and simply sleepwalked through this movie. Yet this guy did his job so well that I'll always remember him now. He had nothing to work with but chose to try to make something out of that. A special mention goes to Eamon Farren that some might remember from the latest incarnation of "Twin Peaks" (he played the son of evil Coop). Granted, he doesn't do anything memorable in this particular role. However he is portraying a fairly positive character, yet I couldn't help myself but dislike him the whole time, since his role in "Twin Peaks" was so good that now he is forever that evil shitbird from David Lynch's multiverse. Kudos for that. The final star goes to the director - Ted Geoghegan. Apparently he's made another movie before - We Are Still Here - but I hadn't seen it. I did just watch "Mohawk" though, and this one is a good lesson on how not to make movies. Mr. Geoghegan also wrote the screenplay and that's where most of my dissatisfaction starts. This is a story that doesn't really give us any human connection, nor does it provide any food for thought. In a case like this the audience should expect some action or horror, yet there is almost none of that. The whole thing is entirely ludicrous, and the closer we get to the conclusion the more ridiculous it becomes. So why give the star to the director? I surely understand how hard it is to get a project from point A to point Z. I barely manage to draw a six page comic at times. And the director's effort is seen in this movie. Not to mention how ambitious this project is for an indie filmmaker. This dude is definitely going to make more movies, and some of them will be good. To sum it up - don't waste your time on "Mohawk" unless you are an aspiring director. But if you do - look for the good stuff and chose to ignore the sloppiness. This isn't a big production and deserves respect for what it is.

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.

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.

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...