Hoboken Hollow

Tagline should be - "Watching this movie....IS TORTURE"

Supposedly based on real life events on a Southern State ranch, the premise of this move has all the ingredients for a cult classic - murder, torture, cruelty, survival....... However the film seems to have been written and directed by someone who has never seen a movie before. The dialogue, editing and continuity of the film are all laughable. What on earth were Messrs Connery/Madsen/Hopper and Howell all thinking of ? Sure, none of these actors are A-Listers and have appeared in their fair share of turkeys but to stoop this low, I can only imagine the money must have been good or the Producer was one hell of a salesman. The movie even features a voice over sequence for much of Jason Connery's scenes that defies all logic. Dennis Hopper must have contributed about 25 minutes worth of his time for his particular paycheck, and the less said about Michael Madsens performance (or even a reason for his characters presence) the better.

If you see this in your local video store I recommend that unless you are a student of truly poor movie making, you walk on by and select any random film and you will have spent your money more wisely than hiring this garbage.

An absolute turkey.

PS If you enjoyed this movie, you may also enjoy watching paint dry.

My God, this film is crap. In the first few minutes, you get a feel of 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre', and not a good feeling either. I've came to the conclusion that any film that has Dennis Hopper associated now a days, makes it bad. Let's have a look back. His career started to take a downfall when he made the 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2', ever since, no one in Hollywood wants anything to do with them, since that monstrosity has come crap like 'Land of the Dead', which was George A. Romero's desperate attempt to get attention once again, any attention he'll be getting though is not good attention. And then we come to 'Hoboken Hollow', If you want my advice, please don't watch this movie because you'll be wanting that precious hour and a half back.

The comment during the credits that the film was 'inspired by true events' sets the scene for a truly dreadful piece of schlock that is more a pastiche of slashers such as Texas Chainsaw Massacre and The Hills Have Eyes, than it is likely to have anything to do with any real and tragic events.

The voice-over is wooden and unnecessary, highlighting the writer/director's lack of confidence in his ability to carry the story via the characters. Considering the quality of the dialogue, IMHO his lack of confidence is well founded, albeit it's his first outing as a director. Reasonable (and in some cases quality) actors struggle vainly with execrable passages - the tone is set early on in the dialogue between C Thomas Howell and Randy Spelling with their first van-load of transients. As both chew grimly on their lines and giggle inanely they seem more like naughty schoolboys who might slip a frog into Harry Potter's bunk than the seriously deranged, or dehumanised, monsters they attempt to portray.

How Dennis Hopper and Michael Madsen got involved in this piece is beyond understanding...and Hopper in particularly does seem to spend his few scenes looking embarrassed for all concerned.

If Glen Stephens goes on to direct further features, this viewer can only hope that he learnt plenty from his mistakes on this one.

The first thing you'll immediately notice about "Hoboken Hollow" (or at least I did) is the very, very extended cast list. The opening credits just don't stop introducing new names - among them a couple of very familiar ones like Dennis Hopper and Michael Madsen - and you promptly realize what this movie will lack are one or two actual leading characters. "Hoboken Hollow" is based on true events that probably did involve a lot of people, but perhaps writer/director Glen Stephens should have just focused on the kidnapping and torturing of hitch-hikers and homeless people instead of also wanting to narrate a dozen of redundant sub plots. The tale of the so-called "Texas Slave Ranch" basically revolved on a family of deranged hicks forcing random travelers to labor on their ranch, but the screenplay finds it absolutely necessary to throw in story lines about real-estate issues, soldiers with post-Iraq traumas and demented family relations. It also never feels as if the movie is inspired by true events. It's your average modern "torture-porn" flick with a lot of disgusting scenery and villains with terrible dental hygiene, but there never is any atmosphere of suspense or genuine morbidity to detect. And, now that we're being completely blunt and honest, this film will probably not even satisfy the real gorehounds and sick puppies among us. There's a fair share of carnage and repulsiveness on display, but the sickness-factor never approaches that of other "Torture Porn" flicks like, say, "Hostel", "Saw" or "Wolf Creek". The rape sequence is quite unpleasant to behold (as rape sequences always are), but the actual torture footage is limited to shots of the victims getting poked with an electric shock device and getting dragged behind a car. Glen Stephens may perhaps be a little over-ambitious, but – especially during a handful of isolated moments - his directing skills definitely show a lot of potential and he most certainly has a talented eye for appropriate casting. The aforementioned "bigger" stars Dennis Hopper and Michael Madsen only appear in small roles, but some of the other villains are aptly cast like C. Thomas Howell as the nastily grinning Clayton and Mark Holton (who played the titular role in "Gacy") as the slightly mentally unstable Weldon. Other remarkable B-movie names in the cast include Lin Shaye ("2000 Maniacs"), Robert Carradine, Dedee Pfeiffer and Randy Spelling. "Hoboken Hollow" is an overall weak and unsatisfying movie, but it's not entirely without interest for tolerant horror fanatics.

I chose this movie on a damp bank holiday weekend when funds were low and there was nothing on TV. The video shop had very few options, and to cut a long story short - I've had a thing for Michael Madson ever since Thelma and Louise, and even Kill Bill 2 (at a push).

Not only was he barely in it, he looked fat!!! "Never mind," I thought, "this is meant to be really scary and should be good," snuggling up to my boyfriend and turning the lights down low.

By the end of the film, my boyfriend was barely speaking to me, half furious, half bemused he stuttered, "I can't believe you brought that DVD in to our house".

This really, really is an awful film, the writing is so bad the "scary" bits are hilarious, so poorly acted that the "moving" bits are, again, hilarious. The characters are far-fetched and the plot is ridiculous.

The Dennis Hopper good cop/bad cop thread is predictable and boring, the bad characters are like pantomime villains (a woman with five warts on her face?!), the good characters are so dull, boring and naive for getting themselves in to the situation they are in leaves you tempted to track them down and torture them yourself... the rape scene was the only part of the film I found difficult to watch - and that is merely because rape in itself is a disgusting act that makes most people uneasy, and not that I was moved by the crude/ludicrous representation of such abuse by lame acting and the vision of ol' five warts lingering in the door way licking her lips... it was borderline insulting.

At the end I didn't care what happened, I just really didn't care. Incidentally, I also chose March of the Penguins on the same trip to the video shop.... How an unsuspecting an unpaid penguin can give off more screen presence and charisma is beyond me.