One of Rutger Hauer's better movies, where he plays a nuanced "villain" who is not all bad.
It has the feel of having a decent budget, good cast and competent direction, generating some tension and suspense, and also succeeds in creating a strong sense of place, including slow pan shots of impressive Alaskan mountain scenery and a plot that incorporates nice details of wilderness "trade craft" that remind the viewer of the unforgiving environment the characters are living in.
I found the town characters to be interesting and quirky and as developed as they needed to be for this type of movie, but the villains were another story, as I found it hard to accept that hard core Mountain men might sit around discussing whether one of them had self-esteem issue, which accounted for his overly aggressive behaviour, or what his gun might symbolise. The character of Lemalle was a bit over the top to be credible to me, in any situation his attitude was always ultra-aggressive, brandishing his rifle and threating to kill everyone (although, in retrospect, I don't recall that he actually directly killed anyone, just shot up vehicles and other inanimate objects, which I consider a point in favour of the movies realism).
Where it gets tricky, in terms of the morality portrayed, is around the actions of Rutgers character and how the audience may feel about him, which is the core of the movie, as it should be, and will determine the success or otherwise of the film in the mind of the viewer. In the initial encounter with Eric Desmond, Lemalle the crazy-man is restrained by Rutger. Then, in the confrontation with the amateur hunters, Lemalle the crazy-man provokes the violence, but it is knife throwing Rutger who does the killing, albeit in self-defence (or rather to defend Lemalle). All good so far
However, later, Rutger accidentally kills the loveable old sheriff, while attempting to escape, and this is where some (including me) may have a problem. When it comes what happens at the end of the movie. I'll also take the opportunity here to address another reviewers mystification over the body hung up in the tree. As Desmond had decided to keep the death of the old Sheriff a secret for the time being, in order to avoid Rutgers trapper allies from gaining any additional information as to what was going on which might help them to rescue him, he needed to store the body. The reason for hauling the body up into a tree was in order to try and prevent it from being mutilated or eaten by wolves or bears.
The other moment which causes a problem for me is when Rutger throws the pick axe one handed and kills... Lemalle!. And also from finding that the distance he throws the axe stretches my credibility beyond breaking point (as this is not the sort of movie where the audience expects that the laws of physics will been thrown out the window). Now, while I understand how the writers found they had painted themselves into a corner, with Rutgers brother being the only trapper left in potentially realistic working order (anyone in an action movie can quickly shake off a fall), but not being an acceptable candidate to be killed with the pickaxe. So they left him behind with a final quip about it "not being his year", re-activated evil Lemalle from his hot tub and had him somehow find the energy to walk all the way up to the factory, despite having been shot in the chest. I know movies have a long tradition of villain's apparently rising from the grave to provide an additional twist, but in this case I found it a bit confusing. The juxtaposition of the brother with the sudden re-appearance of Lemalle bamboozled me at the time into thinking it was the brother that Rutger had killed with the pickaxe, and wondering how he could do that and show no emotion afterwards. I admit they did included a shot of the empty hot tub simmering, to imply he had got out, but at the time it just confused me further.
So for me the movie unravels a bit at that point, and later when Desmond decides to allow wounded Rutger to go off and (probably) die, on his own terms in the wintery wilderness. I was conflicted by thoughts of the loveable old Sheriff and whether Rutger deserved such consideration. But I guess that ambiguity is part of the purpose of the story.
It has the feel of having a decent budget, good cast and competent direction, generating some tension and suspense, and also succeeds in creating a strong sense of place, including slow pan shots of impressive Alaskan mountain scenery and a plot that incorporates nice details of wilderness "trade craft" that remind the viewer of the unforgiving environment the characters are living in.
I found the town characters to be interesting and quirky and as developed as they needed to be for this type of movie, but the villains were another story, as I found it hard to accept that hard core Mountain men might sit around discussing whether one of them had self-esteem issue, which accounted for his overly aggressive behaviour, or what his gun might symbolise. The character of Lemalle was a bit over the top to be credible to me, in any situation his attitude was always ultra-aggressive, brandishing his rifle and threating to kill everyone (although, in retrospect, I don't recall that he actually directly killed anyone, just shot up vehicles and other inanimate objects, which I consider a point in favour of the movies realism).
Where it gets tricky, in terms of the morality portrayed, is around the actions of Rutgers character and how the audience may feel about him, which is the core of the movie, as it should be, and will determine the success or otherwise of the film in the mind of the viewer. In the initial encounter with Eric Desmond, Lemalle the crazy-man is restrained by Rutger. Then, in the confrontation with the amateur hunters, Lemalle the crazy-man provokes the violence, but it is knife throwing Rutger who does the killing, albeit in self-defence (or rather to defend Lemalle). All good so far
However, later, Rutger accidentally kills the loveable old sheriff, while attempting to escape, and this is where some (including me) may have a problem. When it comes what happens at the end of the movie. I'll also take the opportunity here to address another reviewers mystification over the body hung up in the tree. As Desmond had decided to keep the death of the old Sheriff a secret for the time being, in order to avoid Rutgers trapper allies from gaining any additional information as to what was going on which might help them to rescue him, he needed to store the body. The reason for hauling the body up into a tree was in order to try and prevent it from being mutilated or eaten by wolves or bears.
The other moment which causes a problem for me is when Rutger throws the pick axe one handed and kills... Lemalle!. And also from finding that the distance he throws the axe stretches my credibility beyond breaking point (as this is not the sort of movie where the audience expects that the laws of physics will been thrown out the window). Now, while I understand how the writers found they had painted themselves into a corner, with Rutgers brother being the only trapper left in potentially realistic working order (anyone in an action movie can quickly shake off a fall), but not being an acceptable candidate to be killed with the pickaxe. So they left him behind with a final quip about it "not being his year", re-activated evil Lemalle from his hot tub and had him somehow find the energy to walk all the way up to the factory, despite having been shot in the chest. I know movies have a long tradition of villain's apparently rising from the grave to provide an additional twist, but in this case I found it a bit confusing. The juxtaposition of the brother with the sudden re-appearance of Lemalle bamboozled me at the time into thinking it was the brother that Rutger had killed with the pickaxe, and wondering how he could do that and show no emotion afterwards. I admit they did included a shot of the empty hot tub simmering, to imply he had got out, but at the time it just confused me further.
So for me the movie unravels a bit at that point, and later when Desmond decides to allow wounded Rutger to go off and (probably) die, on his own terms in the wintery wilderness. I was conflicted by thoughts of the loveable old Sheriff and whether Rutger deserved such consideration. But I guess that ambiguity is part of the purpose of the story.