The Butcher (2006)

To me, this movie is perfection.

I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

A story that's too fascinating to pass by...

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

I bought this along with 400 other DVD's when one of our local video retail outlets liquidated and this film is better than the vast majority of that group."The Butcher" (2006) is basically a cut-rate combo of "Wrong Turn" (2003) and "Monster Man" (2003). Oddly, I liked this better than either of those films. Perhaps I tapped into the self-reflexive subtext. My reaction would be more negative if it had been a bigger production, but I tend to give a lot of points for quality production design on a limited budget and every bit of their budget makes it onto the screen.It looks like they shot the film at Camp Roberts, home of the California Army National Guard. Which would account for the use of the deuce and a half (M35) army truck to parody the action on "Duel" and "Monster Man".Don't seek this one out if you are expecting something original in the old familial horror genre (insert: "The American family as demented in-breds who lure victims to a home they have turned into a slaughterhouse" here). And don't expect a lot of well-staged action adventure segments or high-end special effects. And be prepared for another of those tired indestructible villain twists at the end.Like "Wrong Turn" they make the clueless mistake of killing off their hottest actress first, although at least here they wait until she has taken off her top.Fortunately Catherine Wreford's tight abs get plenty of screen time for the remainder of the film, so there is still something nice to look at for those who like that sort of thing. Wreford's "Rachel" is a pretty good plucky heroine (certainly better than Eliza Dushku's "Jessie") and handles the scream queen duties quite well. Annie Mackay (who looks a lot like Kristen Stewart) gives an excellent nonverbal performance.Then again, what do I know? I'm only a child.

I was glad I was exercising at home while this mind-numbing piece of drek droned on and on and on…. Otherwise, I would have completely wasted an hour and a half of my life – 90 minutes incidentally that felt like 90 days.I was reminded of some really bad low-budget sci-fi/horror flicks from the '50s, like The Beast With 50 Million Eyes. The Butcher contained some of the same, uh, qualities: no plot, bad writing, mostly annoying characters consistently blurting out stupid, senseless remarks. The director showed no ability for pacing (the film just sat there, congealing) or suspense or character development, i.e., there was NO pacing NO suspense NO interesting characters. As for the latter, it was hard to tell whether the actors & actresses could be any good, seeing how they were given so little of substance with which to work. As it stands on film, though, they either showed the emotions of a cardboard cut out or thrashed about in over-the-top fashion. And, yes, like some other reviewers, I too could not wait for several of the characters to meet their demise because they were SO annoying.I cannot think of anything redeeming about this dawg. It could never be a guilty pleasure for me, like Wrong Turn, for example. The filmmakers had two left feet and empty heads – and they forced their characters to wander around in the same way, dazed and dumb, with nothing to say. I felt tortured. Don't let it happen to you. You have been forewarned.

Did you saw Texas Chainsaw Massacre, See No Evil, Wrong Turn, Hills have eyes, Wolf Creek, House of 1000 Corpses, 1001 maniacs? If yes - you wont see anything NEW. Again some teenagers going into trip and of course their car is broken... YES - it happens in the woods, in isolated place, and YES - they're haunted by some ugly freak... I rated it 4, but if I would never saw those movies that i mention in the beginning, i would give 6. I think that Texas Chainsaw producers should do something with that... almost all movies i watched past 2 years are similar. Aren't laws protect the story? I got tired of this... I guess within 3 months I will see another "edited" copy of same story.

I saw this movie with the feeling that it probably wouldn't be good. But there are movies that are bad but still kind of good if you know what I mean. As in B-movies, they are done with a sense of style and they are charming that way. This movie didn't even achieve that. So why do I feel this way? Well, let us begin with the acting. The actors, or the people as I would like to refer them as, were horrible and I don't mean horrible as in horror, I mean that they really and utterly sucked. For example, if my friend got chopped in half I would be shocked and devastated. I got the feeling that these "actors" didn't deliver that. In fact, they weren't even close.But, bad acting is something I can live with. We have all seen that before. But does it end there? Hell no, there is more. Let's look at the special effects. The FX in this one is way below average. In one scene we see smoke coming out of the woods in a distance. My question: Was it necessary to animate that? I can understand the need of computing animation in such films as Star Wars, X-Men, King Kong, Hulk and so on.. These guys didn't have the time or the knowledge to make a real fire to deliver real smoke. No, they animated it! And guess what.. it didn't even look good. The gore wasn't good either. In fact, there was no innovative ideas at all. The murder scenes was something that we have all seen before in other movies. This leads me to my final and absolutely most important argument. I wonder how much of the script that was written by hand. I guess that 95% was done with the "Copy & Paste" method. Being influenced by other movies is nothing new. We have seen this phenomenon numerous times. BUT, you can show your influences with style. As a tribute to the old classics. It is cleared beyond every doubt that this movie didn't have the motif to give tribute to these movies. This is clearly a ripoff in order to make money. It's bad enough if a movie has 1 ripoff but this one has more and that makes it a whole lot worse.Let's start with "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre". We can see resemblances clear as the blue sky in this one. How about The Butcher himself, this character is very much like Leatherface. In one scene he even use a chainsaw just to ensure the audience that this is a RIPOFF (as if we didn't noticed that). There are scenes that are completely and directly adapted. While I was watching this abomination, right about 20 minutes I said to my friend that this movie will probably end up with the exact ending as in "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and guess what, it did and I'm not a psychic. That sure says a lot. Oh man, it doesn't end here, no no ah ah, there is more. We see huge resemblances to "The People Under The Stairs" and there is probably even more ripoffs if you just think about it.The only thing that was good was the title. But, the bad thing is that the title doesn't go along with the story at all. The Butcher could have been a good horror movie if we replaced the director, the whole film-crew and all of the actors. Then, only then, there would be a chance of success. I'm still amazed that this movie got distribution and a release.Don't support the people behind this movie by spending money on it. Instead I encourage you to download it so that you can enjoy deleting it.