Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer (2007)

After viewing "Still Life", a short film directed by Jon Knautz, I was genuinely excited for his feature film debut, "Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer". "Still Life" had perfectly captured the essence and feel of an episode of "The Twilight Zone" and I was eager to see what Knautz could do when taking on the horror-comedy genre. The campy nature of the name and promotional materials suggested something along the lines of "Evil Dead" or "Army of Darkness"; a fun, gory, 80's style horror flick with lots of monsters. While that was what Knautz was going for, he utterly fails at capturing any of the fun or entertainment value these movies had.

The problem with "Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer" is that it completely lacks an understanding of what made these horror-comedies, that it tries to evoke, so great in the first place. Two-thirds of the running time is primarily devoted to the film's hero, Jack Brooks, a plumber and college student, as he goes to class and attempts to deal with his uncontrollable bursts of anger. There's nary a monster in sight for the greater part of the film, barely even a drop of blood or the slightest attempt at anything horror-related. Even if "Evil Dead" or "Dead Alive" had subsequent amounts of the gore cut out, they'd still be entertaining. "Jack Brooks" isn't. It's plain boring, which is the worst thing a film of this nature can be. Jack Brooks himself is not all that interesting, at least not enough to warrant the amount of screen time he's given. All one needs to know about him is revealed in the films first ten minutes and from that point on, whenever he's not beating the pulp out of a monster (and he rarely does), he's not worth watching. The movie goes nowhere, following him around on psychiatric sessions and scuffles with classmates.

Eventually things do pick up. Jack Brooks battles a few monsters, some heads are crushed, a few humans are slaughtered, and then it's over. Just like that. All within the span of about fifteen minutes. It is a good fifteen minutes. The monsters are all fairly inventive (and done entirely in camera) and there's some great gore gags (the best being a zombies head crushed in), but after sitting through seventy-five minutes of pure tedium, fifteen minutes just isn't going to cut it.

That's really all there is to it. I could ramble on about the acting which is fairly well done (especially horror icon Robert Englund in a non-traditional role) and how the creature prosthetics are a nice throwback to the days when films didn't use CGI, but it really doesn't matter. "Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer" is utterly boring and while Jon Knautz obviously does have the talent to create a good film (once again, the last fifteen minutes are killer and "Still Life" was amazing – check it out), "Jack Brooks" completely misses the mark. It has its successes (acting, make-up), but those don't change the fact that it's not very entertaining at all. The screening I caught this at had the director and cast in attendance. One piece of information I picked up was that a sequel was in development and that this time, it would focus more on fighting monsters as opposed to "the creation of a hero". My advice: skip this one and wait for the sequel.

Fmovies: I really liked this movie simply because I identified and loved the Jack Brooks character so much. The purpose of the movie is to show a regular guy who is frustrated with the world around him trying to find his niche. What's so entertaining and hilarious is watching Jack blow in situations we all would like to blow up in while earnestly trying to trying to fit in and be normal.

I think this movie has a very strong Canadian sensibility which some Americans just don't see the humor in. I'm reminded a lot of Trailer Park Boys, which I personally find hilarious, but understandably some people just don't get. This kind of material is funny if you find the humor in lower/lower middle class life and the types of struggles you have to deal with when you belong to those classes.

This movie isn't a mindless slaughter-fest but instead focuses on the human element with humor and heart. If you enjoyed films like Shaun of the Dead that uses the horror genre as a backdrop to help bring out humorous yet relatable human struggles into focus then you'll like Jack Brooks. If your looking for a non-stop deluge of blood and a forgettable human characters whose only purpose is to be slaughtered then I suggest you look elsewhere.

"Jack Brooks Monster Slayer," is not a good movie. In fact, it is a big letdown. While the production quality and tongue in cheek use of rubber costumes reflects the moderately large budget, the story itself is both flawed and boring. The culprit of the failings is found in the assumptions made by the film makers. By focusing on monster creation process, the film neglects important character development and playful action. Overall, this is a film to be missed. Admittedly, "JBMS," will strike a chord with some nostalgia buffs; yet, as a film, this is little more than a mediocre rehash of genre clichés.

The downfall of this film is two assumptions. First, the makers assume that showing the history and creation of the monster is both necessary and amusing. Second, supplying detail to the above mentioned monster ontology is assumed to also be necessary and interesting. Neither assumption is wrong, per se. The execution in this film, however, is outright boring. An extended example may help to clarify. Cooking shows run a tenuous line. Watching the act of creation is interesting and informative. Detailing every action that goes into dish preparation is dull. A cooking program needs to find a balance between informative exposition and potentially dull but important detail. The answer seems to be that every part of a cooking show is a mix of technique and technique explanation. As such, breaking down an onion is shown because it informs on knife technique in practice and also illustrates the benefits of uniform piece size in cooking. Peeling a potato or boiling water is not shown because they are important techniques that benefit little from being demonstrated. The point is that all elements of the process are evaluated on the levels of understanding that are conveyable. The same is true for the horror film. A background to the protagonist and antagonist is appreciated as long as it sets the current context as well as developing the actual characters. "JBMS," provides a great amount of detail concerning how the main monster is formed. The slow transition from human to demon is the body of the film. Choosing this transition as the focal point of the story leads to a ninety minute film; a ninety minute film that could very easily have been forty minutes. Furthermore, the added detail affords no real development. To the contrary, the monster development is the cinematic equivalent to watching a trained chef peel a potato. Essentially, this film would have benefited from a focus on devious monster action and not hum drum monster ontology.

The above stated, the film is not a total loss. The characters are likable enough, and Robert Englund clearly enjoyed this production. The use of rubber suits as opposed to CGI is a welcome throwback to the creature films of the eighties and before. The unfortunate fact of the matter is that these benefits do not come near enough to balancing out the dry, elongated, boring story telling. This film is worth a miss. I am loathe to recommend this movie even to the horror/comedy buff. There are a great many more interesting and better told stories that are actually worthy of one's time.

On a personal note, I will mention this film to friends as a real Turkey. Unfortunately, this will almost guarantee that it is seen by at least one more person. Should you feel the need to hunt this film down, the movie is best paired with low expectations and somewhat sloppy drunkenness.

Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer fmovies. The ambitions of director Jon Knautz and his entire cast & crew were obviously limited, but nevertheless admirable. All they ever intended to do was bring homage to the glorious horror decade of the 80's and make a nonsensical movie with clichéd themes, stereotypical characters and over-the-top gooey make-up effects reminiscent to the movies the young filmmakers grew up with, like "The Evil Dead" and "Demons". I saw this film at the Belgian Fantasy Film Festival, were it fulfilled the role of ideal midnight movie crowd-pleaser. "Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer" offers plenty of splatter, absurdly crude humor, identifiable anti-hero characters, silly story lines and – last not least – Robert Englund himself in another terrific supportive B-role. Jack Brooks is an ordinary twenty-something man, working as a plumber during the day and attending chemistry classes in the evening in order to reach a more valuable certificate. He suffers from one major problem, though. Ever since he helplessly witnessed his family getting butchered by a forest monster as a child, Jack can't control his anger and regularly suffers from aggressive outbursts. When his teacher, Professor Crowley, gradually transforms into a monstrous entity after a plumbing job gone awry, Jack comes to realize the monster slaying business is exactly the type of anger management he needed. "Monster Slayer" is pretty weak in the plotting department, as you can see, but this widely gets compensated by the enthusiast spirit and determination of everybody involved in the production. The film starts off a little slow and hesitant, but once Prof Crowley starts undergoing his transformation, there's no more stopping the camp and cheese! You can clearly notice how genre veteran Robert Englund enjoyed helping out the young crew and the make-up department seemingly just received a carte-blanche. The monster designs and demonic grimaces are delightfully cheesy and gross, just like they were in the 1980's, and the film constantly remains comical and light-headed in spite of the gory bloodshed. Trevor Matthews is terrific as the reluctant Bruce "Ash" Campbell typed horror Savior and he receives good support from various other young and (still) unknown players. "Jack Brooks: Monster Slayer" is a totally unpretentious and entertaining throwback to B-cinema, and even though it'll never be regarded as a classic, it's warmly recommended viewing for all fans of the genre.

i've heard lots of people go back and forth about this flick, so I decided to pick it up. I must say, I was EXTREMELY impressed. Newcomer Trevor Matthews (Jack Brooks) has the potential to be the next Bruce Campbell. I think the plot and action sequences, while they've been done before (for the most part), were still done in an original way. The best part of this film would be the brilliant performance of horror vet Robert Englund.

This film is honestly a refreshing step back in to the glory of days of mid-80's gore. It is definitely in the same vein of modern gems such as Feast, and is even comparable to solidified classics such as Evil Dead, and Dead Alive.

All-in-all, I highly recommend this flick to anyone who wants to have some fun, and ACTUALLY be entertained while watching a movie.

I hope the sequel gets made soon.

This is one of the most fun horror movies I have seen all year. It is pretty original (although, in one scene a bit similar to Jason Goes to Hell), has good acting, nice gore/slime, and Robert Englund! What more would a fan want? The comedy is funny, and Jack is a character you want to root for in the end. The only flaw really, is that it does take a long time to get into the action. But up until then, it is still extremely entertaining, and pretty funny. It i a great homage to b-rated monster films from the 50's, and is a must for any horror fan. The cinemagoraphy is creative in parts, and the effects are really good. Watch this now!