“A Hard Place” (2025) is about a group of criminals who find themselves in the crosshairs of a feud between the monsters that rule the day, and the creatures that rule the night. The criminals may be more connected to this unfamiliar world than they realize. This independent horror film may have been fun for everyone to make, but if you are not personally connected to anyone in the movie, you probably will not enjoy it. Cannot recommend.
The gang consists of Fish (Rachel Amanda Bryant), her brother, Steve (Steven Morris), the trigger-happy Candy (Jennifer Michelle Stobe II), Candy’s smitten partner, Hurt (Kevin Caliber), the mastermind and siblings’ mother, Zenia (Lynn Lowry), and Zenia’s equal/possible partner with dark circles under his eyes, White (Scott Alan Ward). They go to an empty drive-in to pick up a mysterious silver briefcase. The contents are never revealed, and Fish believes that it is supposed to be one last heist where no one gets hurt because that is how that normally goes. Candy ended up being the most disappointing character because people get the drop on her so quickly then she devolves into a screaming mess until the eleventh hour, but no one is going to forget that when things get hard, she folds.
When things go wrong, the gang decides to hide out in a barn, but again, the best laid plans of mice and men go awry. They encounter the unexplained. Initially the supernatural forces seem inventive, but as “A Hard Place” unfolds, it becomes apparent that they are simultaneously extremely derivative and underwritten. Guardians are like a nonverbal, live action Groot meets the tree roots from “The Evil Dead” (1981) with Poison Ivy’s stylist, less rapey, and more homicidal like zombies. Their scream rivals the aliens in “Invasion of the Body Snatchers” (1978). I’ve never seen “The Last of Us,” but it could explain why plant creatures act like zombies. Despite having no dialogue, their head, Sylvain (Miranda Bourke), is probably the most interesting character. Bourke may be the best actor in the bunch because she has an amazing, determined walk and somehow does not seem ridiculous with that Halloween blonde wig on her head.
Because this gang has never seen “Deliverance” (1972), they are relieved and trust the people with shot guns and country accents who rescue them even though their rescuers force them to come to their house. Even though it is a large group, the gang is not even a little concerned that they describe themselves as if they are a family. This group is supposed to be funny and endearing simply because of their rambling raconteur style and profane rough women, but this movie is not “Supernatural,” so the humor falls completely flat and wears out its welcome long before the bit ends. A big joke is that the women may be tougher than the men and definitely more rapey, which is when Hunt’s role expands along with some exploitive shirtless shots. Maybe it would work if any of the characters felt like three dimensional individuals, but these characters are so archetypical that it is hard to get invested in anyone.
It is a surprise to no one when it turns out that the rescuers are actually not what they appear to be. The rescuers describe themselves as the Caretakers, moon activated like werewolves, but are so otherwise ill-defined that it is not even possible to seriously describe what they look like when they transform: budget Hulk with stripes. Because they can talk and live in a society that resembles human society, maybe cowriter Michael J. Epstein and cowriter and director J. Horton intended for movie watchers to root for them over the Guardians, but it had the opposite intended effect. Team Guardians all the way.
The conflict between the Caretakers and the Guardians felt ripped off from the “Underworld” franchise. If the movie revealed who the hybrid was, it was unclear, and that hybrid was anticlimactic with zero powers. If the movie did not, it is such a damning mistake that it somehow made a bad movie worse. There is a throwaway line about the Garden of Eden that goes nowhere and appears to be a random comment, not related to the actual mythology, which is another pearl on the missed opportunity strand. Among the Caretakers, there is a bit of a revolution occurring between the head, Ma, aka Henrietta (Felissa Rose), and her daughter, Naja (Ashley Undercuffler), but when that thread is pulled, cue more underwhelming reveals that seem to change nothing. It is implied that the whole point of leadership change is to stop the current conflict, but when Fish digs deeper, Naja basically shrugs. So, there is no point other than Naja is cooler and seems to be into miscegenation.
There is supposed to be a sapphic attraction between Fish and Naja, but there is no chemistry. Undercuffler holds up her end of the bargain and is at least brooding and mysterious, but Bryant is like Dua Lipa before she got dancing lessons. Give us nothing, queen. Initially Fish appears to be the protagonist since she is the first character with hopes and dreams, but it does not last long so it is easy for her to get lost in the shuffle. Either Naja or Sylvain should have been the main character, but they are often in the margins. Rule number one: the most interesting characters who clash with the status quo should be front and center as protagonists. There is nothing wrong with having an ensemble cast, but usually someone is the driving force. Not in “A Hard Place.”
Entertainment is a consistent theme within “A Hard Place.” The popular movie in the region, “AbductDead,” stars Bai Ling, Glenn Plummer and Sadie Katz. It is a zombie movie that plays on television and at the drive in, and it is only slightly better than the movie around it. There is also a sex education film on human reproduction that appears to exist so supporters of the film can have cameos because their performance feels very wacky and over-the-top, which fits in with the stereotypical hillbilly comedy, but unfortunately means it is just as funny so not at all. This informational video is supposed to tie into the Caretakers’ plot, but that theme goes nowhere. It felt provocative and promising to treat human beings like animals, but the filmmakers never thought beyond the concept and failed to cross the threshold of their idea.
Some low budget movies are good because with money, the stories’ execution would improve. Others are good because of the talent or the direction. Sadly “A Hard Place” is not one of those movies. The filmmakers get points for deviating from the standard movie monsters, but they lack originality and are so underwritten, it is hard to get into the film. If you see the poster, you have seen the best part of the film. The film’s best trait is the that the filmmakers conceived and made a film, which then got distributed, thus beating the odds of better films that never emerged from someone’s mind or made it to a distributor and stay lying on some metaphorical shelf unrealized and unwatched. Determination, not quality, makes a movie, but it does not make a movie worth watching.
