Truly Dreadful Film

I was totally surprised at how great this film.You could feel your paranoia rise as the film went on and as you gradually learned the details of the real situation.

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

There are moments that feel comical, some horrific, and some downright inspiring but the tonal shifts hardly matter as the end results come to a film that's perfect for this time.

A group of young French Arabs in Paris wind up on the wrong side of the law during riots after the election of a right-wing minister. The group flee and end up at an inn run by neo-Nazis who aren't exactly as welcoming as one may think.I first saw this film sometime in 2007 when it was released in the United States, and recalled it being very gritty and troubling to the senses. Upon revisiting, I've found this still to be true, though now the context in which the film emerged is more clear. "Frontier(s)" is a prime example of the hard-edged French new wave horror cinema that gained traction in the early 2000s with films like "Irreversible," "High Tension," "Inside," "Martyrs," and the like. "Frontier(s)" falls in line with these films in that it creates a palpable sense of dread—it's almost unbearable to sit through, not only because of the violence, but also because the entire thing is shrouded in hopelessness. Where it differs is its overt political themes and irony. What better place for a group of young French Arabs to end up during a right-wing election than an inn owned by neo-Nazis? The cast here is strong all around, and are a large part of what keeps the tension and pathos at such a heightened level. The film spirals down out of control in the second half, with a final act that is as gratifying as it is disturbing. Bleak, pallid cinematography and compositions, along with a brooding musical score also contribute to the film's unnerving demeanor.All in all, I found that while I understood "Frontier(s)" more clearly on a cerebral level a decade later, it still retains the sense of hopelessness that made it an discomforting viewing experience in the first place. It's a well-made film with effective performances and cinematography. The narrative is fairly simple but not self-conscious about it, and doesn't overreach for the sake of overreaching. Overall, a bleak horror film that is commendable but somewhat of a chore to get through. 8/10.

What can I say about this movie that hasn't been said by others here? There is nothing new to it, nothing that you haven't already seen in Hostel, House of 1000 corpses or TCM. But what these movies do have got in atmosphere, this one lacks in great deal. The backstory is quite botch, little to no explanation is given about the existence of the "family", there are characters that are just mentioned but have no role whatsoever in the developing of the plot (the deformed/lunatic kids of the strange girl), you just see them for a fraction of a moment in a couple of scenes and that's all.Plenty of blood and gore, sure, if you love that, you won't be disappointed. But even on that side, nothing new. Lots of clichés, many predictable turns in the story (I understood exactly who was going to help the heroine close to the end of the film one hour in advance) and a bunch of senseless butchery among pig waste. It's not a total failure, but once again, nothing you haven't already seen before many times. Only for fanatics of the genre.

After watching 'High Tension', which has become my favorite horror movie since 'Kill List' and 'Martyrs' I was really excited to see 'Frontier(s)'. On some horror message boards it was listed up their with the aforementioned titles, so I was expecting it to be incredible. I have to say though, I'm a bit disappointed, because in the end, it just felt like rehashed material that tried to be original by putting it into a political context.If you've watched 'Deliverance' or 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre' this film will come as nothing new to you. It's another case of liberal city slickers (like myself) getting lost in the backwoods, and paying the price for meddling with ignorant red-neck scum. There's a lot of gore and violence in this movie, but what it lacks that 'Texas Chainsaw Massacre' was rich in, is atmosphere. There's no room with furniture made of skin and bones, and aside from some Nazi paraphernalia, this film kind of lacks in the macabre department.Another thing that bothered me was that I felt very unsympathetic towards the characters. Quite honestly they seemed like jerks so I couldn't really get that emotionally invested. Luckily the ending is good enough. I liked how after escaping her tormentors and taking off in a car, she hears that the current right wing politician has survived an assassination attack and then screams in agony. Ahead of her is either the military or police at a road stop, and she gets out and surrenders herself, realizing that her literal fight against a conservative far-right government is futile, and finally gives up. It would have been kind of cooler if instead she shot them all, because it's kind of depressing that she just turns herself in, but it still made the movie seem like there was some sort of point, other than just showing miserable ways that people can die and bleed.

I think many of these reviews are rather harsh. It wasn't worth spending money on, but the movie wasn't terrible. I think the premise wasn't necessarily bad, and while the backdrop of riots in Paris was reminiscent of 28 Days Later, it was a good way to start the movie. To be honest, I would've considered it good had they persisted with present day, real world issues instead of changing directions towards some depraved, ritualistic neo-Nazi sect in the countryside. The violence could have been used far more effectively as a depiction of real world struggles. Instead, it ended up being a French synthesis of two movies I can't help but despise: The Hills Have Eyes meets Texas Chainsaw Massacre.