Maneater (2007)
- Andrew Smith
- 3 hours ago
- 6 min read
"How do you hunt the predator when you are the prey?"
Plot
A Bengal tiger escapes from a traveling carnival and finds it's way into the woods outside a small town where it soon stakes its territory and begins hunting and killing any people who happen to stray into the woods. It's up to the local sheriff to find and kill the tiger but how do you take down a six-hundred pound killing machine?
Review
Whilst finishing my monthly trawl through the newest releases over at Amazon, I came across a series of films featuring one of my favourite horror sub-genres - that of animals killing people. The ‘Maneater’ series made for The Sci-Fi Channel has featured plenty of clichés in the form of Shark Swarm (predictably dull killer shark flick) and Croc (absolutely dire killer crocodile flick) and they've also given the killer treatment to spiders, squid, ants and, unusually enough, monkeys (don't worry I've seen them all now). There are not an awful lot of tigers-run-amok films (well not compared to killer shark films anyway) so it's not like you'll have seen it all before. Actually, you will have seen it all before as Maneater follows the ‘killer animal on the loose in remote community’ formula to the latter. But that doesn't mean to say it does a bad job.
The good thing about picking a relatively ‘normal’ animal to turn into a killer for a horror film is evident. I say relatively ‘normal’ because tigers can be trained to respond to situations by professional handlers (within reason) whereas squids or sharks - let me see you try and get them to do circus tricks. I think back to killer baboon flick Shakma to know that real animals can be absolutely terrifying when they’re put in front of the camera. The tiger they use in Maneater is mostly real, save for an odd CGI shot when needed. When you have scenes of an actual real life 600-pound Bengal tiger stalking through deserted suburban streets, it injects a genuine visceral element of danger and unpredictability into the frame. The camera captures a real apex predator moving through a human environment. Your brain recognises that this isn't a digital creation. It has weight. You can see the muscles rolling under the fur. It has gravity. The subconscious part of your brain that evolved to be afraid of predators like this kind of lights up because it recognises a real threat, not just a bunch of pixels programmed to look scary. Ultimately, the great thing with the tiger is that it's a real animal - not some genetically enhanced super monster like Sharktopus or one of the giant snakes from the Anaconda series. It's a real tiger and therefore it will have limitations and weaknesses, but also be one of the most efficient killers on the planet.
But this grounded choice comes with a massive logistical wall. You have a real tiger, which is great for tension, but for obvious safety reasons, you cannot film a real tiger attacking and mauling an actor. The insurance alone would shut down the production, let alone the ethics and safety violations. So consequently, most of the actual deaths in Maneater happened completely off-screen - those expecting the scary-looking thing on the front cover to maul away on some rednecks are going to be disappointed. For safety reasons, filming a real tiger attacking an actor isn't the best idea in the world and the more the tiger was on screen, the more it needed to have been filmed to begin with. I guess there are some drawbacks of not using CGI. You do get to see the tiger's handiwork in all of its glory with plenty of blood and limbs being left at the scene. It's just the initial attacks that are confined to your imagination. There are plenty of attacks throughout the film and a great job is done to turn the tiger into a real threat. If we are watching a film called Maneater, and we don't see the man eating happen, it could feel like a bit of a cheat to the audience. But confining the initial attacks to the audience's imagination works entirely in the film's favour here. The alternative is showing the attacks using terrible CGI and the moment you show a digital tiger that is poorly composited, it would kill any sense of danger or peril that had been built.
Gary Busey looks really desperate for work in this. I'm not criticising his performance as he's one of the best things of the film, it's just that he could quite easily command better roles. I mean who hasn't seen Lethal Weapon or Under Siege and thought Busey was a bad ass psycho in both films? He's good here as the sheriff and he still maintains that psychotic glint in his eye - this is a sheriff who is about two donuts away from snapping and killing everyone in sight. He has this incredible ability to project a volatile intensity but sadly must reign it in a little here as the ‘normal’ mayor. If you have an unpredictable apex predator in the woods, you don't want a boring, strait-laced hero trying to stop it. You want an authority figure who feels just as unhinged as the situation itself and Busey’s casting is perfect. If I was the tiger and took one glance at Busey in a deranged state, I'd find somewhere else to claim my territory.
Ian D. Clark portrays the English game hunter and, whilst his mannerisms and uber-posh accent ticked me off to no end (no one wears those pith helmets anymore, do they?) he still brings an ounce of dignity to the proceedings. His attitude towards the tiger and the respect he shows it is one of the reasons why the tiger works so well. Like the shark in Jaws for instance, the script does a good job of having the characters all show some level of respect and acknowledge at the damage and skill that their beast can do. Even if it’s not on the screen, the other characters are still building it up as a serious threat in the minds of the viewers. He’s doing heavy lifting for the audience's imagination. The character is basically the film’s way of telling the audience, look, I know this trope is a bit daft, but do not underestimate what is hiding out there in those woods, validating the fear the tiger creates.
If you've seen one of these ‘killer animal on the loose in remote community’ films than unfortunately you've seen them all and this one is no exception because they all follow the established Jaws template. The animal involved kills some people. The sheriff doesn't know what is going on at first until it finally dawns on him what they're up against. Some authority figure in town/community doesn't believe him and refuses to let the local festival/special event be disrupted by a load of nonsense about some killer animal roaming the area. An expert on the animal is called in or turns up. Said expert joins forces with the sheriff. Etc, etc. It's standard fare and Maneater doesn't do a lot to sway from the formula. A load of random non-characters get introduced as fodder for a few minutes prior to being chowed down by the animal. You've got joggers. You've got hunters. You've got police deputies. You've got soldiers. They're all here to up the body count. The film is well paced so there's never an overly dull moment and thanks to the wonders of using a real tiger, there is quite a lot of tension in some of the scenes of the group in the forest trying to find it. Unfortunately, the limitations of this formula keep Maneater trapped in an obvious pattern right from the start until the very end. It's predictable but at least it's not a total waste of your time.
Final Verdict
Maneater is proof that "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." It follows its rigid formula to the letter and manages to throw a few nice moments here and there to turn itself into a solid, if unremarkable, film. The real tiger injects enough visceral realism into the film to keep things from degenerating too much into nonsense and Busey is worth a watch.
 |
Maneater Director(s): Gary Yates Writer(s): Phillip Morton Actor(s): Gary Busey, Ian D. Clark, Ty Wood, Diana Reis, Kathryn Albertson, Evelyne Anderson, Mike Bell, Jessica Burleson Duration: 88 mins |  |
|---|
