The title of the movie intrigued me: after all, how could a horror movie that looked at the inner workings of The Mad Hatter NOT be fun and scary? Even the Disney version of the Mad Hatter was creepy in his own right. But this movie followed the pattern of The Black Dahlia, using what should have been the main focus of the film as a set piece on which to hang the suggestion of a plot. It was truly an embarrassing effort turned out by people who should know better. Speaking of "people who should know better," I should have known better than to stick around when the professor described the hatter's parties as "drug-fueled orgies."
No effort was made to give any dimension to the hatter. At one point, he was described as "the best hatter." At another, it's explained that he may have gone mad because he lost his business. No explanation was given for any of it: did he have innovative designs that somehow went wrong? Did someone die from one of his creations? No one expects a lot of character development in a horror movie, but devoting more than two lines to his life history might have been nice. How about a few facts slipping their way in? The hatter could have gone mad simply BECAUSE he was so successful. The chemicals hatters used to cure hides for their hat-making were, in fact, poisons. Mercury could be considered a cause for his madness. Think about how much better this could have been: the popular and successful hatter invites the wealthy people of the area to his house for a fancy dress ball. A few people in the scene comment about how his behavior has changed and it's good seeing him get "back to normal." Instead of the house getting burned down, he poisons them all and watches them drop, one by one. What he didn't notice that one of the party-goers has given his daughter a poisoned petit four. She dies, too, as he cradles her in his arms. Then, having eaten nothing during his party, he goes into the dining room, props her up in a chair with food on her plate, and sits near her to consume a feast. THEN he intentionally burns the place, to "purify" it.
Dang, I might have to write that myself.
It would have taken just a few minutes to give the plot a strong premise, one that would have worked so much better. However, it's 2021 and 2021 seems to demand wokeness and debauchery. What a shame.
No effort was made to give any dimension to the hatter. At one point, he was described as "the best hatter." At another, it's explained that he may have gone mad because he lost his business. No explanation was given for any of it: did he have innovative designs that somehow went wrong? Did someone die from one of his creations? No one expects a lot of character development in a horror movie, but devoting more than two lines to his life history might have been nice. How about a few facts slipping their way in? The hatter could have gone mad simply BECAUSE he was so successful. The chemicals hatters used to cure hides for their hat-making were, in fact, poisons. Mercury could be considered a cause for his madness. Think about how much better this could have been: the popular and successful hatter invites the wealthy people of the area to his house for a fancy dress ball. A few people in the scene comment about how his behavior has changed and it's good seeing him get "back to normal." Instead of the house getting burned down, he poisons them all and watches them drop, one by one. What he didn't notice that one of the party-goers has given his daughter a poisoned petit four. She dies, too, as he cradles her in his arms. Then, having eaten nothing during his party, he goes into the dining room, props her up in a chair with food on her plate, and sits near her to consume a feast. THEN he intentionally burns the place, to "purify" it.
Dang, I might have to write that myself.
It would have taken just a few minutes to give the plot a strong premise, one that would have worked so much better. However, it's 2021 and 2021 seems to demand wokeness and debauchery. What a shame.