[Editorial] And What of the Women of Snow Hollow?

Horror-comedy The Wolf of Snow Hollow (2020) reached top horror lists and received an 89 percent score on Rotten Tomatoes and 3.5 out of 4 stars on Roger Ebert. By this standard, one would think this is a good film. One of the reasons for this surprisingly high score could be due to the high proportion of male reviewers (Male Critics Outnumber Female Two to One) and I assume that they were not watching this film from a female perspective. Luckily, I am here for you. 

Trigger warning for mentions of sexual assault. 

The film’s theme is male responsibility and the pressures that come with it, from being a good father, son and husband to being a leader, friend and colleague and more importantly, how this pressure and society’s perception of what it is to ‘be a man’ can amplify behaviours we more widely identify as toxic masculinity. Jim Cummings (lead actor, writer and director) attempts to tackle this theme by sacrificing the female characters. 

Women are the main victims of toxic masculinity and the general patriarchy as it was recently reported that 97% of women between the ages of 18-24 have experienced sexual harassment. In The Wolf of Snow Hollow, four of the Wolf’s victims are female. The script uses language like “bitch” and “fucking wife” with nonchalance, illustrating the film does not respect its female characters. Instead, one could argue, they are merely bodies to further the plot and male character development. For a film released in 2020, The Wolf of Snow Hollow  might be trying to shed light on the hot topic of the moment, but it is also treading carefully not to alienate half of its potential audience: men.  

The film’s anti-hero is John Marshall (Jim Cummings), who is the ‘next in line’ Sheriff of the icy, isolated town of Snow Hollow. John is introduced at an AA meeting where he tells the group he is an alcoholic and has been sober for 3 years. As he explains his recovery he mentions his ex-wife, to which he ‘woofs’ imitating a dog, subtly calling her ugly and a bitch, neither is respectful . However, in the same breath explains he cannot say a “cross-word against her” as she is the mother of his daughter, Jenna (Chloe East) who he also has a fractious relationship with. In addition, we learn his mum left him when he was a boy which appears to be the film’s explanation of why he has such issues with women – how original. 

John meets Officer Julia Robson (Riki Lindhome) at the murder scene of the first victim, Brianne (Annie Hamilton), who was on holiday from the city with her boyfriend PJ (Jimmy Tatro) when she was attacked by someone in the dark. Julia is clearly professional and competent at her job, providing all the details to John in short clipped sentences. However,  she also has her own experiences of being a woman in Snow Hollow, such as being called a ‘bitch’ by locals and overlooked for the Sheriff’s position she is best suited for. The victim’s vagina has been taken as part of the murder which later lead the cops to speculate. John hypothesises it was taken as a flesh-light trophy. Another cop offers sympathy to the boyfriend, proclaiming it is “the ultimate blue balls story”. Brianne, in death, has been reduced to only being an object for sexual gratification,  she is no longer a woman who had a partner, family, dog or autonomy. These men, who are to resolve the case, display no empathy for the victim. It is possible that this is intended to be the ‘comedy’ part of the horror-comedy we are promised as the genre. I don’t know about you, but I am not laughing.  

We meet the next murdered woman, Hannah (Hannah Elder) a snowboard instructor. At night, she tells her friend she is off to see, presumably, an ex-boyfriend to which her friend asks why she continues to go back to men who treat her badly. This rhetoric of women deserving to get hurt because they choose ‘bad men’ can often be the go-to comment from incels/ nice-guys ‘if she went out with a nice guy like me then she wouldn’t have been murdered’. I would argue that the film sets up the idea that Hannah ‘deserved’ to be killed- she is the one going out to meet her shit ex-boyfriend, she is the one walking in a dark car park towards her awesome van and she is the one who has headphones in so she cannot hear her surroundings. Is this the triple threat bingo of victim-blaming? And if you are surprised that the film does not have Hannah dressed in something ‘provocative’ then don’t worry friend, because shortly thereafter John blames his daughter for dressing inappropriately and attracting unwanted attention. 

As Hannah is attacked by the werewolf, the scene is juxtaposed with John meeting his ex-wife Brittany (Rachel Jane Day) in the diner where she is cussing John out for not committing to their daughter, Jenna’s, college orientation. This scene of Brittany being stereotypically ‘bitchy’ while also watching Hannah being brutally torn limb from limb is jarring. Is the film saying that women verbally rip apart men so in turn they deserve to be physically ripped apart? What is driving this directorial decision to mash up the two tones of these scenes? Is it for the ‘comedy’ value because for me, watching a woman be a ‘bitch’ as a man rolls his eyes while also watching another man butcher a defenceless woman does not fill me with the funnies.  It does not even give Hannah the respect to be the sole focus in her own murder scene.

The third victim is Liz who is sitting in the café when a tall, hooded man walks in and asks increasingly private questions-what school did she go to, is her hair always this colour and does she like the blue car she drives. Sensing she  is in danger, she calls the police, who conduct an interview but shortly after, let Julia go. . She drives home but not before being stopped and attacked by the werewolf. Despite reporting it to the Police (whose duty it is to protect her) they have failed to act and now, as a result she has  fallen victim to another attack.. This rhetoric we know all too well is a similar sentiment as to why many women do not come forward as victims of sexual assault, harassment and stalking for fear of not being believed and potential inaction by those who should protect. 

Like Hannah’s murder, the scene is played side by side to the police at the morgue hearing the coroner explain the details of Liz’s death. John attacks the coroner, leading the two men to wrestle each other next to the body of a murdered woman because the film simply cannot give any focus to women. We then learn Liz’s three-year-old daughter, Miley, was also murdered and is the film’s fourth victim. This feels unnecessarily cruel for most films, let alone this one.

John tells the coroner he cares about the case because he is a father. My eyes could not roll further back into my head. Why does he need to be a father to have empathy? Why does it take men having daughters to start being concerned with the behaviour of other men? It is only when it directly impacts their ‘blood’ or their ‘property’ do they want to take action. John’s motivation for catching the killer should not be because he is a father but because it is his literal job. 

There is a moment of slight awareness when John is researching  werewolf myths and he tells Julia how werewolves were at one point excuses for men to kill women, explaining it happened on a full moon so they could see better. The punchline from John “You think women have had to deal with shit like this since the middle ages?”, Julia is all of us with her ‘Jim from The Office’ expression to the camera. But neither John nor Julia actually says ‘yes, this is what’s happening here, the ‘werewolf’ is a man murdering women because he is a misogynistic asshole’. The word misogyny is not ever said in the film. 

At long last, there is a break in the case! The man in the RV we have been catching glimpses of all film long has died-e must be the werewolf as he has a knife collection, a dog, a wolf tattoo and the kicker0 a dead woman in the back garden. This poor woman we have not met but the film decided to add in a nameless, faceless dead woman. Are four victims not enough? Must we really kill one more woman? My assumption is the film included this random plot point to mansplain to the audience that it is not just the man who is dressed as a literal werewolf you need to look out for, it is ordinary men too. And I think I speak for all women when I say “we know.”

The last 20 minutes sees John and Julia find the real Wolf of Snow Hollow (a man who says “fucking wife” too much) and they take Jenna to college.  Julia is wearing the Sheriff’s badge and she has had to cut a hole in the cap to allow for her ponytail. Stick it to the patriarchy, Julia! However, the film wants to get in one final blow to a female character, the mum/ex-wife cannot be there, at the very same activity she was blaming John for not committing to earlier in the film – I am so exhausted by the constant knocking down of women in this film! John leaves his daughter some condoms, something to protect herself from the good men and a gun, to protect herself from the bad men. In the last scene of the film, John leaves the college and hears two young men walk by commenting on the fresh meat moved into the dorm. And John hesitates, unsure of whether to defend his daughter, but he chooses to walk away as if this is not his fight. But John, it is your fight!

The Wolf of Snow Hollow’s view on toxic masculinity is that it is only a problem if you go too far into it and that as long as you don’t kill a woman it’s is ok to dabble in a bit of derogatory language.. It fails to recognise that it is all bad. Ok, calling a woman a bitch is not the same as killing one, granted, but they both stem from the same root cause, the lack of respect and empathy towards women and the inequality women face on a daily basis. 

When the question of how men can be better allies to women is discussed in social or mainstream media, one of the top recommendations is for men to challenge this toxic behaviour amongst other men. The film gives every opportunity for a man to do exactly that, but it does not, instead ignoring it, walking away and framing it as ‘growth’. To quote Scottish comedian Daniel Sloss, “When one in ten men are shit and the other nine do nothing, they might as well not fucking be there.” It is not enough to not kill, rape, sexually assault or harass women, you must be actively stopping other men from doing the same. You do not get a cookie for doing the bare minimum which is to treat someone with human decency. You must be actively ensuring all people are treated with respect and fairness.

This film does not go far enough with challenging the role toxic masculinity plays in our society. It is a mediocre and egotistical attempt at tackling a serious cultural issue and, to my taste, not funny. I understand that it is possible that Cummings did not intend to provide deep social commentary on what it is to be a 21st century man, but, for a film released in 2020, post Me Too Movement, it is hard to believe he did not see the connotations of his work. The film depicts women being murdered by a misogynistic villain while side-stepping the word ‘misogyny’, he wrote scenes where the women were not the focus of their own murders as he pulls the audience back to focus on the men of the story and he wrote that heinous flesh-light ‘joke’ about a dead woman.

Ultimately, I am left wanting so much more than this film could give me. A horror film from the male perspective critiquing the role of the patriarchy and how men can fall prey to the trappings of toxic masculinity is absolutely my cup of tea. But the film fundamentally needs to have empathy and respect towards women, or else it is just another misogynistic film in sheep’s clothing.   

RELATED ARTICLES

---

---

GHOULS GANG CONTENT

EXPLORE

---

MORE ARTICLES

---