The Big Picture

Collider’s Perri Nemiroff chats with
In a Violent Nature
star Ry Barrett and producer Peter Kuplowsky at San Diego Comic-Con 2024.
Kuplowsky and Barrett recap the film’s journey from script to screen, and explain how they pulled off that epic yoga kill scene.
On top of that, the two tease what we can expect from the recently announced
In a Violent Nature
sequel.

One of the biggest surprise hits of 2024 is In a Violent Nature, a low-budget horror film that’s amassed a significant fanbase via its clever spin on the slasher sub-genre and wildly inventive and gruesome kill scenes.

Written and directed by Chris Nash, the Canadian film follows a silent killer who is accidentally resurrected from his grave by a group of friends vacationing in the wilderness. You can probably guess what happens next. The killer, Johnny (Ry Barrett), starts stalking and murdering them in shockingly creative ways. On the surface, In a Violent Nature can be classified as a slasher movie, but Nash reinvents the concept by telling the story from Johnny’s perspective. The camera follows Johnny as he traverses the woods and takes any opportunity he gets to annihilate the friend group. But don’t expect him to make quick and easy work of his unsuspecting victims via a machete or more traditional slasher weapon. In a ViolentNature is going down in history as a film that rocks some of the most gruesome kills ever for a reason.

At San Diego Comic-Con 2024, Collider’s Perri Nemiroff spoke with Barrett and producer Peter Kuplowsky to get a recap of the film’s journey from script to screen. They discuss what it was like essentially filming the movie twice, what it took to pull off that epic yoga kill scene, and what it means for the movie to be so widely embraced. On top of that, they offer up some teases about what they’ve got cooking for the In a Violent Nature sequel. Hear about it all straight from Barrett and Kuplowsky in the video above, or you can read the interview in transcript form below.

In a Violent Nature The horror movie tracks a ravenous zombie creature as it makes its way through a secluded forest.Release Date January 22, 2024 Director Chris Nash Cast Lauren-Marie Taylor , Andrea Pavlovic , Ry Barrett , Reece Presley Runtime 94 minutes Writers Chris Nash Expand

Here’s Johnny! The Origins of ‘In a Violent Nature’s Quiet Killer

PERRI NEMIROFF: Congratulations on making the movie, and on the astronomical amount of success you’ve experienced since Sundance!

PETER KUPLOWSKY: It’s been an incredibly surreal year. We set out to make a movie that our director, Chris Nash, has frequently said he made the movie for nine people, and apparently, a lot more people were interested in it.

And many more to come. We’ve got some good news to discuss. I’m gonna save that for the end of our chat though.

I want to revisit the beginning stages of this. One of my favorite things to ask about is the evolution of an idea. Peter, what would you say is the biggest difference between Chris’ initial pitch and what we now see in the finished film?

KUPLOWSKY: I think what’s remarkable is that the purity of the pitch really perpetuated all the way to the final product. We were on the set of Psycho Goreman making prosthetic effects and doing all these crazy gags, and he started discussing this idea of a slasher film that would be stripped down, minimalist, and from the perspective of the slasher. Right from the beginning, there would be no music, the dialogue would be far in the background, it would be this very austere collision of arthouse sensibilities and slasher sensibilities.

I loved the idea and our producing partner, Shannon Hanmer, loved the idea. Everyone we were talking to was like, “This sounds great.” Then when we talked to Shudder and IFC, they loved the idea too. No one at any point was asking us to compromise, [laughs] other than the nature itself because it was a very hard shoot.

How ‘In a Violent Nature’ Put a Unique Spin on the Slasher Genre
Image Via IFC FIlms

I’ll follow that up with a broader question about producing horror movies. In this case, you’re leaning into something super popular, the slasher sub-genre, but you’re doing it in a way that is incredibly untraditional. What advice would you give to another filmmaker out there who has a unique spin on a popular concept like this and wants to find the right people to work with who’ll preserve their vision and won’t pressure them to change it?

KUPLOWSKY: That’s a very good question. Again, for us, it was all about staying firm in our convictions, committing to the bit, being very clear in terms of what that vision was, and also keeping it very simple and not trying to convolute it. Our pitch was just very simple from the beginning. We didn’t try to create a bunch of lore, we just really tried to stick with the specific formal premise of the film, and that really resonated. In terms of how to get people interested, I’m just a big fan, as a curator myself, of looking for filmmakers who don’t ask for permission, they just go and start doing it. So just start making your movie if you have an idea. Then, if you hit on something inspiring, people are going to notice.

Ry, I want to ask you a little bit about signing on. Do you remember the very first character description of Johnny you received, and then also, what were some of your biggest burning questions for Chris about him?

RY BARRETT: We knew each other, and I was aware of a lot of the work that they had done ahead of time. I got an email from Shannon, and I was immediately like, “Oh, I’m in!” [Laughs] Then when they explained the premise for it, and the fact that it was gonna be a flipping of the script, and then reading the script itself… To add to what Peter was saying, too, when I read the script and everything was in there, I was just [wondering] if they’re actually going to pull this off. Because a lot of times in the script, it doesn’t end up on screen. Everything in the script pretty much ended up on screen exactly. The specific kills that people are talking about, it was listed exactly how it’s gonna happen, and it happened that way. So, I had an idea that it was gonna go that way, but just not to the extent that it did. It’s been great the whole time. Just being a part of this and, and seeing how people are latching onto it, and being here, the whole trip has just been…

KUPLOWSKY: He really put a lot of research into the role, too. He watched a lot of bear attack videos. [Laughs]

BARRETT: Yeah, animal attacks. I wanted to add anything extra that I could because the slasher genre has been around. We’ve seen the formula, but the fact that this was something fresh, I wanted to try and add anything I could.

Related ‘In a Violent Nature’ Does Something Horror Movies Never Do and Is Better For It The refreshing new slasher is clicing its way into theaters.

So you take the role. Before beginning production, what part of this shoot were you most looking forward to, but then can you also tell me something that came as a surprise and wound up being more creatively fulfilling for you than you ever could have imagined at the start?

BARRETT: I’m a huge fan of practical effects. I’m just a huge horror geek in general, too, so getting to be a part of these scenes with the practical effects and seeing that, and seeing how it was created and how it was done, it was just such a treat to be a part of it, and to step in, do the part, step back, watch the prosthetics come in and the guts pour out, and the blood and everything. It was just a treat to actually be able to see that and be a part of it. I’ve been a part of that in other situations, too, but this was on a large, extreme level.

One of the unexpected things was watching the extent of the Yoga Kill—the Pretzel Kill. [Laughs]

KUPLOWSKY: You didn’t see any of it until the premiere.

BARRETT: No, I didn’t. The first time I saw it was at Sundance. So, I just sat back. I saw it in person, but you never know how it’s gonna end up after the cut.

KUPLOWSKY: My favorite thing that he told me, though, is that at the end of the movie—Johnny’s in the movie the whole time, and I don’t want to do too many spoilers for those who haven’t seen it, but towards the end of the film, you don’t see Johnny for a while, and Ry, you were telling me that you forgot. You were like, “When’s Johnny gonna show up? When’s Johnny gonna show up?” I was like, “You know! You shot all the material.”

BARRETT: I’m Johnny, I know I’m not gonna show up, but at the end of that film, I’m literally watching it, waiting for myself to jump out of the woods. So, obviously, it’s effective in that way because I fully well know that I’m not gonna—I don’t want to spoil it, but Johnny’s still out there.

He has to still be out there! Again, we’ve got a very exciting thing we’re gonna get to talk about in a minute.

But first we need to talk about the Yoga-Pretzel Kill. I like that I have those words to define it now.

KUPLOWSKY: Someone called it the Ampersand Kill, and I like that as well.

Peter Kuplowsky and Ry Barrett Talk About the Most Difficult Scenes to Film in ‘In a Violent Nature’
Image Via IFC FIlms

Peter, going into the shoot, which kill scene did you think was going to be the most difficult to make happen, and ultimately, was it the most difficult or did a different one catch you by surprise?

KUPLOWSKY: The most difficult kill in the script was the Lake Kill, initially, because we had a camera move that was gonna be really, really elaborate. Then we thought, “Oh, no, we figured it out,” but that turned out to be the most challenging one. I’m really happy with how we landed upon something that is far more austere. It’s one of the quietest kills in the movie, but I actually think it is absolutely one of the most disturbing kills. And the use of VFX, which it’s all real, live plates that we’re just compositing together, I’m really, really proud out of that sequence. But definitely, from the beginning reading it, was like, “Okay, this Yoga Kill is going to be very elaborate. It’s gonna be the most sophisticated kill.” It’s really our homage to Giallo kills. The movie is kind of a taxonomy of slasher kills, so we try to hit all the types of kills in that genre, and that’s definitely our homage to [Lucio] Fulci and stuff like that.

It was tough. When we finally were able to find the right location where we could shoot it safely on the edge of a cliff, it took four days, over months. We’d go there for a day, shoot elements of it, return a month later, shoot more elements of it, sometimes not even with the actress, [Charlotte Creaghan], but with a look-alike or just the puppet. There are four different bodies for Aurora, too, because each one had to do a specific different thing. I think, actually, the last shot of the entire shoot was her spine breaking, just the neck of her spine, which I think was shot in Shannon’s backyard. [Laughs] That was a little bit of spice that Nash was like, “We need to have an insert of the back of her neck breaking to sell this.”

Why ‘In a Violent Nature’ Was Filmed Twice
Related From Ari Aster to Jordan Peele: The 10 Best Horror Directors Working Today, According to Reddit The modern masters of horror.

I’ve heard you mention you essentially shot this movie twice. Making any movie is a massive feat, but one of the greatest things is being able to overcome a massive setback like that. What was the key to not getting dejected and giving up, but rather, seeing it through to the finish line?

KUPLOWSKY: All of us put a lot of pride into our work. When we saw that the version of the film was both not working and we were also running into logistical issues in terms of having to recast and weather issues and all that, we just decided, “Listen, we really love this idea and we wanna make something that’s worthy of that idea.” So, what we did is we just exercised patience. Fortunately, our partners at Shudder and IFC were so supportive and patient with us, as well. We scaled down the crew, as well. We put our own resources into finishing the film. But so much of it is, like, take the time. If you need the time, take the time. Sometimes there can be this rush and pressure that builds up, like, “I need to get it done now. It needs to happen now. I’m gonna miss my moment.” Honestly, I’m so glad that we took the time, and in doing so, we tweaked the script, we changed the script, and a lot of elements of the ending, or even that Lake Kill, as I mentioned. All of that is a part of the process.

I thought a lot about The Thing while making this film because that was a movie that was famously shut down because of the writers’ strikes when it was made. But I also think the reason that movie is so exceptional was because they had all that time to review the footage, to watch the footage, to rewrite the script, for Rob Bottin to spend months just building more stuff. That’s what we did too. We were always working during that time, tweaking the costume. The entire mask that Ry wore changed over the course of that gap. I really feel like the little details that we changed to it are part of the reasons, I like to believe, why it’s catching on as an iconic slasher mask.

Ry, were you involved in both iterations?

BARRETT: No, just the second. When I came on, full disclosure, they told me pretty much everything, the situation and everything. So I was like, “Okay, no pressure,” [laughs] but I knew how much work and effort they were putting it.

KUPLOWSKY: Well, we did screen tests with Ry, which we didn’t have an opportunity to do the first time. We really decided to workshop the costume because there are certain things that we didn’t expect would be hard. Actually, one of the hardest things—simply walking. It’s hard because you’ve got a mask on, you’ve got no peripheral vision. You can speak to some of that.

BARRETT: Lots of trees.

KUPLOWSKY: So, the first time shooting it, we were like, “Oh, this is actually the most dangerous thing in the movie, walking with this mask on.” It’s the most dangerous stunt in the film.

BARRETT: It was an interesting terrain, lots of up and down hills and mountains.

KUPLOWSKY: But we cut a big hole in it because we realized we’re gonna be behind him the whole time. We’re like, “Oh, so we can have a mask with a big hole in it.”

BARRETT: He had removable eyes, so there were lots of sequences where I could actually see much better. But then you’ve got the tree branches, and you don’t want to move as Johnny. You wanna just walk the line. So, I just close my eyes, and walk. [Laughs]

KUPLOWSKY: He needs to be forward like a shark, like Jaws.

Ry Barrett Offers Up Johnny 101 for Anyone Who Wants to Be the ‘In a Violent Nature’ Killer for Halloween
Image via IFC Films

Ry, can you talk a little bit about finding the right physicality for him, the specific way he walks and moves, and maybe some variations in the physicality of each kill?

BARRETT: A lot of it was just timing and matching with Pierce Derks, our cinematographer. Because the film is a bit of a puzzle, it all has to fit. The same goes for the prosthetics and the special effects; everything has to fall into place. So it was kind of finding the timing. I would set rules for myself to get in the costume, set myself into the rules, and then follow what needed to happen. So it was all kind of a metronome of leading into the next scene and what the motivation for that was leading to that.

For Halloween, if someone were to dress up as Johnny, can you give that person one “do” and one “do not” for being a believable Johnny?

BARRETT: It’s weird. You gotta be stiff and fluid at the same time. Be as stiff as possible and flex every muscle you can while you’re walking, and then the second the kill starts to happen—or you want to pretend to kill someone—become something else.

KUPLOWSKY: To quote Bruce Lee, “Be like water, my friend.”

I am a firm believer this wave is going to continue through Halloween and beyond because I was told you guys are gonna make a sequel. I was specifically told that Chris is gonna write the sequel. Is it safe to assume he’s also gonna direct it?

KUPLOWSKY: That’s a fluid conversation, as well, but the team is getting back together. We’re going to make a sequel. When we set out to make the film, we always imagined it as a meta-sequel, as if there were maybe three other films before this. So it’s exciting because we have a sandbox where we can go before and we can go after. We can do a prequel, we can do a sequel, we can do whatever. But I think that the key thing that we want to do, what we feel really validated in, is that there is this Venn diagram of people who love slow cinema arthouse and slasher films, and we’d love to continue experimenting with how we can combine the two.

With this film, our influences were very much filmmakers like Gus Van Sant and Alan Clarke. What if there’s a Chantal Akerman slasher film? What if there’s an Andrei Tarkovsky slasher film? We love to blur those worlds, but not in a way that ever condescends to the genre because that’s what’s so important to us, as well, is that we love slasher films and we want to give you the ingredients that you love from those slasher films. We just wanna experiment with vibes in a different perspective.

The Potential Sequel Ideas for ‘In a Violent Nature’
Image via IFC Films

Peter, when I was watching some of the interviews you did after Sundance, you heavily emphasized how special it is that this movie has taken off as an independent original horror film. It’s not part of a franchise. Now it will be a part of a franchise, so I was wondering, is there a specific line you draw or a compass you follow when determining when something warrants more versus when it should be one and done?

KUPLOWSKY: Sometimes, that’s the audience’s decision, and it’s very clear that the audience wants to see more of Johnny, wants to see more of this character, and that they like the form that we’re playing in. I also just love horror franchises. I think in other genres, you can get really cynical about franchising and sequels, but in horror franchises, my favorite ones, like Alien or Predator, they always are opportunities for filmmakers to play in new sandboxes with familiar ingredients. That is also the horror genre in general. People have an idea going in of what to expect, but the delight and the surprise is seeing these new variables, and I think Johnny is a perfect conduit for that, so I’m really excited.

My mind is going down this path now; for each of you, if you could snap your fingers right now and restart a horror franchise that has not been made in a number of years, what franchise would you pick and why?

KUPLOWSKY: Oh, that’s a very good question. I was gonna say Trancers but I don’t know if that’s enough of a horror franchise, it’s more sci-fi. But it’s definitely from Charles Band studio.

BARRETT: I’m gonna say My Bloody Valentine. It had a remake, semi-sequel, quasi… It’s another Candadian slasher film. I love the kills in it, love the slasher. That would be my go-to, I guess.

My dream is coming true with Final Destination coming back.

KUPLOWSKY: Oh, I’m very excited about that!

It’s been 10-plus years. It’s about time.

KUPLOWSKY: In terms of a recent franchise, where’s Malignant 2? I want another Malignant.

Image via Warner Bros. Pictures

I will ask that question over and over until the day James Wan makes that movie happen!

KUPLOWSKY: I want Malignant versus other characters too, like Malignant versus Upgrade. Like, come on? Where is that?

BARRETT: The whole universe is there. It exists.

This is the franchise I need right now! I love this.

KUPLOWSKY: And we can throw Johnny into the mix if they wanna fight. Sure!

So Peter just said that everybody wants more Johnny. I specifically think they want more Ry as Johnny. Is it safe to assume you will be coming back for the sequel?

BARRETT: I mean, I hope so. I haven’t signed anything yet, but the fact that I’m here, I’m kind of crossing my fingers.

KUPLOWSKY: I can’t imagine it without Ry. When we were editing the film, the thing that I thought was so remarkable was that we could cut at any moment to another sequence and Ry’s movement was in sync there. It was like you never changed pace. It was always easy to do the perfect graphic match with your gait and your walk. I don’t know. We really lucked out with Ry, and I can’t imagine anyone else in the role.

Is there anything you started to tap into with Johnny in film one that you would be most eager to explore further or push further in film two?

BARRETT: Everything. Because now that I’ve kind of established what I’m doing with him, it would be fun to just see the new experience. It comes down to the script. You look at the script and you see what’s there, and then try to add or collaborate with whatever you can.

KUPLOWSKY: If we ever do a Terrence Malick version, maybe he can have an internal monologue. [Laughs]

BARRETT: Just a shot of Johnny’s mask.

KUPLOWSKY: Chris Nash is watching this right now going like, “What are you doing? What are you saying?”

That’s one thing that I always pitch with horror franchises. It always feels like there’s great opportunity in continuing them anthology-style rather than a straightforward linear story.

KUPLOWSKY: I’m really inspired by what the original vision of John Carpenter’s Halloween was, was to actually do an anthology series. I think we will definitely want to keep Johnny in all of them, but I love that idea, that impulse of, like, let’s actually tell different stories. And actually, this is a hot take at Comic-Con—I actually really quite enjoyed Halloween Ends because I was like, “Yeah, free Halloween from the pressure to be one kind of thing!”

Season of the Witch is one of my favorites!

KUPLOWSKY: Season of the Witch rules!

BARRETT: It just opens up so many doorways and freedom to explore, too.

How The Filmmakers of ‘In a Violent Nature’ Look To Raise Their Standards’
Image via IFC Studios

I’ll ask one more sequel question leaning into the kills. How do you hope to up your game in that department with the sequel when you started so damn high?

KUPLOWSKY: This is gonna be a job for Chris, but I think the whole team is really interested in having that conversation and supporting it. When Chris set out writing that script — he’s said this in Q&As — it wasn’t like he got to the Yoga Kill and was like, “This will be the big scene that everyone talks about.” He really was just thinking through things logically in the sense that he’s like, “Well, I have these tools. How would I use them in a way that is kind of interesting and I haven’t seen before?” You have to realize Chris Nash and Steven Kostanski were the prosthetic supervisors on this film, as well. They have worked in a lot of movies, and they’re just so familiar with throat-slash, throat-slash — it’s always the same kind of gag. So, they’re just always thinking, “Well, what about this? What about something that’s a little left of center?” And I really feel like when Chris sits down to write, that’ll be the approach. It’ll be simply, “I’m gonna write the story. I’m gonna write the trajectory, and then at any moment in which I can kind of go askew or zigzag a bit…” he’ll allow himself to do that. In doing so, we’ll get somewhere strange.

BARRETT: You get really intelligent, creative, practical effects guys who’ve seen everything, they’re gonna think of something fresh. They’re gonna come up with something cool.

I’ve got all the faith in the world. One more sequel question. Do you have any kind of timeline in mind or a dream start date?

KUPLOWSKY: We plan on going into production next year.

In a Violent Nature is available to rent or buy on Prime Video.

Purchase on Prime