I love extreme horror. I've never seen anything in horror cinema that's offended me and it's doubtful I ever will. As long as it's not tagged on animal cruelty like in Seed, or Cannibal Holocaust etc I'm pretty much untouchable when it comes to whats put on the screen. The baby scene in Human Centipede 2, the son scene in A Serbian Film (and the newborn scene), the bath scene in the August Underground movie etc. These are some sights many found hard to take, but I was OK with them, which brings me to Hanger.This is probably the trashiest pile of garbage I've ever seen put to celluloid, and by saying that it's absolutely no recommendation whatsoever. The director here apparently likes to declare his love for horror cinema now and again but sadly he hasn't a clue how to produce it, instead thinking that stringing together a bunch of (hopefully to him) offensive shots will pass as some kind of great horror art. This really is not the case. I'm not going to list the things that take place in Hanger, but I wasn't offended, rather I found the entire piece of excrement irritating to the extreme. It looks as if a bunch of drunk teenage boys threw it together while sniggering at what they were doing, only thing being, a bunch of drunk teenage boys wouldn't have been so juvenile. Hanger exists as some worthless attempt at being as shocking as possible, but given that the director has attempted it with no class whatsoever he miserably fails. The characters in Hanger scream and shout their lines at one another while most wear some prosthetic make up (to hide their association with this stinker maybe) and it's (almost) obvious a lot of it was aimed at being funny. Rubber penises, full frontal soft porn, and some pretty bad special effects just aren't funny at all though, and I'm guessing by now my review is reading like some disgruntled Hollywood blockbuster lovers who stumbled upon the wrong type of movie and became appalled by what he saw. This couldn't be further from the truth however. I found Subconscious Cruelty as a movie enthralling, and I'm particularly mentioning this film as it's said the director of that set out to shock but (ironically) failed for a totally different reason. The second act of SC (what many consider the most shocking part) stands as brutal, dark, and perverse piece of cinema which I couldn't tear myself away from. I will watch it again, whereas this sad waste of film will never enter my eyes a second time. Ever.Don't be fooled, offensive is not what makes good horror by any stretch of the imagination, but placing something shocking within a good storyline or piece of dialogue can leave a viewer dumbstruck. It's evident Ryan Nicolson hasn't a clue what that means. Yes he's directed some wishy washy shows for TV which really doesn't count for much, and I found his movie Torched just about sufferable, but as for Hanger, it's sad, irritating, childish, and pathetic. Grow up Mr Nicolson.

Like Roger Ebert, I have to give some credit to a film that does what it sets out to do and has no illusions about social value or artistry. That's "Hanger" in a nutshell. Pure exploitation from start to finish. (This review refers to the uncut edition, as though a cut edition would be any better.) Perhaps one of the most striking things about the film (other than an obsession with genitalia) is the heavy use of facial appliances. There may be two male actors who are not heavily covered with facial appliances throughout the film (and I have my doubts about one of them). Female roles fare a little better, trading "money shots" for not having to wear prosthetics. The whole thing comes off like a medieval allegorical play, with all the players in masks representing their roles.Overall, not as funny or interesting as "Gutterballs." It is much more extreme than "Run, Bitch, Run," which hardly rose to the level of exploitation anyway. And it's not nearly as creepy as "deadgirl," which is in a completely different class of film-making (i.e., much superior).The best use I know of for "Hanger" is to show somebody an exploitation film that exists for no other reason than to exploit. Still, you gotta admire honesty.Not recommended for people with reasonable standards of decency or any expectations of artistry.

I don't know how many Debbie Rochon movies I have seen, but there is always room for another one.This is the latest edition in Troma's catalog, and it even features Lloyd Kaufman.Most will be grossed out in the first 10 minutes after witnessing an abortion by coat-hanger. The baby lives and we join him when he is grown (Nathan Dashwood). Otherwise the movie would be over, as he seeks out the pimp who killed his mom (Rochon).This movie has all the trash you can imagine: cannibalism, freaks, smashed heads, blood, gore, and things too disgusting to mention.

Live Feed was a good gory movie, Gutterballs was better, so i was very excited to view Ryan new movie, Hanger. Unfortunately, it was a let down for me. Don't know why, maybe I'm getting old. Maybe. But Hanger was very boring, i watch the Uncut version, and yes, its hardcore gore, with very good bloody fx and very good looking naked bimbos but its just boring. I hope one day to watch it again and start loving it, that can happen. The first time i watched Live Feed i didn't like it and then it became a movie that i watched easily four times if not more. 4/10 for Hanger but all my support to Ryan Nicholson for always try to deliver the goods with extreme gore