Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
I do wonder what people are making of the 17 minute short Lynch dropped on Netflix with little to no fanfare or warning...
Looking at the reviews, I have to first say this. No one seems to be talking about how cheap looking it is, and I wonder if this is purely out of reverence. Trying to separate this in the “would I like this if I didn’t know it was David Lynch” is almost impossible as even without his presence on screen it is thoroughly something only he can make and I think that alone answers the question of its validity. Nevertheless at 17 mins it is the perfect length and I thoroughly enjoyed this little slice of Lynch.
Whilst it achieves a pleasingly Lynchian atmosphere, this was surely shot on a cheap camera with a cheap filter and a minimal set. Lynch has flirted with this aesthetic on films like Inland Empire that achieve beauty despite the grating DV image. Perhaps this most reminds me of things like David Lynch’s weather reports from his old website back in the day, weird homemade videos made on the spot, running with an oddball idea. The goal here must at least partially be self entertainment - which I have no qualm with - and I can imagine Lynch was captivated by putting his endlessly quotable words to the capuchins sympathetic facial expressions. Whilst I enjoy the effect, it is only half carried off, recalling the Annoying Orange, unless you stare at Jack’s eyes, and you can assume the majority of the budget was spent on the well-trained and well-dressed monkey. Save for this it’s something Lynch might have made in his basement if it weren’t for his profile. It sounds like I’m bashing the film, but I’m not.
Whilst there’s always been humour amid the nightmares, this is certainly one of Lynch’s funnier works, its absurdity, non-sequiturs and stilted delivery often generating laughs yet there’s still emotion here even amidst the artifice. David Lynch is a very sincere guy even in his silliest moments and the musical number encapsulates all of these effects simultaneously. And in this I found a huge amount of entertainment.
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movies from AnotherBadMovie
So, a while back I came into possession of two signed Olaf Ittenbach VHS tapes. I thought this was pretty neat, but didn’t really watch them. After having a clear out I’ve decided to sell them to someone who is more into these films but first they have to be watched!
Riverplay is one of Ittenbach’s most obscure (and hard to find) movies and is characterised by being more serious in tone and functioning as more of a thriller than a typical horror-splatter movie.
Firstly let me say, my German is very limited so I probably only understood 5-10% of the dialog despite its very broad story. It is essentially a film about 4 characters coming across a murderous couple on a camping trick and deception and paranoia ‘playing’ out to a grisly climax. There is gore here and there - and it is very good - but this is no Burning Moon or Premutos.
I’m really in two minds about this film, and I acknowledge I find it very hard to assess it fairly as not only an Enlgish speaker, but a filmmaker.
I can say for one thing, I think even with the language barrier I can tell the acting is pretty stinky. And this is particularly problematic as this is for most of its run time it is, what is perhaps the worst kind of low budget horror movie, the daylight conversations in the woods kind of movie. However, it is clear effort has been made to tell a story and build suspense throughout its 80 odd minute runtime. I have to commend the guy for trying something different even it is one of the most cost effective routes to go down, especially when cutting down on the gore. Frustratingly the film is very capably shot from a cinematography standpoint, but this is spoilt by it being shot on digital stock at upwards of 30fps and being edited with all sorts of speed ramps and slomos, wipes and stretches. Though some of it couples with the passable score and almost reaches some strange aesthetic I can’t deny it is some real Windows MovieMaker shit.
I watch a lot of dirt cheap movies and this is certainly far from the worst. Suffice to say its a mixed bag where things it does well are also its downfall but for a film I barely understood to somewhat keep my interest is commendable and I’m sure fans of the guy will find evidence of his wider talents in this unusual entry in his filmography.
So, if you’d like to buy my copy after I’ve called it shit you can find it here!
Well, Halloween is well and truly over. It’s been a few years since we managed the one-a-day challenge, managing just 17 films this year, with a personal best of 33. The goal was quality over quality - let’s see how that goes...
1. The Invisible Man (1933)
Dir. James Whale
It is unreal how well this film holds up at 86 years old. Me and my girlfriend both enjoyed this film, and it’s down to James Whales undeniable craft and Claude Rain’s endlessly entertaining performance.
2. Friday the 13th (2009)
Dir. Marcus Nispel
I fell in to the same trap as I did with the Conan remake by being convinced, by a documentary on the franchise, that this would be worth my time. It’s not terrible but not nearly good enough to rival the charm the original series has just by virtue of being 80s crap rather than 2000s crap.
3. Dawn of the Dead (1978)
Dir. George A. Romero
I hadn’t realised how long it had been since I watched this. Maybe it was zombie-fatigue, or maybe that I usually throw on Night of the Living Dead this time of year. DotD is just a brilliantly crafted film, and I feel like I fully appreciated the commentary on consumerism this time around, rather than just knowing that was what the film was “about”.
4. Scream 2 (1997)
Dir. Wes Craven
This was not nearly as good as I remember. My entire memory of this was the discussion of sequel tropes, and I think that brief moment of doing the thing Scream did was about all I enjoyed from it. While the original is as solid as ever in my opinon, even Buffy wasn’t enough to save this for me.
5. The Child (1977)
Robert Voskanian
A random purchase, this film was a gem of a find. Its low-budget 70s aesthetic really added to the atmosphere of this oddball movie and made some sequences especially creepy, tappinh into a truly nightmarish vibe so seldom found in cinema. Fans of Children Shouldn’t Play With Dead Things should make efforts to track this one down.
6. Candyman (1992)
Dir. Bernard Rose
Quickly realising this wasn’t standard slasher fare, the opening had me very excited for this film. However, it went on to do relatively little for me. I won’t deny it had some unsettling moments, I just felt it wasn’t holding together as satisfyingly as I wanted it to. Whilst I feel I should give this another chance, I doubt I will soon.
7. It (1990)
Dir. Tommy Lee Wallace
I’d never seen an It film. I found myself loving the original for its character work - rare in a horror film - and disturbing concept. For some reason the thought of being haunted by something your whole life really creeps me out. Despite its age and budget, the dual storyline and efforts taken to portray the personal impact of the horror in this film go a long way to make this very effective. Very chilling, very good.
8. The People Under the Stairs (1991)
Dir. Wes Craven
There are good things about this film but it suffers from very weak cinematography (like many 90s horror films) and the fact that satire in horror has been much more interesting and sophistacted in years previous to and since the making of this film.
9. Phantasm (1979)
Dir. Don Coscarelli
I was well aware I needed to revisit this often over-looked franchise which I have always championed. Way back when, I began with the sequel, which bowled me over, and then watched the original. My memories was that the 1979 film was a purer horror film with a very singular tone. Watching it again, it wasn’t the perfect nightmare I’d remembered but is still a must-see for its original aesthetic, unique storyline and chilling moments.
10. Hocus Pocus (1993)
Dir. Kenny Ortega
Despite being a recent addition to the roster, it wouldn’t be Halloween without Sarah Jessica Parker’s cleav- I mean... without Hocus Pocus.
11. Halloween (2018)
Dir. David Gordon Green
Originally wowed by this lovingly crafted follow up to the original Halloween I was concerned that a second viewing might bring me down without the benefit of my initial low expectations. Not so! The characters make this film, and the care taken to blend the old and the new is palpable. I still love this film and believe it’s about as a good as a Halloween sequel could be.
12. Phantasm II (1988)
Dir. Don Coscarelli
While Phantasm (1979), if not disappointing, wasn’t all I’d hoped for revisiting it Phantasm II was just as glorious as I remember. Gory, dreamy and mad as a box of frogs, I can’t recommend this enough and I maintain it works well having not seen the original (like my first time) as it only accentuates its nightmare-like rythm, wooziness and insanity.
13. The Ghost of Frankenstein (1942)
Dir. Erle C. Kenton
I knew this wasn’t going to live up the previous three but you can’t be a bit of Frankenstein for October, and Universal Monsters always hit the spot. What this film lacked in directorial tightness - Boris Karloff - it made up for with bombastic set pieces, wacky plot points and the return of a brilliant peformances by Lugosi as Igor.
14. Suspiria (1977)
Dir. Dario Argento
My thoughts on this film have changed a lot over the years. Initially, upon recommendations from people such as Mark Kermode, I adored it on first viewing, yet recent watches have left me thinking it no longer really did it for me. Viewing it on the big screen (for the second time), stepping in on a chance passing by the Prince Charles Cinema, I’ve come full circle to thinking it is (aside from visually beautiful) pretty perfect as a disturbing, hysterical, dream-like (original opinon, I know) fairytale for adults.
16. Scooby-Doo on Zombie Island (1998)
Dir. Jim Strenson
Whilst inevitably not as good as I remembered from my childhood, revisiting this was a perfectly seasonal treat and in spite of some ridiculousness its combination of hijinks and genuinely creepy moments definitely peg this as one of, if not the best of the Scooby Doo feature films.
17. Halloween (1978)
Dir. John Carpenter
I don’t fully understand why, but Halloween is a film I’ve changed my mind on massively over the years. Maybe it’s because I saw it, for the first time, long after all the other John Carpenter films I’d watched and loved, or maybe because so many films borrowed its formula that the impact of the original was diluted but those first few viewings left me lukewarm on the film. Yet over the years I have appreciated this film more and more, now to the point where - after this year’s Blu-Ray viewing - I think it’s pretty fucking perfect, remarkably atmospheric and actually very scary.
Follow for more horror, cult and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
[Originally written October 2018]
After watching all the awful sequels and in fact until recently not even highly rating the original amongst Carpenters bakc catalogue, the Halloween franchise was something I could live without - at least 364 days of the year.
However, this month I gained a renewed appreciation for John Carpenter’s seminal slasher flick. I’d compare it to listening to the Ramones. Sometimes it’s hard to get your head around something that has been imitated so much and view it as its own piece. I’d probably seen Hallowen (1978) about half a dozen times and whilst I liked it, it was easily one of my least favourite John Carpenter films. However, putting it on this October a lot of things popped for me that didn’t before. Now don’t get me wrong I appreciated on paper the things that worked in Halloween and made it such a classic. But watching it the other night the pacing, the story, the cinematography and ultimately the chills really came home.
What great timing? I’d heard whispers about the new Halloween but with my expectations rising, specifically with the word that it was a sequel to the original, throwing out the continuity of the subsequent films, I’d avoided seeing anything more than the poster. The other day I got to see the film.
Let’s just say if I’d heard nothing of its success I would have been blown away. The standards are so low, but this is what a Halloween sequel should be. At once, its a tribute and a theme park attraction to show us what we want from the series. On the other it’s a smart follow up. What set’s it apart is it’s focus on Laurie, 40 years later still living in the shadows of that fateful Halloween night. Three generations are shackled by those events, while Michael rots in a mental institution. Laurie has been shunned by her daughter whom she raised to be able to fight off Michael; her daughter just wants a normal life. Her granddaughter on the other hand, wants her grandmother in her life, against her mother wishes. When Michael escapes on Halloween night, in a new wake of murders Laurie rallies to protect her family and do what she has been dreaming of for forty years - kill Michael Myers.
It can’t be overstated how much having John Carpenter and Jamie Lee-Curtis on board has helped the project. David Gordon-Green and Danny McBride seemed focus on making their fanboy dream come true by getting their blessing with a project that would interest them both. Carpenter returns to update the score and it’s a thrilling accompany to a tidy visual spin on the franchise. David’s camera takes the story back onto the suburban homes of Halloween bringing the horror home - including some glorious extended steadicam takes.
It ticks all the boxes. But its central characters give this film a uniquely empowering angle.
Follow for more horror, cult and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
On my quest for girlfriend friendly Halloween films I found myself revisiting a film I had not seen in years. Like many, in my teens I couldn’t get enough of Tim Burton and despite his career being much maligned by film nerds these days, I still love a lot of his films. However, I never got round to owning this one and so hadn’t seen it in a good many years.
A lot holds up. The film is oozing with cartoonish but lavish gothic atmosphere - the production design really is to be applauded. Tim Burton keeps the trademark quirk and bounce that’s stops it being depressing or truly nasty but this film has what feels like dozens of gruesome decapitations. It’s icky but not frightening - what a good boyfriend I am.
Sleepy Hollow feels like a loveletter to Hammer films and features an all star British cast including Richard Griffiths, Michael Gambon and Miranda Richardson and Christopher Walken going batshit as the Headless Horseman. At its centre Johnny Depp, often criticised for being one-note in these kind of affairs, has a great turn as Ichabod Crane, battling for science and reason in the face of magic and witchcraft and Christina Ricci, though with little to do here, is well cast as the baby-faced maiden embroiled in the whole plot.
If you go for Burton’s style to begin with, the weakest element by far is the script. It’s not bad, only painfully by the numbers. It’s script writing 101, with a very overwrought theme of ‘seeing isn’t believing’ rammed a bit down your throat - easier without a head one assumes - and an unsatisfying who-dunnit plot that while peppered with a couple twists unfolds in a rather lack-lustre fashion.
This has to visually be one of Tim Burtons finest in spite of being fairly monochrome (and one moment of daft CGI indulgence) but pales to his more well rounded projects. This time of year though? A perfect crowd-pleaser for gore-hounds and filthy casuals alike.
Follow for more horror, cult and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
For years I had held and shared the opinion that there are 3 good Nightmare films - the original, Dream Warriors and New Nightmare (maybe four counting Freddy vs Jason). Of these three I would say New Nightmare is the weakest but admirable for its bold take on the franchise by the series’ original director Wes Craven.
It’s been a long time since I’d seen it and I was curious to see what I’d think all this time later. New Nightmare’s meta take on the series, featuring the cast and creators playing themselves haunted by a manifestation of evil, a boogeyman who has taken the form of Freddy Krueger in the wake of his image being killed off in the previous (sixth) installment is certainly a fresh idea. Interestingly Craven would take this post-modern take on the slasher film only a few years before his success with Scream (1996).
This magickal idea of Freddy Krueger is a very high concept to grapple with successfully and I feel they took a very big gamble - but at installment 7 what do they have to lose?
Where it suffers is in it being a very 90s looking movie - whats more there’s some shameful VFX at points in this film which are very distracting - and the look and feel whilst probably trying to be more based in reality looks drab and uninteresting. Heather Langenkamp does a great job playing herself - though it basically is Nancy but others, including director Wes Craven aren’t so suited to the ‘as themselves’ device. Perhaps the biggest issue however, something many films fall into - bad kid casting. The film revolves around Heather defending her child which should be a primal motivation we can get behind - but it’s all screwed up in this one, with an annoying kid and some sloppy handling of the script.
Still, I’d say this is a must for fans of the series and if there was only the two Craven entries it would be a worthy counterpart.
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
I went in blind on this one, seeing the Arrow release on a friends DVD shelf and being curious. On realising it was a Takaski Miike I figured it could be decent but of course, the man has hundreds of lesser known entries for every Ichi the Killer or Audition.
The opening had my attention right away and even by the end I will say the music featured throughout the film is one of its best features. I didn’t really give two hoots about the story but this film’s combination of gratuitous violence, psych rock and gorgeous grainy cinematography (with the exception of some CGI in the third act which is quite distracting) is intoxicating.
It goes bananas at the end, as if Miike got bored with the story. I can’t say it’s a great film but if you want a good dose of the directors style with less substance then definitely check it out. Simply put, it’s a very cool movie
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
Very loosely inspired by true events, Luc Besson’s “Cinéma Du Look” picture The Big Blue follows two childhood friends and rivals Enzo Maiorca (Jean Reno) and “Dolphin Man” Jacques Mayol (Jean-Marc Barr) as their passion for free-diving pushes them to dangerous new depths.
I had been meaning to watch this film for a very long time, having been exposed to its lush soundtrack, but had been put off by the long run time. This anticipation had found me expecting something altogether different but I was surprised perhaps due to not having really seen much of Luc Besson’s other work.
It is a super extravagant movie and all the more enjoyable for its over the top approach to cinema. It is all the same kind of minimal and languid in its story telling, and runs the gambit from comical (especially in the very enjoyable early scenes with Enzo and his fiat) to artsy-philosophy with many detours. It’s a strange little film with massive scope, trademark brilliant visuals and whilst it is certainly style over substance and incredibly eclectic in mood it has a very immersive quality which really pulls you into its oceanic setting if not its characters.
Folllow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
Wayne plays J.B. Books, a gunfighter diagnosed with cancer who comes to Nevada at the turn of the 20th century. Renting a room from a widow and her son (Lauren Bacall and Ron Howard), Books finds himself set upon by a series of people who have heard the news, looking for profit or revenge. Hell bent on going out how he sees fit, Books figures out his final move.
The Shootist is a very mixed bag. It’s slowness alone is not necessarily a fault but it doesn’t hold together as well as you want it to. John Landis, talking about the film here, pretty much hits the nail on the head - this is “nearly a good film”, I would say almost a great film. As a fan I want this film to be special, and it is in many ways. The cast of genre stars who show up in tribute; James Stewart, John Carradine, Richard Boone etc and the subject matter echoing the reality of its star so directly gives it a very special feel. However outside of a neat set up and stand out performance it is fairly inconsistent.
Fristly, on a more pedantic note this is a drab looking film to my eye. Visually speaking, a lot of ugly looking Westerns seem to have come out of the 1970s. The archetypal Technicolor Wild West seemed to have fizzled out and these later American affairs seem to pale massively in their aesthetic when compared to the classics really lacking a direction in their look.
More significantly however, the film’s weakest element narratively speaking is something we see done so well in other films of the genre and that is the relationship between the old gunslinger and the young apprentice. I didn’t enjoy Howard in this role, and though the potential was there the fatherly advice to the young kid blinded by the glamour of gunfighting fell very flat for me and was easily the least engaging relationship explored in the film for me. The producer explains on the documentary included on my DVD copy, that the novel had Gillom turn on and kill Books for a much more dramatic ending, and he admitted he felt that their making of a more palatable ending, wherein Gillom kills Books’ assailant before casting his gun away and seemingly denouncing the violence he had so admired, watered down the ending. I didn’t even care so much about the pay off, as I had never been invested in the relationship to begin with.
However, an undeniable strength of the film is Wayne’s performance and it really holds the film together in its central storyline culminating in a great sequence in the films climax. Had he not been given the Oscar for True Grit (1969) Wayne would have certainly deserved the recognition here, but thankfully this film is in itself a very fitting send off for the ultimate icon of the genre. Remarkable in some ways and mediocre in others, The Shootist is surely an essential moment for fans of The Duke, but I would still have to disagree with those who would put it on the list of the best Westerns ever made.
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
With the first film sticking with me for some time, and director Jörg Buttgereit serving as something of an inspiration in recent weeks I was eager to check out the second installment in Buttgereit’s self labelled “corpse-fucking art”. You can stream it on Amazon - how times change.
Buttgereit’s third feature is a vast improvement on the first Nekromantik. Despite losing some of the grime, the switch to 16mm does bring a lot of beauty to the macabre perverse world of Buttgereit’s necrofile in love. From its new truly grotesque corpse and other FX to its sets and decor this is a pretty good looking film. Most notably the tone is far more consistent and allows you to get more in the artistic and psychological headspace of the film and yet there’s still the characteristic dark humour, punctuated with far more directorial flourish. Slow at times, and not without overindulgence this is still certainly the superior film and worthy of discussion by horror fans.
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
Several years ago I expressed that I had no interest in watching these sick movies. I rarely seek out extreme movies anymore, less interested in pushing my limits than when I was younger. However, in that time I’ve also gained a lot of interest in the film’s director, the vibrant Jörg Buttgereit whose charisma and words on independent filmmaking in interviews have really resonated with me. Arrow Video recently had a sale and I thought I’d give it a try on its reduced price - if not now, when?
Overall, thanks to a great release, I found the story of the film more interesting than the movie. This is a film that is overrated for all the right reasons. The hubbub around its release, how they took on the German censors and made ultimately their names through a pre-internet underground horror community and cottage industry production peaking with a 7am final slot on an all-night horror marathon for its UK debut is a super inspiring period in time to hear people discuss in interviews. Similarly, the spirit of its production, shooting on super8 on the weekends with no script over 2 years - relatable and awesome to hear about if you’re into indie/no budget projects.
I would say this would have been less than half as enjoyable without the abundance of context on the Blu-ray however the film has its merits. It is not nearly as shocking as I’m sure it was on a bootleg tape in the late 80s but it is certainly nasty and boundary pushing and I admire its bravery. Whilst improved thematically in the sequel its the delicate approach that Buttgereit takes to the subject that remains unsettling, treating the necrofile’s behaviour as utterly normal, even beautiful. ou really get the feeling of living with psychos who thin this is normal - and the influence of Buttgereit reading about Dennis Nielson is very evident. Whilst, by the directors own admission, the film is amateurish and messy this grimy lo-fi nature splattered with vicious and shocking material is its enduring strength.
It definitely stuck in my head for a few days and I’m glad I finally saw what all the fuss is about. But be warned after all this time it’s still pretty disgusting.
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
Coming out the same year as Conan the Barbarian, Ator is a classic in the Italian mockbuster genre and one of the first of many dodgy barbarian flicks to come out of that wave.
As far as euro Conan knock offs go it has quite a reputation. The first thing you’ll notice about it is how cheap this movie is - I mean it is bottom of the barrel. Some no doubt reused historical drama costumes, what looks like one redressed set and some one-time-removed (yet remarkably convoluted) Conan plot elements manage to just about scrape the requirements of the story and setting required of the genre. Aside from that it’s a lot of daytime exteriors somewhere in Italy, stock footage - everything you might expect of a quick turnaround C-grade knock off.
I’m not here to bash this film however, more to highlight what good ol’ Joe D’Amato does with very little. On the one hand this is a so-bad-it’s-good of Troll 2 calibre and ripe for mocking; from the silly costumes, Ator and his sister’s weird incest romance scene, the goofy monsters, the cheesey theme song. But for me, aside from being more welcome Barbarian goodness (I’ll take what I can get) it’s the weird moments that come out of it that are a treat. Scenes such as a the seductress/hag and shadow fight are, yes, cheap and cheesey but not without a low budget fun and capture that nostalgic cheapo fantasy aesthetic I’m so fond of.
Also there’s a bear cub in this entire movie, which if you don’t think about how miserable it’s life probably was, is utterly adorable.
Having watched this twice now, I’ve got a lot of love for it. For best results, watch on VHS with beers and friends.
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
Watched this one because my girlfriend said I had to see it as it was my kind of film and it recently came up on a podcast I like and the hosts said it was funny. I remember hearing about this movie as a a member of the demographic it would best be enjoyed by, preprubescent boys. However having missed it as a kid and growing up on the likes of Wayne’s World, Bill & Ted’s Excellent Adventure (and their respective sequels) and Beavis and Butthead Do America I felt I’d been a bit spoiled to enjoy this dumb movie. I mean this might be the dumbest movie I’ve ever seen - and of course that’s the intention here to some degree - but at least on this view I found it lacking in entertainment value, only getting one or two laughs out of me and turning me off for the most part.
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
I saw this movie years back - probably off that Quentin Tarantino list of the best spaghetti Westerns. Even though I remember liking it a great deal and even still listen to the Riz Ortolani soundtrack I think I had a pretty high chance of never bothering to watch this again.
I’m really glad I did. The collector in me saw the Arrow Video sale as a good chance to take this movie off my hard drive and into my blu-ray collection - for a more than reasonable price - and on a fine (and rare) day off I threw it on for the hell of it.
Having watched this a second time I’d argue this is actually an essential spaghetti Western. Regardless of the fact that for my money anything starring Lee Van Cleef is worth watching, Day of Anger seems like such an archetypal story - and yet I can’t think of an immediate parallel...
Director Tonino Valerii describes it as an Oedipal story - an angle I’d never considered - but on a more relatable level the story of a mistreated prostitute’s son who dreams of being a legendary gunslinger, gets taken under the wing of an aging master and ultimately has to face off against him; student vs teacher, is such a satisfying view.
Day of Anger succeeds because it has a great balance of the gravity of a classic Western and spaghetti trash entertainment value. Western fans are well advised not to miss this one.
Follow for more cult, horror and genre movie reviews from AnotherBadMovie
Immediately jumping on to the list of most indefensible films I actually enjoyed, House on the Edge of the Park, from notorious director Ruggero Deodato (Cannibal Holocaust) was one I’d avoided for years, even previous removing it from my 31 Days of Horror after deciding it probably had nothing to offer outside of an abundance of exploitation sexual violence. I wound up watching it due to a friends association with co star John Morghen aka Giovanni Lombardo Radice.
When I originally saw Cannibal Holocaust it really put an end to my hunger for extreme movies and I no longer try to find “the worst of the worst” like I did for a brief period as a cult movie fan in my teens. Whilst this might be one of the most debased “rape revenge” movies - as with Cannibal Holocaust I was left sore and admitting defeat once more in saying: “...but he does have something here”.
The script, the style and the character dynamics in this film really elevate it above the cinematic cess-pit it is on paper. In spite of its excesses watching this film you do sense the meaning underneath it all, and in this regard it falls more in line than I thought it would to films such as Last House on the Left and Night Train Murders, that whilst remarkably unpleasant did have an intention behind them that was more than shock - not that you’re going to find many people talking about the sociopolitical undertones of a film as notorious as this. I’m not proud of watching it, but this film was a unique and powerful experience and shows the talent of its director. It’s amazing to think what he could have done in the mainstream.
