A very different movie this week and an odd one to find itself on the Video Nasty list.
This is a completely different kind of disturbing, but disturbing none-the-less. I struggle with my viewpoint on this movie.
*****SPOILERS*****
The story involves a young woman called Molly who was abused repeatedly by her father when she was a child. The movie follows the mental and emotional problems she now has as an adult following this abuse and her rather odd way of dealing with this.
She is shown in the movie as a doting auntie to her young nephews. She regales the boys regularly with tales of their wonderful, perfect grandfather (her father) and how he was lost at sea as he was too perfect for this world. She even oddly comments during a conversation with them about tattoos that he never had tattoos as he was too perfect and his body was as god had intended.
Why she holds a notion in her mind as to her fathers perfection and pushes his abuse to the back of her conscious mind is an odd one. She seems to struggle with the concept of 'perfect' men. Gazing adoringly at them on the television... the perfect symbol of masculinity, yet at the same time dispising men and that masculinity. She struggles with this throughout the movie and her abuse as a child is only shown in flashbacks, where the movie adopts a wierd 'spaced-out' style.
Due to her repressed memories and her inability to deal with what has happened and her feelings towards men in general (more-so perfect models of masculinity.. sportsmen, actors) she takes to seducing these men and when she gets them in a vunerable position in the bedroom, she slowly tortures them and kills them, generally culminating in her castrating them... the ultimate demsculinizing.
As the movie progresses, her boyfriend and sister finally have to start admitting what she is doing. They don't know how to cope with what she is going through and its effects much as they care for her.
As I said, this movie is uncomfortable and hard to watch in places. I struggle with my viewpoint here. I can see it has its redeeming features as it has a lot going on and works on several levels. It is full of imagery which is there if you care to look for it. I did find it very depressing to watch though. Maybe aspects of this one felt too real with stories floating around in the media at the moment. The whole abuse of children thing has always turned my stomach, so it sort of made the killings almost incidental to me.
I leave this one kind of confused. Most definately not one for horror fans or anyone expecting gore or shocks, but an interesting study of the human condition and its demise.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Showing posts with label Rape. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Rape. Show all posts
27 Oct 2012
SHOCKTOBER SPECIAL: I Spit on Your Grave (2010) - Will's Review
Reviewed (spoiler free) in full over on my solo blog, as per last week this article will focus on the differences between the 1978 and 2010 version, and therefore contain spoilers for both (although I'll try and keep the 2010 spoilers to a minimum).
Characters:
Jennifer is less well-rounded as a character this time, simply because we spend less time with her.
Mathew, the retarded 'gang' member, is a lot more believable that in the original; between being much better acted and losing the 'trailer park boys' glasses he is much less of a cartoon character.
With the exception of the new attacker (this time we are given the 5 that the original's tag-line promised, rather than the 4 it delivered) the rest of the gang are, in contrast to Matthew more caricatured this time out; from the moment we meet them they are obviously bad news.
Characters:
Jennifer is less well-rounded as a character this time, simply because we spend less time with her.
Mathew, the retarded 'gang' member, is a lot more believable that in the original; between being much better acted and losing the 'trailer park boys' glasses he is much less of a cartoon character.
With the exception of the new attacker (this time we are given the 5 that the original's tag-line promised, rather than the 4 it delivered) the rest of the gang are, in contrast to Matthew more caricatured this time out; from the moment we meet them they are obviously bad news.
2 of the attackers have families this time, although one of the families actually has a role i the movie this time.
The attack:
The attack is much shorter this time: Jennifer passes out and the camera fades to black part way through; but of the attack we do see there is a lot more psychological abuse this time and a fair but less physical violence, the sexual assaults seem as bad as they ever did - we just don't see as much of it.
Whether this is a good thing is debatable; it does rob the film of some of its predecessors 'power' but it also means we don't have to watch a woman getting raped for as long; which certainly helps the film be a little easier to watch (again, whether 'easier to watch' is a good thing, is open to debate).
Matthew is even less willing to take part (at least initially), requiring a threat on Jennifer's life at the hands of on of the other guys before he's willing to have sex with her
This time the plan isn't quite so stupid; the attackers do not rely on Matthew to go back and kill her.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
The attack:
The attack is much shorter this time: Jennifer passes out and the camera fades to black part way through; but of the attack we do see there is a lot more psychological abuse this time and a fair but less physical violence, the sexual assaults seem as bad as they ever did - we just don't see as much of it.
Whether this is a good thing is debatable; it does rob the film of some of its predecessors 'power' but it also means we don't have to watch a woman getting raped for as long; which certainly helps the film be a little easier to watch (again, whether 'easier to watch' is a good thing, is open to debate).
Matthew is even less willing to take part (at least initially), requiring a threat on Jennifer's life at the hands of on of the other guys before he's willing to have sex with her
This time the plan isn't quite so stupid; the attackers do not rely on Matthew to go back and kill her.
The Aftermath:
Again, we see less (in fact none) of Jennifer's effort to piece herself back together, although we do learn some of it through the things she says in the final act; arguably the experience in the 2010 version has left her even more damaged than her 1978 counterpart.
The Revenge:
Is where the movie deviates most - this time none of the men die of stupidity (1978 movie; I still haven't forgiven you for the guy who grabbed the propeller of the motor boat) and Jennifer takes her time to make sure that each man gets a death they deserve - even using a little poetic justice to customize each kill; the specific tortures she devices for each man mirror or reference their part in the attack - a man who held her face underwater is suspended over a bath, a man who analy rapes her wakes up with a shotgun up... you get the idea.
Tone / Overall:
The poetic nature of the kills, as well as the semi-elaborate setups of them, provide plenty of "punch the air" type moments.
You may recall that I criticised the Last House Remake for having just one of these at the end - but here it works; mainly because it isn't just one, that stands out as being inconsistent with the tone, but becomes the point of the movie.
Although the rape is still horrific, and not-for-kicks, it is shorter, and therefore easier to bear.
Between the shorter attack sequence and the more crowd-pleasing deaths (not to mention that the ordering of the kills is much improved - the most vile offender last this time) this movie is much easier to watch than the original; rape sequence notwithstanding this one is even a 'fun' movie in its own way. This I think is both its strength and its weakness; It fails as an important film, but makes a much better movie than the original.
I had fun watching it, and it did not eroricise rape, So I'm going to go ahead and recommend it. I'm going to guess Lisa has not (I didn't check yet), but we shall see...
Counts:
Body Count: 6
Boob Count: 1 pair
Animal Body count: 6 (3 Birds, 2 fish and a rat - none killed on screen)
Most memorable Death: Eye Eye!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
SHOCKTOBER SPECIAL: I Spit on Your Grave (2010) - Lisa's Review
*** SPOILERS ***
So another remake for our Shocktober special and a break from our 'Nasties' list. I was wary about watching this for a host of reasons. I didn't have much desire to watch the original (reviewed by us both HERE), due to its subject matter and my abject hatred for watching graphic rape scenes, but having managed to stomach that movie, I was left with nothing but admiration for its directors, writers and actors with what a fantastic job they did with such a difficult premis.
So did I feel the same about this one? Sadly not!
The story here is the same. I won't go into detail again (click the above link to read the above reviews if you haven't seen the original). Everything that was strong and poignant about the original is removed. The most disturbing aspect of the original, was that that the guys responsible for the heinous acts are portrayed as very 'normal' men. In the remake, it is made very clear from the offset, that these guys are nasty, certainly not normal members of society. It feels very 'Hollywood' and not as gritty as the original. Worst of all, the avenue we go down when Jennifer exacts her revenge turns this into a completely different movie!!
Now I surprised myself here and I'm going to sound all hypocritical-like, but in my original review (which I re-read before I wrote this), I was crying out for more brutal revenge from Jennifer. This movie delivers this BIG time. However, it feels all wrong. The brutality of the 'kills' Jennifer perpetrates is not in keeping AT ALL with her character and it changes what this movie is all about. It takes the focus away from the psychological horror and concentration on bigger questions and turns it into another SAW movie. Yet again, that must sound hypocritical, as I'm a big SAW fan, but turning 'I Spit on your grave' into 'SAW' is like watching a remake of your favourite kids show waiting to feel all sentimental and warm inside and being subjected to a tirade of swearing.
Don't get me wrong, the acting is very strong all the way through. The make-up and effects are good. There is even an addition in this movie of an evil Sheriff who wasn't in the original (excellently played incidentally). The gore is cringeworthy and would curl the toes of most die-hard horror fans, but its all wrong when used in this context and in this movie.
My original desire to see exactly what I have just watched, shows me how wrong I was. Jennifer should not have exacted revenge in a series of 'traps' designed to maximise the shock factor and ramp up the gore in this movie. It somehow 'cheapened' it for me.
I don't doubt a lot of people will like this movie and think it's an excellent remake, as, like I said, there wasn't an awful lot you could find wrong with the acting, script, effects etc, but it just didn't 'feel' right after the power of the first movie.
Had the 'kills' been in another movie, SAW 8 for example, I would have enjoyed these scenes when watching in a completely different context, but they just didn't belong here.
I wont' say this is a bad movie persay, but it didn't work for me.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
So another remake for our Shocktober special and a break from our 'Nasties' list. I was wary about watching this for a host of reasons. I didn't have much desire to watch the original (reviewed by us both HERE), due to its subject matter and my abject hatred for watching graphic rape scenes, but having managed to stomach that movie, I was left with nothing but admiration for its directors, writers and actors with what a fantastic job they did with such a difficult premis.
So did I feel the same about this one? Sadly not!
The story here is the same. I won't go into detail again (click the above link to read the above reviews if you haven't seen the original). Everything that was strong and poignant about the original is removed. The most disturbing aspect of the original, was that that the guys responsible for the heinous acts are portrayed as very 'normal' men. In the remake, it is made very clear from the offset, that these guys are nasty, certainly not normal members of society. It feels very 'Hollywood' and not as gritty as the original. Worst of all, the avenue we go down when Jennifer exacts her revenge turns this into a completely different movie!!
Now I surprised myself here and I'm going to sound all hypocritical-like, but in my original review (which I re-read before I wrote this), I was crying out for more brutal revenge from Jennifer. This movie delivers this BIG time. However, it feels all wrong. The brutality of the 'kills' Jennifer perpetrates is not in keeping AT ALL with her character and it changes what this movie is all about. It takes the focus away from the psychological horror and concentration on bigger questions and turns it into another SAW movie. Yet again, that must sound hypocritical, as I'm a big SAW fan, but turning 'I Spit on your grave' into 'SAW' is like watching a remake of your favourite kids show waiting to feel all sentimental and warm inside and being subjected to a tirade of swearing.
Don't get me wrong, the acting is very strong all the way through. The make-up and effects are good. There is even an addition in this movie of an evil Sheriff who wasn't in the original (excellently played incidentally). The gore is cringeworthy and would curl the toes of most die-hard horror fans, but its all wrong when used in this context and in this movie.
My original desire to see exactly what I have just watched, shows me how wrong I was. Jennifer should not have exacted revenge in a series of 'traps' designed to maximise the shock factor and ramp up the gore in this movie. It somehow 'cheapened' it for me.
I don't doubt a lot of people will like this movie and think it's an excellent remake, as, like I said, there wasn't an awful lot you could find wrong with the acting, script, effects etc, but it just didn't 'feel' right after the power of the first movie.
Had the 'kills' been in another movie, SAW 8 for example, I would have enjoyed these scenes when watching in a completely different context, but they just didn't belong here.
I wont' say this is a bad movie persay, but it didn't work for me.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
20 Oct 2012
SHOCKTOBER SPECIAL: Last House On The Left (2009) - Lisa's Review
*** SPOILERS ***
Another remake this week for the month of October. I was interested to see how this remake would compare to the original 1972 movie reviewed here. I had heard much about the original and had always been advised to avoid due to the horrendous violent and brutal scenes and graphic rape depicted. I myself found the movie to be very sympathetically shot and well put together. When I heard similar comments about the remake, I wondered whether it would be palatable. I hadn't rushed out to see it, so tonight was my first watch.
Again, I was pleasantly surprised with this movie, as with the original. I won't go into too much detail about the storyline of the movie as its still quite fresh and raw in my head. I did find it disturbing in places and difficult to watch, so don't think any amount of waffle could convey my feelings on the movie in full. While the movie started rather typically and wasn't much different to your typical modern horror movie, around the middle it shifted gears dramatically.
We have 2 girls again (Mari & Paige) as with the original who get into the company of a criminal gang who are on the run for murder. The movie actually started with the 'rescue' of one of the criminals by his 2 compatriots and the murder of the 2 cops transporting him to prison. The death of the second officer was particularly horrid and left me with a bad taste in my mouth as they held a photo of his children in front of his face as he died, telling him he'd never see their faces again. As a mother, I found that one difficult to bear and wondered whether I was going to be able to watch this movie.
Back to the 2 girls. In short, the gang take them deep into a forest where Paige is viciously stabbed and left to bleed to death due after shouting insults to the gangs leader (Krug) to save her friend Mari from being raped. Sadly all this facilitates is her own death and the slightly delayed rape of her friend. This is where the entire movie changes and even the cinematography ramps it up a gear. The rape scene is (as with the original) very difficult to watch, it is brutal, nasty and heartbreaking. For me the word heartbreaking sums up the entire mid section of this movie. I sat transfixed with the horror in front of me feeling loathing, empathy, disgust, fear, regret and deep sadness. In my eyes, even though, to give the whingers their dues; it is sick, it is disgusting, but it's real! It happens and if it is to be depicted, it should be for what it is. I feel this movie does this well. This is thanks to the direction, but mostly for me due to the amazing acting of Sara Paxton. This is an actress that hasn't come to my attention before, but I was remarkably impressed by her. She is stunningly beautiful in an innocent, naive, almost child-like way, which makes what she endures all the more heartbreaking. Its almost as if her eyes were made to illustrate the expression doe-eyed. Her portrayal of a young girl destroyed is captivating and horrific all at the same time. As in the original Mari manages to escape and is pursued through the forest. In the remake however she is a champion swimmer, so as we watch her swim across the lake towards her parents summer home, we have everything crossed she'll make it. The scene showing her swim and the eventual hit with a bullet is beautifully shot. (no pun intended) One scene where she rolls over in the water (which is all shot in slow motion) and lays on her back bleeding out, I have to admit made my eyes water. It is just so heart-breakingly sad. A rainstorm starts and hammers off her still body and upturned hands. It gives me shivers even now. I found myself intensely sad for some time after watching this scene.
In this remake, there is a major difference with regards to Mari, but I won't give it away. I had no idea and it made a VERY pleasant surprise for me.
Following these scenes, the movie goes back to its starting pace and loses its shine for me. That's not saying it was bad. It still stands as a solid horror movie. The acting is good, the effects are good, but that special something had gone. I felt some scenes were dragged out longer than they needed to be and not enough time was spent on the kills (especially the lead thug Krug, although it was spectacularly done).
I liked the ending. I can't say what happens as it would completely give everything away and I think I've given more than enough away above.
I would recommend this movie, but not for anyone who finds it difficult to watch disturbing scenes or who isn't a fan of horror. You have to have a strong stomach and a strong head to watch this one and not have it stay with you. I have no doubt it will stay with me for some time, but hey, to me that#s the sign of a good movie.
Thumbs Up and a Lisa Recommends from me.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
6 Oct 2012
Visiting Hours - Lisa's Review
*** SOME SPOILERS ***
I struggled this week with why on earth this movie found its way onto the Nasties List. It would be much better suited as a Sunday afternoon movie. There is little in the way of gore or graphic scenes in the movie to complain about, so I'm at a loss. There is a scene which sexualises a knife torture and rape, which I suppose is a bit in bad taste, but I've seen worse before the watershed I'm sure.
That's not saying its a bad movie. It's not too bad. I found it remarkably easy to watch and there wasn't that much in the way of irritation for me. It had crazy inconsistencies, most notably a scene at the start of the movie where our lead lady (Deborah) is on air (she's on a talk show) making her views clear on the conviction of a woman who finally fought back against her abusive husband. As she pulled no punches and her comments were close to libelous, her boss advised her they would be unable to air the episode. Whats odd about this is at the same time as we are watching the scene, we are shown our movie villain who is at home watching the airing of this same show???
Anyways, if you can put that aside that glaring inconsistency, its watching this show that sparks our killer (Colt Hawker) off to stalk Deborah. Seems he has followed her work for years and he is not her biggest fan as she is a big female activist and he is something of a misogynist (getting to be a remarkably familiar thing in these movies). What I also failed to mention is that the woman in question who was being defended by Deborah for fighting back against her husband (by throwing a pan of hot oil around him hence disfiguring him for life) is actually Hawkers mother. The husband is of course his father. He has never forgiven his mother for what she did to his father and basically just thinks that she should put up and shut up.
The movie follows Hawker tracking down Deborah. He finds her, manages only to wound her (we have another knife through door scene here) as they are interrupted so she is taken to recuperate in hospital, hence our title. Hawker keeps up his pursuit and a young nurse Sheila is dragged into the mix, probably mostly because she shares Deborahs feminist views. There are a few kills, including of the wrong person. Breathing tubes are cut to detract attention away from him.
The story which follows is pretty normal for a murder thriller and is very predictable, but like I said its easy to watch as the acting is pretty solid. The ending is very TV movie, but I wasn't left feeling like i'd wasted an hour and a half which I have with other movies.
I wouldn't say don't watch this movie, but I would say, if you're looking for gore, horror, shocks or anything remotely graphic, this isn't the place to look.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
15 Sept 2012
The Toolbox Murders - Lisa's Review
*** BIG FAT SPOILERS ***
A VERY sleazy one this week. I struggled with how to present my review and whether or not to give the movie a 'recommends' tag. I decided since the aspects of the movie that I didn't enjoy are specific pet peeves of mine and perhaps aren't things that would irritate most viewers, I would go with a thumbs up.
The movie starts very abruptly and launches into several murders in an apartment block. We don't know any of the victims nor the perpetrator. The fact that I found the murders very disturbing and cringed numerous times, points towards the strength of the scenes, as we don't need prior knowledge nor a connection with the victims to feel an empathy. The murders weren't dragged out (which for me can sometimes dilute the effect) and the methods, which included the sharp end of a claw hammer, a drill (with a very large drill bit), a nailgun and a knife were toe-curling (in a good way) and had me wincing and cringing. The blood was realistic and the killer himself had an eerie madness about him. The completely contrasting music the victims were listening to in their homes before their attacks, which end up accompanying their demise definately adds to the disturbing nature of the scenes.
One complaint I do have though (and the one thing that ruined these scenes for me) was the necessity to have 2 of the victims presented in a sexual manner when it wasn't required and is so obviously done for titillation. We see a young woman in a bath (with a full face of makeup... bad for the skin that) masturbating. The killer gains his entry unheard by the woman due to her loud music and he kindly waits for her to finish before dispatching her by way of a nail-gun.... the obvious pun would be something along the line of 'nailing her' but I'm not that crass. Anyways.... I have nothing against nudity in movies, male or female, but put it in there when its required and is relevant, don't just make a murder victim nude because you can. These scenes are meant to be disturbing, shocking and chilling, not titillating. I did ask my husband his viewpoint on this, as a matter of interest and wanting a males perspective and his view is simply, they did this at the time because they wanted to push the boundaries as much as they could, by making the movie as controversial as they could (ie as much nudity, gore and distasteful scenes as possible). The intention was never to titillate. Hmmm I can see that angle, but I still reckon its distracting from the scene and for most viewers. I mean how many naked men do we see murdered in movies? Like I said before, its a personal pet peeve and not one which would apply to everyone, hence me giving the movie the 'Recommended' tag.
Anyways, after the first half hour, the movie takes a dramatic change of pace as we see the killer kidnap a 15 year old girl (Laurie). Its a strange change of pace, but not a bad one and the remainder of the movie is more pyschological rather than a physical horror. The acting is impressive, which is a big change for The Nasties List and you genuinely feel empathy with the characters. The film is now pretty much split into 3. A Whodunnit with a waste of time police investigation... there really was no point in even bothering with this side of things if they weren't going to do it properly. I've seen more convincing crime solving in an episode of Scooby Doo. Speaking of Scooby Doo, the second part of our 3 part movie split follows our kidnapped girls brother and his friend (who just so happens to be our killers nephew) trying to solve the case themselves. Lastly we follow the killer and kidnapper and his odd relationship with Laurie who spends the duration tied to a bed. This was a bit uncomfortable, as although there are no sexual scenes between the killer and her, the general creepiness almost implies something is amiss. Sadly the inevitable rape of 15 year old Laurie is factored in nearing the end of the movie, but not by our killer/kidnapper, but by his nephew. Thankfully we are spared any gratuitous and unnecessary shots with almost everything happening off camera. I liked the ending. Simple and effective. I won't give that away. I've given away pretty much everything else.
The movie had flaws. There are inconsistencies, there are lots of unbelievable bits, there are frustrating bits (like a victim who hides in a small room from the killer who is wielding a drill and chasing her... she leans AGAINST the door separating the 2 of them! ARRRGGGGHH). I will say however overall its one of the better nasties and one I could recommend to any lovers of horror who aren't too easilly offended.
Can we maintain positives movies for a few weeks??? Watch this space!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
25 Aug 2012
SS Experiment Love Camp - Lisa's Review
*** SPOILERS ***
So ANOTHER Nazi Sexploitation movie *YAWN*. The last one I am assured, thank gawd!
What to say? This movie is a big steaming pile of poo. It probably didn't help that I had to watch it on a faulty laptop which made a constant loud whirring noise the entire time, but I don't think the comfort of a lounge on the sofa and my DVD player would have made much difference.
Soooo, a storyline? Hmmmm lots of attractive German females POW's who are used in experiments, mostly sexual, in order to spawn the perfect Arian race. There are non sexual experiments but they seem to be reserved for the less attractive of the women and seem to have no place in the movie at all. Everything seems to have a very 'tame' nature to it. I know that sounds like an odd thing to say and I'm not saying I have a penchant for watching horrid human experiments or rapes, but if you're going to do this kind of movie, surely the aim is to shock, disgust, infuriate? This movie is neither strong enough nor clever enough to evoke any kind of emotion, other than perhaps mild amusement and boredom.
The rapes for example (as that's what they were) seemed to be something the women enjoyed. There was no need for violence or restraint as would have been the case in this situation. I neglected to say that it is a woman in charge of the experiments (reminiscent of The Beast in Heat), but the acting is so poor and the dubbing is so bad, there was no way you could take her seriously.
While i'm on the subject of not taking something seriously, can I point out that another of the reasons the experiments are being carried out were to find a 'replacement pair of testicles' for a colonel who lost his by way of a rather vicious prostitute. He wants to find the perfect pair of balls to replace what he's missing. Step forward Helmut, a patriotic German willing to do anything for his country. I don't think he quite knew what he would be sacrificing however.
His balls are indeed removed in a shoddy looking operation and are left in a dish in all their glory, just for our amusement. The most amusing thing of all however, is that Helmut has no idea his bits have been removed until he tries to have sex with a prisoner he is having a relationship with. On discovery that he has been castrated, he rushes to his superior and demands to know "What have you been doing with my balls?"... I kid you not! This is a serious line of dialogue!
I'm not really sure what else I can say about this movie as I my previous paragraph left you with an idea as to the 'quality' of this movie. I thought it sucked. It was weak and didn't achieve what it set out to. I don't think it would have even titillated the perverts amongst the viewers as it was so mild, not even up to soft porn standards. I should have known straight away to be honest. An early scene in the movie where the female prisoners are ordered to shower as they stink should also give an idea as to the quality we should expect. They all stand around giggling and moaning with pleasure as the camera zooms in on their 'that really needs a waxing/shaving' bits. I mean seriously?? If all I can think about is how badly these women need to tend to their gardens, what hope does the movie have?
I won't stick an 'avoid' on this weeks movie, but its only just escaped. Congratulations 'What have you been doing with my balls' line. A chuckle saved you.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
18 Aug 2012
Snuff - Lisa's Review
I'm not going to beat about the bush this week. This movie is monumentally awful!!! I usually try to come up with a positive about our movies, but this week, I'm afraid I am struggling in a big way. The best thing about this movie is the publicity campaign which was the reason so many poor sods ended up watching it. The possibility of viewing an actual snuff movie was obviously a big pull. Unfortunately for them, this was a previously released and unsuccessful Argentinian movie called 'Slaughter', which the director took and made changes to (included an additional ending supposed to be a piece of snuff) and they were to be bitterly disappointed.
The movie doesn't tie together well at all. Whats wrong with it I hear you ask? Where do I start? The dubbing is laughable - lips don't move at the same time as people speak, voices don't match characters, one of our main characters voices sounds like its coming through a speaker.... Then there's the editing. Scenes end and cut away abruptly and you're left thinking WTF?.... well I suppose I was thinking that most of the time anyway. There are copious continuity errors that would keep error spotting nerds entertained for hours on end. Every character in the movie is unlikable, horrid and you want to see die (a bunch of greasy, druggie hippy females who enjoy torturing each other and getting their norks out and their Manson-inspired leader Saataan.. Hmmmm great name).
The 1 main scene the movie seems to base all its advertising on, is in the last few minutes of the movie and it sooooo isn't worth sitting through the other 80 minutes just to get there. The special effects are poor and I'm sat there spotting continuity errors rather than watching whats going on. Also it bears no relation to what is going on in the rest of the movie, so there is no tying up and you're left wondering where the story (well, loosely speaking) went.
This is a movie I would definately never recommend to anyone, in fact I would go out of my way to tell people to avoid this one. Wish someone would create a new 'nasties' list with something worth getting bent out of shape about. At least with movies that contain scenes I struggle to watch, you can see how they warranted a place on the list, but with banal crap like this, its way beyond disappointing.
NEXT!!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
30 Jun 2012
Night of the Demon - Lisa's Review
*** SPOILERS ***
Well we've got a right stinker this week. I wouldn't say it was the worst one I've watched so far on the list, but it is definately not one I would ever recommend to anyone else for any reason, other than a desire to complete the nasties list challenge.
Our basic storyline here centres around a very nasty Bigfoot who lives in a forest and likes to go around killing people in various entertaining ways. Of course there is a willing group of cannon fodder for our monster courtesy of a group of college students (yup... yet again) and their professor who are investigating the truth behind the legend of this particular monster (or Demon if you will).
The movie actually starts by telling you how its going to end. The professor is in hospital, all bandaged up. The only survivor of a Bigfoot massacre. The movie is told through a series of flashbacks, which like another movie we watched recently also made no sense as the person telling the story was not present at all the flashbacks! Irritating! Contingency issues is the least of our worries here though.
Where do I start? The acting in this movie is terrible. The script is laughable to the extreme, but not in a funny way, more in a 'I can't believe I'm watching this shit' way. The story is oh so predictable but is full of holes.
One thing which really irritated me about the movie is the way some of the deaths or reactions to them are drawn out. They in no way change or add anything. The camera just stays there filming the same scene for aaaaaaaaaaaages. I could just feel the actor hung upside down with blood dripping down his face, into his eyes and mouth thinking... 'Come on already!!!' Also there is nothing more irritating than a screaming woman in a horror... jeeeeeeeeez you have your fair share of this here. I refer to the first death scene which happens to a courting couple who are making love in a car. The bloke is dragged out and onto the top of the car and murdered out of sight. His bloody body however falls down onto the windscreen and slithers downwards (as they always do when a windscreen is involved). The womans reaction was downright ridiculous! How many ways did the director ask her to react? Its like her said, 'No, try that again', she did about 20 attempts and they kept them all in!! This is all while she is completely starkers by the way. She does pick up something to cover herself with and decides to cover her waist with it....
The gore is ok in places, but it would have been very easy to improve the effects with a little more effort. Gore includes an impaling on a tree, a ripped off penis when a motorcyclist stops to relieve himself, a throat slitting on a window pane, an impaling on a pitchfork, a disembowlment (this was probably the best one as he proceeds to whip the poor guys innards around the room) and the birth of a half human / half Bigfoot.
So where does the baby come from? Well our students hear a story that a young woman called Wanda (who has a reputation for being crazy) has had an encounter of the very close kind with Bigfoot where he impregnates her. Her father (a preacher) witnesses the rape and waits until his daughter gives birth so he can kill the offspring which he believes to be evil. He's an odd sort, her dad.
Wanda then undergoes a ritualistic reliving of her rape every year by her fathers followers who believe the ritual somehow protects them. Is it any wonder the girl is a little disturbed?
Our ever understanding students blunder into her home and basically force all this information out of her by way of hypnotism. When the beans have been spilled, predictably Bigfoot makes an appearance and does away with the cast (I felt a cheer coming on.. GO BIGFOOT!).
Sadly our professor lives to tell the tale in a hospital and we are subjected to this movie. As always with this kind of experience, everything is put down to 'madness'.
Conclusion? This is bloody awful. Avoid.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
2 Jun 2012
Love Camp 7 - Lisa's Review
Well yet another Nazi Sexploitation movie... YAWN. What can I say that hasn't been said 100 times before about this kind of movie.
There was some kind of story here to begin with. It centers a POW camp where Jewish females are used as prostitutes for Nazi officers mainly (Love Camp 7). Two female American soldiers are sent into 'Love Camp 7' to attempt to rescue a female assistant to a scientist to gain knowledge about his work on a new weapon. They have been trained to memorize everything they read to give them a plausable background story and to enable them to convince the woman they are allies and have been sent in to rescue that they are indeed there to help her and are not nazi spies.
Sadly the story is left behind when we enter the 'Love Camp' when it is very clear from the script, angles, camera work and direction, that the movie is purely just a typical sexploitation movie getting in as much female frontal nudity, torture, squirming, rapes and violence. The movie seems to be directed specifically for that purpose. I won't even go into detail about what happens and to whom it happens, but this kind of thing shown for kicks just gets my goat every time so I'll treat it with the distain that it deserves.
The supposed big confrontation and escape as well as the ending is downright laughable to top it all. Interesting to see Picadilly Circus back then though...
Its quite sad as there could have been a decent film underneath had it been handled properly, but the desire to make this piece of crap was obviously overwhelming so even the most determined of viewers would struggle to pick out a plotline or story worth making this palatable.
If you want to watch a decent movie with a good story line, believable script and good acting, avoid this like the plague... if on the other hand, you like to watch violent sex, torture and abuse and are a complete mysogynistic w*nker, then this is right up your alley! Knock yourself out!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Love Camp 7 - Will's Review
Nazi sexploitation. Again. This time with really bad German accents (except from the token 'nice' soldier, who sounds remarkably not-German).
I think the thing that bugs me about these things is that Nazi run enforced Jewish 'staffed' brothels did exist, and I'm sure there's a few great, if harrowing, stories to be told, so long as the material is handled sensitively. The subject matter, however, is not at all suited to the LOOK AT THE TITS!!! approach.
The story this time around is that an allied sympathising Jewish scientist's assistant who worked for the nazis(!) was feeding our side information, but was sent to Love Camp 7 when the scientist she was working with died. 2 allied officers (women of course) are sent to pretend to be Jews and infiltrate the camp by allowing themselves to be captured.
Once in the camp OH LOOK TITS!!!! TITS AND RAPE!!! LOOK AT THE 'SEXY' RAPE!!!
Except, it even fails on that level, as the 'rapes' are all committed without the men so much as unbuttoning their flys, much less removing their trousers, so we are 'treated' to repeated and prolonged scenes of men in (the bottom halves of) Nazi uniforms dry humping and clumsily groping struggling or crying naked women.
The highlight of the movie is the 'vicious' guard dog who is supposedly chomping at the bit to attack the women while they are being hosed down; except he is clearly excitedly trying to play with the stream of water and has had some growing dubbed in.
Oh, and the whole thing is told in flashback by someone who wasn't there...
Ineptly made, offensive, not sexy, not entertaining and not worth your time.
Body count: 8
Boob Count: 10 pairs.
Most memorable Death: shot through the shoulder.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
I think the thing that bugs me about these things is that Nazi run enforced Jewish 'staffed' brothels did exist, and I'm sure there's a few great, if harrowing, stories to be told, so long as the material is handled sensitively. The subject matter, however, is not at all suited to the LOOK AT THE TITS!!! approach.
The story this time around is that an allied sympathising Jewish scientist's assistant who worked for the nazis(!) was feeding our side information, but was sent to Love Camp 7 when the scientist she was working with died. 2 allied officers (women of course) are sent to pretend to be Jews and infiltrate the camp by allowing themselves to be captured.
Once in the camp OH LOOK TITS!!!! TITS AND RAPE!!! LOOK AT THE 'SEXY' RAPE!!!
Except, it even fails on that level, as the 'rapes' are all committed without the men so much as unbuttoning their flys, much less removing their trousers, so we are 'treated' to repeated and prolonged scenes of men in (the bottom halves of) Nazi uniforms dry humping and clumsily groping struggling or crying naked women.
The highlight of the movie is the 'vicious' guard dog who is supposedly chomping at the bit to attack the women while they are being hosed down; except he is clearly excitedly trying to play with the stream of water and has had some growing dubbed in.
Oh, and the whole thing is told in flashback by someone who wasn't there...
Ineptly made, offensive, not sexy, not entertaining and not worth your time.
Body count: 8
Boob Count: 10 pairs.
Most memorable Death: shot through the shoulder.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
19 May 2012
Late Night Train - Will's review.
I don't usually discuss the movies with Lisa until reviews are both written (or at very least until we've both seen it) but I texted her twice about this one; After I'd seen it "This week's movie is 'Last house' [on the left] with a Train instead of a forest...", and before that, while still watching the movie, "If something were to happen in one of the movies that I know is going to piss you off royally, would you prefer to be forewarned, or remain spoiler free?"*
Because of that first text, this is going to be a short review, because of the 2nd, I'll be running off to witness Lisa's outrage as soon as I'm done here.
[spoilers follow]
So, We have 2 naive girls traveling alone for festivities (this time it's Christmas, rather than last houses' birthday), Who meet a gang consisting of 2 men and a woman, wind up anyone with them and get raped and killed; the gang ends up at the parents' home, where they are made welcome, the parents find out their daughter is dead, the gang realizes where they are, the parents realize who thier guests are, and a swift and unsatisfying revenge ensues...
When I said this movie is a lot like last weeks, I really wasn't talking broad strokes!
The rapes of the girls are handled well again; they are horrific and NOT for titillation (see boob count) and the attacks are, if anything, even nastier than the ones in last week's movie (The virgin is deflowered with a knife!) BUT in one of only two major deviations from Craven's movie, the woman was not originally part of the gang (which leads us to Lisa's presumed rage)
You see, before out 5 characters transferred to an otherwise deserted train, our male antagonists had already met out girls on a rather busy train... on that same train, one of the guys rapes a rather well-to-do woman....
You see, he follows her into the toilet, pushes her against the sink, and molests her, but then just before it becomes actual rape...
She consents, fucks him, and joins the gang.
Really.
Now, it turns out that she's as psychotic as the guys (possibly more so) but the point is that, in that scene, a sexual assault, not a role-play; and actual (in the context of the movie) sexual assault is portrayed as pleasurable, and leads to consensual sex.
In a move passed uncut in the UK.
Despite the fact that the BBFC say "a scene of rape or assault in which the attack is portrayed as, or appears to be pleasurable, desired or desirable and in some cases inconsequential is likely to be cut."
Whether it should be cut, I'm on the fence with; at the end of the day it's fiction, but I find the contradiction interesting.
There's one other deviation form the plot, right at the end, but since it's the only part of the film NOT spoiled by watching last week's movie, I'll leave that alone.
So anyway, If you didn't like Last House on the Left, If you did like Last House, you probably still won't like this, because you've seen it already.
Meh.
Boddy Count: 4
Boob Count: 0
Most Memorable Death: Don't Jump from Late Night Trains.
*She opted to remain unspoiled.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Because of that first text, this is going to be a short review, because of the 2nd, I'll be running off to witness Lisa's outrage as soon as I'm done here.
[spoilers follow]
So, We have 2 naive girls traveling alone for festivities (this time it's Christmas, rather than last houses' birthday), Who meet a gang consisting of 2 men and a woman, wind up anyone with them and get raped and killed; the gang ends up at the parents' home, where they are made welcome, the parents find out their daughter is dead, the gang realizes where they are, the parents realize who thier guests are, and a swift and unsatisfying revenge ensues...
When I said this movie is a lot like last weeks, I really wasn't talking broad strokes!
The rapes of the girls are handled well again; they are horrific and NOT for titillation (see boob count) and the attacks are, if anything, even nastier than the ones in last week's movie (The virgin is deflowered with a knife!) BUT in one of only two major deviations from Craven's movie, the woman was not originally part of the gang (which leads us to Lisa's presumed rage)
You see, before out 5 characters transferred to an otherwise deserted train, our male antagonists had already met out girls on a rather busy train... on that same train, one of the guys rapes a rather well-to-do woman....
You see, he follows her into the toilet, pushes her against the sink, and molests her, but then just before it becomes actual rape...
She consents, fucks him, and joins the gang.
Really.
Now, it turns out that she's as psychotic as the guys (possibly more so) but the point is that, in that scene, a sexual assault, not a role-play; and actual (in the context of the movie) sexual assault is portrayed as pleasurable, and leads to consensual sex.
In a move passed uncut in the UK.
Despite the fact that the BBFC say "a scene of rape or assault in which the attack is portrayed as, or appears to be pleasurable, desired or desirable and in some cases inconsequential is likely to be cut."
Whether it should be cut, I'm on the fence with; at the end of the day it's fiction, but I find the contradiction interesting.
There's one other deviation form the plot, right at the end, but since it's the only part of the film NOT spoiled by watching last week's movie, I'll leave that alone.
So anyway, If you didn't like Last House on the Left, If you did like Last House, you probably still won't like this, because you've seen it already.
Meh.
Boddy Count: 4
Boob Count: 0
Most Memorable Death: Don't Jump from Late Night Trains.
*She opted to remain unspoiled.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Late Night Train - Lisa's Review
*** Spoilers ***
If you are a regular reader (are there any?) and are reading this review, you could be forgiven for wondering if you have been here before... as in last week. This movie IS 'Last house on the leftt' with the forest being replaced by a train. The actual similarties are uncanny.
Here we have the same 2 naive girls Lisa and Margaret, who board a train to spend Christmas with Lisa's parents. Its all very steady and plodding along, I'm getting rather bored and very irritated by our female stars who are doing nothing to ingratiate me to them. Throw into the mix a couple of one dimensional thugs (who we are introduced to as they mug Santa!). Of course the same 2 guys make their way onto the same train with Lisa and Margaret. Initially they help the guys hide from the ticket inspector in the loo's but grow steadily more wary of them due to their changing behaviour and aggression.
A scene which initially REALLY pissed me off was the first sign that our bad guys are scum when one of them attempts to molest a rich female passenger in the train toilets. The reason for my disgust is the woman is about to get raped but decides she is actually quite enjoying it. I mean COME ON!!!! My disgust later turned to a nodded Hmmmm as this females character is uncovered. She makes the 2 bad guys look like 'Bert & Ernie'. This is one good thing I would say for the movie is that her character is well and truely one of the most depraved, remorseless, sick female characters on film I have ever watched. Unusual to see this and there should be more of it to be honest.
So, our 2 girls change train when we have a stop due to a bomb scare but they find the 2 guys and their new female 'friend' onboard the same train. They force their way into their carraige and the nastiness well and truely commences. I'm not going to go into full detail, but needless to say its not nice and I did not enjoy watching it. What I would say though that most of the horror is implied and left to our own minds.
The attacks are brutal, violent and obviously sexual as you can tell a mile off that is going to be the emphasis in the movie. We have the innocent virgin (as in LHOTL) and we keep flitting back to Lisas parents preparing for the girls arrival for Christmas in high spirits (again much like the parents in LHOTL for the birthday party).
What is rather shocking is how much the attacks are pushed by the new female member of this little gang. She seems to be the sick mind behind it all. There is the stereotypical humiliation, stripping, rapes, abuse and violence. Another passenger is even pulled into it all when he is caught watching some action, but he manages to run off.
One girl is so terrified, when she manages to escape into the toilets, she throws herself from the train and ultimately to her own death just to get away from them. There is also a VERY uncomfortable scene with the other young girl (a virgin) being 'broken in' with a knife. She dies from blood loss and they throw her body and possessions out of the train.
As with last weeks movie, the gang 'coincidentally' end up in the home of one of the murdered girls parents (I won't bore you with details) and again, like last week an item worn by one of the gang members gives the game away and we have the start of the revenge of the parents.
Frustratingly AGAIN, like last week it just doesn't cut the mustard. It isn't satisfying. It wasn't enough for me. This movie spends an age setting it all up and the revenge of the parents is over in a heartbeat, whats more is that the blonde nasty cow gets away with it all as she claims the guys tried to atack her too! Wheres the justice in that? What was the point? We are left wondering what is going to happen to her at the end of the movie.
I wouldn't say this was a bad movie. It is LHOTL rehashed and in my humble opinion, it doesn't do the job as well. I wouldn't say avoid it, but I wouldn't say rush out and see this now! If you've seen one of these, you've pretty much seen them all. Change of subject matter please!!!!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
12 May 2012
Last house on the left - Lisa's Review
*** SPOILERS ***
So, a controversial one this week and one I have known about and have never watched as I had been told how difficult a watch it was and how it was probably one best avoided by women.
Well, I have to say I'm not altogether in agreement with that statement. Yes, it is nasty and parts are horrible but again, like 'Spit on your grave' I felt the repugnant acts were properly and well portrayed in this movie.
The story is basically a young, virginal girl goes out partying with a more 'experienced' if you will friend and they end up being held against their will by a dangerous gang who are passing through the area, while they attempt to buy some cannabis from them.
What follows is the horrible torture, degradation, humiliation and rape of both girls and their eventual deaths. The portrayal of their experience is horrific, realistic, definately not played for kicks and really hits home the repugnant nature of the gangs boss and his female accomplice especially. After the death of one girl, the woman in the gang delights in pulling her innards out for the simple pleasure of it.
The movie doesn't end with the girls' death, it leads on to the virginal girls parents finding out what has happened to their daughter when they happen to put the gang up for the night and see a necklace they bought for their daughter around the bosses sons (a rather naive and mentally slow individual) neck.
This is where the movie fell apart for me. I thought the first half of the movie was well executed and quite eerie how it switched between the frivolity of the girls parents preparing for her party to horrible scenes in the forest of what their daughter is going through. However from the stage the parents find out about their daughters death (and they didn't look sufficiently upset by it for my liking either) it lost its edge for me.
They plan to take revenge on the gang and indeed they do, one at a time, but for me the revenge was too fast, not horrific enough and just not fitting. There didn't seem to be enough emotion in what they were doing. Then again I thought it was mighty odd at the beginning of the movie when the father proclaimed how he could see his daughters nipples through her shirt.... maybe they just act differently to normal people... who knows.
In conclusion, I thought the film 'could' have been much better if the ending was longer and better thought out. If it felt (to use one of Wills terms from another review) more satisfying. These didn't feel satisfying to me as the viewer.
I would say its definately worth a watch and definately is nasty, but lets itself down by losing its nastiness where it most needed it.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
28 Apr 2012
Island of Death - Will's Review
Well, I'll say one thing for this - It was indeed a Nasty.
Not all that graphic, but look at this checklist: Rape, Male Rape,Golden Showers, a 50-year old nude, bestiality, someone gets nailed to the floor and made to drink paint, stabbings, shootings, beheading via heavy machinery, limestone burns, incest, racism, homophobia, drugs, hanging, water sports (and I don't mean surfing), strangulation, public sex, goat slaughter... It's like they were trying to piss of the censors!
Oh. and the thing that really cracks me up; this one briefly got (accidentally) removed from the list, after someone watched "Who can Kill A Child" (Alternate title "The Island of Death") and though that was this!
The Plot involves a British, Christopher and Celia couple visiting an island in Greece, one which Christopher especially approves of due to its high number of churches and presumed Godly people. The couple (again, mainly Christopher) decides to cleanse the island of its ungodly - Those they deem perverts, such as Drug addicts, homosexuals, people who have the audacity to flirt with the Celia after being explicitly told she is single...
Oddly though, their righteous attitude doesn't come from a very pure place; They have sex in a phone box, and phone his mother to tell her what they are doing, they often seduce their victims before offing them, and they photograph their crimes and masturbate to the pictures - it is even Christopher who preforms the above mentioned goat rape! In short, they are not so much righteous, as messed up.
They mention having done similar in London, and are tracked and followed by a man who suspects them to be killers (is he a cop? We never find out) - this for me was the films biggest letdown, I wanted to know more of the backstory; why are they like this? Who is the guy following them? Why does Christopher think that red books bring him luck - This feels like a sequel rather than a stand alone movie.
All that said, although It could have been gorier, some of the kills here are pretty unique, and if you're after an intro to video nasties, you could do a lot worse!
Body Count: 9
Boob Count: 6 Pairs
Animal Body Count: 1
Most memorable Death: Jus' hangin' out on a rented plane...
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Not all that graphic, but look at this checklist: Rape, Male Rape,Golden Showers, a 50-year old nude, bestiality, someone gets nailed to the floor and made to drink paint, stabbings, shootings, beheading via heavy machinery, limestone burns, incest, racism, homophobia, drugs, hanging, water sports (and I don't mean surfing), strangulation, public sex, goat slaughter... It's like they were trying to piss of the censors!
Oh. and the thing that really cracks me up; this one briefly got (accidentally) removed from the list, after someone watched "Who can Kill A Child" (Alternate title "The Island of Death") and though that was this!
The Plot involves a British, Christopher and Celia couple visiting an island in Greece, one which Christopher especially approves of due to its high number of churches and presumed Godly people. The couple (again, mainly Christopher) decides to cleanse the island of its ungodly - Those they deem perverts, such as Drug addicts, homosexuals, people who have the audacity to flirt with the Celia after being explicitly told she is single...
Oddly though, their righteous attitude doesn't come from a very pure place; They have sex in a phone box, and phone his mother to tell her what they are doing, they often seduce their victims before offing them, and they photograph their crimes and masturbate to the pictures - it is even Christopher who preforms the above mentioned goat rape! In short, they are not so much righteous, as messed up.
They mention having done similar in London, and are tracked and followed by a man who suspects them to be killers (is he a cop? We never find out) - this for me was the films biggest letdown, I wanted to know more of the backstory; why are they like this? Who is the guy following them? Why does Christopher think that red books bring him luck - This feels like a sequel rather than a stand alone movie.
All that said, although It could have been gorier, some of the kills here are pretty unique, and if you're after an intro to video nasties, you could do a lot worse!
Body Count: 9
Boob Count: 6 Pairs
Animal Body Count: 1
Most memorable Death: Jus' hangin' out on a rented plane...
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Island of Death - Lisa's Review
*** LOTSA SPOILERS ***
Bit of an odd one this week, a contradiction if you will. This is a pretty nasty movie with nasty ideas, nasty people and nasty kills, but it still manages to be quite tame in how much it shows. You get an 'idea' as to what is happening a lot of the time, but not the full picture. This is a bit odd for a Video Nasty, as surely the whole idea is to show to nastiness? Don't get me wrong, I don't think you always have to see everything to make a good movie, but I struggle to see why they come up with some of the ideas they do, only to edit the movie in such a way that it actually looks like its been cut by the censors.
So what did I think of it? Well it seems a bit sick saying it was ok given various scenes in the movie which include our main character having sex with a baby goat when his wife is feeling too tired to oblige, he then proceeds to slaughter the goat. This may have been the first obvious proof that the main male character (Christopher) was a sick, sick man, but we get hints that he's a little 'angry' early on from his rather humorous name calling of a man who dare look at his wife in a restaurant of 'Bastard' (this guy is later seduced by his wife, Celia, all while Christopher watches and photographs them having sex. When they are done, he is nailed to the ground and force-fed paint).
He also gets rather animated when he see's a woman cheating on her husband, calling her 'Bitch' over and over. Its appears that he thinks the acts he carries out in the movie are 'cleansing the Island' of its sinners. He is sitting on some kind of moral high ground and his slightly warped wife (who it seems is losing her taste for cruelty as the movie progresses) is along for the ride.
They go on to murder a gay couple, one by sword at Christophers hand and one by gun at Celias hand following a rather uncomfortable sexual scene at gunpoint between her and the young gay man. All of these are again photographed for the couples use afterwards. I'm sure you can imagine the 'use' of a couple of sick indivduals.
As the movie progresses Christopher promises Celia there will be no more deaths, as she has made it clear she is not enjoying what they are doing any more. They agree to continue their sexual exploits and photograph them.
The first 'victim' of this randy twosome is an older woman who has the hots for Christopher.. and when I say older, I don't mean sexy older woman, I mean granny.... this scene is probably one of the most disturbing for me and had me yicking and yucking from start to finish.... both at the tongue waggling and come-ons of the old dear and the golden shower that follows.. rather than be disgusted however, granny loves it and rubs it all over her droopy, loose-skinned body. A bit put out by this and the fact that she bit him where no man wants to be bitten, he beats her to death.
The no death agreement didn't last for long, as Christopher walks in on 2 men attempting to rape Celia in the bath. He makes short work of them and more bodies pile up.
I'm beginning to feel a bit desensitized to it all by now. I don't know... this movie just doesn't seem disturbing now. You're just wondering who is going to be next and how. So we're getting bored... what better way to wake the audience up by having our beautiful leading lady get it on with a lesbian (would you believe it, called Leslie!!) again Christopher is outside taking photos... do none of these people have curtains?? I say get it on.. she pretty much just doesn't protest, but there doesn't seem to be much interest coming from her side.
Of course poor Leslie meets her demise by being forced to drink something (I wasn't sure what) and is given a lethal dose of heroin. Christopher then delights in blow-torching her body for fun. Delightful chap!
If we are not already enamored with Christopher, he comes upon a naked young woman having a shower and attempts to rape her. She manages to escape so we are 'treated' to her running about all over the place naked, with Christopher in pursuit with a sickle for some odd reason.... this ends in the girl being killed by way of sickle penetration to the chest, through a door....
The rest of the movie is just Christopher and Celia running all over the island to avoid capture. They end up hiding out in an old barn. Christopher wakes in the morning to Celia being raped by a simple farm hand and rather than help her, he gets out his camera and takes photos!!! In a sick twist of fate, the guy (who is obviously a bit camera shy) then knocks Christopher unconscious rapes him also. He dumps him in a pile of rocks and leaves him half buried and returns to Celia who sleeps with him (I wasn't sure if she was feigning enjoying it to save her life or if she actually did).
In a final twist we find out that Christopher and Celia are actually brother and sister.... Wheres the moral high ground now??? The movie ends with Celia having sex with the simpleton while Christopher is still buried in the rocks in the pourng rain.
So what did I think? Well it wasn't awful, but it wasn't shocking or frightening either. While some of the subject matter maybe deemed suitable for the DPP list, the actual execution of it did not. Given the subject matter, we could all imagine much, much worse in our heads... or is that just me?
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
14 Apr 2012
I Spit on Your Grave - Will's Review
This is one on the more famous Video nasties, so you probably already know the plot, if you don't allow me to fill you in using only information found on the films posters.
Its origional title was "The Rape and Revenge of Jennifer Hill" and the tagline is "This woman has just cut, chopped, broken, and burned five men beyond recognition…but no jury in American would ever convict her!"
Up to speed? Good.
***Spoilers (such as you can have for such a simple plot) follow****
First of all; The poster lies - Jenifer is attacked by (and takes her deadly revenge on) only 4 men.
After moving into a rented lakeside house for the summer to write her first full length novel, author Jenifer Hill orders a grocery delivery from the local store. They are delivered by a walking cartoon character (and town simpleton) Mathew:
So, what with him being a half-wit, and her being nice to him, he gets a crush on her, the fact she had a thin shirt on and no bra helped too...
Mathew immediately tells his only 3 friends, Johnny, Stanley and Andy (who Own the local fueling station, hang out at the local fueling station and hang around at the local fueling station, respectively) about the new girl.
One sunny day, when Jennifer is out sunbathing in a drifting rowboat in the lake, Stanley and Andy start harassing her from her speedboat and drag her to shore.
What follows is one of the most unpleasant hours of cinema I have ever seen.
It becomes quickly apparent that Johnny has orchestrated Jenifer's capture, so that Mathew can lose his virginity, she is stripped and held down, but when Mathew is reluctant, he is demoted to leg holding duty while Johnny rapes her.
The rape is, an I'm sure I won't find much opposition this time, horrific, we see most of it while the camera is trained on Jennifer's face, and I have to offer kudos to Camille Keaton at this point, who does look genuinely humiliated, terrified and pained.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Its origional title was "The Rape and Revenge of Jennifer Hill" and the tagline is "This woman has just cut, chopped, broken, and burned five men beyond recognition…but no jury in American would ever convict her!"
Up to speed? Good.
***Spoilers (such as you can have for such a simple plot) follow****
First of all; The poster lies - Jenifer is attacked by (and takes her deadly revenge on) only 4 men.
After moving into a rented lakeside house for the summer to write her first full length novel, author Jenifer Hill orders a grocery delivery from the local store. They are delivered by a walking cartoon character (and town simpleton) Mathew:
Mathew
So, what with him being a half-wit, and her being nice to him, he gets a crush on her, the fact she had a thin shirt on and no bra helped too...
Mathew immediately tells his only 3 friends, Johnny, Stanley and Andy (who Own the local fueling station, hang out at the local fueling station and hang around at the local fueling station, respectively) about the new girl.
One sunny day, when Jennifer is out sunbathing in a drifting rowboat in the lake, Stanley and Andy start harassing her from her speedboat and drag her to shore.
What follows is one of the most unpleasant hours of cinema I have ever seen.
It becomes quickly apparent that Johnny has orchestrated Jenifer's capture, so that Mathew can lose his virginity, she is stripped and held down, but when Mathew is reluctant, he is demoted to leg holding duty while Johnny rapes her.
The rape is, an I'm sure I won't find much opposition this time, horrific, we see most of it while the camera is trained on Jennifer's face, and I have to offer kudos to Camille Keaton at this point, who does look genuinely humiliated, terrified and pained.
That said, when she is allowed to go free, I found myself thinking "is that it" - not because here ordeal wasn't horrific, but because it wasn't as horrific by movie standards as I had expected.
Unfortunately , for the next half hour or so, we see her tracked recaptured, raped and beaten again and again - even once she reaches the "safty" of her rented home from home; Mathew is eventually coerced into taking his "turn" (although can't preform under the conditions) and things get so bad that she offers to give the last guy a hand job, just to avoid being raped again.
When they are quite finished, Mathew is sent back into the house, to kill her - which, again, he cannot bring himself to do, and so he lies.
You may have noticed that up until this point my review has been lacking its usual sarcastic edge, usually only absent when the movie was good; make no mistake, this movie was not "good" - it's just that the subject matter does not lend itself to snark.
Rest assured that the following half hour of the movie is outright stupid, Jenifer's revenge involves (separately) seducing the members of the gang and killing them.
When this works with Mathew (Who she actually sleeps with again - not sure I buy that) I can accept it; he's a retard; However I'm not entirely convinced that Johnny would be so easily fooled. I get that you have to be at least a bit lacking in the head department to think that raping someone is a good plan. however that same person came onto me, ran be a bath, got in it with me and started masturbating me, I'd like to think alarm bells would go off - I'd also like to think that when she (quite rightly) chopped my dick off, I'd notice before I saw the blood, not just think that the hand-job was "so good it hurts" . Further, one of the guys only dies because he after realizing that Jennifer is out for revenge, he literally grabs onto the outboard motor of a speedboat she is driving!!!
Another problem with the kills is the order of them. The castration of the leader should by rights have been the dramatic climax of the movie; both for the fact that he was the leader, and the obvious 'symbolism' (if you can call it that) of castrating a rapist - instead he's the second kill, which then gives the feeling that the other 2 are more or less "clean up" and that the peak has passed.
Another problem with the kills is the order of them. The castration of the leader should by rights have been the dramatic climax of the movie; both for the fact that he was the leader, and the obvious 'symbolism' (if you can call it that) of castrating a rapist - instead he's the second kill, which then gives the feeling that the other 2 are more or less "clean up" and that the peak has passed.
All in all though, killing order and extreme stupidity aside, it's fairly competently made, and (With the exception of the characiture that is Mathew) reasonably acted, so if you think you might enjoy 20 mins of setup, 40 mins of a woman being raped and half an hour of stupid people dying in stupid ways, knock yourself out.
No really... do!
Body Count: 4
Boob Count: 1 pair
Animal Body Count: 0
Most memorable Death: Turns out an outboard motor isn't a great ladder...
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
I spit on your grave - Lisa's Review
So this was a biggie for me, a movie I've heard a lot about and one I never really found the right time or mood to watch. As I watch most movies with my husband and he was never keen that I watch this movie, it was kind of hard to get around to it. Then came the 'Video Nasty' challenge and a reason to watch it.
I didn't quite know how I would feel about it as I know the subject matter was surrounding brutal rapes, something any regular reader will know, I feel quite strongly about. As this was such a notorious and widely discussed movie, I was keen that it be an accurate representation of the brutality of this act.
So - The premis. Pretty straightforward. A woman (Jennifer) leaves New York to stay in a house by a lake in a beautiful countryside setting to write her book. The start of the movie is a bit irritating and you can see what happens coming a mile off (maybe not to the degree it happens, but the fact you see it coming is disturbing in itself). We get to know Jennifer and there is no concentration on any other character, apart from a retarded young man called Matthew.
After some set up, the movie is quite quick to get down to a series of brutal rapes of Jennifer. I found these scenes very uncomfortable to watch and very upsetting. I won't go into minute detail as to what took place, but it was far from pleasant. The camera doesn't cut away as it tends to in scenes such as this. Its stays on the victim and perpetrators throughout the entire act adding to the uncomfortable nature of watching these scenes real time.
Although I have said these scenes are upsetting and I found them difficult to watch, I feel that the director here did an excellent job of conveying the brutality of rape. He concentrated on the violence usually involved, the complete and utter lack of respect for the victim as a human being and most importantly, how the experience is affecting the victim. There were no gratuitous shots, even though Jennifer spends a vast portion of the movie completely or partially nude. There is never an air of arousal or tease, there are no genital or breast close-ups, there really is no need. The rapes are shown for what they are with no need to spell anything out to us.
What is just as disturbing as the brutal rapes and violence in this movie, is the mysoginistic attitudes of the men in the movie. On a one to one basis, they seem like pretty normal guys, but when brought together they turn into complete and utter vile, aggressive animals. This is something I've always had problems with as it has been proven in history over and over again (ie war) that this does happen. What can make an ordinary man turn into someone capable of such repulsive acts. To me, that was the most disturbing aspect of the movie. One character is even heard to say that any man when given the chance will rape a woman. That is obviously completely untrue, but a frightening thought that some men may even think that way.
Anyways pondering aside and back to the movie.
Young Matthew is sent (after they've used her for their own needs) by the other lads to dispatch Jennifer by way of a rather pathetic looking knife. Unfortunately he is unable to do so and just cuts the side of her face to collect some blood to make it all realistic like... Hmmmmmmm.
We return to the story with Jennifer physically recovered and ready to exact her revenge.
This is where I hypocritically cheer for violence of a massive degree. Jennifer does indeed track down all the perpetrators (starting with retarded Matthew) and dispatches with them one by one. Now I won't go into detail as to how as some people may want to actually watch the movie, but I was satisfied with the first 2... just desserts I thought. Very satisfying. However the last 2 guys (including the most aggressive, nasty of the 4some) get away far to lightly for my liking. Not enough thought is put into their murders. I would have liked something a bit more thought provoking, nasty and deserving.
In conclusion, I don't know if 'enjoy' is the right word for this, but this movie did tick most of the right boxes for me and left me feeling mostly satisfied (all but for those last 2 deaths) and impressed by the directors genuine accomplishment at making a move that portrays this nasty subject just as it should be.
Heartilly recommend it for anyone who can stomach it.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
I didn't quite know how I would feel about it as I know the subject matter was surrounding brutal rapes, something any regular reader will know, I feel quite strongly about. As this was such a notorious and widely discussed movie, I was keen that it be an accurate representation of the brutality of this act.
So - The premis. Pretty straightforward. A woman (Jennifer) leaves New York to stay in a house by a lake in a beautiful countryside setting to write her book. The start of the movie is a bit irritating and you can see what happens coming a mile off (maybe not to the degree it happens, but the fact you see it coming is disturbing in itself). We get to know Jennifer and there is no concentration on any other character, apart from a retarded young man called Matthew.
After some set up, the movie is quite quick to get down to a series of brutal rapes of Jennifer. I found these scenes very uncomfortable to watch and very upsetting. I won't go into minute detail as to what took place, but it was far from pleasant. The camera doesn't cut away as it tends to in scenes such as this. Its stays on the victim and perpetrators throughout the entire act adding to the uncomfortable nature of watching these scenes real time.
Although I have said these scenes are upsetting and I found them difficult to watch, I feel that the director here did an excellent job of conveying the brutality of rape. He concentrated on the violence usually involved, the complete and utter lack of respect for the victim as a human being and most importantly, how the experience is affecting the victim. There were no gratuitous shots, even though Jennifer spends a vast portion of the movie completely or partially nude. There is never an air of arousal or tease, there are no genital or breast close-ups, there really is no need. The rapes are shown for what they are with no need to spell anything out to us.
What is just as disturbing as the brutal rapes and violence in this movie, is the mysoginistic attitudes of the men in the movie. On a one to one basis, they seem like pretty normal guys, but when brought together they turn into complete and utter vile, aggressive animals. This is something I've always had problems with as it has been proven in history over and over again (ie war) that this does happen. What can make an ordinary man turn into someone capable of such repulsive acts. To me, that was the most disturbing aspect of the movie. One character is even heard to say that any man when given the chance will rape a woman. That is obviously completely untrue, but a frightening thought that some men may even think that way.
Anyways pondering aside and back to the movie.
Young Matthew is sent (after they've used her for their own needs) by the other lads to dispatch Jennifer by way of a rather pathetic looking knife. Unfortunately he is unable to do so and just cuts the side of her face to collect some blood to make it all realistic like... Hmmmmmmm.
We return to the story with Jennifer physically recovered and ready to exact her revenge.
This is where I hypocritically cheer for violence of a massive degree. Jennifer does indeed track down all the perpetrators (starting with retarded Matthew) and dispatches with them one by one. Now I won't go into detail as to how as some people may want to actually watch the movie, but I was satisfied with the first 2... just desserts I thought. Very satisfying. However the last 2 guys (including the most aggressive, nasty of the 4some) get away far to lightly for my liking. Not enough thought is put into their murders. I would have liked something a bit more thought provoking, nasty and deserving.
In conclusion, I don't know if 'enjoy' is the right word for this, but this movie did tick most of the right boxes for me and left me feeling mostly satisfied (all but for those last 2 deaths) and impressed by the directors genuine accomplishment at making a move that portrays this nasty subject just as it should be.
Heartilly recommend it for anyone who can stomach it.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
24 Mar 2012
The House on the Edge of The Park - Will's Reviews
This is one of the few (3 so far I think) nasties I have already seen, It turned up on a 10 movies budget pack I bought on import from Canada years ago, I remember being impressed then, and I enjoyed it on a re-watch too..
Yes, I liked it! I know that Lisa will have a very different opinion, I haven't checked her review before writing mine (I never do) but I just know we will disagree on the Rape and sexual harassment scenes - and once you disagree on those, you aren't going to reach a consensus as they make up 90% of the movie!
In short, I'll have to be proven VERY wrong for this one to get a VNAW Recommends badge...
The film (directed by Cannibal Holocaust's Ruggero Deodato) opens with our lead character, Alex (the late David Hess), stalking, raping and killing a woman - the stalking is very well filmed, just the right amount of shaky cam to make it feel very claustrophobic, and i think the rape itself is well handled. While I am sure there exists a certain type of man who might'get off' on this, I felt that the rape was shown as a nasty and violent act - yes, the camera go up close and gave us lingering shots of breast and genitals, but this was not a posing woman 'sexing it up' and to me, these close ups were a violation, in much the same way the rape was shown to be. I'm sure there exists a type of man (possibly even woman) who will enjoy this as titilation, but to me it drove home the humiliation.
Alex apparently gets away with his crime, and we join him some time later (a year later, as we will find out) where his is finishing up for the night at the garage he owns, where he works with his (slightly challenged) friend, Ricky.
When a couple of Yuppies pull in to the garage as he is closing, he agrees to let Ricky fix their car, in exchange for an invite to the party they are headed to.
Once at the party, the hosts and their well-to-do friends waste no time in humiliating the duo, encouraging Ricky to dance and strip (while they point and laugh), while one of the women does everything she can to lead Alex on - even inviting him into the shower with her and washing him, before telling him he has no-chance.
I don't want to use the phrase "Asking for it" - but these idiots sure could have seen it coming... invite two strangers into your house then humiliate them - Not. Smart.
And so, when Alex decides that enough is enough the tables turn and it becomes a home-invasion movie - think Ils, The Strangers or even Week 37's Fight for your life - but with more sexual abuse and, in the case of fight, less racial hatred.
The women are all forced to bear at least there breast (most are stripped comply) Alex's Cock-tease gets taken up-stairs and raped, and Ricky is "gifted" his first choice of the women (Although he seems to like the idea, the reality is a different story and he is unable to go through with it).
There is also a particularly brutal razor assault on virginal time younger woman who drops by, that is hard to watch - made harder by those damned intrusive camera shots like the opening rape.
It's not without it's faults one of the women's behavior towards Ricky is just ridiculous in context, and the 'twist' is both predictable and pathetic, but all in all this one is worth your time... if you have the stomach for it.
Body Count: 2
Boob Count: 5 pairs
Animal Body Count: 0
Most memorable death: Like a floating pinata; only with bullets instead of sticks...
As an aside - Hess was set to star in a sequel to be released this year, reprising his roll as a 75 year old, newly released from prison, Alex. As far as I know though, this was never filmed before his unexpected death.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Yes, I liked it! I know that Lisa will have a very different opinion, I haven't checked her review before writing mine (I never do) but I just know we will disagree on the Rape and sexual harassment scenes - and once you disagree on those, you aren't going to reach a consensus as they make up 90% of the movie!
In short, I'll have to be proven VERY wrong for this one to get a VNAW Recommends badge...
The film (directed by Cannibal Holocaust's Ruggero Deodato) opens with our lead character, Alex (the late David Hess), stalking, raping and killing a woman - the stalking is very well filmed, just the right amount of shaky cam to make it feel very claustrophobic, and i think the rape itself is well handled. While I am sure there exists a certain type of man who might'get off' on this, I felt that the rape was shown as a nasty and violent act - yes, the camera go up close and gave us lingering shots of breast and genitals, but this was not a posing woman 'sexing it up' and to me, these close ups were a violation, in much the same way the rape was shown to be. I'm sure there exists a type of man (possibly even woman) who will enjoy this as titilation, but to me it drove home the humiliation.
Alex apparently gets away with his crime, and we join him some time later (a year later, as we will find out) where his is finishing up for the night at the garage he owns, where he works with his (slightly challenged) friend, Ricky.
When a couple of Yuppies pull in to the garage as he is closing, he agrees to let Ricky fix their car, in exchange for an invite to the party they are headed to.
Once at the party, the hosts and their well-to-do friends waste no time in humiliating the duo, encouraging Ricky to dance and strip (while they point and laugh), while one of the women does everything she can to lead Alex on - even inviting him into the shower with her and washing him, before telling him he has no-chance.
I don't want to use the phrase "Asking for it" - but these idiots sure could have seen it coming... invite two strangers into your house then humiliate them - Not. Smart.
And so, when Alex decides that enough is enough the tables turn and it becomes a home-invasion movie - think Ils, The Strangers or even Week 37's Fight for your life - but with more sexual abuse and, in the case of fight, less racial hatred.
The women are all forced to bear at least there breast (most are stripped comply) Alex's Cock-tease gets taken up-stairs and raped, and Ricky is "gifted" his first choice of the women (Although he seems to like the idea, the reality is a different story and he is unable to go through with it).
There is also a particularly brutal razor assault on virginal time younger woman who drops by, that is hard to watch - made harder by those damned intrusive camera shots like the opening rape.
It's not without it's faults one of the women's behavior towards Ricky is just ridiculous in context, and the 'twist' is both predictable and pathetic, but all in all this one is worth your time... if you have the stomach for it.
Body Count: 2
Boob Count: 5 pairs
Animal Body Count: 0
Most memorable death: Like a floating pinata; only with bullets instead of sticks...
As an aside - Hess was set to star in a sequel to be released this year, reprising his roll as a 75 year old, newly released from prison, Alex. As far as I know though, this was never filmed before his unexpected death.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
The House On The Edge Of The Park - Lisa's Review
As I start this review, I don't know what I'm going to write so there may be spoilers.
I struggled with how to review this movie without bias, trying not to let the fact i'm female affect my viewpoint, but sadly its not something I was able to do, so.. if it makes me a feminist whinger, then so be it.
I won't go into serious levels of detail with the plot, but the main male lead (Alex) starts the movie by raping a young woman in the back of a car. I knew by this stage I wan't going to like this one. Ok, so how do I explain this... rape happens, it's nasty, so sure it has a place within 'Video Nasties' but what I have a real problem with is the execution of a rape scene being filmed as a 'love' scene for titilation. A womans body being used to get as many shots of her various parts as possible, rather than concentrate on the vile act that rape actually is. As I watched this first rape and we zoomed in for chest and genital close-ups, my stomach turned over. I don't know whether this is because I am female or whether men would feel similarly.
We move on in the movie and Alex and his slow friend Ricky are invited to a party with a bunch of rich individuals. Its made clear early on they've been invited for kicks for the yuppies to laugh at. They cheat at poker with Ricky cleaning him out of all his money, they make him dance, cheering him on, all while laughing at him and encourage him to strip. Our supposed smart switched on guy is even taken for a fool by one of the women who does everything possible to lead him on and then won't have sex with him.
What follows is similar to 'funny games' I suppose. Alex turns nasty and holds the houses occupants hostage. He beats the 2 men and we get to see every woman in the house completely naked (ok so, 1 woman only goes topless, but we have every other female in the movie to make up for that). Ricky is easilly led, but when it comes down to it, he doesn't want to perform in front of the group at Alex's request by forcing himself on one of the women.
So its a typical bad guy holds a group hostage and does bad things movie. What I found different about it however was the sheer amount of uncomfortable forced female nudity. Women being abused, raped, stripped, having razors held to their throats, even a teenage babysitter (a virgin of course) being stripped, humiliated and cut all over with a razor. The scenes made me squirm and not in the way they should have. As I have said before, I don't like scenes of sexual abuse and i dislike them even more when every angle, shot and movement is to cause excitement to the viewer. As the women are being abused, the director is very careful to make sure their leg is at just the right angle for maximum body exposure and to make the most of what they've got. As with the first rape, we are 'treated' to close-ups of all the females breasts and genitals through-out the movie. I just wanted to give the people responsible a big kick in the nuts from all rape victims who might be unlucky enough to come across this piece of drivel!
We have a 'twist' at the end of the movie which might surprise a retard, but I saw it coming from the initial invite of Alex and Ricky to the house. I won't give it away for anyone who feels compelled to watch this movie from my review, I seriously hope however, most people I know would have the intelligence to avoid!
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Please use the comments bellow only to comment on this post - to write your own review, please comment on the main post for this movie.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)