Category Archives: Movies with a rural setting

Let’s Scare Jessica to Death (1971)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Crazy lady versus vampires.

Jessica (Zohra Lampert) is recovering from a nervous breakdown and taken to a secluded Connecticut home for rest and recuperation. Here she starts to see strange visions, but nobody believes her making her the only one aware of the dangers that are brewing around them.

Haunted houses, ghosts, zombies, weird townspeople, madness, vampires, and even a tacky séance this film seems to want to take all the elements from other horror movies and mix it into one. The idea may sound great, but the approach is tepid. This may be due to its low budget, but either way the final result is unexciting. Yes it is creepy and eerie specifically at the beginning, but it never manages to get to the next level with no real scares or even a few minor ones.

The film is also slow with some stodgy drama used as filler. The special effects are minimal and the little that is shown looks unrealistic. Only at the very end do things start to get interesting.

Director John Hancock adds a little flair and had the script been able to reach the level of its scintillating title this film might actually have been special. His framing and photography of the outside of the old house is good. There is also a shot of an early morning sun rising off a foggy lake that makes for a perfect creepy atmosphere. I also like his placement of the howling wind and the whispering voices although he does go to this well a little too often.

One good reason to watch this film is too see Lampert. Although always a supporting player this was to date her only starring vehicle. She has a distinctive look and style that doesn’t match the glamour of a conventional leading lady. Her face exposes a nice fragility to the vulnerable character that she plays and her performance of a tormented person is excellent.

Although she has a pair of unique blue eyes like actress Meg Foster Mariclaire Costello, as the ghost/vampire, is just not frightening. The rest of the characters are boring and seem almost like stand-ins.

I got a kick out of the antique dealer (Alan Manson) who tells Jessica about the death of the original owner of the home that she is now living in. The tale is bland and transparent even though he insists, several times, that it is ‘quite extraordinary’.

Released: August 6, 1971

Runtime: 1Hour 29Minutes

Rated PG

Director: John D. Hancock

Studio: Paramount

Available: VHS, DVD, Amazon Instant Video

Misery (1990)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: She’s his biggest fan.

Paul Sheldon (James Caan) is a writer who has just finished his latest novel. On the way back to his publisher (Lauren Bacall) he gets stranded in a freak snowstorm and ends up being ‘saved’ by Annie Wilkes (Kathy Bates) who is his ‘number one fan’. He is injured so she takes him to her nearby house where she proceeds to make him a helpless prisoner to her tormented and delusional mind.

The story has some interesting underlying elements. The film doesn’t really explore them, but does at least touch on it. It is the metaphor of the artist and the public. He is an educated man and yet his stories appeal to those with less education and what he puts into his work isn’t always what they take out of it. He doesn’t really like these stories and wants to expand his craft, but can’t because the formulaic stuff is what sells. In a way Paul was already trapped by Annie long before he ever got to her house and it is a sad dilemma a lot of artistic people have to deal with.
Bates as Annie plays the part really well. She is the ordinary, bland looking woman that you would never think about or consider dangerous. Her strange, erratic behaviors are slowly revealed until in the end the complete monster inside is unleashed. Screenwriter William Goldman, director Rob Reiner, and Bates herself show a good understanding of the character and what makes her tick. They create a woman who is complex, real, frightening, and at times even sad and pathetic.

Caan is a good competent actor however any one of number of actors could have played the part and maybe even done better. Yet you really sense and feel his confinement and ever growing frustration and when he finally revolts at the end you love it!

On the whole the thriller is pretty standard. There are some tense moments, but it is also routine and by the numbers. I thought it was too well lighted as a good psychological thriller always works best with a lot of shadows. The room Paul is trapped in looks more like it was done on a sound stage than in a real home and the film needed a few more unexpected twists.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: November 30, 1990

Runtime: 1Hour 47Minutes

Rated R

Director: Rob Reiner

Studio: Columbia Pictures

Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video

My Cousin Vinny (1992)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Don’t hire this lawyer.

A huge and much talked about hit upon its release in 1992, My Cousin Vinny is the story about two traveling college friends (Ralph Macchio, Mitchell Whitfield) who, upon going through Alabama, get implicated to the murder of a convenience store attendant that they did not commit. They’re only hope is calling up Macchio’s uncle Vinny from Brooklyn (Joe Pesci) who has only been practicing law for six weeks and has never tried a case.  Even worse is the fact that his brash Brooklyn sensibilities do not mesh well with the trial’s very strict, no-nonsense Judge (wonderfully played by Fred Gwynne in his last film role).

One thing that stood out right away with me was the way this film did not fall into age old stereotypes despite being in a setting that seemed ripe for it.  There is not a single mention of racism anywhere.  Instead the film seems to want to focus on a more contemporary Alabama where the African American characters are, by and large, on equal footing with the whites as well as having a white Sheriff who is not redneck, corrupt, or ignorant.  The two college kids also thankfully break rank from the typical Hollywood films of that era.  These kids are not the rowdy, partying, beer swilling, sex crazed teens that you usually see, but instead believable and most of all likable.  I found them to be so likable that I wished they were in the film more, unfortunately after the first twenty-five minutes they pretty much disappear until the very end, which I found disappointing.  Still it was nice seeing Macchio growing out of his Karate Kid role and looking a little more filled out and mature.

I also want to give mention to the excellent on-location shooting.  Although it was not actually filmed in Alabama, but instead the neighboring state of Georgia, it still nicely captures the look and feel of the south and it does it right from the start.  I have often said good on-location shooting (as opposed to the annoying Hollywood studio back-lot) can enhance just about any story and help create what’s almost like another character.  I have been to Alabama recently and enjoyed the many references to the red, muddy soil that is everywhere down there and the scene where the Pesci character gets his car stuck in it is great.

The comedy runs pretty well, but is much stronger at the start.  The conversations the boys have with the police are quite amusing as is Whitfield’s initial dialogue with the Pesci character who he doesn’t know is a lawyer and instead thinks he is a cellmate there to ‘break them in’.  I also enjoyed the running gag dealing with Vinny using his debating skills to try and ‘negotiate a settlement’ with a tough guy at a bar who refuses to pay up after losing a bet.

Unfortunately there is also a lot of comedy that does not work.  The running gag dealing with Vinny and his girlfriend constantly being awakened in the early morning hours by some unexpected noise at each of the places they stay at starts to get real redundant and silly.

There is also another segment featuring actor Austin Pendleton who plays one of the court appointed attorneys and, without warning or any logical explanation, starts to stutter terribly when he tries to give his opening argument.  I was genuinely shocked to see Pendleton take this part since he was a stutterer in real like and didn’t overcome the problem until he was well into his forties.  He even starred in a 1983 film entitled Talk to Me about a man coping with the affliction. Apparently Pendleton did protest the scene and even labeled it a ‘sick joke’, but eventually did it anyways because he needed the work, which was unfortunate because it comes off as being forced and uncomfortable.  Most lightweight comedies, which in the end this is, run about ninety minutes yet this film runs a hundred and twenty minutes, which is too long.  Had some of these so called ‘funny’ scenes been cut it would have shortened the film nicely and even strengthened it.

I should also mention Marisa Tomei who won the Oscar for best supporting actress as Pesci’s girlfriend.  Now her performance isn’t bad, but I didn’t see anything really outstanding about it either.  She spends most of the time wearing garish and gaudy outfits, speaking in a Brooklyn accent that borders on annoying, and playing the caricature of a ditzy girlfriend. Only at the end does she become a little more dimensional when she inexplicably displays some amazingly detailed knowledge about automobiles that for me just didn’t ring true.  I would have given the Oscar to Fred Gwynne, TV’s Herman Munster, as the judge. Some of his courtroom exchanges with the Pesci character are the best parts in the film.  I also really like Lane Smith in the role as the prosecutor. His performances are never flashy, but he is always reliable and gives his characters a nice, quiet dignity.  He is also a genuine southerner, so he fits into his role more easily.

The film is overall passable.  I had no idea how it was going to turn out and it kept me intrigued.  However, once the resolution was made and the mystery solved, I wasn’t completely satisfied.  I was hoping it would be like The Vanishing, the excellent 1988 film from the Netherlands, that went back and reenacted how it all took place.  It would have at least been nice had the film put in a little red herring at the beginning, so the viewer could have tried to figure it out themselves instead of just throwing in a wrap-up that seemed too convenient.

If you are fans of Joe Pesci then you’ll enjoy this movie a little bit more.  His performance as the volatile character in Goodfellas is so etched in my mind that I have a hard time adjusting to him in likable roles, or comedy.  However he manages to be quite engaging throughout.

My Rating: 5 out of 10 

Released: March 13, 1992 

Runtime: 2Hours 

Rated R 

Director: Jonathan Lynn 

Studio: 20th Century Fox 

Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video

‘Night Mother (1986)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Please don’t kill yourself.

Jessie Cates (Sissy Spacek) informs her mother Thelma (Anne Bancroft) that she plans on killing herself during the night and her distraught mother spends the rest of the evening trying to convince her not to do it.

It is hard to imagine a more maudlin and static production. The film consists of just two people talking inside a small, isolated house with no cutaways, flashbacks, inventive camera angles, interesting scenery, music, or editing. Louis Malle once did a film entitled My Dinner with Andre that featured two men sitting at a table and filling the film’s entire runtime with one long conversation, but at least there the topics were fascinating while here it is depressing. I was expecting some profound intellectually stimulating talk dealing with the meaning of life much like the one in Igmar Bergman’s classic The Seventh Seal, but instead it is general and banal. Part of the problem is that the Thelma character lacks sophistication and is unable to debate Jessie on any type of deeper level. The result then is a rather rhetorical 95 minute banter revolving around Thelma pleading with Jessie not to do it ‘because she needs here’ while Jessie glibly replying ‘I can if I want to’. The screenplay, written by Marsha Norman, who also penned the play from which it is based, fails to deliver that lyrical, poetic quality of dialogue that most films based on stage plays seem to have.

I kept wondering what the point to this was.  We never seem to get to the bottom of what is bothering Jessie and only seem to skim the emotional surface. The film does not dig deep enough into the human psyche but should’ve as her issues here are rather derivative and typical. Her main complaints is that she suffers from epilepsy, which is now under control through medication, and she has gone through a painful divorce, but there a lot of people with similar problems and worse who are not trying to kill themselves. Most viewers might be disgusted and appalled at Jessie’s selfish nature and the way she callously ignores her mother’s emotional pleas and insists on moving forward with the suicide despite how clearly devastating it will be to her mother. In the end the film will probably leave most people cold and unable to connect to either character.

The one thing that does save the film and even makes it riveting to an extent is the brilliant performances. Although I could’ve done without her southern accent I still found Bancroft to be fantastic and was impressed with the way she hit all the right emotional peaks. Spacek is superb in every facet and I liked that she wore no make-up and her face had a natural and worn look.

Tom Moore’s direction has a few nice touches. I liked the opening shot showing the remoteness of the home and how the rugged western landscape helped accentuate the hard-living of the characters. The music although only played at the beginning at end has an ominous tone to it that effectively hits the mood and theme of the material.

Of course suicides are always an on-going issue and if this film had given some insight into it I would have given it more credit, but it really doesn’t. I was surprised that Aaron Spelling who was usually known for producing shallow, glitzy stuff like the TV-show ‘Dynasty’ was the producer here.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: September 12, 1986

Runtime: 1Hour 35Minutes

Rated: PG-13

Director: Tom Moore

Studio: Universal

Available: VHS, DVD, Netflix streaming

American Gothic (1988)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 2 out of 10

4-Word Review: Rod needs to chill.

A group of young people must make an emergency landing on an off shore island when their single engine plane begins to malfunction. There they meet up with a strange family that seems locked in a bygone era and displays psychotic tendencies.

You would think a film with some big name stars of Rod Steiger, Yvonne De Carlo and Michael J. Pollard and an established director of John Hough would at least be passable, but this one is as bad as it gets. The goofy premise is taken too seriously and is too formulated. The characters are bland and stereotyped and the victims allow themselves to be killed off too easily with hardly any gore or special effects. There is also no suspense or scares. There isn’t even any good dark humor. It just plods on and on until you don’t care what happens.

It has a lot of similarities to Just Before Dawn and Mother’s Day. It even has the twist of having one of the survivors turn the tables and become the aggressor. Yet Mother’s Day had a lot more style and pizzazz.

Steiger is of course a very accomplished actor who has done a lot of good work, but seems miscast here. He should have injected more campiness into his part, but instead approaches it with his usual intensity. At the end he even gives out a loud primal scream of inner anguish much like the one he did in The Pawnbroker except here it is hollow and meaningless. Out of everyone De Carlo does the best.

The setting also becomes an issue. It has the word American in its title and yet was filmed entirely in British Columbia. Ma and Pa talk with southern type accents, but are surrounded by a northern landscape. The house is also a problem as it looks too neat and trim and like it was newly built. It would have been better had the building been taller and more foreboding and even displayed some decay or gothic style. The inside of the house doesn’t look like it’s been lived in and the furniture is nothing more than theatrical props.

Overall this is a pitiful attempt at horror movie making. It fails to be either offbeat or scary and only succeeds at becoming mind numbingly sterile.

My Rating: 2 out of 10

Released: May 13, 1988

Runtime: 1Hour 30Minutes

Rated R

Director: John Hough

Studio: Vidmark Entertainment

Available: VHS, DVD

Hail, Hero! (1969)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: Michael Douglas film debut.

Okay all you Michael Douglas fans out there, you know him, you love him, and you’ve seen all his movies, but what was his film debut?  I say this because I have known other fans of stars who are a bit vague when asked about early films of their favorite actors. I remember one lady who was in her 20’s, who I knew from work and professed to be a ‘huge’ Jack Nicholson fan, but when I asked her about some of his early films, which I had enjoyed including Five Easy Pieces, and King of the Marvin Gardens, she drew a complete blank. In fact she was not aware of any of the movies he did before The Shining. I had a similar experience with another lady friend I knew from a different job who professed to be a big Goldie Hawn fan and yet had no idea what film she had won the Academy Award for, which was in 1969 for Cactus Flower a movie that she hadn’t even heard of.  So I was curious how many Michael Douglas fans are actually aware of some of his early work. In fact this film, which was his first, was released when his future wife Catherine Zeta-Jones was only 11 days old.

It is the story of Carl Dixon (Douglas) who is an idealistic, peaceful young man that joins the army simply to please his conservative father (Arthur Kennedy). The film is a pleasant, even touching look at a someone learning to face the difficult and complex issues of adult life and realizing there are no easy answers. The movie doesn’t try to make any type of statement while carefully examining both sides of the issue. There isn’t any ‘bad guy’ here. The characters are real and multi-dimensional. The conversations and debates that they have are ones that went on in many households across the country at that time.

Douglas looks expectedly younger and initially I didn’t even recognize him. His hair is long, at least initially until his father cuts it, and his eyebrows are bushy and his voice much higher pitched. His performance is excellent and the  character his likable and engaging especially with the way he treats everyone with respect and is so generous that he gives his entire suitcase of clothes to a poor family in need.

Kennedy is perfect as the old-school father and my only complaint here is that I wished he had been in more scenes. Theresa Wright, as Carl’s mother, is okay, but she is not given enough screen-time either. She is also caught having an affair, but the film does not delve enough into this, but should have. Louise Latham is terrific giving one of the best performances of her career as a hermit-like woman living alone in a cave alongside the skeletal remains of an Indian baby.

There are some good scenes including Carl’s visit to a senior home where he comes face-to-face with the difficulties of aging as well as when he finds himself ready to strike someone at a party whom he does not agree with and realizing that violent tendencies lurk within anyone even those purporting to be pacifists. Yet the film fails to leave any lasting impression. The ending is weak and the story does not progress enough. The viewer is left feeling almost cheated because we are never shown how these characters evolved. In my opinion the material was insufficient for a feature film.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: October 4, 1969

Runtime: 1Hour 40Minutes

Rated M

Director: David Miller

Studio: National General Pictures

Available: VHS

Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom (1975)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 5 out of 10

4-Word Review: They want sex slaves.

During the end of WW II in a northern city of occupied Italy a group of bourgeoisie men and women round up a group of teenage boys and girls and take them to an isolated mansion where they are forced to become sex slaves. They are also inflicted with cruel tortures in this story based on the writings of Marquis De Sade.

The film is interesting, but only up to a point. Director Pasolini’s natural lighting fetish really works here and he makes it into an art form. His ability to find the perfect moment in the day to shoot the scene and be able to frame the action within the shadows is amazing and along with the color schemes gives it a very distinctive look and an unusual atmosphere.

The acting by the adults is amazing as they project evilness without flaw. The perverted stories they tell in some ways is more shocking than the actual scenes and the casual way they go about their sick behavior achieves an unprecedented level.

The story itself has some good insights. It shows the veneer of civilized behavior and how the passive nature of the victims and society as a whole only helps to allow evil to flourish. There’s also the main point which is that evil is truly a part of the human make-up and hides itself in everybody and can come out if provoked including the victims themselves.

Yet the film makes its point and then hammers it home without pause. The non-stop perversity becomes excessive and the redundancy eventually makes the shock value and message meaningless. Showing the background of these captors might have helped given it more of a balance.

I have nothing against those who wish to ‘push the envelope’ and there is nothing that says movies need to be tasteful, or even entertaining, but I couldn’t help but wonder if Pasolini simply used the material as an excuse to explore his own dark fantasies. Of course DeSade’s actual writings were far more twisted and unsettling then anything you see here and the film is a significantly toned down version.

Actual teenagers were used and there is an abundance of nudity and perversity. Something like this could never have been made here in the states and exactly how it ever got made is more interesting than the film itself. If there was ever a movie begging for a “Making of…” documentary it’s this one. It is also interesting to note that Pasolini was mysteriously killed by a hit-and-run driver just a few days before the film’s official release.

My Rating: 5 out of 10

Released: November 22, 1975

Runtime: 1Hour 56Minutes

Rated NC-17

Director: Pier Paolo Pasolini

Studio: United Artists

Available: DVD, Blu-ray (The Criterion Collection)

Friday the 13th Part 2 (1981)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 3 out of 10

4-Word Review: Jason likes to kill.

(This review contains spoilers, but it is such a bad movie, so who really cares.)

A new campsite near where the massacre from the first film took place and still on Crystal Lake opens for business. Soon the counselors begin receiving the same type of bloody fate.

I was a bit surprised how incredibly derivative this movie was. In many ways it is almost exactly like the first one even to the point of having them killed at night during a thunderstorm. My opinion is that if it says ‘Part 2’ in the title then that should mean some sort of story progression, or evolvement, but instead it’s just the same formula getting repeated. The only real difference is that the young counselors aren’t the only ones who get killed as Crazy Ralph (Walt Gorney) ends up being one of the killer’s victims as well. Although I thought his murder looked a bit fake, I was still glad to see it as the idea of having to hear him say “You’re all doomed” for another ninety minutes seemed more horrifying.

It might have been more intriguing had the story centered on Alice Hardy (Adrienne King) the sole survivor from the first film who is now living by herself many miles away. The film starts out with her, but she is then immediately killed and then it’s back to the campsite for the same old, same old. I also found this opening sequence to be a bit baffling.  Here is a woman living alone and still suffering from nightmares of the attack and yet it is only after she wakes up from one of these bad dreams that she decides to lock her front door and close her kitchen window, which has no screen and wide enough for even a large person to crawl through, even though I would’ve thought she should’ve done that from the very start.

One plus to the movie is that the cast here is more attractive than in the first one. Amy Steel as Ginny Field is pretty and looks great in a bikini. I liked how her face has a very natural quality to it, but still quite appealing without any excessive make-up. Kirsten Baker, who plays another counselor named Terry, is really hot and can been seen fully nude from the front and back. For the female viewers I’d say the male cast has more hunks as well. I also found it interesting how the character of Mark (Tom McBride) who is confined to a wheelchair is still portrayed as being sexy and appealing to the other female characters, which is good. Also, for the trivia buffs, McBride was the first actor to portray one of the counselors to end up dying in real-life.

The killings are a letdown. At times it seems that director Steve Miner is trying to put a satirical spin on the bloodshed, but then pulls back at the last minute. For instance when Mark gets ‘the axe’ he is seen in his wheelchair rolling down a long flight of steps and I thought this may be an amusing homage to the classic Battleship Potemkin where a baby carriage rolls down a long flight of stairs while a battle rages all around it. Instead we see the victim and wheelchair go halfway down and then the shot freezes and cuts away without the expected pay-off. Another part that is similar to a famous scene in Mario Bava’s Twitch of the Death Nerve where a couple has a spear go through them while they are making love. Here Jason attacks the couple, but all we see is the end of the spear going through the bottom of the mattress and touching the floor, which seemed unrealistic. It was hard to believe that there would be a spear long enough and a person strong enough to push it through two bodies and what would probably have been two mattresses to get it to reach the floor.

This also brings up the issue of the Jason character. Supposedly this is a ‘mentally and physically challenged’ individual with limited thinking and social capabilities. Yet in the scene where he murders the couple in bed he then removes their bodies, which would be rather difficult as supposedly they have a big spear going through them, and places them somewhere else in the room so when Ginny comes in he is the one lying in the bed where he then jumps out and attacks her, which seemed too sophisticated and elaborately thought out for someone of his supposed mental state. Also, the opening sequence where he kills Alice doesn’t make sense either. How is Jason, who has been living in a ramshackle shed in the woods most of his life able to track her down and figure out where she is? Also, I would think anyone living alone in the woods would be very intimidated and confused coming to a big city, or any populated community for that matter. There is also the fact that with his deformity, even if he is wearing a mask, he would have called a lot of attention to himself, and it is very unlikely that he would have gotten away with her murder undetected. In addition there is the matter of his mother’s decapitated head, which he keeps on top of a candle lit altar in his shack, but even in a shriveled up state it still doesn’t look anything like actress Betsy Palmer who played the role in the first film.

This is the type of film that gives slasher movies a bad reputation. It is very mechanical and unimaginative. There are a few shocks here and there, but I saw them coming and there is no sustained tension at all. Of course at the very end you do get to see what Jason looks like unmasked and my response to that is ‘whoop-te-do’.

My Rating: 3 out of 10

Released: May 1, 1981

Runtime: 1Hour 27Minutes

Rated R

Director: Steve Miner

Studio: Paramount

Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video, Netflix streaming

Friday the 13th (1980)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 6 out of 10

4-Word Review: Don’t reopen the campsite.

(This review contains spoilers. Lots of spoilers)

Twenty-two years after two counselors were brutally murdered Camp Crystal Lake reopens, but as the young staff tries to get the place ready they are killed one-by-one by an unknown assailant.

I first saw this film back in 1986 and thought it was alright. I presumed I would dislike it this time, but instead came away entertained and although certainly not a perfect film it does deserve its classic status. Director Sean S. Cunningham shows more flair than a lot of critics give him credit for. I liked the idea that all the murders take place during one stormy night at a remote location. Every murder sequence has its own beginning, middle, and end and filming it at an actual campsite gives it a lot of flavor. In fact I believe that is the main element for why this film became such a big hit because it reminds everyone when they went to camp as kids and tried to frighten each other by telling ghost stories around a camp fire.

Some of my favorite aspects of the film are what most might consider minor stuff, but stands out for me. For instance when Brenda (Laurie Bartram) goes to the archery range during the storm and the killer turns on all the lights and she becomes blinded by them is an interesting visual sequence. It is just unfortunate that she was not slayed with a shooting arrow as this would have corresponded to an earlier scene where she was almost hit by one shot by Ned (Mark Nelson). They were apparently planning to this, but then for whatever reason changed their minds. I equally liked the part where the killer shuts off the power and the viewer can see the lights slowly fading from the campsite at a distance, which has a nice foreboding quality. The part where Crazy Ralph (Walt Gorney) rides off on his bicycle after warning the staff the they are doomed creates an eerie image because there is no music and the lake is amazingly still proving that sometimes less is more when creating an intended impact. Having shots from the killer’s point of view watching the staff from a distance is creepy.

I watched the film closely thinking that there would be a lot of errors due to its low-budget, but found surprisingly little, or at least none that would create any type of major distraction. I know Betsy Palmer, who played Pamela Voorhees and is exposed as the killer at the end, only participated in a few days shooting. The hand that you see that represents the killer’s during the first half of the film was not Palmer’s, so I presumed that seeing a big ring on the third finger of the left hand would prove a mistake, but when Palmer does finally appear a ring is indeed there and the filmmakers prove to be astute. I know some people consider the scene where Alice (Adrienne King) has trapped herself inside a cabin and piling all sorts of stuff in front of the door to keep the killer out is a mistake because the door pushes out instead of in. However, I don’t agree because in her panic she would not be thinking straight and putting chairs in front of the door gave her a false sense of security, which at the time she may have needed emotionally. About the only real annoying mistake I saw is the fake lightning. Clearly it is a bright yellowish light coming from a flashlight that was shown on the performers from a stagehand that was just off- camera. The effect looks stupid and when are filmmakers ever going to realize that thunder and lightning rarely occur at the same time. You will always see lightning first and then the sound of thunder will usually occur several seconds later.

Too much time at the beginning is spent on the crew getting the campsite ready. These scenes don’t build any tension, the characters are vapid and clichéd, and the dialogue is trivial. I also found Ned to be incredibly irritating as the ‘comedian’ of the group whose attempts at humor where lame to the extreme. I found it funny how his murder is one of the few you don’t see and I think that was because the filmmakers feared that viewers would end up enjoying it too much. A little more nudity during this segment would have helped it along. I found it ironic that the one cast member that does end up going topless, Jeannine Taylor, was in real-life a graduate from a conservative Christian college. There is also a part here where they kill an actual snake and it deserves some mention because it is rather gory and has hints of Cannibal Holocaust where the viewer starts to think ‘if they are willing to kill actual animals in front of the camera what’s to stop them from doing it to the people’.

I like Betsy Palmer and the final climatic segment where she terrorizes Alice who is the last remaining survivor is in many ways the best part of the whole film. However, Estelle Parsons had been their first choice and I was a bit disappointed because Parsons has a unique acting style and a more distinctive face, which could’ve given the character more depth. Still, upon my third viewing I must say that Palmer does well. The close-ups of her face are great as is her gray sweater.

The music of course is another plus. I always thought it sounded like ‘chi,chi,chi; ma,ma,ma’, but it is actually supposed to be ki,ki,ki; ma,ma,ma’ and used to reflect the voice of Jason that Pamela hears inside her head instructing her to ‘Kill her Mommy’. Composer Henry Manfredi actually said ‘ki’ and ‘ma’ into a microphone before using sound effects to get the intended distortion.

Despite the film’s reputation the killings seem rather quick and uneventful. The slitting of the throat is a Tom Savini specialty, but was starting to get old even here. The machete through the head is one of the better ones, but the shot of it is too quick. The decapitation of Pamela is far and away the best. I liked how her hands continue to move even when she is headless. Apparently this is unrealistic and would not happen in real-life, but it is a cool visual nonetheless.

My Rating: 6 out of 10

Released: May 9, 1980

Runtime: 1Hour 35Minutes

Rated R

Director: Sean S. Cunningham

Studio: Paramount

Available: VHS, DVD, Blu-ray, Amazon Instant Video, Netflix Streaming

The Passion of Anna (1969)

By Richard Winters

My Rating: 8 out of 10

4-Word Review: Lonely little island retreat.

This is an intriguing film that seems quite similar to Roman Polanski’s Cul-De-Sac. Both films have a unique atmosphere and take place in a remote island setting and deal with a turbulent undercurrent that brews just underneath its deceivingly placid exterior.

Here we have Andreas (Max Von Sydow) living a lonely existence on an island retreat. He meets, by chance, Anna (Liv Ullmann) who is still grieving from the death of her first husband. The two form a tenuous relationship that slowly unravels as the dark corners of their personalities are eventually exposed.

In many ways this film has all the right ingredients. It wraps you up in its surreal nature and adds interesting effects. There are some creepy elements including a mad killer running around the island killing and torturing all the animals. Things work at a deliberate pace and leave no clue as to where it is headed. The characters are unpretentious and introspective. They are open about their faults and failures and give good reason as to why they have them. There are also fascinating cutaways to the actors themselves who help explain and interpret their characters motivations, which is a novel idea that gives the viewer a deeper understanding of the characters and adds an extra dimension.

Unfortunately it doesn’t come together and leaves no real emotional impact. There are a few good twists, but you can’t help but feel that it should have gone farther. There a certain scenarios that get touched on, but are never explored. For instance there is Andreas’s relationship with Elis (Erland Josephson).  Andreas has taken a loan out from him, but has also had an affair with his wife. This of course has some potential for fireworks and there is a moment where it begins to sizzle, but it never goes back to it. The same thing can be said for many of the other segments including the identity and reason for the animal killer.

Overall this is an outstanding experimental-like movie. It is not one of director Ingmar Bergman’s best, but it is still richer and more deeply textured than eighty percent of the other movies that are out there. The crisp and revealing dialogue alone makes it worth it and Bergman displays the most realistic perspective on the union of marriage.

My Rating: 8 out of 10

Released: November 10, 1969

Released: 1Hour 41Minutes

Rated R

Director: Ingmar Bergman

Studio: United Artists

Available: VHS, DVD