The American Scream (1988)
Dir. Mitchell Linden
Written by Phil Hopper, Mitchell Linden
Starring Pons Maar, Jennifer Darling, Matthew Borlenghi, Riley
Weston, Blackie Dammett
THE AMERICAN
SCREAM (the 1988 comedy[?]-slasher, not the 2012 documentary of the same name I reviewed to kick-off Chainsawnukah 2013: The Search For Schlock) begins with a moody, dour keyboard jam while the credits
somberly march their way across a Stygian blackness. A rather unexpected
introduction to a movie with the above poster, I would think. You keep waiting
for the other shoe to drop, like the music is suddenly gotta ironically shift
and turn into a wacky party to let us know how much this movie is gonna turn
the stodgy expectations of this stale genre on their head. But it doesn’t; the
credits end and the music continues to insist this is a dour mood piece, even
as we’re introduced immediately to the movie’s curious idea of comedy, which is
a stereotypical suburban Mom and Dad being loud, broad stereotypes, much to the
disaffected, angsty displeasure of their two teenage kids.
If this strikes
you as odd, well, at least it’s giving you an accurate idea of what you’re in
for, because THE AMERICAN SCREAM is a profoundly odd movie. I watch a frankly
unhealthy amount of terrible, z-grade slashers from the 80s, and this is hardly
the most incompetent I’ve ever encountered. But it may well be one of the
strangest. It’s one of those inexplicable examples of misguided genre flicks
which stray so far from their expected course that they can possibly wander,
blinking and disoriented, into the realm of art (or least least outsider art).
By the end, this movie may resolve itself as metaphor (an overwhelmingly
incompetent one, to be sure, but still identifiable) for the existential dread
of identity loss which hovers around the hazy but perceptible precipice of
adulthood. Or, it might just be some movie where they ran out of budget and
didn’t shoot the scenes where it would explain what the hell was going on, so
that’s a possibility too. But either way, it’s a truly odd duck.
The odd-duckyness
begins with the casting, which puts Jennifer Darling (recurring roles in Six
Million Dollar Man / Bionic Woman but mostly known for extensive voice
acting work in everything from THE IRON GIANT to THE GI JOE MOVIE) and Pons
Maar (a lanky, odd-looking actor known for eccentric physical roles like the
head Wheeler in RETURN TO OZ or the lizard bounty-hunter in MASTERS OF THE
UNIVERSE) in the roles of Mom and Dad. Satirizing how clueless and bourgeois
these two are seems pretty high on the movie’s priorities list, but the two
performances (both actors clearly savoring their rare starring roles) sail
heroically beyond simple parody, well into the territory of surreal performance
art. It’s like they both gobbled down a sizable hillock of amphetamines before
being shoved out in front of the camera with the director already screaming
“Bigger! BROADER!! MORE COMEDY!!” at them. They look manic and frantic and
giddy and are uniformly delivering performances not just to the back row, but
to the back row of the adjoining theater and possibly even to the customers in
line at the Chipotle next door.
And they’re pretty much alone in that. No other actor, nor any other aspect of the movie in general, is operating in the same register, raising the obvious question, what the hell? This is clearly something the movie is doing intentionally with these two characters, and only these two characters, which it foregrounds a sizable minority of the time but who are not in any discernible way connected to the ostensible narrative of the movie. But if you removed them, it would be an almost completely straight-faced (though still incompetent and perplexing) horror movie in every other way, with only some light comic touches. What is being attempted here, exactly, I do not know, but it’s definitely something. There’s an ambition and intent here which you virtually never see in this kind of one-off indie horror cheapie, but to what end, I cannot possibly guess.
Except for the
inexplicable musical cues, though, it begin conventionally enough, introducing
us to Mom (Barbara) and Dad (Ben) Benzinger, and their kids, cool guy Brent
(Matt Borlenghi, a prolific TV actor whose credits include a 5-year
tenure on All My Children and the role of “Jock” in NIGHTMARE ON ELM
STREET V: THE DREAM CHILD) and vaguely defined Bridgett (Riley Weston, a less
prolific TV actor and later Lifetime movie scribe*), as well as their “comic”
“relief” friend Larry (Kevin Kaye, only two other listed roles, one of them
being “stunts” in ALLIGATOR II: THE MUTILATION) who can, I think, be charitably
described as “absolutely intolerable.” It was 1988, and so we’re introduced to
all these characters doing charming, relatable things like using a telescope to
watch the lady next door take off her top and have her breasts fondled a couple
inches in front of an open window. Normal life was just intrinsically a horny
sex romp in the late 80s, so even the horror movies had to start out that way
just to establish a baseline reality. Try not to overanalyze it or learn
anything from it.
Anyhoo, after the
main characters are established to be a bunch of enthusiastically degenerate
peeping toms as a way to endear them to us, the family piles into their station
wagon for a vacation getaway to a secluded mountain town. During the
interminable drive (the journey-establishing “comedy” shot of the car driving
away after one loosely-packed suitcase drops off the roof rack is as standard
as these things come, but then the shot lingers a full 15 seconds while the car
literally disappears into the distance), with the parents singing a hearty
rendition of “99 bottles of beer on the wall”** (“Brent! You could play along
on your guitar!” Dad gushes), the kids, hunkered in the back of the station
wagon witness something… unusual.
In a car following them, a woman sitting in the
passenger seat next to a bald man takes out her boob. The two young men take
this second opportunity in as many hours to spy on unwitting semi-nude women as
another gift from god, and also as an opportunity to berate Bridgett and her
friend Roxanne who I forgot to mention earlier is also vacationing with them
(Jeanne Sapienza, “Shopper” in 2005’s GOING SHOPPING, which sounds like the
starring role but is actually one of 41 listed “Shoppers” in that cast [plus
one uncredited “Shopper” according to IMDB]) on being such prudes, as
demonstrated by their disparaging remarks about the boys’ EXTREMELY NORMAL AND
TOTALLY ADORABLE HABIT OF SPYING ON UNSUSPECTING NUDE WOMEN TOGETHER. But their
scintillating discussion of modern sexual mores suddenly takes a turn when the
man behind the wheel decides he wants to place his head between the now-exposed
breasts, and doesn’t take too kindly when he’s gently pushed away so a baby
can nurse. And by “doesn’t take it too kindly,” I mean he grabs the baby as
though it was made of very light-weight foam and rubber and bashes its head in
on the windshield, splattering the window with dripping brain matter!
I don’t, uh, know what to make of that,
especially since the murder car just pulls away and then the movie abruptly
cuts to the family arriving at their destination, apparently with no discussion
whatsoever about what they just witnessed (“isn’t this cute!” is the next
spoken line, as Mom takes in the rustic local diner wherein they’ll be
inaugurating their journey to the Real America). Have they forgotten? Do they
not understand what they just witnessed? Do they think it’s no big deal? Your
guess is as good as mine, but they arrive at their destination about 5 seconds
of movie time later with no apparent interest in following up on this topic.
If they were just hoping to put the whole
business behind them and enjoy their vacation, though, they’re out of luck. The
“country folk” (read: Camp Nelson CA, 3 hours outside LA), whose virtues the
parents have been extolling, seem friendly at first (everyone is town is waving
at the newcomers as they arrive, while Larry muses, “I feel as if we’re
expected”), but when Mom and Dad briefly leave the kids alone at the diner,
things start to get very weird, and in fact the “record” on the soundtrack suddenly
skips, just so you have no doubt that the mood has changed. All the adults in
the place stare fixedly at the kids, while they chew their food discomfortingly
loudly. There’s a VERTIGO-esque dolly zoom shot to really drive the point home,
and John Carpenter regular George “Buck” Flowers wanders over to awkwardly play
with Bridgett's hair while the kids sit there in silence. Then the parents come
back and everybody goes back to normal as if nothing has happened, including
the kids, who seem slightly off-put, but not nearly as much as this bizarre
event obviously warrants. Even when a local police officer named Sam (James
Cooper, supposedly a character named “Ralph Riddle” in a 1992 crime movie
called MOLESTED for which I can find absolutely no corroborating evidence
whatsoever) shows up, no one mentions having seen a brutal child murder earlier
in the day or the whole business with the dolly zoom.
Of course, the family doesn’t seem so stable
either, as we can clearly see when Larry whips out a switchblade over a dispute
over who gets what bed, and screams “DONT FUCK AROUND MAN I’LL CUT YOU SO
FUCKIN FAST YOU NEVER SEEN IT COMIN YOU MOTHAFUCKER!” with the blade to Brent’s
throat, before cheerfully backing down with a “just kidding.” It should come as
no surprise by this point that Brent’s reaction is to barely register some
minor annoyance and then go about his day as if nothing happened.
Nevertheless, Larry is downright harmless
(though still overwhelmingly repellent) compared to the locals, who seem to
harbor dark designs of some type on our protagonists. It seems like the
vibe they’re going for here is some kind of WICKER MAN riff with an
intergenerational twist, where the young people --and only the young
people-- are being targeted by some sort of mysterious local conspiracy of
malevolent townsfolk. I’m like, 70% sure that is the broad outline of what’s
going on, but that’s about as far as I can explain it. People definitely keep
acting weird to them, but then again, their behavior is also completely inexplicable.
Does that whole business with the knife tell us that Larry’s an unbalanced
psycho, or is that just what the movie considers to be wacky hijinks? Does
their silence about witnessing a brutal infanticide on the road mean they’re
low-simmering sadists, or is that just the standard incoherence for a movie
this low-rent? So sometimes it’s kind of hard to know who to blame when things
go sideway. For example, in an early incident, Brent is in a public urinal,
when another man walks up next to him and conspicuously stares at his junk.
When he goes to a stall for a little privacy, the guy stands immediately
outside, and then pushes the door open. This is obviously extremely rude and
provocative behavior, but Brent’s response --smashing the guy's head in with a toilet
seat cover-- also seems a little extreme, and neither he nor Larry seem to be
especially bothered about having just beaten a man to death in a public
bathroom. “Who the hell is this guy, man? Someone’s trying to kill us, man,”
Brent reflects in exactly Keanu Reeves’ voice from BILL AND TED.
This weird, slippery mix of dream logic and
possibly unintended incoherence reaches its zenith in the next scene, a
sequence so brazenly bizarre and yet made with such apparent deliberateness
that it seriously flirts with that rare Italian giallo spirit of giddy
nuttiness seamlessly mixed with self-consciously stylized art cinema. It seems
that while Brent and Larry were defending the public restrooms, Bridgett and
Roxanne got picked up by two adult men and taken to a strip club. I don’t
believe it’s definitively established how old the “kids” are, but they’re
definitely still living with their parents and specifically differentiate
between themselves and “adults,” making it ridiculously inappropriate that adult
men (including a cop!) are plying these teenage girls with beer anywhere, let
alone at a strip club (albeit a pretty friendly, low key strip club, which
looks suspiciously like a familiar diner set thinly re-dressed with some beer
signs and a raised platform).
But here’s where things get weird: Brent and
Larry run up to the strip club, and then see through the large windows (what? A
lot of strip clubs have windows!) that the cop and his buddy, who had
temporarily excused themselves from the girls’ beer-bottle-littered table, are
returning in what they interpret to be a menacing fashion. This is visually
depicted as the film shifts to slow-mo and the men expressionlessly advance in
profile, at the exact speed of the strippers’ legs, which occupy the immediate
foreground of the shot. Meanwhile, Brent, also in slow-mo, pounds soundlessly
on the window and screams helplessly from outside. With the music growing
anxious, the film cuts back and forth between these two shots for what seems
like geologic epochs. Then, out of the fucking blue, somebody else
-- a stranger we’ve never seen before and will never see again-- runs out of
the darkness behind the boys, directly at the camera, with a baseball bat in
his hands and murder in his eyes. Focusing their attention inside, they don’t
see the danger coming. Just as disaster seems certain, George Flowers (who we’d
previously encountered as the mystery hair-fondler) suddenly appears behind the
boys, pushes them to the ground, grabs an ax, and swiftly beheads the interloper
in one swing, sending his head flying through the air until it alights,
upright, on a row of conveniently placed spikes. Whereupon it grins
lasciviously at the two girls, who can see it through the large strip-club
window. Roxanne screams and flees the establishment, but as near as I can tell
no one else notices any of this.
Reunited outside, Brent muses, “we got to get
the hell out of here. What the hell happened back there?”
“A head! A goddam head! ...Is what I saw.”
Roxanne shouts.
“What, exactly, did you see?” Larry
patronizingly asks, apparently either unaware or unconcerned that this line is
clearly supposed to precede the otherwise unnecessary ‘...Is what I saw.’
“I saw a fucking head on a stick!” She explains
again.
“DId you see anyone else?” Larry helpfully
offers, as if the severed-head story is interesting but not conclusive.
“No,” she says, in a tone of rising
embarrassment about her womanly hysteria over nothing. “I didn’t see anybody.
Or any body” (well, it was a pun too good to resist, even if the
circumstances are less than ideal).
So what happens next? Apparently they just go
home and go back to bed, because the next thing we see is the following
morning, with Mom and Dad chipperly rousing the youngsters from sleep. “7:30?
Mom, we’re on vacation!” Bridgett protests, apparently determined not to
let a few unfortunate episodes of public ax murder get between her and some
much needed R & R.
Now, I know what you’re thinking: mean ol’ Mr.
Subtlety here (that’s me) is shamefully trying to make these poor one-time
filmmakers look like incompetent boobs by being deliberately obtuse about an
admittedly amateurish but basically simple WICKER MAN scenario. It hurts that
you think I would stoop so low, but I’m glad you raised that concern, because
you’re actually completely wrong on both charges. Not only am I making the
movie, if anything, much more comprehensible than it manages on its own,
it’s actually not exactly amateurish filmmaking, either, and that scene in the
strip club is the perfect example of the movie’s weird mix of ambition and
insanity. If you don’t believe me, take a look for yourself:
Although
writer-director-producer Mitchell Linden was a one-and-done first time
director, there’s a mix of talent and experience on the crew. Editor Noreen
Zepp did only this and one other movie (and probably deserves most of the blame
for its complete incoherence), but cinematographer Bryan England would go the
next year to shoot I, MADMAN for Tibor Takacs and FRIDAY THE VIII: JASON TAKES
MANHATTAN before settling down and becoming the cinematographer on 58 episodes
of VIP (is that the entire run of the show?). Composer Richard Cox has
only one other credit, but it’s SLUMBER PARTY MASSACRE II, so that’s pretty
much all anyone needs. Sound mixer Jay Patterson had ten years of experience
already, and would go on to a lengthy (if undistinguished) career as a
soundmixer including multiple episodes of CSI. And lighting tech Rick
Senteno would go on to work on THE SLEEPING CAR, APOCALYPTO, xXx, and a bunch of other big studio movies.
Suffice to say, these aren’t just a bunch of
naive amateurs; they’re hungry youngsters with something to prove, and they’re
obviously really trying to do something here. When I first heard about
this movie from Outlaw Vern, he actually invoked
DePalma to describe the strip club sequence. I scoffed at that until I actually
watched it, but by God, the comparison is unmistakable. The way this sequence
is blocked, staged, and edited obviously aspires to be ostentatiously stylish
and suspenseful. I mean, it obviously doesn’t, you know, succeed, at all,
like, at all, so please don’t get that idea. It’s a total mess,
completely free of any meaningful context or even a comprehensible source of
tension. But you don’t watch a movie like THE AMERICAN SCREAM for tense,
finely-tuned suspense. You watch it for the traces of weird personality that
slip into these indie horror flicks when they’re not being homogenized through the
hands of a bunch of dull responsible money men. I have almost no idea what THE
AMERICAN SCREAM is about even on a basic narrative level, let alone what
specifically the artistic and thematic goals of its creators were, but it’s
absolutely packed with intriguing oddness. I’d always prefer genuine greatness,
of course, but I’ll take colorfully bizarre over dull competence. Plenty of
movies can adequately communicate their boring plot. Far fewer can make me go,
“What the hell?”
Speaking of plot: at about 50 minutes in, some
kind of explanation appears to be on the horizon: Flowers, portraying some kind
of mentally ill man who carries around a taxidermied dog with him, shows up to
tell the kids they’re in terrible danger, courtesy of an unnamed “them” who
killed his children years ago and left him brain-damaged. He articulates this
via a lengthy POV flashback shot in a Super-8 filmstock with no recorded sound.
It’s an idyllic backyard scene which is suddenly interrupted by unidentified
intruders who show up and start hacking people to death with machetes, all in
what is at least edited to appear as a five-minute long single-perspective
“found footage” shot (even though it’s actually a memory). The original
videographer is hit first, and drops the camera, so the butchering of his
family is seen only in the background from an upside-down stationary camera…
but then the killers walk back and pick it up, to document their victims up
close. It’s a weirdly unsettling sequence, truth be told, especially because
while it’s happening, several disembodied voices (not the victims or the
killers) have the following conversation:
[vague, animalistic screaming]
[laughter]
What’s a matter boy? Monster got your tongue?
What the hell is that shit?
[silence]
Its monster food.
What?
We come down here and we find all them jars that
them generic [sic] engineers keep their pickled animal parts in?
[garbled] all over the [farm?]
Figures.
Must be that monster you’ve been talking about.
You assholes don’t get it do you? That thing’s
real and it’s down here.
[silence]
Well have you seen anything?
I don’t miss a thing! 20/20 vision.
Look, this creature. [indecipherable] a filmy
substance.
[silence]
Boogers! [laughter]
Goddamit it boy, it was just a tremor! This shit
happens all the time, there ain’t no goddam monster.”
[long silence]
[electronically distorted groaning/growling]
[long silence]
Jesus!
What the fuck that means, I couldn’t possibly
say. It sounds like maybe it’s footage from some old TV movie, and although the
flashback sequence is otherwise explicitly silent save for a broody electronic
drone, we do see a TV set playing in a few frames, possibly suggesting
the source? If those lines are from some other movie, though, a search of each
of those lines individually comes up with nothing, and the credits don’t list
any other film sources. Of course, the boys later watch a porno which is also
not listed in the credits (“clips from DICK RIDERS IN THE SKY used with permission
from Time Warner Entertainment”) so I’m doubtful that the makers of THE
AMERICAN SCREAM had what we would typically described as a robust legal
department.
With someone finally acknowledging an
unspecified threat, the movie is now in serious danger of hinting at some
explanation for what in God’s name is going on, so thankfully immediately after
sharing this disorienting slice of personal nostalgia, an unidentified rifleman
in the woods shoots Flowers before he can explain any more. It’s at least the
fourth violent death the kids have seen today, so they’re not too broken up
about it, or, apparently, particularly curious about the killer, or even
worried enough about their own safety to take cover. They still seem mildly
curious about what’s going on, but not really enough to take any specific
action other than burying the body in their vacation-house front lawn.
Afterwards, while Brent and Larry spend some
quality time watching porn and waxing philosophical about the meaning of adult
masculinity, the girls are wandering around and stumble onto something which
finally seems to unnerve them. It took me a couple of viewings to quite figure
out what’s going on, but I’m pretty sure they stumble upon the baby-killing
vehicle from the film’s start. The editing is unbelievably confusing, but they
definitely encounter blood on the car and get unreasonably freaked out by it,
considering they actually saw a child bludgeoned to death in this very
vehicle not two days ago and consequently have no reason at all to be surprised
by this. But then -- and this is possibly the key to understanding
what’s happening here -- there’s a quick shot of the woman eating a fried
chicken leg, and there’s a grill nearby. Which I think, maybe is a hint
that the lack of kids in town is in fact due… to cannibalism! As near as I can
discern, this is the only clue of any kind, anywhere in the movie, about what
the heck this town’s deal is, and even having watched it carefully several
times I can’t be 100% sure I’m reading this correctly. But considering the
amount of mayhem these kids have already witnessed, baby-eating really is the
only explanation I can fathom for the girls’ extreme reaction. (Not that the
movie up to this point leaves me confident that any of these characters can be
counted on for a rational human response to any given stimuli.)
If that’s the case, though, the movie (and the
girls) seem to forget about it almost immediately, because neither one ever
brings it up again, and the film switches gears. Brent and Larry end up in a
hotel, and get distracted when they discover that a young woman has been tied
up and murdered in the bathtub next door by a deranged preacher (Blackie
Dammett, “Drug Dealer #3” in LETHAL WEAPON, father of Red Hot Chili Peppers
singer Anthony Kiedis). This preacher guy (who looks hella cool decked out in
all black with one of those black preacher hats with Mr. Dammett’s splendidly
malevolent face beneath it) has been hovering on the outskirts of the film all
along, and the movie seems to realize he’s cool enough to focus on even in the
absence of any clear reason why he’s worse than anyone else in town.
That seems like it’s gonna lead to the climax,
but they manage to get away from him pretty easily, and, finally --apparently
more out of boredom than any particular concern-- the four kids sit down and
sort of discuss what to do about their little problem with murder-town.
Roxanne, who yesterday saw a disembodied head on a spike and who not two hours
earlier fled from a duo of possible baby-eaters in such terror that she either
puked on her shoes or peed her pants (the girls discuss this, but the scene is
underlit and their voices are similar enough it’s hard to tell who did what),
is now witheringly skeptical that anything out of the ordinary is happening,
but is at least bored enough to hear Larry’s plan. It’s a simple plan, one
which is so boneheaded it may actually be brilliant. The townsfolks hate kids,
right? So, as Larry says, “if you can’t beat em, join em!” The “kids” will
steal adult clothes and integrate themselves into their society. Larry will
disguise himself a the preacher, Brent will become the cop, the two girls are
girls so the movie doesn’t really concern itself with what their deal is,
they’ll be housewives or something.
That night, the four kids show up at the big
country-western dance in their disguises (Brent sporting a fake mustache for
some reason). Nobody sees through them (even their own parents) even after
Brent --drafted into the country band-- is unable to contain his youthful
desire to play sick ass rock n’ roll solos. The townsfolk seem to think this is
unprofessional and baffling behavior, but no one acts overtly threatening or appears to see through the kids' ruse…
except, I think, the four adults they’ll be replacing. So Larry has to have a
(mostly off-screen) knife battle with the Preacher, Brent has to have a Western
standoff with… well, the grouchy diner waitress, who I guess maybe one of the
girls will be replacings… uh, Bridgett has to shoot this douchebag who’s trying
to fuck her, not sure how that one connects, and then presumably Roxanne has to
kill the sinister cop who Brent will be replacing, but instead she just fucks
him and we never see either of them again, and there’s a dubbed-in line near
the end where Bridgett implies Roxy will off him but we don’t see it.
OK, so it’s not exactly diamond-cut precision in
a metaphor, but after three separate close viewings, it’s pretty clear this is
what the movie has been building towards. In fact, the kids notice that their
parents have a brochure from the town, with the worrisome slogan: “Wilson
Creek***: A Place to Bring The Kids... And Leave Your Troubles Behind.” So
maybe chipper Mom and Dad aren’t so clueless after all. In fact, once the kids
have successfully infiltrated adult society, the parents just drive back home
with an empty car, with no mention whatsoever that they’re returning a little
lighter than that arrived. Whether this is a plot to dump their obnoxious spawn
to their doom, or just some kind of metaphor for kicking the kids out of the
nest and forcing them to grow up, I don’t know, but there’s plenty of loose
talk about what it means to be an adult floating around, so this definitely has the unmistakable whiff of being an intentional theme. In fact, this might even explain the scene where Dad sits Brent down
for a bizarre rambling father-son “talk” where he alludes briefly to “the way
you kids have been acting lately” and then starts extolling the virtues of the
“bonds of blood” in a family, while his face gradually gets covered in slime
and then his ear falls off and then his head starts bleeding profusely, but
then it seems like Brent is just hallucinating it and he walks off and nobody
ever mentions any of that again.
Or, maybe none of this means anything and it’s
just a bunch of weird nonsense they made up on the spot when they couldn’t
afford shoot the whole story as scripted. I don’t know. But if you’re in the
mood for something really, truly inexplicable which is often dully incoherent
but still sprinkled liberally with bizarre offbeat color, THE AMERICAN SCREAM
is probably worth your time, if not necessarily your mental energy. It doesn’t
deliver laughs or thrills, but if your game is watching inexplicable insane
gibberish with a bunch of friends, this might well be your great white whale.
Besides, you can probably watch the whole thing
faster than it took you to read these 4,700 words, Jesus Christ, what the hell
is wrong with me. THE END.
*Most notable for the 2014 Lifetime movie DAMAGED, which is not in
itself especially significant, except that it led to this IMDB review, which,
uh, suffers a little mission drift about halfway through:
Say, while I have you down here, I should also point out that “Riley
Weston” actually has a crazy secret identity and backstory which is detailed in Outlaw Vern’s review for this movie, which you absolutely must read. I’ll say no more.
Click there, you won’t be sorry.
** Which he inexplicably calls “100 Bottles of Beer on The Wall,”
in the first of many subtle tells that the makers of this movie were alien
beings who have carefully studied human beings but still don’t quite have the
details down.
*** Assuming this town is, indeed, Wilson Creek, which I don’t
believe is ever definitively established.
CHAINSAWNUKAH 2017
CHECKLIST!
The Discreet Charm of the Killing Spree
TAGLINE
|
It’s a Tradition. No idea what that means.
|
TITLE ACCURACY
|
I don’t see what this has to do with the
American Dream, as commonly conceptualized.
|
LITERARY ADAPTATION?
|
No
|
SEQUEL?
|
No
|
REMAKE?
|
No, although there’s a 2012 documentary of the
same name.
|
COUNTRY OF ORIGIN
|
USA
|
HORROR SUB-GENRE
|
Uh…jeez, I can’t even really name it. I guess
“small-town conspiracy / WICKER MAN ripoffs”?
|
SLUMMING A-LISTER?
|
None
|
BELOVED HORROR ICON?
|
George “Buck” Flowers
|
NUDITY?
|
A little, though none of it is very prominent except for the extended stripping sequence.
|
SEXUAL ASSAULT?
|
It’s super uncool that these pervs are always
spying on naked women, and then the adult townies pick up and eventually have
sex with the underaged girls, which is also icky. But it was 1988, so the
movie thinks this is lots of fun.
|
WHEN ANIMALS ATTACK!
|
The only animal is a taxidermied dog.
|
GHOST/ ZOMBIE / HAUNTED BUILDING?
|
None
|
POSSESSION?
|
...No? Hard to tell what’s going on here,
honestly.
|
CREEPY DOLLS?
|
None
|
EVIL CULT?
|
...maybe? Seems like the preacher’s got
something to do with all this, though I’ll be damned if I know what.
|
MADNESS?
|
?
|
TRANSMOGRIFICATION?
|
Kids to adults
|
VOYEURISM?
|
Pretty much the first thing we see is the kids
watching their neighbor through a telescope.
|
MORAL OF THE STORY
|
Boy, uh, I got no answer here. Maybe get a few
simple slashers under your belt as a director before you try some sort of
weird comedy/horror metaphor about growing up which is also a parody of
bourgeois American values?
|
It's objectively terrible, but that's kind of what makes it worth your time, so... |
No comments:
Post a Comment