Category: 1980’s

Directed by Tim Ritter [Other horror films: Day of the Reaper (1984), Twisted Illusions (1985), Truth or Dare?: A Critical Madness (1986), Wicked Games (1994), Creep (1995), Alien Agenda: Endangered Species (1998), Screaming for Sanity: Truth or Dare 3 (1998), Twisted Illusions 2 (2004), Deadly Dares: Truth or Dare Part IV (2011), Hi-8 (Horror Independent 8) (2013, segment ‘Switchblade Insane’), I Dared You! Truth or Dare Part 5 (2017), Trashsploitation (2018, segment ‘Truth or Dare’), Hi-Death (2018, segment ‘Dealers of Death’), Zombarella’s House of Whorrors (2019, segment ‘Cosmic Desires’), Sharks of the Corn (2021)]

Dedicated to H.G. Lewis, Tim Ritter’s low-budget fourth film is overly inept but extraordinarily fun, and if SOV horror is something you’re a fan of, I think you’d find this a blast.

The story, if taken seriously, is actually somewhat tragic, what with a man believing his wife is cheating on him, and so he decides to kill the men ‘making’ his wife unfaithful. Of course, in as low-budget, gory ways as possible. Obviously, this isn’t a Hollywood film, and the acting is pretty awful across the board. That said, so many of the lines of dialogue are hilariously awesome that it doesn’t matter (such as a favorite of mine, “Why is she writing all of this down?”).

Asbestos Felt does fantastically great as the paranoid husband, with plenty of cheesy dialogue and overall a beautifully delicious performance. Courtney Lercara, the wife, wasn’t quite as memorable, but I did love her over-the-top scenes of her various lustful encounters. Pretty much everyone else was second tier, but that doesn’t stop individuals such as Raymond Carbone, Joel D. Wynkoop, and Rachel Rutz from standing out of the pack in their wacky, goofy ways (Rutz’ nonsensical dialogue just broke me up multiple times despite her short time on screen).

For a lower-budget flick, the gore effects are decent. They don’t really become great until the ending (such as the hammer in the jaw scene, perhaps my favorite kill, followed by the lawnmower sequence), but you can tell that Ritter definitely got his sensibilities from the Godfather of Gore, H.G. Lewis, who, like I mentioned at the beginning, this film is dedicated to.

I have a few issues, though, that hinder this film from reaching it’s arguably-rightful place of above average. One was a dream sequence which struck me as way too goofy, though the fact that it is clearly a dream sequence grants it some leeway. The other problem, though, is the conclusion, in which the movie shifts gears from a slasher to something else (and to avoid spoilers, I’ll just say it sort of comes out of nowhere). The final 15 minutes felt far more stale to me than the rest of the film, and I would have been okay with a 70 minute film, cutting out or changing the conclusion.

It’s a shame, as pretty much everything else is both amusing and deeply enjoyable (I always loved his random beach-rage sequence – for some reason, that’s always a scene that I remember the most from this flick). The twist, such as it was, came across as slightly more sophisticated than one might think from a film like this, but it certainly added a tragic twist to the film. If only the ending was better. It’s still a deeply enjoyable film, though, and despite my seemingly unenthusiastic rating, I’d recommend it to fans of lower-budget outings from the 1980’s.

6.5/10

Directed by Pericles Lewnes [Other horror films: N/A]

I am somewhat ashamed to say that I actually have a pretty good time with this movie, mostly due to the fact of how utterly stupid so much of it.

For some reason, I’ve seen this at least twice before, and some scenes are pretty damn memorable, such as the introduction of the Tobacco Man (sort of a parody of the neighborhood staple ice cream man) and a rather odd, yet ominous, sequence at a local butcher’s house. Other scenes stand out also, such as the LSD-inspired zombie sequence, along with the autopsy scene which, while ultimately silly, was entertaining if only due to Anthony Burlington-Smith’s over-the-top antics.

Being a lower-budget film, the gore is pretty damn good, in a Nathan Schiff way. I rather liked the scene in which a zombie pushed his thumbs through another’s eyes and a solid decapitation toward the end. Obviously, this movie was aiming to be gory, and they certainly did a good job with what they had.

Most of the actors and actresses here weren’t in anything else, which probably isn’t surprising due to the nature of the film. It’s difficult to judge many of them, too, because they sort of tried to make this a traditionally bad film. Lisa DeHaven doesn’t really seem like final girl material (which isn’t a spoiler, as it’s shown at the very beginning of the film she survives), and didn’t particularly stand out. I did like James Housely, but he didn’t add all that much to the story. Bucky Santini was something else entirely.

There were times when the silly nature of the film was too much for me, such as the almost line-for-line parody of the hitchhiker from The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Also, the high levels of stupidity the rednecks had was, again, a bit much (though the “Don’t open ’till Christmas” line did make me sort of chuckle). It’s not an easy film to necessarily like, but if you can get past some of the really stupid scenes, I do think it’s a movie you can enjoy.

Redneck Zombies is classic Troma entertainment. Great gore, horrible acting, and a somewhat interesting taking on a often-told story. Just think of it as a low-budget and politically incorrect (the Jew joke at the beginning got me laughing, I admit) version of The Return of the Living Dead, but even then, you’ll not really understand what this film’s like until you chance a watch. For as stupid as it is, I do enjoy it, and that certainly counts for something. It’s indeed the epitome of horror.

6.5/10

Directed by Jim Mallon [Other horror films: N/A]

While I generally enjoy slashers and slasher-like flicks from the 1980’s, something about this one didn’t quite work for me. Dare I say, I wasn’t hooked.

One thing I do appreciate about this film is the story – while they had characters who never really did much, I did like the characterization of some of the main performances, and though it was sort of muddled due to the low-budget quality of the film, I think the backstory on some of the characters here was interesting and a bit deeper than you might expect.

Of course, the movie throws in a bit of humor too, and it’s not too over-the-top, which is another thing I give Blood Hook props for. Oh, it certainly felt silly at times (just an over-sized fishing hook flying out of the dark, with no indication of someone nearby, felt a bit much), and the ‘loon-woman’ was just hilariously ridiculous, but the light-hearted tone, if anything, was far more muted than I expected (especially for a film distributed by Troma).

Speaking on that point, actually, there is a longer version of the movie out there, clocking in around two hours, while I saw the more common Troma release, which cut out quite a bit, from my understanding. Given that I didn’t particularly care for what I saw, I sort of doubt I’ll try out the longer version, but it should be stated that, in all fairness, that I didn’t see the ‘most complete’ version of Blood Hook out there.

For a movie of such a low budget, I will say that much of the cast did decent. Most of them appeared just in this single film (which was filmed on location in Wisconsin), such as Christopher Whiting, Sara Hauser, Don Winters (probably one of my favorite performances in the film), and Paul Drake. Others appeared in a handful of other movies and/or episodes, such as Mark Jacobs, Lisa Todd, and Bill Lowrie. Lisa Todd had perhaps one of the funniest scenes, in which she’s trying to connect on a personal level with the killer – something that I generally wouldn’t care for, but worked well here.

As much fun as the movie can occasionally be (personally, I wasn’t feeling all that invested until around the half-way mark), Blood Hook dragged much of the time. The little gore there was struck me as decent for the budget, and like I said, the story itself was actually pretty solid, but this movie didn’t work on some level for me, which is a shame, as it certainly had potential.

Honestly, this may just be one I need to give another shot a few years down the line – I could see my opinion improving a bit if I gave it another chance. As it is now, though, I find Blood Hook a rather sub-par slasher during a time when so many better horror flicks were being released.

5.5/10

Directed by Joseph Zito [Other horror films: Bloodrage (1980), Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter (1984)]

The Prowler is one of those early 80’s slasher classics I’ve just seen once before. Truth be told, I only remembered the vaguest of scenes, so it was nice coming into this one as an almost-new viewing. While the story and conclusion are a bit lacking, The Prowler more than makes up for it with it’s atmosphere and fantastic gore effects.

The setting for this one is pretty good also – it’s nothing overly special, just a college campus (of sorts), but I liked how everything happened so close to each other. In one scene, the main actress is walking out of a dance, tons of people and energy, and then just two blocks away, the streets are dark and empty. I’m not sure why, but I just really dug that.

Of course, when anyone talks about this one, they’re going to bring up the gore, and for good reason. I don’t think there was a single death in this movie that disappointed me. The bayonet through the guy’s head (from top of skull, coming out his jaw) was fantastic, as was the double pitchfork impalement at the beginning. Even better, the shower-pitchfork scene, which was fantastically gory, along with providing a bit of welcomed nudity to the film. Let’s not forget the head being blown off with the shotgun, though – in pure Maniac style, that scene was great.

Which makes complete sense, given that the same individual behind the special effects for Maniac, Tom Savini, was behind these also. If you want to see a slasher that’s not afraid of showing some gore, this one is perfect.

I don’t want to give off the impression that the film is without downsides, though. The motive behind the mystery killer are never really explained, leaving the kills without context, and in fact, the identity of the killer is almost pathetically easy to ascertain pretty early on (many of the red herrings were obvious, and we’re pretty much left with a single suspect in mind). Also, while the atmosphere never falters, it did feel a bit sluggish toward the end before the conclusion. And on that note, there’s a scene in the conclusion that just feels overly silly (I’m guessing that, if you’ve seen this, you know which one I’m talking about).

It’s also worth noting that the cast isn’t really amazing either, but for an early 80’s slasher, I pretty much think most of those involved did fine. Vicky Dawson was a pretty fair main character, and Christopher Goutman, while a bit generic, did okay as a co-protagonist. Neither one, by the way, had much a career in movies, which I find a bit interesting. I wish he had appeared more, but Farley Granger was fun while on screen, and I have no idea who Bill Nunnery is, but his short scene is pretty amusing.

It’s the lack of motive that bothers me most about this one, and all other complaints can mostly be swept under the rug. I don’t get why they didn’t throw in a short relevant flashback, or a Dear John letter, or something to indicate why the killer went out of his way to kill again after so long. It was noticeably weak, which is a shame, as otherwise, The Prowler is a solid movie. Even so, the special effects here are damn good, and if I’d recommend it for anything, along with the classic feel, I’d recommend it for that.

8.5/10

Directed by Rick Rosenthal [Other horror films: The Birds II: Land’s End (1994), Halloween: Resurrection (2002)]

In many ways, this sequel reaches similar heights as it’s predecessor, and though it lacks the classic feel of the original, it’s both a fun and oft-thrilling watch.

Much of the suspense works due to the setting, a rather isolated and understaffed hospital, filled with empty corridors and many deadly weapons (and a therapy tub, used to glorious effect). It’s worth noting that the film doesn’t have a significantly higher amount of gore (aside from a pool of blood that one character slips in), and still manages most of the kills without showing that much. That said, there is a much higher body count here, so there’s still certainly enough to keep us looking for more.

The great setting aside, the fact that Laurie is wounded here also makes the chase sequences just a bit more suspenseful. When in her prime, Laurie could defend herself against Michael, but here, she’s nowhere near her best, and watching her stumble down a deserted hallway to escape Michael, then going into a dingy basement area, those were great scenes, and perhaps my favorites of the movie.

Of course, Jamie Lee Curtis does pretty good here as Laurie, though she doesn’t get nearly as much screen-time as you might expect. Donald Pleasence is fun here too, and gets a few more wild moments only hinted at in the first film. He especially gets in some good action toward the end and the explosive finale. Lance Guest is pretty solid here, though doesn’t have as much to do with how the film goes as first thought. Finally, returning from the first film, Charles Cyphers is nice to see, but quickly gets put out of commission after finding out his daughter, Annie, was a victim of Myers’.

Speaking of the first film, I liked how this film replayed the last few moments of the first, the music not kicking in until after Pleasence talks to a neighbor attracted to the gunshots. A nice, subtle beginning that quickly turns into a chaotic police manhunt, but of course, Michael still evades the search. The one plot twist in the film isn’t necessarily the best thought out (I think we all know what I’m talking about), but for this one film, it works out fine.

Halloween II doesn’t feel nearly as good as the first movie, but given how I think the first movie is one of the best horror movies ever made, that should hardly come as a shock. Still, there’s plenty in this movie to deeply enjoy, and ever since I first saw this many years back, I absolutely loved the hospital chase sequences, and always found them thrilling. The ending too was also pretty epic, and if they had wanted, would have served a fine conclusion to the story. A great movie by any means, this film stands the test of time, and brings a lot to enjoy to the table.

8.5/10

Directed by Chuck Russell [Other horror films: The Blob (1988), Bless the Child (2000)]

This is one of those films I can watch over and over again without getting tired of it. Without a doubt the best movie in the Elm Street series save the first one, Dream Warriors does almost everything right.

Like most movies in this series, this is sort of a hard one to take an overall look at, what with the fact I’ve seen it around eight to ten times, thereabouts. There are portions that feel a bit out there, such as the whole mysterious nun (who communicated to Neil, but not to Nancy, for some reason), and while it led to a pretty good origin of Freddy’s birth (‘the bastard son of a hundred maniacs’ – such a great description), it didn’t really feel like it fit. That said, it added something interesting to the film, so I don’t really begrudge it.

The whole ‘dream powers’ thing is the type of idea that, in many other movies, I’d find sort of ridiculous, but it’s done really well here. I still laugh a bit at how Ira Heiden’s character looks while a magician, but still, I think they did a fine job blending some lighter fantasy with the dark horror elements. Speaking of which, I absolutely love the opening to this one – the papier-mâché house, the utterly creepy dream, and then the suicide attempt. Grabs your attention right from the start.

The special effects, too, are damn good. My favorite death is the whole marionette kill, and the scene with Freddy in the stars, cutting the strings, has always been a favorite of mine of the series. Freddy-snake looks a little suspect, but the skeleton sequence is solid, so that’s a plus.

There’s no performance here that disappoints. It’s great to see Heather Langenkamp back, along with John Saxon (despite neither one having particularly happy endings). Jennifer Rubin, for some reason, stood out, along with Ken Sagoes and Patricia Arquette (who is, behind Nancy, my favorite lead character of the series). Of course, Englund gets the highest praise – while more comedic influence is creeping into his character, he’s still plenty menacing here.

And “Dream Warriors” by Dokken? What a kick-ass song.

Honestly, there’s not much about this movie that I don’t like. I don’t think it’s a perfect 10/10, but at the same time, I can’t really pinpoint my perceived issues with the film. Perhaps it comes from the sub-plot regarding Freddy’s mother, and the fact that despite thinking that he’d finally be put to rest, he’s clearly still an active spirit come the end of the film. It is a bit bothersome that he’s been seemingly destroyed three times (if you want to count the half-assed ending of the first film), but he seems immune to defeat.

All that said, though, without a doubt, this is the finest Elm Street film past the original, and I don’t believe I’ll ever really get tired of it. A solid film overall.

8.5/10

This is one of the films covered by Fight Evil’s podcast. Listen to Chucky (@ChuckyFE) and I discuss this one below.