valiumthousand

What we have here is 5% Poe, 70% Lovecraft and 25% Frankenstein.

Oozing with type of the fantastic atmosphere that Corman seemingly effortlessly delivers again and again while working with a meager budget, effective period evocations, and more than serviceable performances from the principal actors, this is an entertaining if occasionally slow paced Gothic horror film and an important early entry in the canon of explicitly Lovecraft/Mythos based films.

It could have been an 8 or even 9 star film if it wasn't for the (even for its time) mind numbingly trite ending which for me, detracted greatly from the overall quality of the film.

Honestly, the ending frustrated me to the point of wanting to rate this 5 out of 10 but it would be unfair to do so given the caliber of the production, sets, performances and atmosphere. So, 6 it is.

This one's a hot, hot mess. There's no denying that much of the cinematography is well done and there are some visually compelling moments.

But truly, this is a terrible movie. The dialogue/script is overblown and comical. I'm a big fan of trash cinema but I'm really hard pressed to recall a movie that took itself so seriously but was so cliched and vacuous as this is.

The acting veers wildly between wooden and dinner theater histrionics and there are zero sympathetic characters in it.

Amusing and there are some stupefyingly bad moments of dialogue that will have you howling with laughter. The positive reviews are really difficult to comprehend.

I'd been meaning to watch this for a few years and finally did so. I'm not a huge Paul Williams fan but I do like some of the songs he wrote and I'm always interested in stories about creative people, their lives, creative process, career arc, "behind the scenes" glimpses into what resides behind reputations and hype.

This movie veers between an illuminating look into a.very interesting person and career, and an examination of a sometimes uncomfortable relationship between documentarian and subject. The director is very awkward, pushy, intrusive and insensitive at times but the dynamic between he and Williams is of interest (when it isn't off putting).

One thing that did strike me as being a bit disingenuous is that it neglects to mention the part that other songwriters and composers played in most of Paul Williams' best known songs. Williams was chiefly a lyricist while the music was written by others, mainly Roger Nichols and. Tony Asher. I'm not trying to diminish Mr. Williams in any way...he is a considerable talent and a worthy subject who deserves to have his story told, but this aspect of his career is subject to hagiography here.

I think that how one rates and reacts to this movie has to do with the following:

Are you familiar with the oeuvre of director Bill Rebane? And if you are, do you consider (or admit) that you are a fan?

If you're not familiar with Mr. Rebane's other movies and just came to this because you either wanted to see Tiny Tim in a slasher movie, or were just looking for a weird, idiosyncratic take on the 80's slasher genre, then you may well enjoy this film. It's offbeat and has some twists and plot contrivances that you don't find in more mainstream films.

However, if you are one of the select few who have enjoyed/endured Rebane "masterpieces" such as "Invasion From Inner Earth" aka "They", "The Game" aka "The Cold", "The Alpha Incident", "Rana: The Legend of Shadow Lake", then you may be as disappointed as I was after watching Blood Harvest.

Yes, it has some of the traits we have come to expect from other Rebane efforts...the odd characters, the sense of local color supplied by regional film-making, the juxtaposition of high drama with a sense of detachment provided via plot deficiencies and wooden performances.

But in the end there is something missing...whereas previous films by the director seemed to carve out their own peculiar identity through a sort of studied ennui, innocence, and single minded dedication to whatever peculiar sense of inspiration birthed the ideas that drove him to create, in Blood Harvest it seems that Rebane was content to be more follower than leader.

Tiny Tim is the standout actor here with most of the remainder of the cast unremarkable to wooden. While there is a decent quotient of gore and gratuitous nudity to be found, it just seems like padding and standard genre tropes.

While this may be an atypical and somewhat satisfying outlier for 80's slasher fans, this lacks the kind of Thorazine "magic" that the rest of the auteur's filmography contains.

At least for me.

As others have pointed out, this is a pretty singular dive into an almost alternate universe of cinema. Regional fare, with a strong and extremely nasty hicksploitation context, special kudos to Tommy Lamey as "Slick".

Others here have covered the plot and various "highlights" (chase scene, 'boinggggg' sound, 'wanna root?' and countless other experiences) quite well but I basically wrote this review to clear up a major misconception about Linnea Quigley's appearance. This film was made in 1975 but additional footage was shot in 1978 which included Quigley's infamous barroom sequence, which would place her age at 20, not 17 as some who thought she was in the 1975 edit have claimed.

I recently rewatched this movie after having seen it not long after it's release. I couldn't remember much about it and perhaps this was a case of my mind protecting me from recalling the initial experience. The 3 stars I'm giving it is a generous rating, and it pains me to say that, since I generally enjoy Bill Murray quite a bit. However, as most of the other negative reviews here note, he is dreadful in this retelling of Dickens' "A Christmas Carol". Others have pointed out that he seems uninvolved in the movie but I'm going more with those who feel his performance suggests he's more contemptuous of it than anything else. Shouting, scowling and declaiming his lines in a perfunctory devoid of any true emotionalism, he's exhausting and tiresome to watch. His "redemption" at the grand finale is utterly unconvincing and a drawn out mess that feels tacked on and perfunctory.

Only David Johansen and Carol Kane bring any life to the film while Robert Mitchum, John Forsythe and Karen Allen are largely wasted in their thankless and underdeveloped roles. Look for Miles Davis literally "on the corner" in the band of buskers in one of the few moments of interest.

This is an appalling movie on every level. I'll break it down "right quick fer ya" as this piece of tripe might say... #1. People from the North are snooty Yankees who are condescending, arrogant and superficial "city folk". People from the South are lovable "real folk" who despite being uncouth, illiterate and strangers to soap and basic hygiene, are the salt of the Earth. #2. The Confederate flag is a charming home decor addition. #3. Don't try to evolve, grow or develop as a person. Best to sip yer Bud or Coors Lite in the same barstool yer daddy and his daddy sat and rotted on for decades and talk about the gal you almost did it with in high school, the big one you almost caught at the fishin hole and the home run you almost hit/touchdown you almost scored in high school. There is not one sympathetic character in the movie and the predictable script and story line is akin to hitting yourself repeatedly over the head with a rubber mallet.

This made for TV effort will undoubtedly please Yeti/Bigfoot genre fans and aficionados of oddball/quirky cinema but may likely disappoint typical horror fans. The rather tepid love triangle subplot between Bo Svenson, Yvette Mimieux, and Robert Logan's characters hampers any sense of real tension while a perfunctory script (highly derived from "Jaws") doesn't help. Still, the scenic backdrop along with decent performances from Svenson and Mimieux have a certain naive appeal and charm and kept me mildly entertained. Robert Logan's "Tony" was unfortunately wooden (or perhaps even cardboard) but screen vets Clint Walker and Sylvia Sidney offset this nicely. One could do worse.

Many of the more positive reviews here have summarized my opinion of this film so I am not going to expound much about it. But, it does deserve to be said that this film is far from the train wreck that the critic reviews claim it to be and also some of the more scathing fan reviews as well. To me, it is enjoyably quirky and then some and the portrayal of Ronald Chevalier by Jermaine Clement is superb.and knowing. Judging from personal experience, I can't help but wonder if his character just may have been "informed and inspired" by a certain Demonwars Saga scribe..... Anyway, ignore the naysayers and give this film a try.

I'll make this brief. While there is some very interesting photography and cinematographic turns, and, a very good performance by Steve Carell in a thankless role, this film is a very sanitized retelling of a true story. To everyone here with the 8-10 star reviews who can't figure out why the movie was pilloried by critics, watch the original documentary, MARWENCOL. Given the jarring disconnect between the tenor of this film and the true reality of the documentary, I'm very surprised that Carell took the role..

I almost hate to write this review, being that my remarks will merely echo the "love it or hate it" factor that divides opinions on this show, and that is the presence of Caroline Quentin. Many others have said it here and just to add my tuppence....she is utterly dreadful. A shame really, as I am interested in shows that feature unusual architecture and design.

As for the homes...some are amazing, some are overrated exercises in ego, some are just ok. I'm a bit in the middle about Piers...in any other context he'd be quite annoying...."The Sultan Of Smug" seems apropos. But one can only sympathize to his plight to some degree, having CQ nattering and squealing and laughing at her own jokes and puns uproariously through each episode. A bit like a pole vaulter who always has to enter competition with a dead corpse strapped to their back.

Since so many others have already done so, I won't go into the countless flaws and problems with this movie.

Eh, maybe I will. Or at least point a few.

The leaps in logic are cavernous. The number of lame decisions and non-decisions by the 3 main characters manage to make most of the dumb ideas in horror/thriller movies you may have seen appear insignificant. Plus, only one of the 3 is even tolerable (hint..it isn't either of the guys). A water-tight ATM vestibule. One could go on and on and on and on.

The people behind this film truly show contempt for their audience by releasing this and actually attempting to get people to pay for watching it. Oh...you'll pay alright. With your time, money and the inevitable headache you will feel the next day after beating your head against a hard surface for having sat through this mess.

I've seen a lot of disappointing films but this is one of the very few that made me really, really angry for devoting a couple of hours of my time to watching it.

Avoid.

Oh, and to the people who are saying "Not as bad as the reviews would lead to to believe": I need to meet your dealer. Pronto.

Late entry in the slasher/teen campground genre is better than the low viewer ratings would indicate, as long as one isn't looking for a straight-up horror flick.

Campground owner Cameron Mitchell envisions the grand opening of Memorial Valley Campground as the opening salvo in his attempt to create a kind of resort destination that will lines his pockets with a lot of $$$$. However, a madman (or should I say "mad caveman"?) who lives on the campground has other plans.

With a full crew of potential victims at hand, this movie doesn't take itself seriously and the pacing is actually fairly deft. There are slayings galore in the latter part of the film and countless moments of hysteria and humor via the acting and script.

I found myself laughing but totally involved in the film and as long as one's expectations aren't too high, this film is a good diversion from the usual 80s slasher fare, and there are some memorable characters among the expected clichés.

Most of the comments I've seen about this collection of 3 short films have been negative, and I'm a little surprised. No, this isn't a masterful collection, but there is quite a bit on offer for the curious viewer, as long as one's expectations aren't unrealistic.

Part of the problem lies in the packaging...2 of the 3 tales are at least as much sci-fi as they are horror, so the title and standard horror fare cover art on the VHS box aren't the best indicator as to the true contents.

As mentioned in other reviews, the films are 3 UCLA graduate projects from the mid 1980s, each with their own individual opening and closing credits.

The first film, "Ten Seconds To Countdown" is the most effective. Equal parts thriller and eerie sci-fi headgame, it is a tale of a young woman fleeing her controlling father, only to meet up with a more cosmic threat. In what is obviously a low budget effort, there is a genuinely creepy and surreal atmosphere that is very effective. Even though many would characterize the pacing as slow, I'd say that the term "deliberate" would be more apt. There are some inconsistencies, but they add to the surreal element of the tale and do not detract. I thought this was a really excellent segment.

The second feature, "Final Destination: Unknown" is a more predictable tale of murder and justice, but is still effective, and again, there are some unusual and imaginative moments that transcend the low budget production values.

The final segment, "Creatures Of Habit", is more of a crime drama meets character study that even being the weakest of the 3 shorts, still manages to reasonably entertain within a sort of strange neo-noir setting.

For those not expecting your typical horror fare, there is a lot to enjoy here. The performances are decent, and there is more going on here than in many by numbers Hollywood mega budget productions. Not on DVD as far as I know, but if you can get a VHS copy for $10 or under, you can do much worse.

I'm surprised to see so many positive reviews here. Not that this is a bad film by any means, but I think that people are trying too hard to find significance and meaning in this somewhat dull crime flick. As has been mentioned in other reviews, much of this movie was allegedly inspired by the crimes of Ted Bundy. Yes, John Karlen's character (the killer) does torture and murder attractive young women, but the resemblance pretty much ends there. Bundy was a good looking charmer, while this guy is a creepy freak, plus, I don't recall any detective having his mistress murdered during an abortive attempt to snare Bundy. Add this to about another 100 inconsistencies, and you can see that there isn't a lot of commonality. The Hillside Stranglers or even the Zodiac had more in common with Karlen's character than Bundy.

Anyway, to me, this film is most effective when looked at as being a prototype for the buddy films of the 80s like Lethal Weapon, 48 Hours, et al. James Luisi is the tough cop, and for me, his unending tough guy posturing and attempts to be "the man" around women half his age came off as forced and eventually tiresome. I was more entertained by his sidekick Martin Speer, who was barely discernible amidst his forest of facial hair and feathered do. TV staple Susan Sullivan is adequate as Luisi's mistress, and the rest of the cast is generally competent.

Worth a look, and entertaining if one isn't expecting too much. I must say, the basketball scene between the 2 detectives is hilarious. Neither of them look like they had ever handled a ball before and the stilted. awkward gamesmanship is a hoot.