User Reviews (256)

Add a Review

  • Warning: Spoilers
    Maniac is one of those hard to define flicks. Although, it would seem easy to lump this into one category because of the subject matter, this is actually a hard movie to categorize. It is not really a horror film and not really a slasher. Sure, it has its typical slasher suspense scenes with the random girl running and hiding from the killer and the gory moments are all there, but, there is something about this movie that separates itself from most of the others of its genre. This, in my opinion, is typical of Tom Savini special effects flicks from the early 80's. The grittiness, disturbing nature of most of those films will never be duplicated. And I am not talking about flicks like "Creepshow" or "Day of the Dead" (although, that one is disturbing), I am talking about films like "Friday the 13th", "The Prowler", "The Burning", and "Nightmare in a Damaged Brain" (even though Savini said he never worked on that flick it certainly looks like his style).

    Maniac is simply about a man named Frank (played very well by actor Joe Spinell) who was tormented by his mother when he was very young. As a result of this, he grew up to be a sick person who murders woman, scalps them, and uses their hair to nail on to a collection of mannequins. He ends up falling in love with a woman named Anna (Caroline Munro), and when he sees her he seems to be a normal fellow. This all leads up to an interesting climax.

    Now, the storyline is rather simple but the movie is suspenseful enough to hold your interest. I will admit, the first 40 minutes were a bit slow, but once when the story starts going more into Franks behavior when he is by himself and then when he acts towards Anna, things start picking up.

    Of course, Savini's gore scenes are excellent just like the rest of his stuff. We get to see Savini in the movie himself in a rather famous scene where he gets his brains splattered all over the inside of a car. Though, as a gore fan myself, this is definitely not the goriest flick I have seen. But after listening to the cast and director talk about the movie, I don't think it was meant to be. Joe Spinell himself said that the flick wasn't as violent as a Hershell Gordan Lewis film but was meant to be more realistic and shocking. So, when watching this movie it is important to know this instead of going into the movie expecting a real gore-fest.

    I enjoyed this movie, but that is just me. Many people don't like this movie, but if you haven't seen it yet this is for you to decide. I just hope this review helps out. 7/10
  • It's a showcase for sweaty character actor Joe Spinell, who appeared in a lot of major films (The Godfather Part II, Taxi Driver) in small roles, and larger roles in more dubious fare (Starcrash). The story was inspired by the Son of Sam killings, with Spinell as the ranting, depraved killer. The film was notorious for its (at the time) very graphic killings, featuring the work of make up FX legend Tom Savini.

    The movie's appeal will be limited, but if one enjoys that particular brand of late-70's/early-80's NYC grime and sleaze, it's a must-see. Director William Lustig made several other genre films (Vigilante, Maniac Cop) before starting the Blue Underground home video company, who are the prime source for Italian genre films on disc (horror, giallo, spaghetti westerns, crime thrillers, etc.).
  • I'd first like to applaud Tom Savini for his work here; MANIAC contains some of the most realistic and unrestrained gore fx I've seen; possibly THE best up until the time of its release. Anyone who says that horror film make-up men (and women) don't deserve to be called artists is an idiot. Here you get explicitly bloody murders and scalpings, plus a show-stopper head-being-blown-off-with-shotgun murder and a man being ripped apart nightmare and it all looks pretty damn convincing to me.

    Aside from the effects, director William Lustig does an OK job with color schemes (especially considering the budget) and the grimy, sleazy underbelly of New York is brilliantly exploited to give this film a truly nihilistic and seedy feel. The film itself, I thought, was scary, disturbing, intense and even suspenseful in parts (the subway sequence was especially well handled), which is how it should be. Reliable character actor Joe Spinell (from TAXI DRIVER, THE GODFATHER, etc.) also offers an effective performance as the sweaty, overweight, emotionally- scarred killer.

    On the down side, a plot would have been nice and it's unforgivable to waste British actress Caroline Munro on such a poorly scripted nothing role. Her beauty, charm and smile light up the screen and could have been better harnessed to counteract the ugliness on hand. Anyway, the film at least provokes some kind of reaction from its audience. Seeing a few of my squeamish female friends appalled and horrified by the film made it well worth the watch to me!
  • William Lustig's MANIAC wasn't a critical hit in 1980, but it garnered the attention of horror fans in its gory homicidal story. It was a low-budget film with some disturbing violence which many people deemed misogynist (TOTAL BULLS**T) because he kills off women here. It's good to notice two of the best murders happen to the fellas too (Tom Savini gets it the worst obviously). But that aside, MANIAC is neither the best horror film of all time or most enjoyable, but damn is it intense.

    Joe Spinell is absolutely strong in his portrayal of Frank Zito, a real man who has a nasty habit of slaughtering random individuals, mostly female ones so he can dress up mannequins with their scalped hair and clothes. This guy isn't Michael or Jason: when he bleeds, he feels pain. And because he feels guilty a bit over the tragic death of his abusive mother, he feels the urge to murder. Frank falls in love with Anna (Caroline Munro), a photographer who is unaware of Frank's dirty deeds, until Frank sets his unrested demon upon her in the end. The ending is bizarre, and the love story subplot feels a tad unsuitable (although the restaurant scene sets up some exposition, including the knowledge of Frank's mom being killed in an auto wreck). But when the gory carnage sets in, its realistic and graphic. Most other gore flicks seem timid.

    The DVD version from ANCHOR BAY is a keeper, with audio commentary, a documentary on the late Spinell, the obligatory trailers/TV ads, a radio interview pitting the Spinell, Lustig and Munro against a DJ who roasts the film despite not seeing it, and some more angry comments from the critics in a "Gallery of Outrage". Tin box version contains the moody and effective Jay Chattaway film score on CD.
  • Poor Frank.

    As a child, Momma was a mean hooker who used to lock him in the closet while she turned tricks. She loved those men and their money more than she ever did her own son. How's a sweet & innocent child to recover?

    Kill em all!! That's how!!

    As an adult, Frank Zito now wanders the lonely streets of New York nightly, looking out for his next victim. Whether it' a hooker, a cheating spouse, a snooty model, or just someone out and about in the late night hour, Frank's M.O. is always the same : Kill em, Scalp em, take their head of hair home, and nail it onto one of the several female mannequins around his scummy apartment.

    Good boy Frank!

    Now Frankie doesn't have to be lonely anymore. He has a department store full of victims around his apartment, all to himself! They will never leave, and will be kept always by Frank.

    This guy has a lot of heart, and it shows.

    Maniac isn't the fastest paced movie, but it has some of the most awesome graphic violence that 80's horror produced (thank you Tom Savini!). The late Joe Spinell (who also co-wrote) is simply irresistible as Frank Zito. He's terrifying, childish, maniacal, and downright lovable as the crazed New York madman.

    Maniac is gritty, dark, horrifying, and directed in many parts as a "documentary" film, allowing the viewer to see things through Franks eyes. You feel like your right along for the ride with this fine gent!

    It's a beauty of a horror film, one not to be forgotten after the credits roll.
  • PaulyC18 January 2008
    Okay, first of all this movie was shot in New York and there's something I find fascinating about the look of films shot in NY in the 70's or 80's. The movie itself is decent but not great. It has a good look and feel to it and I like Joe Spinell in it. Joe plays Frank, a photographer, who misses his dead mother despite being mistreated by her as a child. He begins killing women at night and keeping parts from the bodies. I however didn't find the relationship he had with the model he stalked all too believable. It has some good scenes and is still a good watch for slasher fans and fans like me of gritty New York City in the 70's and 80's.
  • "Maniac" is one of the few horror movies that I have seen that actually got under my skin a little. It made me feel uncomfortable while I watched what was happening on screen, and very few movies have ever done that to me. The movie follows a psychotic murderer as he wanders the streets of New York City, in cheap restaurants, rundown apartment complexes, and subway stations, searching for his next victims, each of them savagely murdered.

    The plot for this movie may not seem very scary, but the way the movie is crafted is genuinely grisly and really made me feel uncomfortable. Rather than going from the victim's point of view as they are slashed to pieces (like most horror movies tend to do), this movie rather focuses on the actual killer himself. We learn about the abuse that he suffered as a small child at the hands of his domineering mother, which is presumably the reason he's become a murderer, taking out his own personal revenge on other people. The one thing about this movie that was so interesting was how the audience got to enter the mind of the killer, so to speak. Joe Spinell gave an excellent performance as the maniac in this movie, he portrayed a tormented human very well. There are some very grisly murders throughout the movie, all of which are fairly gruesome. But the most disturbing aspect to the film was the sense of psychosis that the killer is experiencing.

    "Maniac" is surely similar to "Psycho", which makes me wonder whether or not the writers of this film were basing the plot on the real life serial killer Ed Gein, who also grew up with an abusive mother and suffered psychological problems later on as an adult, which ultimately drove him to grave-robbing and murder. There are some striking similarities between the story of this film and Ed Gein's life.

    Overall, "Maniac" is one grisly, nasty movie. It displays the psychological torment that many real-life serial killers suffer from and does a good job at it, leaving it's audience uncomfortable in their seats. And from what I have seen, not many movies do that. 7/10.
  • markovd11128 May 2023
    You see, "Maniac" isn't necessarily what you would call a bad film. It's filmed decently, Tom Savini's gore effects are good and Spinell's and Munro's performances are very good. But "Maniac" fails at being an entertaining experience. It's neither a good horror movie (only somewhat tense scene is the one in subway station toilet) nor a good psychological movie. In fact, whole story about Frank's relationship with his mother and Anna feels just tacked on to give some explanation to his murders. It's worth to mention "Goin' to a Showdown", a song featured in the movie, which is quite good. But other than some positive things, "Maniac" is boring and unpleasant (not in horror, but in entertainment sense) movie that I recommend only to horror movie veterans looking for a piece of genre history. Everyone else, avoid it... 5.5/10!
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This one's a sick flick. If Henry: Portrait Of A Serial Killer and The New York Ripper chugged beer till they were sick(er), they would probably puke up Maniac. Mmmm, nice image, huh? Well, get used to it, cause if you're watching Maniac, you'll be seeing plenty of sick sh*t. You might wanna even skip the Suds & Buds. This one will kill your buzz and if you watch it with friends, they might expect an apology afterwards.

    So, Frank Zito (an absolutely nutty Joe Spinell) has Mommy issues. A lot of guys do... they just don't handle them the way Frank does. He destroys women (and a couple guy who were unfortunate to be involved with the women Frank had his eye on). He's a creepy dude alright. You see, he has this thing for scalps. And as most girls are rather attached to theirs (chortle), he's gotta take them. So he stalks young ladies till he finds a window of opportunity and then gets down to business.

    This is pretty much what Frank does with his life, till one day he meets a photographer named Anna. For some reason, Frank tries to play it normal with her (2 guesses how this turns out). He wines and dines her, all the while letting her keep possession of her scalp like a perfect gentleman. Things go swimmingly till Frank decides it would be nice to take Anna to pay his Mother's grave a visit. Frank kinda loses his grip and tries to get familiar with Anna's scalp. Anna thinks the date is over and flees accordingly, leaving Frank to stumble home to his rat-hole apartment and have a total psychotic breakdown and a happy ending is enjoyed by none.... except Anna's scalp.

    OK, so Maniac is not a date movie. This is that special kind of horror movie that exists to make you regret watching it, in the sense the it leaves one feeling kinda depressed and dirty afterwards (like the other 2 movies I mentioned at the start). Let me state right now that I don't think it's "wicked cool" that Frank has it in for women. I have nothing but love and respect for women (my Mom is a woman). But this isn't a nice movie.

    Actually, it's a very ugly and mean spirited movie. So why the good rating? Cause I can appreciate ugly, mean spirited movies. I mean, this IS a horror movie, right? This isn't mainstream Hollywood horror, like The Grudge or Final Destenation, where the idea is to put pretty people in precarious positions. This is low budget '80s sleaze. This is from an era when horror movies wanted to make you uncomfortable. And it does just that.

    The Good: Joe Spinell (who also wrote the screenplay) is, uhhh, very convincing. As are the effects, handled by the one and only Tom Savini. Speaking of Tom, he has a cameo in one scene as a disco dude taking a lady down to the docks for a little rub and tug... till Frank shows up and blows his head off (one of my all-time fave gore effects, really, ya gotta see it). Some of the other effects are almost too much to bear.... which is a good thing? Seriously, if you're looking for a "fun" horror movie to watch, don't even bother with this. But, if you know what you're in for and you're still down, Maniac is nasty and truly horrifying.

    The Not So Good: See: ugly, mean spirited, nasty. Some people (about 99.9%) will wonder how and why this ever got made. As I mentioned above, some of the effects are really harsh. The first time we see Frank scalp a girl, it's really quite unsettling, to the point where if you don't dig stuff like this, you might feel sick. It could be labeled misogynistic and irresponsible but, I'm of the mind that if you watch this and think it's OK to scalp women, your screws were loosening already. Don't blame movies, music or books for f'd up people.
  • Co-written by, and starring Joe Spinell, 'Maniac' is a grim, bloody and horrific journey into the world of a psychotic murderer. Spinell gives a bravura performance as Frank, a deeply disturbed individual haunted by childhood memories of his mistreatment at the hands of his mother.

    As a result of his lousy upbringing, Frank is now a first-class loony tune; he slaughters women (although the occasional man gets in his way and ends up dead too) and removes their scalps, taking them home to place upon the mannequins that he keeps in his apartment.

    When Frank has his picture taken in a park by photographer Anna (played by the gorgeous Caroline Munro), he tracks her down and almost manages to pass for normal for a while, wining and dining the sexy snapper and being quite charming. But it's not long before the real Frank emerges, and has a go at adding Anna to his long line of victims.

    The direction by William Lustig, whilst not exceptional, does the job it was supposed to do; the film never drags and there are one or two edge-of-your-seat moments and a couple of nifty scares.

    'Maniac's gory death sequences, by legendary horror make-up legend Tom Savini, are real showstoppers, and include ultra-realistic scalpings, amazing exploding heads and vicious bloody stabbings. The majority of Savini's work on the film is stunning, with only the final decapitation being less than perfect.

    'Maniac' is a great example of low-budget 80s splatter and will appeal to all those who enjoy their horror down and dirty with buckets of gore.
  • a_baron28 March 2016
    This low budget romp through the American nightmare is not really a slasher film, though it does see a maniac running around murdering people for no apparent, or perhaps that should be no rational, motive. This guy is eclectic if nothing else: he murders men as well as women, and he uses both weapons and his hands. "Maniac" is set in New York, and as crime buffs may know, a few years earlier a bloke name Berkowitz was running around doing essentially the same thing, though the Son of Sam was positively normal compared with this guy. So what is his problem?

    It appears to be something to do with his late mother, that and the fact that eventually he attacks the wrong damsel, who gives as good as she gets and then some. It is likely this film was intended as a quasi-serious exploration of madness, but with gore for the sake of it and absent a proper plot, it is nothing more nor less than yet more outpourings of a sick mind, most probably that of its New York born director William Lustig.
  • In brief: Talk about a poster being completely accurate to what the movie is! (If anything it doesnt sell enough how WOW this is). Spinell, Lustig Savini are top of their game.

    Longer: I was glad to be there for one of William Lustig's Q&A'd after the movie (hes an entertaining raconteur) in particular for the background about how the idea for this movie came to be, since, as I was watching it (and knew Spinell was also a co-writer), I wondered how the flying eff this came to be. There were two key points I took away from what Mr Lustig said, and these were:

    1) originally the screenplay was "more conventional," and had the kind of dual plotlines we see in certain detective movies and shows (Dirty Harry just popped in my head as I'm typing this), where the audience follows the killer and the cop tracking him down. But Lustig found this boring, and decided to just take out the cop scenes. In fact, only once, at the end, do cops show up and there is no dialog for this particular scene (as a side note, there was no deeper meaning intended for this, except that the cop "actors", actual cops, weren't any good at delivering lines). So by way of a kind of basic artistic daring it created a provocation, which leads to:

    2) the framing is what counts here, and Lustig and Spinell took as many serial killer tropes and types (from mommy issues to Ted Bundy and Gacy to Son of Sam, this last one seemed like the major influence to me, ie replace the dog with mannequins) and stuffed them into this one gutter-bag of a man, but again it is ALL from his POV. While Lustig cuts to showing what the women are doing when they are in Frank's cross-hairs (and Tom Savini in one iconic horror scene), we don't get to know them really as people really outside of these scenarios entirely - not even Caroline Munro's photographer who Frank befriends, who gets to have the closest to a character arc of a sort - so this is ultimately not unlike one of those intense character studies that Scorsese did before (Taxi Driver) and after (King of Comedy) ... Only here, there's *only* the mania, and an audience will usually try to, you know, find some way in to a character is the lead. There's something about Pupkin or Bickle we can recognize as vulnerable or broken and yet there might be the trace of a soul beneath the mental illness... Here?

    I found this entire film so intense and yet so unnerving that I couldn't look away, even when I knew I should. The violence here holds up today not simply for the shock factor, though there is that (this is one of Savini's major works as a make up artist, his own head being blown off as one key example), but because there is a lot of mental WTF-ery that is attached to Frank's pov. When we see him strangle a prostitute early on, he keeps flashing to another woman as he's doing it. And then when he does his...gulp, scalping, this isn't meant to be entirely objective.

    And it's not as though Lustig shows *every* muder in gory detail, though I'm not sure if that was restraint so much as him trying to keep a tone and pace that would work. So for example in that Savini scene, he gets the giant explosive death - sort of a next-level-of-Dawn-explosion - but he cuts away from the woman's demise just before it happens.

    A lessor director would show everything, every last one of them, but that leads me to the key point with this: this is a piece of pure, uncut 100% pure Grindhouse moviemaking, but what makes it emotionally disturbing is that the direction is so assured isnt sloppy or boring. When he moves the camera, it's done with purpose and to add psychological intensity. When he gets some really uncanny angles in Frank's apartment (again, all on grainy 16mm, though restored in 4K it looks even crisper), it had the feeling of Italian horror. In a way this is Italian Giallo, except it isn't lying to us about who the killer is.

    And Spinell is fully omitted to this role, so much so that if I hadn't seen him in anything else before (ironically hes in Taxi Driver, in the first scene interviewing Travis) so that is what also makes this a home-run. The director and the writer/actor in sync and in control, and while I cringe and grip my seat and hope one woman can get away but likely wont (oh that bathroom scene in the subway, my god!) I know I'm seeing confidence in what is going on.... And it makes for a really rough and tough sit.

    Maniac is not framed as a story where we are going to identify with this guy - Id be worried about someone who does or did - but Lustig isn't asking us to laugh or dismiss it all as a freak or geek-show either. It's more along the lines of: this is ugly, but this is a lot of what these scumbags are, they're human beings, but these monsters aren't some abstract thing. In a sense this is a more honest slasher than a lot of what came out during that time; it's scuzzier, in part thanks to setting, and it has a bleaker and more surreal ending than most. And if someone decided to turn it off or walk out, well, I get that too. It's true grain provocative-genre alcohol.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    This sick quickie earned its notoriety thanks to its high gore content, taking bloody special effects to a new sickening level of realism thanks to the work of master craftsman Tom Savini. Other than the gore, it's a grim, on-the-street style film, brought to gritty life by director William Lustig (a major film fan himself). It often recalls other films like TAXI DRIVER (a film in which Spinell had a bit part) in its depiction of a New York filled with litter, sleaze and low-lives and it has to be said that this is a depressing, non-entertaining ride through some of the lowest quarters imaginable.

    The plot is routine, a series of murders as in a slasher film, interspersed with disturbing moments inside Frank Zito's flat, where he talks to his dead mother and imagines that the mannequins around him are real people. It certainly is a sick film, one for those with strong stomachs only; Savini outdoes himself with the gore here, from graphic impalings to throat slashings, garrottings and stabbings. The film is also notorious for a head explosion by shotgun blast (Savini contrived to pull the trigger and shoot himself, in a small role as Disco Boy) which is more graphic than the one in SCANNERS!

    Yet the worst bits are the scalpings, played out in excruciating slow motion, as we get to see every detail as Zito slices the hair off his victims with a straight razor. Spinell sweats and grimaces as the disturbed psychopath, haunted by memories of childhood torture at the hands of his mother. Yet he also provokes pathos thanks to his plight, and you end up feeling sorry for this monster despite the horrendous acts he commits. Although Spinell starred in many productions this will forever be remembered as his most defining moment.

    The only other star name is glamour queen Caroline Munro (who re-teams with Spinell after Italian sci-fi epic STARCRASH). Munro isn't much of an actress but she is pretty, so her relationship with Spinell is the result of a bit of artistic license, I think. The film is full of tension and suspense, with the highlight being the lengthy stalking of a nurse, which literally had me on the edge of my seat throughout; fingernail-biting stuff. Things are definitely weird at the finale, where there's a scare copied from CARRIE and a final mutilation which looks to have been copied in DAY OF THE DEAD.
  • No humor, no horror, not even bad acting, just plain empty air
  • Over one century ago (1897 to be exact) in the dingy back streets of Montmartre, Paris, an eccentric ex-secretary to a Police commissioner named Oscar Metenier, opened the Theatre du Grand Guignol. For 65 years, groups of performers staged one-act plays that depicted graphic scenes of murder, mutilation and torture. Famous works by authors such as Charles Dickens and James Hadley Chase were adapted for Grand Guignol and made into, some might say, horrific gore-laden masterpieces. People's morbid curiosities kept the shows ever popular, all the way up until the Nazis invaded France during World War II. Perhaps because the French population was experiencing true horrors of their own, the urge to see such events portrayed on stage, quite obviously became a lot less alluring. The theatre never recovered, and it finally closed its doors for the last time in 1962. William Lustig's Maniac is basically Grand Guignol for the cinematic audiences of the eighties. A movie that viewers of a quainter disposition will describe as depraved, demoralising and redundantly mean spirited, while others have touted its story telling as artistic, ballsy and daring. Although its often labelled as a formulaic stalk and slash offering, it is actually a member of the sub, sub-genre that differentiates itself from the Halloween and Friday the 13th created format. Along with Nightmares in a Damaged Brain, Mardi Gras Massacre, and Don't go in the House; Maniac offers something refreshing, by giving the killer characterisation and making him more than just a loony in a mask with a machete.

    The plot portrays the life of Frank Zito, an insane and stammering psychological mess of a man, with more than a few severe problems upstairs. His story unravels around his decent into madness, which stems from his seclusion and isolation from the outside world. He is a lonely, redoubtable character, with no friends or companionship; he's just alone with his fragmented mind to torment him. His desperation to feel accepted by civilisation results in him creating his own 'family' from female mannequins. To add realism to their beings and to make them as human-like as could be possible, he furnishes their heads with the scalps of women that he butchers remorselessly. In the first ten minutes, an unfortunate prostitute is ruthlessly slaughtered for no apparent reason, and the misogyny continues all the way through the movie; as nurses, models and innocent bystanders are gorily slain for nothing more than the misfortune of being in the wrong place at the wrong time. The creepiest thing about these murders, is the fact that Zito has no apparent understanding of the results of his actions. He reads headlines, which describe the feelings of a city left in fear by his spate of madness and he watches news updates that inform us of the aftermath of his bloodthirsty rein. But his reaction is non-existent; he shows no knowledge of any wrongdoing, almost like he is unaware that he commits such atrocities. His mental downfall takes a U-turn, when he meets up with Anna D'Antoni (Caroline Munro) a photographer that attracts his attention for the first time when she snaps him wondering through a park. We finally get to see a thoroughly different side to his character, - a romantic, insecure personality that's been buried beneath years of self-inflicted misery and emotional torture. There is a constant battle between two separate personalities that rages inside Zito's mind however, and Anna's fate depends upon whether the good or evil side emerges victoriously...

    The opening sequence stays true to its stalk and slash counterparts; as the masked, heavy breathing Zito kills a loving couple on a beach. Lustig describes the scene as a homage to Jaws, only this time the monster is out of the sea and on land, thus explaining the beach setting. It's a well-handled commencement, with Savini adding the magic that he is most reputed for; and Robert Lindsay's competent photography creates energy that prevails throughout the whole movie. Although body count material is introduced without any characterisation or development, it can be argued that the story resolves around Zito; and to him, victims are only objects or playthings anyway. I have always considered Bill Lustig to be a highly underrated filmmaker. Maniac Cop was yet another great movie, although I would consider this to be one of his best - probably because he was relatively unknown when he worked it. The parts that were filmed inside the killer's flat are shot in complete silence, which effectively adds to the feeling of seclusion and abandonment. It's like the viewer is inside the character's apartment, but also inside his own remote world, where his loneliness has degenerated into an unrelenting insanity. It's added moments like these that make Maniac all the more creepy. The subway scene adds some awe-inspiring suspense, as Frank stalks a nurse through the station. Lustig does well to keep the atmosphere tense and the viewer is always aware that something is about to happen, meaning there is never any allowance for comfort in the fact that any of the characters will escape to safety. He also manages at least two effective jump-scares, the final Carrie-esque jolt being particularly memorable. Jay Chattaway provides a superb score to accompany the visuals, and Lorenzo Marinelli's editing is equally impressive.

    Although you could never call Joe Spinnell a fantastic dramatic performer by any of his pre-Maniac work, Frank Zito (named as a nod to Joseph Zito the director of The Prowler and friend to Lustig and Savini) was undoubtedly the part he was put on this planet to play. It's a convincing performance that allowed the actor to immerse himself deep into something that he had researched thoroughly and accurately, giving his character a vivid portrait of realism that was necessary to create the child's nightmare-like quality that the movie possesses. Spinnell is Maniac and Maniac is Spinnell, there's no doubt about it; it was his signature role. It's impossible to imagine another character actor fitting the bill so perfectly. Not only does he play the part; he also looks and sounds it too. He wasn't the only one that hit a career high under Lustig's direction though; the ever-adorable Caroline Munro gave her most realistic portrayal too. Her star had just reached its zenith in 1980, before she became a scream queen in less memorable flicks such as Slaughter High and Faceless, which would supplement her income, well into motherhood. This also offered a chance to break away from the bikini-clad bimbo roles that she had been given up until that point; and it gave her the chance to try something a little different. I strongly respect her refusal to do any nudity, which cost a further contract with Hammer in the early seventies. It takes a strong women to reject such offers for the sake of her modesty, and Munro proved that she was just that; and her career strengthened because of it. It's worth noting that the pair were reunited two years later for Fanatic (aka The Last Horror Film), which lacked the gritty edge and invitingly sleazy surroundings of its predecessor, but attempted to cash-in on the fame that Lustig's film had earned from its gruesome reputation.

    Maniac was filmed on super 16 mm and like the best slashers from this period, it was shot for the most miniscule of budgets ('under a million dollars'). A lot of the on-location work was staged illegally, without any insurance or authorised permission. Lustig anecdotes about the exploding head scene (no less than Tom Savini's, by the way), where they had to fire a shotgun through the windscreen of a car and then make a quick getaway, before the Police arrived to investigate the gunshot! Munro was given only one-day to rehearse the script before starting work, due to replacing Dario Argento's wife of the time, Daria Nicolodi. Admittedly, it does seem pretty strange that a woman with a name as Italian as Anna D' Antoni, would be played by an English Rose; but she does a good enough job and is truly a sight to behold. Many, MANY countries rejected this movie on the grounds of its unnecessary violence towards women; including the censors here in the UK, who made sure to add it to the DPP list almost immediately. The Philippines' board of film review was so outraged by what they discovered that they told the producers to take it to Satan instead of their country, and went on to describe it as 'unentertaining' and 'unfit for Human consumption'! Of course, knowledge of those monstrosities, only made it seem all the more curious to youngsters that had heard such tales of unruly degradation, and were eager to check it out for themselves; thus earning it a massive cult following. Upon release, it became immensely popular, although it was heavily criticised for its brutal violence. Spinnell said that the blood was never on screen long enough for his creation to be considered too gruesome. He lied; - there are parts of the movie that are limitlessly gory and blood-soaked. You'll find decapitations scalpings and dismemberment, - if you can name a gory way to slaughter a female, then you'll find it somewhere in here. Maniac is one of the only video-nasties that have managed to retain its shock factor, even after twenty-four years!

    I saw an edited copy of this in the mid-nineties and was unimpressed. Perhaps my attentions were elsewhere or I was expecting something more? I can't be sure, but last night, watching it once again for this review, I found myself captivated. There are flaws, yes for certain. It's unlikely that a beauty as striking, as Anna would give the time of day to a misfit like Zito in the first place, and the end sequence is a little bizarre to say the least. But all niggles are forgiven when you acknowledge the effort that has been put into making this production as realistically as they possibly could. Credit has to be given to Spinnell for believing in the project and his dedication and research into serial killers deserves recognition. I haven't yet seen Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer, although I'm told that the two movies have a great deal in common, so I'm after a copy right now. Maniac has earned itself another fan, and I believe that it deserves to be seen. There has never been, and probably never will be, another movie so depraved and disturbing; so grab a copy whilst you've got the chance. It's an innovative and daring take on the standard slasher genre, which succeeds because it is just that.
  • Warning: Spoilers
    Maniac is set in New York City where psychotic loner Frank Zito (Joe Spinell, also executive producer & co-writer) has snapped after spending too much time in his seedy apartment, he now regularly goes out & viciously murders people & in particular young women. You see Frank has a big problem with women & resents them so he kills them, simple. Besides killing them he scalps them & places the scalp on a store window mannequin inside his apartment & he has amassed quite a collection. He then falls for sexy photographer Anna D'Antoni (Caroline Munro) but the fact that he is a brutal serial killer of women is sure to cause problems in the relationship eventually...

    This notorious 80's sleazy gore flick was directed by William Lustig (surely the man who has directed the most films with the word 'Maniac' in the title since he also directed all the Maniac Cop trilogy) who has a small cameo at the start as he plays the hotel manager & if we are all totally honest Maniac would be virtually unknown & almost certainly have disappeared into obscurity if it were not for the aforementioned gory & sometimes disturbing special make-up effects courtesy of the main man Tom Savini who also plays the dude who gets his head blown off to save having to mould another fake head presumably since Savini had a fake head of himself lying around anyway. Maniac was a difficult film for me to rate & judge & I am still not sure whether I should give it a six or seven out of ten, on the one hand you have one of the most threadbare films I have ever seen with virtually no plot whatsoever yet it's undeniably effective & those gore effects are just terrific if your into that sort of thing which I am. There are no character's beyond Frank & Anna who barely features anyway, Frank has the whole Psycho (1960) thing going on as he has been left mentally scared by his late abusive Mother just like Norman Bates & as such has a misogynistic attitude towards women & likes to kill & scalp them in his spare time. That's the whole plot. Seriously beyond a shallow relationship between Frank & Anna & his killing if women nothing else happens in Maniac, nothing. At just under 90 odd minutes the pace is alright, there's enough gore & horror to satisfy the exploitation crowd & it is oddly watchable but when all said & done there's just not enough to it to justify 90 minutes of most people's time.

    The film definitely has a sleazy, seedy feel & atmosphere to it, those graffiti covered toilets in that New York subway are enough to give anyone nightmares. I wouldn't have liked to take a crap in one of those late at night that's for sure! The whole 80's New York feel is there too which adds a lot & it is generally well made although a bit basic. The one real stand-out feature of Maniac has to be the gore effects, from scalping's to slit throats, from sliced throats to stabbings, from chopped off arms to heads being pulled off & the infamous scene in which a guy has his head blown off from point blank range by a shotgun. Good stuff & the effects by Savini are up to his usual high standards. There's a tight, claustrophobic atmosphere to the film & it can be unsettling at times, the surprisingly suspenseful chase through the subway as Frank stalks the nurse is particularly well shot & put together in this regard.

    Apparently shot on a low $350,000 budget the real life New York locations really help sell the film, the production values are alright if basic & the special make-up effects are better than perhaps the film deserves. Also to keep costs down several porn actresses were hired to play the female roles rather than proper actor's. The acting is pretty good actually, again maybe better than the film deserves. I think Caroline Munro was cast after her husband put some money into the film & adds a touch of English glamour I suppose.

    Maniac is a film that doesn't sound too promising as it's merely a collection of women being killed by some fat guy but it has a certain compelling atmosphere & the memorable gore effects really are showstoppers at times. So, shall I give it a six or a seven? I'll tell you what I will sit on the fence & give it a six & a half. A planned sequel Maniac 2: Mr. Robbie (1989) had a ten minute promo reel shot but the film was never made after Joe Spinell's death.
  • Horror films, no matter what the focus can be scary. Perhaps what makes people more frightened is when they realize what they're watching is more likely to happen in real life. Supernatural entities, other worldly creatures or scientific abominations are all monstrous by design, but the likelihood of coming across something like that is slim to none. Maybe the person who just walked by is your average citizen. They also could very well not be the average citizen one would expect them to be. Sometimes people have alternative activities when no one's looking. This is the feeling a viewer can have after watching this flick, because it does feel very grounded. One never knows what another person does behind closed doors.

    The story is about what seems to be an ordinary person by the name of Frank Zito (Joe Spinell). From the outside, he's not the classiest looking person, but he's not a slob. That is until viewers see what he does for a hobby, which is murdering random women and scalping them after. Written by C.A. Rosenberg and Joe Spinell himself, the script gives its viewers a twisted look at a disturbed person. This feature would also be what director William Lustig was best known for until he created the Maniac Cop (1988) franchise. While that horror film was unique its own way, it is completely unrealistic. However, the possibility of this scenario happening is much higher.

    Think of it this way. What's more popular for the execution of horror films? Most of the set ups require a bunch of random characters that don't receive proper development and end up becoming fodder to the villain. This feature though, focuses on the villain as the main character. This allows the viewers to see Frank Zito when he's the killer, when he's playing a regular guy other people and how he is when he's by himself. It's definitely a different way of showing the audience the story and not blatantly exposition dumping everything at key plot points. That doesn't mean the script doesn't have its problems. One thing that's missed is explaining why Frank scalps his victims. What's the purpose? What does it represent?

    Then there's also the supporting cast which is very small but understandable since it is a low budget flick. Unfortunately there, one of the characters that begins to get development is abruptly dropped. But that's where the issues end. The supporting cast has very few recognizable names but they all act decently. Spinell gives a creepy performance as Frank, considering he also played Rocky Balboa's boss Gazzo in Sylvester Stallone's franchise. There's also Anna (Caroline Munro), a professional photographer. Munro was also in Dracula A.D. (1972) and The Spy Who Loved Me (1977). Even Dawn of the Dead (1974) makeup effects artist Tom Savini has a brief role to play.

    Visually speaking, the film has a very raw feeling to it. This is most likely due to the film equipment at the time but it's because of that realistic feel to the movie that helps make the story that much more frightening. Shooting for this feature was Robert Lindsay as cinematographer. Prior to this Lindsay had worked on adult films, which is as far as I'm going to go there. Special effects were also handled by Tom Savini so the violence is definitely credible. As for the film score, this would be the first debut for Jay Chattaway who would also later be known for his compositions to Maniac Cop (1988) and Maniac Cop 2 (1990). Here, Chattaway's music is just as creepy and provides interesting cues using synthesizers.

    Something this horror film does right is changing the focus of the story to the villain. This allows the viewers to get a better understanding of who they are. While the cast is bare bones and a true reason as to why the killer kills the way he does goes unexplained, the music is appropriately unsettling, the acting is good and the gore effects are noteworthy for the time.
  • This movie has taught me not to trust meta score as much. It's amazing. It's claustrophobic, gory as hell, all leading up slowly to the ending that will mess you up. Give it a shot of you like slashers. You'll love it.
  • God i don't know what film others were watching...especially those that gave it a 10...really?! I was bored from the start..stopped half way through...had to convince myself to finish it...a tedious lack of suspense...predictable,
  • From the amazing performance of Joe Spinell to the Brutal Make-up FX of Tom Savini, this is perhaps the mother of all Horror Slasher Flicks...Written to be "Jaws on Land"...this film captures to wonderful vibe on New York City in the late 70's
  • mattgray-4302213 November 2020
    7/10
    Wow
    That was a truly sickening experience. One thing most people aren't mentioning is that this film takes perspective from the killer only.. No annoying cops until the end, and they don't even talk lol. Just a look into the mind, habits and daily rituals of a maniac. The gore was just an extra. Do not watch with your gf, I wouldn't even try and she can handle some stuff. There's just a seedy, genuine vibe here and it's what makes 80's horror stand out from every other era, the 70's was great too though.
  • Be warned, 'Maniac' is a very uncomfortable watch. This is an extremely unpleasant viewing experience (although still not as discomforting as 1986's 'Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer'.

    'Maniac' is a perfect description for the film's antagonist, Frank - a sick, mentally disturbed, sadistic killer with no conscience. He kills women, takes their clothes and scalp (!!), and then dresses mannequins with it at home.

    The first half was the most difficult to watch, so much so that I at times didn't want to see. The second half tells us more about Frank, and what (possibly) lead to his condition. He becomes more involved with other characters, and even visits them at home. Ah, speaking of which, interesting how he just shows up at people's homes without them asking how he got their addresses.

    'Maniac' is a film I'd rather not have seen. Not sure I consider this entertainment, as it is way too disturbing. I must just point out Frank is excellently portrayed by Joe Spinell. The film probably wouldn't have been as creepy or worked as well without him.

    Would I watch it again? No.
  • "Maniac" is one of the most visceral examples of the horror genre.Along with Romano Scavolini's "Nightmare"(1981)it is one of the most disturbing horror films ever made.The killings presented here are cold-blooded,extremely brutal and gory."Maniac" in its almost pornographic depiction of violence makes any "Friday the 13th" film look tame.Joe Spinell is perfect as a maniac killer Frank Zito,who graphically murders and scalps his victims.Caroline Munro("Kronos","Slaughter High")is really hot as a young fashion photographer.The gore effects made by Tom Savini are simply spectacular-the head explosion scene has to be one of the most amazing moments in cinematic history.The amount of gore splashed in this sequence is incredible.The direction by William Lustig("Maniac Cop" series,"The Violation of Claudia")is well-handled,the acting is fairly convincing and the atmosphere is really ugly and disturbing.Definitely one to avoid if you're politically correct,but if you like confrontional stuff you can't miss it.10 out of 10.See it now!
  • Exceedingly grim and disturbing slice of sleazy 80's NYC where a mommy obsessed, mannequin hoarding serial killer stalks, murders, and scalps prostitutes, models, nurses, and any other unfortunate woman unlucky enough to get in his way.

    Maniac is a powerful film, no doubt, but it's also not a very fun movie to watch, so the odds of it being a perennial, rewatchable favorite are slim. The special effects by Tom Savini are inventive and fittingly grotesque and the actors are nowhere near as bad as you'd expect with Joe Spinell turning in a great performance as the title character. For his performance and Savini's effects alone, Maniac is a worthwhile investment of your time.
  • Released during the flood of slasher films after the successes of Halloween (1978) and Friday the 13th (1980), this grittier, New York-set film, is closer to a character study (like the proceeding, and superior Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer (1986)), than the more fantastical killers of most stalk and slash fare. Frank Zito (Joe Spinell) represents the lone killer, preying on young, vulnerable (and incredibly stupid) women, and procures their scalps to dress his "flat-mates". He has many of the character traits of previous screen villains of this ilk, such as Norman Bates - Frank clearly has a mummy complex that manifests itself through audio flashbacks, illustrating a youth cradled with violence. Frank's raison d'etre here is quite simple, if slightly unnerving. He seems to be attempting to reconstruct the image of his mother onto these fibre-glass entities.

    The story was written by Spinell himself (a man who could previously be seen in such classics as The Godfather (1972), Taxi Driver and Rocky (both 1976)), and his performance is fantastically sweaty and creepy. Being set in the grim New York, it is impossible to separate it from the real life killings of David Berkowitz (more commonly known as Son of Sam), and one scene particularly highlights these murders as an influence. A disco couple sit in a parked car (the male is played by Tom Savini, who also created the gruesome special effects), copping off, when a shotgun fires and Savini's head explodes to bloody effect.

    What differentiates this from much of the films in the saturated sub- genre market is its realism, and sense of filth. But besides the more horrific elements, it even manages both pathos and even some very black humour. In the scenes in Frank's flat, he talks incessantly to the mannequins, and this becomes his downfall in an absurdist, paranoid finale. But perhaps what the film mostly left me with, was that 20th century society creates these kind of monsters due to isolation. We are continuously separating ourselves from the idea of community, locking ourselves within walls and minds. Perhaps a lesson should be learnt from the damaging effects of our capitalist consumer society.

    www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com
An error has occured. Please try again.