PeterBradford

If you want to know why the director's career when nowhere after SILENT NIGHT BLOODY NIGHT, here is your answer. SUGAR COOKIES means well, but it has no story. It has the idea of a story, but it is never fleshed out, never explored deeply, and never really developed. Outstanding performance by Lynn Lowry. Great to see Monique Van Vooren, an underutilized talent. The always interesting Mary Woronov doesn't appear all that comfortable in the part her husband wrote for her. A major plus: the Vinegar Syndrome transfer is outstanding.

Non-stop action, good cinematography, tight editing, and it all works. I watched the interview with the director before I watched the film, which I think enhanced the viewing experience. How this was shot for 20, 000 in 35mm with two name actors is unfathomable. The film really looks good. The two names do not have cameos. Chris Mitchum is the star, and he's in the film from beginning to end. Aldo Ray has about three good scenes. The best performance is by some guy I never heard of Antoine John Mottet or something like that. The director was also the cinematography. How he pulled that off working with a 35mm camera I'm not sure. Well worth watching!

The film has a good premise, namely, the fear of cats. So much more could have been done with this. But one-hit-wonder Joseph "Psycho" Stefano's script is burdened with endless talk and repetitive dialogue. The film is well-cast, although some of the supporting players give the strongest performances. Tim Henry, in his first film role, is outstanding as Luke. And Jennifer Leak is only in two scenes, but she makes them both unforgettable. Nothing much happens in the first hour, but the film is still memorable.

I watched this late-night on cable years ago, because it was made by the director of DAUGHTERS OF DARKNESS. All I could think while watching it is how embarrassed I was for Harry Kumel, sinking so low in his career 15 years after making his masterpiece.

Well-lit, good location, detailed costumes, and a stellar cast means a lot of effort went into this. It's a slick production, looking far better than most adult movies of its time. In fact, that's part of the problem with the 95 minute cut, available thru Vinegar Syndrome. Is it an adult movie? Had they taken this 95 minute cut and trimmed out the explicit sex, there would still be about a 90 minute horror movie left. The director probably would have wanted it that way. Also included in the VInegar Syndrome release is LUST AT FIRST BITE, a 74 minute strictly hard-core cut which is worth seeing as well.

Hard to believe this was shot on 16mm film, as it looks great. Well-lit, colorful costumes on the babes, atmospheric sets, and overall good cinematography. John Carradine, in one of his later-career starring roles, is terrific. He actually gets a lot of screen time, unlike in the 80s when he was relegated to cameos. Bruce Fairbairn, who starred on TV's "The Rookies," is great in a leading role. He's an actor who should have gotten a lot more work.

"CEMETERY OF TERROR is non-stop thrills and bloodshed from beginning to end" is the bold-face lie on Vinegar Syndrome's insert for this crap. There is one zombie killing at the opening. Then the film is non-stop talk for at least forty minutes. You're not watching a film as much as just reading subtitles. Then some stuff happens. The only thing this film has going for it is some effective, atmospheric cinematography. Although allegedly shot in Texas, much of it looks like a studio set intercut with location footage.

Wow. I am not sure where to begin. Top-billed "special performances by" Yvonne DeCarlo is literally in one shot. Cesar Romero does slightly better with two shots. Poor Cornel Wilde (with a bad hair dye) and Aldo Ray appear in two short, poorly lit, poorly shot, poorly framed, poor sound recorded scenes. Now onto the good stuff: I actually found the two male leads compelling. Glenn McKay and Mic Morrow have no other credits on IMDB, but they're actually quite good. The film itself, in some strange way, drew me in. It was much better than I expected it to be. Like one of the other reviewers said, I saw the Variety add back in the day and was curious about the cast. I doubt this film got any playdates at all, despite the "theatrical" trailer included on the DVD. I could see myself sitting through this one again.

The correct tile of this film should be BARBED WIRE BEAVERS, because that's all you see in this film. Gratuitous beaver shots, men playing with women's beavers, women playing with their own beavers. But, this is a Jess Franco film, so it's to be expected. And as with Franco's work, it's entertaining in its own way. It draws the viewer into the sick, perverted world of the women's prison.

WARNING: SPOILER!

The good stuff: well-photographed, on location in Florida; fair-good performances, good looking cast of young folks, and Joe D'Amato's name attached to it. The bad stuff: boring. Talking. A tediously loooong 90 mins. A short film concept padded out to 90 mins.

SPOILER ALERT: Unless my math is really bad, I think the death count was about...um...er...ah...one. Maybe two?

Does anything say 80s cheesecake better than Linnea, Michelle, and a pre-bangs Brinke? This film is fun to watch, thanks in part to a oddball script and campy performances. And the new blu-ray from Vinegar Syndrome looks terrific. Well-lit, well-shot, and really polished for what the credits bills as a "4 day wonder."

This documentary appears as an extra on the Image Entertainment Plan 9 from Outer Space DVD. It's far more entertaining than Plan 9. In fact, I've watched this documentary more times than Plan 9. Well worth seeing.

First of all, I am tired of hearing how this film uses "40 minutes" from the original. It does not. It uses approximate 27 minutes from the original, spread out over the first 40 minutes of the film. That 27 minutes is intercut with footage of Ricky and the doctor. Okay, I confess I saw this film in 1987 when in screened theatrically in NYC and I thought it was one of the CHEAPEST looking films ever. The scene in the so-called "movie theater" was obviously shot in some low-rent production studio's screening room. But the film ages well. Watching it today, it's almost brilliant. Critics get Eric Freeman's performance all wrong. He's a good actor. During the first part of the film, his performance is subtle. Nuanced. The director wisely shoots lots of close-ups, drawing the audience to him. After he snaps, then his performance becomes broader, showing Freeman's range as an actor. I enjoy watching this film now far more than when it was first released. Check it out with fresh eyes.

I watched this for the first time last night. Scary, and better than the original. Top billed James Olson gives a good performance as the priest. Burt Young isn't given a whole lot to do as the dad. Rutanya Alada, who I usually love, over-acts. 70s genre star Andrew Prine (SIMON KING OF THE WITCHES, GRIZZLY, NIGHTMARE CIRCUS) walks through a do-nothing part. The star of the show is Jack Magner. In his first professional role, only starring role, and one of two film parts, does an amazing job. His performance is outstanding, creepy, and hypnotic. I am wondering how playing such an intense part affected him and why he didn't work more. He's brilliant. The film is well shot, using the same exterior location at the first film. The interiors, however, are a completely different set design. Well worth seeking out.

It took me a long time to get around to watching this one. I'm not a fan of seeing bees as predators in movies. Thankfully, the CGI in this one is well done. The bees did not look cheesy, which was my fear going into this one. The film makes good use of Puerto Rican locations, although the most interesting thing about it is the audio commentary when the director reveals he was looking for locations that his mentor Roger Corman had shot at decades ago. Some scenes go on too long, as other reviewers have stated. Great looking cast, and good looking bees.

There's not much blood in BLOOD THIRST, but it's still a moody and effective thriller. The standout is American actor Robert Winston, whose career amounted to very little else besides the starring role in this film. He's handsome, chiseled features. robust hairy chest, muscular physique, and talented. A shame he didn't do more work.

Like another reviewer said, this is one of Al Adamson's lesser known films. It was likely not as financially successful as his horror films. Yet, it's very well done. The script spends more time on character development, and the film has a less frantic pace than most of Adamson's horror films. Sondra Currie is outstanding in the lead role, and Regina Carroll is great in a strong, supporting part. This was likely a passion project for Adamson, as the western genre was said to be his favorite. Check out this film.

Andy Milligan's House of Seven Belles has some good qualities. It's shot on 35mm film, well lit, outstanding period costumes, good locations. What it lacks is a plot. It's a talky series of scenes, some good, some very slow. The lack of pacing could be attributed to it still being a rough cut, although compared to Milligan's earlier works, it ain't so rough. The problem with the film is marketing. What would Andy have done with it? It's not horrific enough to be a horror film. Barely anything happens in 92 minutes. There are a few gore effects, but not enough to sustain interest. It's hard to even picture it as the third feature on a triple bill at the drive-in.

How did they get Susan Blakely and John Saxon in this one? I can only fathom when they read the script it was so far off from anything they've done, it might have sounded like fun. It's beyond silly. Yet, it works. And it's entertaining. Mark Pirro wrote the script but didn't direct. The film has a good cast and high production value for a Crown International release.

This one pretty much has it all. It wears 1980s on its forehead. Linda Blair gets star billing in a role that was a far departure from her usual victim parts. Age 24 when this was filmed, she really seems to revel in this new role. Linnea Quigley gives one of the best performances of her career as a deaf-mute. One year older than Blair, the implication is that she is Blair's younger sister.

Linda (wisely) avoids nudity during the shower scene. She did that the year before in CHAINED HEAT. But she does have an artsy candlelit bathtub scene where she is nude displaying her ample assets.

Also, you know this is an eighties film when the shower scene features an abundance of pubic hair. You wouldn't see that today.

SAVAGE STREETS has nudity, violence, rape, murder, revenge, 80s music, and good locations.

But is also has something else....

Homo hijinks. There's a guy gang called the Scars. They kiss on the lips. One guy sucks another thumb. One wears more makeup than Boy George. And they are CONSTANTLY touching one another. WTF? Did I miss something in the 80s? Oh, yeah...and they have to assert their masculinity through rape. Right.

Sal Landi, as one of the gang members, gives an outstanding performance. Blair is in top form. Check it out!

Great 80s grade B cast! Mary Woronov as the head doctor of a psychiatric hospital. Seen-better-days Marjoe Gortner as one of her associates. Ray Sharkey as a sleaze bag. Forty-three year old Edy Williams in a very good performance! Terry Moore in a very good cameo. Dyanne Thorne in a wasted bit part. Robert Z'Dar in his first film role! Judy Landers as a capable lead. Plenty of nudity. Plenty of beaver (back in the day when it was common). 80s sleaze at its best. Would have made a great double bill with Linda Blair's RED HEAT. In fact, I think they did play together on 42nd Street. They were released only a month apart. FUN FACT: When HELLHOLE was originally announced in Variety, Linda Blair was cast as Susan and Britt Ekland as Fletcher. I believe the producers made the right choice with Landers and Woronov respectively.

I saw this on one of the Turner channels in the early 1990s and had good memories of it. I saw it for the second time tonight, and I have no clue what I saw in it. It doesn't hold up well at all. Maybe this was entertainment in the late 80s. Today, it plays as dull as dishwater.

This film is cheap. No "stars" like Tisa Farrow. Ok, it's not as cheap as Oasis of the Zombies or Zombie Lake. But it's cheap. It's considered a "bad" movie. Yet, it's non-stop action. And, in it's own twisted way, entertaining. Fulci's Zombi is a snooze-fest in comparison. Barely anything happens in Zombi for the first hour, except for the zombie on the boat in the beginning, and the zombie underwater. But NIGHT OF THE ZOMBIES (the title I first saw it under in a 42nd Street dive called The Roxy) delivers the goods from start to finish. Yeah, it's too long and padded with stock footage. The camera angles are bad. But if you want gore and zombies, this is the film.

This TV version is captivating. The performances, particularly by Angie Dickinson and Christopher Plummer, are amazing. Angie made this film fresh off the success of DRESSED TO KILL, and she is strikingly beautiful. This is rare chance where a remake is well-worth tracking down and watching.

Only in the 80s could you find George Segal and Shelly Hack disco dancing. The film is a fictionalized account of the factual search for the so-called "Goodbar" killer (so-called by Judith Rossner, despite the disclaimer). Jean De Baer plays Segal's wife, jealous of his relationship with their daughter. Barton Heyman is particularly strong in a supporting role.