VIDEO NASTIES: MORAL PANIC, CENSORSHIP, AND VIDEOTAPE (2010)

VIDEO NASTIES: MORAL PANIC, CENSORSHIP, AND VIDEOTAPE (2010) (NR)
Dir. Jake West
72 mins.

In the 1980's a wave an inquisition concerning graphic films erupted in British politics. The DPP (Director of Public Prosecutions) compiled a list of 72 films, labeled the "Video Nasties," and attempted to pass legislation banning the distribution, rental, ownership or sale of any of the entries on the list. Because of this, there was mass seizings of videos from collections and warehouses, as well as the legal prosecution of multiple distributors and store owners. The DPP constructed not only a mainline Nasty list, but a supplementary watchlist known as "Section 3", which included 80 more films, as well.



OUTRAGE!



The concern was that Nasties, a relatively new phenomena at the time, would irrevocably corrupt the nation's youth and, over time, cause massive spikes in violent crime. Many violent crime and murder cases in this era were blamed on these movies, regardless if the perpetrators had seen them or not. The most famous example of this being the murder of two-year old James Bulger by two ten-year old boys. The press insinuated the Bulger's murderers had been inspired by the film Child's Play 3. This, of course, amounted to little more than propaganda, as there was no evidence to suggest the youths had even seen the offending movie.
 



Would you fuck me? I'd fuck me.

This documentary follows the nativity of the Nasties controversy three decades ago, up until the modern era, in which many of these celluloid pariahs are still censored or completely unavailable to British consumers. Director Jake West has compiled interviews hailing from both sides of the fence; he speaks with journalists and industry insiders who oppose the legislation, and with the politicians who were the architects of the public scare. Though it is clear that West sympathizes with the former camp, he grants the latter the opportunity to explain their views. This is a thoroughly entertaining and informative documentary begging to be seen by horror fan and sociologist alike. 8/10

 

View the trailer here:

 

 

THE MUTILATOR (1985)

THE MUTILATOR (1985) (R) Dir. Buddy Cooper
aka FALL BREAK
86 min.

It's Big Ed's birthday and Little Ed decides to polish Daddy' guns as a surprise. Well, surprise! Dad's rifle goes off in Little Ed's hands and kills his mother in the next room. Big Ed comes home and proceeds to go insane. This dialogue-less opening, which is clearly meant to be shocking, is unintentionally hilarious.

 

 

Many years later, Little Ed is all grown up, and his Dad, a raging alcoholic, calls his son and tells him he has to tend to his beach house while he's away. So Little Ed, his girlfriend, and a few friends head to the beach. The problem is that Big Ed isn't away, he's sleeping in the workshed, and is hellbent on revenge.

 

 

From there on, the movie is a typical slasher fare as one by one Big Ed dispatches of his son's friends. The Mutilator leaves a lot to be desired. It's fun and hokey, for sure, but with a title like "The Mutilator" I expected more... mutilations. The gore it does have is good, and the nefarious fish-hook-in-the-vagina scene is every bit as mean-spirited as it's reputed, but the atrocious script and ridiculously bad acting leave, what should have a been a tense movie, belly up. Oh, and the theme song. What the hell was that? 6/10

 

 

SPOOKIES (1986)

SPOOKIES (1986) (R) Dir. Genie Joseph, Thomas Doran, and Brendan Faulkner
aka TWISTED SOULS aka GOBLIN
85 mins.

This movie has quite the cult following and just a cursory glance at the reviews of it on IMDB are overwhelmingly positive. That being said, it really, really sucks. Maybe if one grew up watching this as a kid, like age 6 or 7, I could see why as an adult one could consider this to (nostalgically) be a good movie. It is however, at least for me, utterly bad. Acting, writing, directing, lighting; god!

 

The film's logo in the title card, is a ripoff of the Goonies logo. The ending is a ripoff of Night of the Living Dead. The main plot and direction are a complete ripoff of The Evil Dead, sometimes shot for shot. Imagine if, you will, that The Evil Dead was written and directed for kids by R.L. Stein. That's this. No real gore, just slime and little blood and loads of monsters... Why is this an R-rated Video Nasty??? I'm getting ahead of myself.

 

Oooooo.... Spookies.

 

Some kids get thrown out of a party, but the night is still young and the alpha male of the group is an insufferable dick, so yada yada yada, they go to an abandoned mansion, yada yada yada, MONSTERS. All sorts of strange monsters. There's zombies, gremlin like things (that look remarkably like Jason's worm-incarnation in Jason Goes to Hell), a wolfman-ish lackey, a Spider-woman and her giant spider baby, mud-men that fart but are destroyable by water (doesn't mud CONTAIN water?), possessed Evil Dead demons, the Grim Reaper, an immortal wizard, his reincarnated son, a ghost.... There's no point in describing the film's characters or the plot at length. There's no logic or consistency, there are just set pieces and FX, to which the story itself serves as an almost screwlessly loose diving board.

 

Here you are folks: the best part of this movie.

 

The monsters are many, and some the effects work would be quite good, if they were puppeted, lit or filmed right. Instead we get brightly lit rubber dripping Vaseline and awkwardly attacking the actors (who know they're in  a bad movie... so don't even try to be more than one-dimensional stereotypes). Though there are implied and on-screen deaths in this (meaning it wasn't "technically" made for children), they goreless and leave much to be desired, hell I had to rewind the movie at the climax because I had missed the deaths of three characters. Don't blink, or you'll miss them "die" by psychic lightning attack.

 

Inept on all levels. I'm sure it doesn't help that Genie Joseph pieced this film's new footage with footage from the other two previous directors, who were initially filming it under the title Twisted Souls. what's left is essentially a kid's movie. Maybe it's a disasterpiece, but unless there is a seasoned heckler or three in the audience, and copious amounts of recreationals, its not worth it, at least to me. I know myriads of 80's kids disagree.  I CAN however say it was still better than Home Sweet Home, though. 3/10

 

 

NIGHTMARES IN A DAMAGED BRAIN (1981)

NIGHTMARES IN A DAMAGED BRAIN (1981) (UR) Dir. Romano Scavolini
aka NIGHTMARE aka BLOOD SPLASH
97 mins.

George Tatum is a very mentally unstable individual. Having committed a double murder as a child, he has been hospitalized, suffering from schizophrenia, intense dreams, and seizures. A team of doctors attempt to rehabilitate him with an experimental drug, echoing both the Ludovico technique in A Clockwork Orange, but more appropriately, the MKULTRA mind control scandal that shocked America only a shortly before this film. Considering their project a success, George it let back into society, but when his case workers lose track of him, he begins to lose his grip on reality, and the murders start rolling in.

 

The bowtie makes this look.

 

George sets his focus on an alcoholic mother and her family in Daytona, because the youngest of 3 kids, C.J., reminds George of himself as a child, and this triggers one of his many ongoing flashbacks. George then stalks the family, makes obscene phone calls, and starts killing the people around them in the six days prior to his final attack.

 

Is that a Sid Haig mask?

 

The most interesting part of the movie is George's character, played masterfully by Baird Stafford. George is horrified of the crimes he commits, traumatized, and is constantly struggling with every act he commits, rendering him sympathetic (unlike the one note killer in Home Sweet Home). It is also ambiguous as to whether his medication keeps him from killing or inspires him to. He wants to stop himself but can't, and even tries to warn C.J. before an impending confrontation. There are two twists in this ending, and while they are maybe not the hardest to predict, work really well. The gore is good, which Tom Savini apparently was not involved in creating, despite the movie's marketing campaign, and I think it shows that it isn't him as it is less Maniac and more Pieces, but his involvement to this day is still a point of contention between the director and Tom, and amongst the fans. Good pacing, well fleshed out characters, lighting and cinematography. A must see grindhouse, yet lesser known, classic. 8/10