Return of the Evil Dead (1973)

Return of the Evil Dead (1973)

Scream… So They Can Find You

Five hundred years after they were blinded by fire and executed for their unholy crimes, the Templar Knights rise from the dead to take revenge on a small Portuguese town during its centennial celebration of the executions.

 

No, this is not related to Sam Raimi’s infamous low budget classic, rather it should be titled Return of the Blind Dead as this is a sequel to 1972′s Tombs of the Blind Dead. Not many people have heard of the Blind Dead series. I hadn’t until a few years ago when I came across the box set on eBay. A series of Spanish-made horror films about undead, zombie-like Templar knights, the films were a big success in Spain and have gained cult status in the genre. But they’re little-known to anyone without a keen interest in the genre and it’s a big shame because the imaginative monsters are some of the most nightmarish creations to come out of films since Boris Karloff donned the Frankenstein make-up back in the 30s. Commonly lumped in the Euro-zombie explosion of the 70s and 80s, the Blind Dead films were far more than gratuitous splatter flicks, crafting themselves into fine Gothic horror pieces with a focus on atmosphere, mood and dread.

Despite being a sequel, Return of the Evil Dead doesn’t have any links to the original, especially with the open way that Tombs of the Blind Dead ended. Instead, it opts to re-tell the tale of the Templars by putting them into another location (the next two sequels would also follow this same stand-alone logic). Everything we learnt about them from the original is essentially ditched, save for their appearance and blindness. It is the iconographic appearance of the Templar knights that is one of the reasons this series has found such a strong and devoted following. Looking like skeletal Grim Reapers with remnants of hair still clinging to their cracked bones, the knights are the wizened, decayed stuff of nightmares and virtually impossible to stop or escape from. They’re slow but relentless. Once you cross them, you know that they’ll get you no matter how hard you try to prevent them. The question of whether their faithful steeds are undead is answered is this one as well.

Return of the Evil Dead does what many sequels do and that’s up the ante and the scope to try and outdo its predecessor. The undead Templars are back in force this time around and are not content with hanging around derelict towns in the middle of nowhere waiting for people to stray into their domain. This time around they’re out for vengeance and assault the town itself. Whilst it took an eternity for them to rise from their graves in the first one, Return of the Evil Dead sees them jump the gun and get a good head start, making their moves only a quarter of an hour in. It’s this change of approach that benefits Return of the Evil Dead, casting aside some of the sluggish pacing problems of the original. Having said this, the attack on the town has little real direction and seems to go on for too long, as if Ossorio just kept the camera rolling. It’s only when the survivors escape and shack up in the church that the film finally settles down into something with a bit more direction and focus. The creepy way that the Templars just silently hang around outside the church, waiting for someone to come out is a marked contrast to the usual slamming and banging zombies trying to break through doors.

With the Templars coming for revenge this time, the gore ante is upped tenfold. Heads are lopped off, arms sliced off and hearts ripped out. Ossorio was clearly influenced by George A. Romero and Night of the Living Dead when he made Tombs of the Blind Dead and he’s been even more keen to use some of Romero’s ideas in the sequel, namely the fact that a group of survivors barricade themselves up in a church as the Templars surround the place, unable to get in. The results aren’t as effective but still provide the cast with a bit more to do than running around screaming. There are a few good performances here actually, notably Fernando Sancho as the slimy mayor who will do anything to stay alive, including sacrificing one of his henchmen and even persuading a little girl to distract the Templars whilst he runs away! Horror films need more weasels like this guy! The ominous Gregorian soundtrack returns once again (thanks to the same composer) to crank up the atmosphere and tension a few more notches.

Return of the Evil Dead is not without problems though. Lots of stock footage of the Templars rising from their graves is lifted from the original and the same slow-motion shots of them riding their horses are back to annoy us every so often. These scenes bring with them some day-for-night continuity errors with the new footage and are slightly off-putting. As the case is for many Euro horrors, make sure that you check out the original language version as opposed to the international/American cut, which has been cut quite severely and is missing lots of footage, mainly of the juicy bits!

 

The Return of the Evil Dead is a solid follow-up which doesn’t do the original any harm at all and actually adds to the menace and scare-factor of the Templars by giving them more to do and more people to kill. Some consider this the best entry in the series though in all fairness, every single entry has its strengths and weaknesses.

 

 ★★★★★★★★☆☆ 

 

 

Night of the Living Dead (1968)

Night of the Living Dead (1968)

They won’t stay dead

A group of strangers find themselves trapped inside a farmhouse when the dead suddenly come back to life, hungry to feast on human flesh.

 

Sometimes reviews are hard to write because the film in question is just such a landmark film that every man and his dog has seen it at least once. Night of the Living Dead is one such landmark film, a monumental horror outing which every self-respecting horror fan should have seen, and any real connoisseur of film should have too. For every thousands of films made, few have as much significance on their genres as George A. Romero’s 1968 classic did. That may be a grandiose statement but it’s so true.

The horror genre around the late 60s had grown stale. Hammer’s popular British monster franchises had lost their appeal and the old Gothic horrors had grown quaint, with audiences preferring more contemporary settings. A number of controversial psychological thrillers were released such as Peeping Tom and Hitchcock’s Psycho but failed to really spurn a new sub-genre, or at least a popular mainstream one. In America, producers were struggling to get away from the cheap and cheerful William Castle-style shockers from the 50s, tacky Vincent Price vehicles, or even detach themselves from the 50s sci-fi monster movies. Horror was very much suggestive, with lavish costumes, cardboard sets and evil mad scientists providing everything that the audience needed for cheap and cheerful chills like you’d find at a fairground. But a red line was always drawn and rarely crossed as to what a filmmaker could get away with. The genre needed something different and along came George A. Romero to not only walk over the red line but run about as far over it as he could.

Night of the Living Dead represented an entirely new direction for the horror genre. Visceral, in-your-face and not afraid to land some hard-hitting social commentary at the same time. It was everything that horror films had not been – the classical conventions of the genre were completely obliterated and re-imagined in one swoop. Audiences just did not know what to expect. The premise is simple, and something that has become somewhat of a staple ingredient for a zombie film as a group of strangers find themselves trapped inside a building with the zombie hordes gathering outside trying to break in. You don’t an overly convoluted story if you focus on developing the characters and getting audiences to associate with them. Night of the Living Dead is surprisingly talky, though its essential for the viewer to witness the disintegration of society, captured perfectly with this bickering group of strangers from all ages and walks of life. Don’t worry though – no one is safe. The horror genre had been a safety-first playground, where major protagonists rarely succumbed to the threats they were up against, but Romero changed all of that, removing the safety blanket and common knowledge security that audiences had grown up on. It was now everything goes and anyone dies, adding much needed unpredictability to the genre.

Despite the fact that zombies originate in Haitian folklore and there had been cinematic depictions of zombies long before Romero came along, it was Night of the Living Dead which really etched our modern interpretations of what we have now come to think of (and let’s face it, love) as the zombie. Slow, shuffling, monsters with only one thought process going on – to feed. From the opening scene with Bill Hinzman’s famous cemetery zombie to some of the unique zombies that attack the farmhouse later on, Romero always had an eye for giving them some personality. Not really a threat on their own to any relatively strong or quick human, the problem comes when the zombies increase in number. This is where they can do their damage, and damage they do!

The stomach-churning gore scenes were vile and outrageous for their time, though admittedly they have lost some of their impact nowadays after wall-to-wall zombie overload for the past twenty years. With the contemporary setting, coupled with the black-and-white photography, the gore sequences come off as documentary-style news reports, much like the TV screens were filled with real images from the war in Vietnam back in the 60s, giving the film much more of a gritty realism. This wasn’t some mad Victorian scientists creating Frankenstein-like monsters a thousand miles away in some random Eastern European country setting – these were the next-door neighbours, horribly disfigured through the zombie virus and attacking and eating you and your family. There is no reasoning with them. No real way to stop them all. It would have been a chilling thought back in the 60s.

Romero was never one to shy away from political commentary and his first directorial effort would include some of his most powerful and thought-provoking critiques. Casting Duane Jones, a black man, in the lead hero role back in the 1960s was not something which Romero thought about – he was the best candidate for the role after auditions and there’s no mention of his skin colour at all throughout the film. But having him holed up inside a house full of squabbling white people and to be on the receiving end of some rough justice in the shocking finale, it’s not exactly rocket science to see what sort of message Romero is transmitting – deliberate or not, given the assassinations of Martin Luther King and Malcolm X. Jones is excellent in the role, a real calming sense of logic and reason who does the best in the conditions he’s faced with. Karl Hardman, as his opposite number Cooper, is equally as good in his role, though he does overplay the character a little bit. With the white and black male characters bickering at each other and vying for alpha male dominance, the female characters are relegated to little more than screaming background fodder. The sense that this rag-tag group of survivors, so desperately trying to cling together in the face of such horrific opposition, is on the verge of collapse at any moment is symbolic of American society in the 60s, where the optimism of the 50s had been replaced with pessimism, anger and attitude. Romero’s later zombie films would come to embody this sentiment: the main threat has never been about the zombies, but how quickly people turn on each other in the struggle for survival and self-preservation.

 

Fifty years after it’s original release, Night of the Living Dead still has not lost its potent impact to shock and terrify the audience. Whilst we may have been subjected to more gruesome zombie outings, none have quite matched the intensity and shock value that this would have had on audiences back in 1968.

 

 ★★★★★★★★★★ 

 

 

Maniac (1980)

Maniac (1980)

I warned you not to go out tonight

Deeply traumatised by his childhood abuse, a psychopaths lets loose in New York City, killing young women and taking their scalps as his trophies.

 

A notoriously disturbing, grotty and downright sleazy shocker from 1980, Maniac is one of the taboo films that the British Board of Film Classification absolutely hate, refusing to give it a certificate upon its initial release in 1980 and then banning it from home video release in 1998. Finally released in 2002 with fifty-eight seconds of cuts, it’s good to know that I tracked down the original uncut version from the US to watch. I have to say that Maniac’s reputation is well-deserved, perhaps more so for the fact that this isn’t your typical slasher film.

Maniac comes at the material solely from the point-of-view of the slasher himself with no clear protagonists to draw in our sympathies. The audience goes through every single emotion that the killer goes through as we see the world from his eyes, understand his motives and become repulsed at the things he does. The most dangerous man with mummy problems since Norman Bates opened up the Bates Motel, Frank Zito is one fruit basket short of a bunch of grapes. Like Bates, he’s not truly evil and is torn between two personalities, as a result of his troubled upbringing, and he becomes a multi-layered character with no clear dividing line between what is right and wrong. In the hands of someone else, Maniac could have really gone off the rails. But with competent director William Lustig and a first-rate character actor in Joe Spinell, who clearly did loads of research for the role, the character becomes one of the genre’s most emotionally-damaged and tragic antagonists.

Joe Spinell, as Zito, puts in one of the best portrayals of a serial killer ever committed to film. He’s not just a killing machine, though he’s pretty good at that, but an unhinged individual, bordering on the edge of insanity. His monologues are creepy, giving us an insight into his degenerating state of mind, but he can hold it together enough to stalk his victims, plan out his line of attack and even develop relationships in order to get to his next targets. He is the psycho-next-door that we’ve all read about in the newspapers or seen on TV – not the mask-wearing silent slashers like Michael Myers or Jason but someone masquerading themselves as normal during the day but unleashing a repressed inner rage at night. That’s what makes him scary. Spinell’s performance never turns comedic, camp or cartoony. He strikes the right line between charming, caring and compassionate, and downright scary, aggressive and single-minded. When Zito gets into the zone, he kills. It’s as simple as that. Spinell’s performance, particularly his crazed facial expressions, really express the unpredictability of the character and is what makes Zito such a compelling and fascinating watch.

The problem with Spinell’s casting is that, let’s be brutally honest, he was no oil painting so the idea that all of these ridiculously hot models would find him sexually attractive is rather ludicrous. None more than so than the truly gorgeous Caroline Munro, who is literally one of the most beautiful women to ever grace the screen. However, despite all of these attractive women walking all over New York, director Lustig paints the city in very much a different light. New York is shown to be an unsympathetic and harsh place, isolating individuals and turning them into a product of the environment. Perhaps the puzzling thing to Maniac is just how it comes off as seedy and grotty without even trying. Lustig’s filmmaking techniques work wonders to capture the darker side of New York, something he would go on to employ in his later work Maniac Cop.

New York’s mean-spirited nature lends itself an element of notoriety in a lot of 80s horror films, none more so than Maniac. But what has lent this film even greater notoriety more than the nihilistic feel is some of the most realistic and downright nasty gore effects this side of a zombie splatter fest. Special effects maestro Tom Savini delivers some impressive gory set pieces here in some of his earliest, but many would say best, work. The most famous of them all, the shotgun sequence with the couple in the car, is truly terrific and horrific in equal measure. Savini himself stars as the victim and it’s perhaps the best head-explosion on film, even topping that of the exploding head from David Cronenberg’s Scanners. Foreshadowing Captain Rhodes’ death at the end of Day of the Dead five years later, the brilliantly brutal decapitation by multiple hands ripping away at flesh and bone is truly marvellous. It’s the type of gory set piece you’ve got to be careful not to be watching if you’ve got young children in the house!

Maniac’s blatant problem is that there’s no real story. Zito kills a few people, there’s a few scenes of him talking to his mannequins, he then goes and finds another victim before befriending Caroline Munro’s photographer character. That’s virtually it. There’s no hiding the fact that he’s killing people right from the opening scene. Things go a little bit weird towards the end when Zito finally snaps and there’s a few supernatural twists – clearly the writers hadn’t got a clue how to end the film and so just plumped for the most abstract way to finish it.

 

So outright filthy that you’ll feel like having a good scrub down in the bath after watching, Maniac is a true classic of the genre which has never received half as much credit as it truly deserves. Disturbing, mean-spirited and downright shocking at times, it can be tough to sit through but will linger in your mind for long after viewing. If Oscars were given out for horror performances, Spinell deserved one for his portrayal of one of cinema’s most compelling serial killers.

 

 ★★★★★★★★☆☆ 

 

 

Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy (2005)

Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy (2005)

Half man. Half shark. Total terror.

A scientist tries to save his dying son from cancer by developing a way to isolate and specialise human stem cells by mixing in shark DNA. However, his experiments turn his son into a deadly man-shark hybrid. A group of people from a pharmaceutical corporation are lured to the scientist’s island to investigate his activities but he has something far worse planned for them when they arrive.

 

Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy, or now apparently referred to as Sharkman, was one of my earliest forays into SyFy Original movies (then known as The Sci-Fi Channel). Many of you long-term readers will know my love-hate relationship with these films. You know exactly what you’re getting and for every nine awful ones, there’s always one gem that stands out. Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy is not such a case, though it’s not entirely awful. I’m a sucker for killer shark flicks no matter how bad they are (Shark Zone anyone?) so when I read the synopsis for this, I was a little curious as to how things would pan out. And boy was I not expecting something as trashy as this – although on further reflection after many, many years of watching SyFy Films, I was far too naïve! On reflection, the story for Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy is perfect for the type of rubbish Sy Fy churn out. In fact, if they produced more of this type of over-the-top cheese than their attempts to be straight and serious, I wouldn’t give them such a hard time.

Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy starts off inconspicuously like any killer shark film does, as a couple of innocent swimmers are taken care of in quick fashion. But then things start to get a little crazier as the pseudo-science nonsense kicks in and the plot starts to morph into something that Roger Corman would have been proud of back in the 1980s – all this needed was plenty of gratuitous nudity and some sleazier gore effects. The characters are quick to arrive on the island and the purpose for them being there is revealed fairly early in the film, giving us plenty of time to sit and watch them struggle to survive amidst the multitude of dangers that await them.

I get the logic of making the monster half-man/half-shark but surely taking the shark out of it’s element and having it amphibious and being able to survive on land just weakens the whole novelty of the idea. Who wants to watch a land shark which could be any other mutated monster? Oh, that’s right, I forgot – the characters in this film actually have half a brain for a change. They deduce that by staying away from the water, they can avoid the shark and stay safe! The shark has human intelligence, looks like it’s been talking bodybuilding tips from Arnold Schwarzenegger in his prime and runs as fast as Usain Bolt over 100m. This is literally the perfect killing machine. It’s a pity we hardly see it on-screen. The monster gets little screen time and then when you are finally treated to an attack, the camera cuts and shakes all over the place, leaving a small pool of red water behind where the victim had just been. Aside from a few brief CGI shots, there’s no grand unveiling of the monster. In fact, you’ll see more of it, and for longer, by Googling some production screen shots.

Like many of Sy Fy’s later films, a large swathe of screen time is devoted to the human bad guys. Not only has Dr King created this abomination but he’s got a small army of mercenaries at his beckoning call. So, the characters spend much of their time trying to fight off this gang who are that well-equipped, they could take down a small South American country with no hassle. If the shark man and the mercenaries weren’t bad enough, there’s also the small matter of the number of killer plants that King has been cultivating on his island. If this was an episode of the original Star Trek, the majority of the cast would be wearing red shirts!

 

Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy just about manages to survive on its decent cast. The always-reliable Jeffrey Combs stars as Dr King and hams it up massively, ranting about his son’s intellect growing as he hunts down his victims. Combs can play mad scientists in his sleep (the Re-Animator series) and this one is no exception. William Forsythe pops up as the hero of the day in a rare change of direction for him – the guy likes playing tough guy/heavy roles and he’s got a bit of a gut on him which doesn’t make him your bog-standard action man. However, the unusual step of casting him in the hero role is different but makes a nice change of pace from the genre conventions of having a twenty/thirty-something save the day.

 

Hammerhead: Shark Frenzy is a mixed bag. You have a preposterously-plotted but perfectly watchable B-movie which, sadly, is let down by a number of clichés and a sense of being too self-conscious to embrace its ridiculousness and go all-out. Not enough of the titular character hurts matters greatly too.

 

 ★★★★☆☆☆☆☆☆ 

 

 

Scream Park (2012)

Scream Park (2012)

Death is the new attraction

On the final night at Fright Land before its permanent close, the group of teen workers and their manager are killed off one-by-one by two masked killers. Unbeknownst to the group, the owner has hired the two men in order to create a media sensation and attract a new breed of ‘dark’ tourists to the park.

 

The rising trend of low budget horror films getting their big breaks via crowdfunding continues with Scream Park, a derivative throwback to 80s slasher films with a meagre budget that most likely covered Doug Bradley’s appearance fee and that’s all.

Can’t pitch your slasher film to a younger, modern horror market weaned on found footage horror and gimmicky ‘killer entity’ films (Insidious, Sinister, The Babadook etc.)? Then pander to the adult horror crowd who grew up on the home video slasher era and throw in a few nods to old school slashers. Scream Park clearly has a director/producer/writer who has seen a couple of old school slashers and thought “I could do that for a living” and tried to make their own with diminishing results. The problem is that Scream Park needed to show off some sort of creative spin on the old formula because it ends up being wholly derivative and not very good at that. There’s a reason that the sub-genre died out in the 80s and that was because it was done to death. The 90s saw a post-modern self-aware revival but that was short-lived. Since then, we’ve been getting ‘80s throwbacks’ but that doesn’t mean to say the material is any less stale than it once was. This is a cheap tactic which is designed to make us remember the glory days and play upon on our nostalgia to pretend that these modern films are better than they are. Watching Scream Park, I’m guessing the intention was to link it back to Tobe Hooper’s classic The Funhouse and have the same sort of affinity to tourist attractions. Well this fails miserably.

I’ve ranted a bit too much, unfairly aiming a lot of the sub-genre’s current problems onto this one film, so time to get more film-specific. Scream Park’s most glaring issue is that the filmmakers had a potentially great location to utilise but fail to do almost anything novel with it – the majority of the film could have been shot inside a murky barn for all the viewer knows because there’s so little done with the park itself. Only on occasions does the film attempt to showcase some of the rides and more sinister attractions of the theme park – one of the film’s highlights involves a hanging from a rollercoaster. It’s these little unique kills related to the location which Scream Park should have been championing from the very start. It’s almost a wasted opportunity.

But it’s almost a blessing to be fair because even if the theme park had been used more, the people inhabiting it would have killed off the mood. The acting here is, to put it mildly, diabolical. The actors mumble through their lines, sounding bored, lifeless and definitely without rehearsing beforehand. There’s no urgency or emotion in voices – one character’s reaction to seeing one of his co-workers brutally slain is laughably pathetic. It never helps actors when the script is as bad as it is here but that shouldn’t stop them from actually trying. Look back at some of the turkeys that horror legends like Vincent Price, John Carradine and Peter Cushing starred in and listen to some of the dialogue they had to recite – at least they put effort in to make it sound like the most dramatic thing ever!

The only person with any remote sense of talent in the acting department is Doug Bradley. He is the token genre name in the cast and he pops up far too late and with a role that is limited to a solitary scene. Bradley’s character provides the necessary exposition to explain just why the employees are all getting killed off and the speech comes slightly out of leftfield in the context of the scene. I guess we’re just meant to accept the fact that the guy proposes outright murder and the person he is speaking to just bluntly agrees. Researching more about the film, it appears that Bradley shot his scene a few months before the production commenced in order to sell the concept to get more crowdfunding – I’m sure the donators expected to see more of him than the solitary scene they had already seen!

With a soundtrack that owes a lot to Halloween and Friday the 13th, Scream Park at least gets a few brownie points for trying something a little different. It’s a pity that the dialogue comes and goes at times because the sound is generally solid throughout, adding just the right amount of tension even if some of the music is a tad overplayed. Technical issues should not be making it this far into a production which is a shame.

 

On occasion, the low budget shows but this is the least of this film’s problems. A right slog to get through, if this was a real theme park, Scream Park would deserve closing down for good. You’ve all been on bigger, better and scarier rides than this.

 

 ★★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆ 

 

 

Scarecrow Gone Wild (2004)

Scarecrow Gone Wild (2004)

He’s the death of the party.

After a fraternity prank goes horribly wrong and results in his accidental death, a young college freshman is resurrected in the guise of a vengeful scarecrow who descends on the beach where those who killed him are having their spring break.

 

Since when did the scarecrow become such a cinematic horror icon that he has now starred in his own trilogy of horror films? I can understand why Freddy, Jason and Michael Myers all become icons and to a lesser extent even the annoying Leprechaun. But the scarecrow? Didn’t anyone see Scarecrow or Scarecrow Slayer? Two of the most atrocious, low grade slasher films I’ve ever seen, with their own saving grace being a slightly-cool killer who looks way better on the front covers of the DVD boxes than he does in person in the films. Now we have a third instalment, Scarecrow Gone Wild, though thankfully this has been the last one (to date). To think they managed to crank out two sequels still gives me shivers!

Scarecrow Gone Wild goes down the serious route and this is its biggest mistake, despite it being billed as a ‘comedy’ on IMDB. The idea of this killer scarecrow heading to the beach and killing off a load of co-eds cries tongue-in-cheek: surfing scarecrow, sun-bathing scarecrow, volleyball-playing scarecrow and sitting-round-a-beach-campfire scarecrow were all ridiculous ideas waiting to be mined (NB the scarecrow doesn’t do any of this in the film, I’m just saying they could have made him do some stuff to lighten the tone). Anything to get him to, well, go wild. He doesn’t. He’s a pretty boring dude and just opts for the usual slash ‘n’ dash moments. But then again most of the film is based around empty hospital corridors, schools or the generic cornfields and not the beach. Something seems to have wrong in the translation of the plot. Also, the fact that the costume looks worse than my Halloween scarecrow outfit doesn’t exactly send chills down your spine. For some reason, a lot of the scarecrow is seen during the daytime which completely nullifies any sort of fear factor that could be created. Scarecrows, especially ones designed for horror like this, are pretty damned scary – I know, I’m a 6’5” walking monstrosity in my scarecrow outfit when it comes around to Halloween – but that’s because I stick to going out when it’s dark.

Scarecrow Gone Wild does contain the necessary slasher elements including loads of cheesy gore. Sadly, though there is plenty on offer, it’s not exactly been done well and is a clear sign of the meagre budget they worked with on the shoot. There is also plenty of T&A. One female character has about two lines but spends most of the film walking around without a top on. Boxes had to be ticked and she ticks them. It’s not exactly slim pickings for slasher fans when it comes to the goodies but it’s the haphazard way in which the ingredients are cobbled together which comes off as more disappointing than anything. The problem with Scarecrow Gone Wild is that, despite it being a slasher flick, it’s actually rather dull and boring. There’s far too much human drama, with the characters arguing with each other and dealing with too much nonsense other than the fact that there’s a killer scarecrow on the loose. To rub salt into the wounds, just when you think Scarecrow Gone Wild is over, along comes another ten minutes to prolong the misery.

Ex-UFC and WWE wrestler Ken Shamrock is the ‘big name’ in the cast this time around, portraying the school’s baseball coach who, for some sinister reasons, decides to follow these teenagers around on their spring break. He’s a better fighter than he is an actor and at least gets to duke it out with the scarecrow in one scene. But, like the rest of the fun factor getting sucked out of the film, Shamrock doesn’t get to do any trademark moves and instead just tumbles around in the sand with the scarecrow as if they’re making out with each other. It’s such a letdown – you get one of the toughest men on the planet (at the time) into your film, knowing that a certain audience will be tuning it to see him kick ass, and then proceed to neuter him completely. Such a wasted opportunity.

 

Scarecrow Gone Wild continues the rapid downward spiral of this dead-on-arrival series. At this alarming rate of decline, I’ll be giving minus stars out for the next few sequels. Avoid this at all costs and to make sure they don’t make a fourth one, set fire to any scarecrows you see outside.

 

 ★☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆☆