Sleepaway Camp (1983)

Director: Robert Hiltzik
Writer(s): Hiltzik
Starring: Felissa Rose, Jonathan Tiersten, Karen Fields, and Christopher Collet

Following certain circles on Twitter, it's just about impossible not to hear about Sleepaway Camp every month or so; the latest bout found me stumbling on a page I don't even follow, asking users to name their picks for the horror movie endings that shocked them the most. There were several movies named--I myself submitted Short Night of Glass Dolls, simply to avoid the typical mainstream fodder—but no movie was mentioned more than Robert Hiltzik's seminal body-count film. This was the straw that broke the camel's back: after putting off several viewings thanks to my slasher-obsessed friend's intense dislike of it, I decided that I finally had to see for myself what all the fuss was about.

I have to say that I'm pretty much in my friend's camp (no pun intended) when it comes to the ending, which I have to give some kudos to for being truly “out of left field”, but that is completely bereft of anything truly chilling or nightmare-inducing (though I do have to admit I think about it far more than I ever thought I would).

Angela and Peter are out on a boat with John, their father. John intentionally tips over the boat, as a joke (they are close to a dock and the children are wearing life-jackets), but things don't remain funny for long, when a speedboat, manned by two clueless teenagers, loses control and runs them over...John and Peter are killed in the collision.

After this obligatory flashback, we are now transported eight years into the future: Angela is now a nearly-grown woman, and she is cared for by her weird aunt, whom she lives with along with her cousin, Ricky. But she has never forgotten the events of that fateful day, which is pretty evident given the fact that she can't—or simply refuses to—speak. It doesn't seem like spending an elongated amount of time at a summer camp full of talkative teenagers would be the best place for her, but we'll assume that their aunt is sending her there in the hopes that being around others her age will help her come out of her shell. If that is indeed the reason, it doesn't take long to see that idea is a failure, because people start making fun of the mute girl almost right away.

Of course, most of the torture comes from Judy and Meg, two promiscuous girls who are jealous that people are fascinated with Angela, so they make it a point of calling her out in front of everyone else. Their jealousy reaches fever pitch when Angela starts talking (literally) to Paul, a friend of Ricky's who is simply sympathetic to her situation. Really, that's all it took for her to abandon eight years of silence? But it's not just women who go out of their way to make fun of her...men also join in the fray, perhaps annoyed that she won't put out, since that's all boys at camp seem to think about. Before long, it seems like Ricky is constantly defending her every day from some sort of verbal abuse; what do you think of your idea now, Angela's aunt?

Let's be real here: slasher movies are rarely, if ever, known for actually being good (and the first person to try mentioning Halloween as evidence to the contrary is getting shot in the face), and Sleepaway Camp is no exception: It’s pretty tedious, there are long pauses between death scenes, and the “story” surrounding the murders basically consist of Ricky getting angry at everyone taunting and humiliating his (mostly) mute sister. All these problems, paired up with the rather pointless, though admittedly fascinating, ending doesn’t leave much to recommend.

But that doesn’t mean there’s nothing to hold on to: although the death scenes are largely blood-free (or only lightly-blooded), the special effects are very well done. There is an early sequence in which a man has scalding hot water poured on him, and the way the flesh on his face bubbles appears to be painfully accurate—looks like someone (makeup effects artist) did their homework when preparing for that scene. The build-up to another death is incredibly hokey, but the aftermath is very gruesome.

There are also some scenes of kids just being kids early on, before it degrades into almost-constant humiliation of its main star, that are actually humorous, and give the film a sense of fun. I also appreciated that, although Angela is constantly being harassed, there are enough “good guys” to always prevent things from going too far—usually, it’s Ricky, but there are also some sympathetic counselors and fellow campers that also pitch in to break things up. This at least prevents the film from ever becoming too cruel or ugly.

The acting is pretty bad, though Felicia Reese (as Angela) is cute enough when silently staring at someone, and also has a cute voice when she starts to talk, so she quickly becomes the star of the movie. The rest of the characters are just typical slasher stereotypes, though I guess to be fair, they were less stereotypes back then than they are now, so I guess that can be slightly forgiven.

For true, hardcore fans of the slasher film, Sleepaway Camp might just be different enough to win them over—it tries to be a little bit different, in that it’s clearly not just interested in graphically dispatching loads of campers, and actually tries building up to a shocking ending. As I’ve mentioned plenty of times, I personally didn’t think it worked, but I can respect a film that is focused more on just graphic bloodshed or the quantity of its victims. It held my attention until the end, something not every movie can accurately say, but there just isn’t enough of a payoff to fully justify the time I invested into it. It’s a curiosity piece, and one that I’m not angry I sat through, but I don’t think I’ll ever feel the need to see it again.

RATING: 5/10

TRAILER

Angst (aka Fear) (1983)

Director: Gerald Kargl
Writer(s): Kargl and Zbigniew Rybczynski
Starring: Erwin Leder, Edith Rosset, Silvia Rabenreither, and Rudolf Götz

I had been wanting to see Angst for a while before finally sitting down to watch it one winter evening. If I remember correctly, I learned about its existence from a local theater that was playing it as part of an ongoing weekly horror series—I read its plot and was immediately enamored with the idea. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to make either of the film’s showings, so I had to postpone its viewing until later.

What drew me to this project was its dark and unrelenting subject matter: Erwin Leder, in a solid performance, plays a man known only as The Psychopath. He is serving a ten-year sentence for stabbing his mother (who, for the record, survived), and today is the day that he is going to be released. But prison did not change him; no, The Psychopath turns out to be a fitting name, because he knows the moment that he becomes a free man, he is immediately going to find a victim (or two, or three) to kill. The only difference is, this time he is not going to get caught.

And sure enough, his quest for murder is the entire plot—so great is his desire to kill, that he will let nothing get in his way, and we are along with him for the ride as he attempts to do what comes naturally to him. It kind of plays out like Man Bites Dog, only this killer isn’t in on the joke. With favorable comparisons to Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer, I was expecting the whole affair to have the feeling of Otis and Henry’s taped home invasion attack, only elongated to feature length. That isn’t quite what I got.

Unsurprisingly, a man nicknamed The Psychopath who stabbed his mother, has no family or friends to pick him up after he is released, and so he goes to the first café that he sees. Inside is an older man, two young girls, and a waitress. He orders what appears to be Italian sausage, sees the two girls looking at him, and desperately wants to kill them. But he knows performing such an act in a public place would lead to his immediate arrest, so he resists the urge. He goes outside and hails a cab. The driver, conveniently a female, would make an excellent victim, but she catches him just as he is about to strangle her with his shoelace. Panicked and desperate, he bolts out of the cab—conveniently leaving behind his briefcase—and just runs until his lungs can’t take it anymore.

Conveniently, this takes him to an old, secluded house, which he feels would be the perfect place to carry out a murder. No one is home—or so he thinks—so he breaks a window and plans to await the return of the inhabitants. He soon learns that one person is home…a mentally handicapped man in his forties, who can’t say much more than “mommy” and “daddy”, and gets around via a wheelchair. Why anyone would leave a person in this condition home alone at all is beyond me, but we’ll just say the owners made a quick trip to the store and give them the benefit of the doubt, because very soon after, the house’s inhabitants return. Thankfully for our psychopath, it’s a mother and daughter!

From here, he kills everyone in the house, attempts to clean himself up, decides to carry the bodies with him rather than leave them behind, goes in search of more victims, and that takes us to the finale. But what sets Angst apart from others in its ilk is the straightforward manner in which the murders are committed: the camera lingers on each murder, giving them a gritty realism that’s missing from other films. At least, that’s the mood they were trying to cultivate, but Angst is a film where its lofty ideas just don’t match up with what makes it onto the screen.

For starters, and a [SPOILER ALERT], we have the murder of the mentally-handicapped brother. He is drowned in a bathtub. Now, human feelings and emotions are not lost on me: I completely understand the heinousness of such an act. I mean, murder itself is already about as disgusting as it can get, but to kill someone so defenseless is somehow even more heartbreaking. I get that. Only here, it’s not, because the character is treated like a caricature: the first time we see him, he has slobber on his face, right before uttering “Da-da?” It might sound depressing, but the scene is presented in such an unconvincing way that it almost approaches self-parody. [END SPOILER ALERT]

The whole protracted murder sequence itself has a bizarre surrealism about it that I just couldn’t wrap my head around. Why is it these women are being tied up and attacked, yet never once scream for help or even seem to fight back? They just lay there as he wraps them up with tape, or stockings, or whatever other item seems to be nearby. The most shocking part of the deaths, at least for me, is merely how cheesy they are. I was expecting the murder set pieces to really deliver, considering they are mostly the point of the movie, but they ranged from hokey, to just plain ridiculous.

One thing that works, that I haven’t seen mentioned very often is the film’s pitch black humor…or at least, what I hope was supposed to be intentional. Like the way the killer doesn’t want to get caught, yet doesn’t even attempt to cover his tracks or clean up after himself. Or the way his plans are always getting foiled by little more than bad luck. Or the way he attempts to revive an unconscious woman by force-feeding her a dozen pills. I chuckled aloud at a couple of these scenes; they manage to be humorous without lightening up the atmosphere.

The cinematography, with its almost constant use of tracking shots, especially during the outdoor scenes, is a thing of beauty. The filmmakers, lead by director Gerald Kargl and cinematographer (as well as co-writer) Zbigniew Rybczynski make extensive use of close-up shots of The Psychopath as he treks through the town, looking for fresh victims, shots that appear as if the killer has a camera attached to himself. These scenes actually really give the film some kinetic energy and a sense of urgency that really makes it come alive…it’s a wonder more films don’t utilize this technique, because it’s a simple, yet very effective way to put your audience right there with a character. But even the photography isn’t without its faults: some scenes go on way too long, giving the film a “real-time” feeling that just isn’t necessary here. For example, when The Psychopath is dragging bodies throughout the house, there’s no implied passage of time where he grabs the body, then it cuts to the final location. No, we have to watch him drag it through every room, and down stairs, and through doors before finally laying it to rest, only to go back to where he came from so he can do the same to the other body. I get this is supposed to give kind of a “documentary” feel that puts us right in the action, but a lot of it just felt unnecessary elongated.

When it was all said and done, I just couldn’t help but feel quite strongly underwhelmed. It started off excellently and had loads of potential, but the lack of good performances outside of the lead doesn’t do it any favors, nor do the overlong takes that make some scenes a drag. It also builds up to the ending that you’re expecting, so there are no twists to look forward to…it’s just a straight shot from point A to point B without much in between.

RECAP: Made in the early ‘80s, which would have been at one of the peaks of the slasher film, Angst is a film that goes in the opposite direction, instead attempting to deliver a realistic expose on the mind of a man who, quite simply put, is born to kill. While it deals with some pretty intense themes (such as the murder of a mentally-handicapped man), the actual execution of this material, from director Gerald Kargl, leaves a lot to be desired, with results often bordering on the amateur: scenes go on way too long, characters being attacked refuse to scream, and vulnerable characters are treated simply as unengaging sterotypes. Erwin Leder is good, and fascinating, in the main role, but Henry he is not, and Angst is a clumsy mess of a film that’s more disturbing, and powerful, on paper than it is on screen.

RATING: 5/10 

TRAILER

(it's honestly an amazing trailer)