Snuff - 1975

Upon its release at the National Theatre in New York City with a $4 ticket price, Snuff grossed $66,456 in its first week.  In New York, it outgrossed One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest for three consecutive weeks.

Its staggering how successful a lot of these were, and perhaps it was numbers like these that led in part to the Video Nasty list.  If this was so successful than that means a lot of people were seeing it, and what were we going to do if people saw this film?  Surely they would grow up to do the same horrendous actions depicted in the film.

I wanted to write about this film though because in a way, a few of these films in the Video Nasties have touched on the idea of trauma, and this is one of them.  One of the women who is in this film has a truly awful story about being raped by a neighbor when she was just a young girl, and having such anger at the man who victimized her.  The mastermind character in this movie manipulates her to take out that anger on the person he chooses, and uses her in that way but still, the trauma is acknowledged.  

Interestingly, its still not something we see talked about in movies now, despite being the obvious "reason" behind things like serial killers, etc.  For how popular true crime has become, you just would think it would be a huge plot point.

This movie is about some Manson-esque charismatic leader named Satan.  He has a group of women that are in his harem, and he makes them attack people.  That's about it, and it certainly leans into the demented side of things, that bizarre esoteric genre sort of known as psychotronic.  

This movie is definitely a vibe change from the last couple, a ton more fun.  It's a lot more of the campy weirdness going on, there's a bit more plot.  There's a clash of tones, there's fun nudity, there's B movie acting.  This is a welcome change, I have to really say.  Somehow it just feels fun again, and maybe cause I took the Nazi, psuedo-documentary and cannibal excursion.  This movie is a breath of fresh air right now.  For that its not awesome or good, but I give it a 3.5

Nasty-Meter:  5/10

Argument:  Mildly for Video Nasty

Cannibal Ferox - 1981

 Also known as Make Them Die Slowly and as Woman from Deep River.

"Do you realize it's us?  The so-called civilized people who are responsible for their cruelty. "  And in this movie it is, which I guess makes it at least somewhat different and/or accurate depending on your point of view.  Called "the most violent film ever made". Cannibal Ferox was also dubiously claimed to be "banned in 31 countries".

Some people are visiting the Amazons and find some drug smugglers there.  The drug smugglers are abusing cocaine and forcing a tribe to harvest the drug for them.  The evil and coke-sniffing Mike goes off the deep end and turns into a sadistic killer, mutilating and slaughtering some of the local tribes, which brings out the savage in them to return the favor.

Part of the giant cannibal craze in Italy at this time, at least this one had a semblance of a plot.  If my memory of Cannibal Holocaust holds up, that one was a lot more plotless.  I also don't mind making the white guy the villain, versus the other norm of this genre in general:  the sadistic unexplained Indigenous tribe.  

Banned for animal cruelty, tribal nudity, a couple cannibalism scenes, and some infamous penis chopping scenes, this was certainly controversial in plenty of places.  I think I said in my review of one of those Zombie movies that I prefer zombies over cannibals, and that held true.  This is pretty much much unremarkable from any other of the genre.  If you like the genre its fine, there ain't nothing here to write home about tho.

Argument "For Video Nasty"

Nasty-Meter:  8/10

Mr. and Mrs. Smith - 2005

 As we put this thing on I told my girlfriend that I remember it coming out and that I didn't deign to see it as this was the height of my "art film only" phase.  

The thing about this movie is mainly this:  we are in such dire circumstances now that this seems really fun and better in retrospect than it probably did at the time.  Real actors, sharing the same space, in real sets, with real effects, and with actual squibs and liquid fake blood - nowadays this is all CGI.  Its just insane that this was likely shot in film paying A list movie stars the height of their billing asks, it was all done practically and filmed in LA, like this sort of film just does not exist now, every aspect of this has changed.

Mr. and Mrs. Smith are both secretly assassins, they're married to each other and hit a rocky patch in their relationship, and eventually learn the truth about each other.  They are set against each other and fight, only to get turned on and begin to fall back in love, team up and take on the other assassins of the world.  

The movie moves well.  There was a moment early on when internally my head said, "okay I get it with the setup, move into the actual plot" and it did moments later.  This is oldschool Hollywood in a lot of ways, such as even the direction by not an auteur, just classic journeyman direction style of Doug Liman who quietly has what like 5 of the better undersung action movies of the last 25 years?

I appreciate that this era was what it was now, when everything is overblown and over budget despite being all shot on green screen with actors Zooming in their entire part and yet somehow it does $100 million over budget?  I mean seriously, how did things get so bad so fast...a question we're all asking these days, about many things.  This isn't like the best movie ever not even great among its peers but it's a fine Tuesday night thing to watch with a few glasses of wine, like I did.  I give it 3 stars.

Faces of Death - 1978

 I was going to go on some tirade about this genre, went to Wikipedia, and apparently these are still being made, even with a "re-imagining" coming out this year.  Also known as The Original Faces of Death.

What this was was nearly inconceivable at the time.  This is almost the pure definition of exploitation.  Real footage of actual dead people, real dead bodies, purportedly "real" deaths live on screen, animal abuse and cruelty, and so on.  On screen, at your theater.  Banned from a reported 46 countries, do they get crazier than this?

We start with a super gruesome surgery scene, and you have to admit, like this is a fucking challenge.  The insanity of the surgery scenes in these movies are really something to me as a take away 25 films into this.  That's my count?  I hadn't done inventory in a while so that's kinda nice, but yo, the surgery scenes are legit disturbing.  In my youth I would have watched with the type of morbid curiosity people speak of when they say in stupefied awe "it's like watching a car crash".  I can genuinely say, partially from experience, not interested.  I don't watch, I look away.  And in the case of this movie, I don't watch, I look away.

Animal cruelty and sadistic acts don't bother me, tribal exploitation doesn't bother me, as well as supposed "eating brains" and other exploitative material.  But real footage of the aftermath of a car accident or a very recent plane crash, one cannot help but to grimace a little bit and take in a breath.  Maybe wince or look away, even. Which is to say, in my classic film review way, if its effective nearly 50 years after it's release, it works....just like, does that mean its good?

I watched the movie "Into The Wild" recently after just recently asking my girlfriend "if a movie is affecting emotionally does that mean it is a good movie?"  Into The Wild has extremely self indulgent, irrelevant moments and it is just not a very good movie about a really compelling and emotionally engaging subject.  This movie is sort of the same.  Its almost impossible to not be effected by something like this, but does that mean its good?  No, and that's the bizarre thing about art.  

I do get what this is trying to do.  It's trying to blend fact with fiction, for both shock value but also a provocateur of thought.  It'll have a detached narrator witnessing something barbaric and it'll say "Despite being the most intelligent creature, mankind is also the most inconsistent" and it's kinda like, you're not wrong, I get that.  It is interesting the fragile and tenuous link between life and death, and we are pretty inconsistent with whether we value or don't value existence.  Suicide, death sentences, cult rituals, many other examples of things in every day life in which life is either near over-valued or thrown away in casual disregard.  We cannot necessarily say right or wrong...we are just to take note, and move on.

What else would a documentary about death look like?  Well, it might not be trying to provoke, one might suggest.  But I don't say that in an argument that this is "wrong" morally or otherwise.  What is weird about this film in particular is with all that said, there are hokey moments aplenty and the fiction they represent is ridiculous.  Those make for parts of this to be insanity, and silly beyond most films, while the other parts are horribly scarring and like nothing else.

A strong argument "For Video Nasty"

I give this a 10/10 on the Nasty Meter.  

I guess I'll give it a 2.5?  I have absolutely no idea what to rate this.

Update a few days later:  

I keep thinking about this movie, and particularly in one specific way.  This movie makes you think, and it does not make you think from asking high level questions or even making suggestions, stating an opinion, doing anything.  By shoving fact and fiction in front of you, it makes you think about such broad topics like mythology, cultural values, cultural differences, the value of life, the rituals and the idiosyncrasies of human beings and their thoughts.  Religion, certainly.  

I think the criticism here would be that it asks these questions in a defiant, childish, and immature way.  But who am I to say this is wrong?  Art does not need to be "representational" in order to work.  It does not need to be high minded, eloquent, or even polished.  Those who need these questions asked in specific cadence with specific nuance should ask themselves why they do not accept a very poignant question, which they themselves cannot ask in polite society, to be asked to them in that way. Is it because you don't want to be confronted?  Is it because it takes you out of your comfort zone?  Is it because when it boils down to it, you can only accept certain answers to certain questions?  

This is all my thoughts on Faces of Death, which is not a masterpiece, but if it can illicit this response.... well... you know the rest.

Nightmares in a Damaged Brain - 1981

 Also known as Nightmare.

Very cool, another slasher and another decent Video Nasty!  Also a great title, the secondary title is what I put here, Nightmares in a Damaged Brain.

This is a very straight forward slasher, one of the ones where we know the villain and we understand the why, and at times those are harder to keep interesting because it gives us so much information at the get go and there's not the addition of a mystery to keep us watching.  A little boy watches his parents having some sort of weird BDSM sex and sees his mom kill his dad.  An incredible decapitating scene and we're off!

Cut to present time and that same kid has grown up, he gets out of a mental institution and immediately goes on a killing rampage.  And one thing I liked about this, as well as probably one of the reasons why it is labeled a "Nasty"?  Kids in trouble and kid death.  Gotta love it.  That and the blood.

This movie credits Tom Savini, which is apparently somewhat refuted but either way the effects are incredible.  Axe chops, knife stabbings, the aforementioned decapitation.  There's not a need for much more than that.  

Not a ton more to say about this.  Very enjoyable, very quick paced.  

Nasty meter 5/10

Argument very slightly "For Video Nasty"

Love Camp 7 - 1969

  According to Wikipedia, this may very well be the first Nazisploitation of this type, these sexual and torture based fantasy films.  Also the beginning of generally the women-in-prison genre which blew up shortly after this in the early 70s.  

Like I said in the review of SS Experiment, I get this completely.  You have WWII end and barely 20 years later some sick fucks are making something which sexualizes and exploits the actions of the Nazis?  Specifically also including sexual violence, nudity, gore, and excess?  It does not necessarily condemn the Nazis also, even if it includes the characters getting killed and clearly being villains, they're not dripping with evil intent, and the film seems to be secretly getting off on the power they wield.

Love Camp 7 follows a group of new female recruits to a Nazi camp.  Their job is to have sex with the Nazi guards and generally to be exploited.  We have them strip nude pretty much early on and get abused for about an hour.  Then we reveal that the nice guard at the prison can't help them, that one of the female recruits is actually an undercover agent, and that they're going to rebel at some point.

It's all a thin plot and an excuse to have nudity, depravity, and Nazis raping women and hurting them...and it goes on and on while nothing happens.  It's a lot like the SS Experiment Camp, even hinting at a possible relationship between the "nice guard" and one of the "willing women".  There's also "main character" and that's about as deep as these characters are written.

This is not worse than the last one by any means, but it's def a little bit of the same thing.  It can have a 2.5

Nasty Meter: 4/10

Argument:  For Video Nasty

The Gestapo's Last Orgy - 1977

 Also known as The Last Orgy of the Third Reich and Caligula Reincarnated as Hitler.

I wanted to get through the three of these quickly, as this is not my genre and it is not what I want to be watching, and the first two fit the bill pretty much completely for what I thought they'd be and what I didn't care to see.  But this one slightly surprised me!

It's not like this is a different plot.  A woman recalls her treatment in the Gestapo's sexual service area.  She seems to have experienced some truly awful experiences.  We have an initiation to what will happen as nude German soldiers watch extreme torture videos with forced lesbian incest, coprophagia, bondage, urination, etc.  The soldiers are getting into it, and even though the film doesn't quite match that extremity again, it's just a fuck and torture fest for the next hour 20.

I'm not going to say I liked this, but what I appreciated is that if you're going to do it, DO IT.  Push the boundaries.  Salo The 120 Days of Sodomy had come out in 1975 (by the way how did that escape the Video Nasty list?) and if you're not going to top that you're going to be forgotten - and this film does top it.  We also have (albeit shadowy) male nudity and even hints at erections, which is pretty cutting edge.

This movie is one that has still not been released in certain areas, and it is certainly one of the crazier Video Nasty entries.  I'm glad to be through this Nazi era of Nastys and I enjoyed it more than the other, but its like a 3.

Nasty Meter 10/10

Argument:  For Video Nasty

Tenebrae - 1982

 I haven't reviewed all that many Argento films in this blog, nor have I really delved too much into Giallo at all, which is odd cause I do really love it.  Case in point with this masterpiece, so called the "last great Argento Giallo film."

Tenebrae has all the hallmarks of a giallo, and coming out relatively late in that film movement, they've all been sharpened like the very murder weapon in this film.  The almost fetishization of the weapon is on high effect in this film, the glint and the following of the straight razor is absolutely awesome.  Other great parts of the giallo are here too:  the sexual nature including plentiful nudity, the serial killer and their twisted self and motivation, the awesome music.

This movie starts with American author Peter Neal coming to Italy after publishing his newest book Tenebrae.  It appears he may now have an obsessed fan, because a woman is killed with her mouth stuffed full of pages ripped out of the Tenebrae novel.  John Saxon is brought in to help while the killer begins to stalk women around.  Simple, effective plot.

Part of the video nasty list because of a arm cutting-off scene and largely just because in general it had stepped up the violence and the sexual content, this is one where its really just splitting hairs.  Why this over certain other giallos, over the proliferation of slashers in the 80s in general...  This is not wildly outside of any other bloody 80s horror movie, and it does not seem to be entirely justified.  It could be this version I watched was at least partially censored still, I have no idea about that, but yeah.  Dunno.

Therefore I give this a 3/10 on the Nasty Meter.

It is in the argument slightly Against Video Nathy.

SS Experiment Camp - 1976

 Also known as SS Experiment Love Camp.

Bizarre Magazine, in a 2004 overview of the Naziploitation genre, said the following: "Its advertising campaign, an image of a semi-naked woman hanging upside-down from a crucifix, was instrumental in bringing unwanted attention to the Nasties, although, beyond that, its infamy is unwarranted" -Wikipedia

Two things here, not just related to this but the entire genre.  One, it is absolutely jaw dropping to think that the women starring in movies like this were born in probably the 1950s or even the 1940s.  They're great-grandmothers now, and I just cannot quite fathom that when we see the level of sexuality, when we see their young supple bodies, when I as a male get an erection while watching segments of this film.

Second, the human race re: its relationship to sexual violence, masochism, and sadism.  BDSM has Masochism represented strongly, encompassing the entire second half of the 4 letters.  Whether you interpret SM as Sadomasochism or as Sadism/Masochism, they're obviously quite similar and around the same level of potential simulated or real sexuality mixed with a level of violence or minimally inflicted "torture".

What's fascinating about that to me is that there was a time when we confronted this head on, via an art form that was well known enough to spark controversy and receive censorship.  The world has only escalated from here and outside of a few times when we might remove one certain video of a porn star who maybe turns out to be 17 or gets cancelled or some stupid shit like that, we now have this type of thing available at any website, probably with multiple full penetrations in addition to what is filmed here.  

If you as a viewer are someone who doubts about if there should be censorship, watch films like this. Not necessarily this one, but of this genre. This is a movie in which characters who are presumably Jews are raped by Nazis and like it, after all. There’s almost less scenes of women wearing clothes in this film than scenes of nude women, and there’s no plot it’s just exploitation for 90 minutes. I think part of the Video Nasty was always something saying something on the lines of “Why does this exist? Who is this for? We should not have people who want entertainment like this. In an ideal world no one seeks out this type of entertainment.”

 

It’s not a sentiment I disagree with. Which makes it a very fascinating thing to study as a moment in time when people who are great-grandfathers now were watching Nazi rape in art house cinemas. Not something I think will come back. This isn’t a great example of it though and I’ll give this only 2 stars.

Nasty Meter: 8/10

Argument: For Video Nasty

The Cannibal Man - 1972

 Thus we come to the first of what I assumed would be multiple of these- a film where I think...this got labeled a Video Nasty?  Why?

Also known as Week of the Killer and The Apartment On The 13th Floor.

Yeah I mean, first the name is misleading.  There is a scene where our main character is eating soup with human meat in it unbeknownst to him, and he specifically stops when he discovers this.  He is not a cannibal by any real choice.

Marcos is a hapless man in a plot which I think is pretty brilliant, a man forced through almost comedic circumstances to become a serial killer.  It begins with a man assaulting his wife, and Marcus killing him on accident.  Then the wife wants to tell the police, so kill her, then kill the people who come poking into his life after the two disappearances preceding.  He gets rid of the bodies by taking them to his meat processing plant where he adds them to the sausage.  With basically no crazy blood or nudity, one does have to wonder about the labeling and prosecution this one got.

The most interesting aspect to this for me was that it was directed by a gay man, and there are absolutely homosexual undertones to a lot of what happened in this flick.  And you know what?  I'll say it, it was hot as fuck.  Dude, I wanted these guys to go at it, show nudity, have them touching each other cocks, FUCK!  Get me all riled up over here...

This is a original movie with a great premise, its maybe a tad slow and/or long, but its not that bad by any means.  Its very much of its era, and the dubbing and the production all feel very enjoyable in the B grade, trying for A grade sorta way.  It has some decent kills and its almost kinda sorta a proto-slasher, giallo leaning in some ways, but wholly original as well.  

Nast-ometer:  0/10

Argument for or against Video Nasties:  Against.

I give it a 4!

Flesh for Frankenstein - 1973

 (Googles current popular artists)  I mean, I haven't heard of any of these guys, so this goes back a little bit, but what if Banksy officially endorsed and produced a relatively low budget, X rated version of The Creature from the Black Lagoon?  What if fuckin Taylor Swift put out a 3D Video Nasty version of Doctor Jekyll and Mister Hyde?  Wouldn't the world be better?

Andy Warhol did not have much to do with this movie which is alternatively titled Andy Warhol's Flesh for Frankenstein, but still man, this was a bit of a controversial move I have to imagine.  I guess Rob Zombie is maybe the modern version of this, but the music was not a far cry from the cinema, so it does not compare.

Flesh for Frankenstein was a Italian, American and German co-production for a super underground film that got rated NC-17 and X, got on the Video Nasty list, and also helped launch Udo Kier's career.  I'd seen this one before, perhaps over 10 or even 15 years ago, as this is on many lists of "most disturbing" and "most cult" movies.  I didn't remember anything on this rewatch.

This movie is minimally going for satire, and I think its also an early example of meta, self aware, excess for the sake of excess type thing.  I wanted to look up early self aware movies, and just on the initial screen the things they cite are not far and away far off from this things 1973 date.  This certainly has a comedy of extremes, satirical leaning to it, there isn't a ton of outright humor but there is certainly an air of "having fun with the material", a wink and a nod.

There's plenty of nudity and some surgery scenes, there's a scene where Udo Kier has sex with a dead body, but overall this is pretty tame.  I think if anything it is the oddness of tone and the way this film almost feels like a comedy that makes the disturbing parts stand out.  Part of you really wants this movie to pick a lane, and from modern aspects I think it did, its just we were not ready for THIS lane yet.  But in that way this is super ahead of it's time.

There's an aspect of moral panic to some of these Video Nasties for sure - it's not that the content is not disturbing, but this could be seen as a little bit more of a skew towards moral censorship certainly.  There's homosexual content in here as well, and there's a bit ol' dick that you can see for a little while. 

While this movie is popular mainly because of the big name attached to the front of it, this is a fun and self-aware, strange and somewhat boundary pushing film.  It succeeds because of the name in front, lets face it that something with a big name will bring in a bigger audience, and we may have this film to thank for bringing cult movies a bit more into the spotlight.  4 stars.

Nasty Meter:  2/10

Argument for or against Video Nasty:  extremely mildly For.

Yeti: Giant of the 20th Century - 1977

 I'm trying to watch whatever free pre-1990ish Yet, Sasquatch, and Bigfoot movies are available.  But does this one really count?

Apparently some Italians heard that there was going to be a sequel to the 1976 King Kong movie and they decided to rush production on this "would be ripoff" except that the sequel movie in question was never made and now this is an odd curio from 1977.  

In this, a frozen creature thought to be a Yeti is thawed, promptly comes back to life, and goes on a rampage.  I mean, that sounds fun and whatever, except that the Yeti itself is instead a giant regular man, and once he's raised he quickly acts as much like King Kong as possible, including falling in love with a human woman and doing all that typical bullshit.

Featuring stodgy effects and ridiculous acting, there is a B grade drinky smoky aspect to this, but its a little slow, and a big section of the movie where the monster gets sick and has to be put on oxygen really grinds the momentum to a halt.  Its also just like...not a Yeti.  It is more like a giant neanderthal and plays like any "giant" monster movie, especially perhaps obviously like King Kong.

Its whatever.  Kinda boring.  I give it a star.

Night of the Bloody Apes - 1969

 Also known as The Horrible Man-Beast.

What was the deal exactly with our views of the tenuous line between man and animal, as well as our struggle with identity that fed into such things as Doctor Jeckyll and movies like this?  Movies where a brain are put into a another body make some sense, but I love the idea of an animal brain into a human, vice versa, and I love animal heart into a person like in this movie.

Video Nasty is attributed because of some pretty gross stock footage shots of a real heart transplantation, and because of a couple pretty insane rape scenes with lots of nudity.  Definitely the fact it is an ape-monster raping a human woman doesn't help the case. This fits nicely into the "surprise" theory of my Video Nasty project, people were expecting some stupid Mexican ape movie, not real and graphic gore.

Night of the Bloody Apes feels like a Mexican version of a Hammer Horror movie, in a good way.  Stuffy Mexican actors stand in for British ones, such as Santa Claus from MST3K's Santa Vs The Devil wants to raise his son from the dead and swaps his heart for that of a dead ape.  Kiddo transforms into a horny and destructive half ape half human monster, and by that I mean completely human except with ape makeup on.  The monster goes on a destructive rampage, the humans have to stop it.

The Video Nasty components are good, and the original movie was good, I argue.  Without the insane parts this is still like a late 60s monster movie which I would tend to enjoy.  So with those, its just an added bonus.  Its also blessedly short and quick moving.  The 80ish minutes did just fly on by.   I give it a solid 3.

Nasty Scale: 3/10

"For" or "Against" Video Nasty as a Concept:  For

Mardi Gras Massacre - 1978

 Yet another proto slasher, and another I've never really heard of mentioned.

I coulda sworn I'd seen this in some dumbass idea of "watch all the themed horror movies" especially if they were built around either a holiday or a bizarre device.  Microwave Massacre, Death Bed, New Years Evil, Valentine...you get it, the ones that're built around something specific.  How did this escape me?

These movies seem to get labeled a Video Nasty easier if they mix violence and sexuality, and also if they throw in some Satanism.  It made me think if Video Nasty was related at all to Satanic Panic, and they certainly were both in vogue at the same time, the DPP list was in 1984 and Satanic Panic started in 1980.  If people think we live in Conservative times now, remember this shit!  At least these were released!

This is a extremely simple movie of this guy John trying to track down "evil" women and sacrifice them.  He picks up a girl, he takes her home and kills her.  He picks up another and does it again.  His method is to strap them naked to a black table and go into the other room, change into a weird Mayan-esque mask and outfit, come out with a little sword and cut them open, removing their heart.

The violence is a bit extreme, I guess, and we have plenty of close-ups to scar our precious little innocent eyes. There's also some weird confluence of strange astrological sounding music, full frontal female nudity, and stiff weird acting to generally invoke an overall uneasy feeling which honestly, I will give quite a bit of credit for.  I sorta wish the movie had slightly more to it, because it is seriously just one thing for 90 minutes, but you know...oh well.

I also wonder how many of these have this in common, slightly hard to explain...Because of the amateur nature, they have both these strange upsetting moments but then they're still making a movie that they want to crossover, so they include some bizarre and lighter-hearted 70s movie moments, such as a full musical sequence montage where people dance, etc, and its not that these are unsettling its more that the wide variance between the two totemic extremes of this film are SO much more than MANY movies.  It speaks to that "surprise" factor I've noted before, these are movies you can predict.

 This movie is relatively monotone, but that tone is a bit odd and certainly could be described as disturbing.  It also makes you think about rib cages and Mon pubis, which is....something.  I give it a 3.5.

Nasty Scale: 8/10

"For" or "Against" Video Nasty as a Concept:  For

The Werewolf and the Yeti - 1981

 Also known as The Curse of the Beast, Night of the Howling Beast and Hall of the Mountain King.

This took me a while to get through because Fawsome, the streaming app, sucks.  Don't use it.  It has more ads than the others and didn't remember where I was, and then at one point when I went to resume this movie it started playing something else....  I also had to restart this movie twice.  I seriously considered not finishing this and leaving a review anyways.  

This is part of Paul Naschy's Werewolf series, a movie I've visited on this review site before.  These were a somewhat long running series of B or C par Spanish werewolf movies that were relatively modest in scale and success, but like some series just kept going.  

Again, this returns to my "surprise" theory about why these would be labeled as Video Nasty.  They felt like this was a fairly whatever schlocky Spanish werewolf movie, and were just not ready for it to have a bit more gore effects.  This is pretty mild overall, I will have to maybe rate the Nasties on a Nasty Scale, maybe from 1 meaning not nasty to 10 meaning mega nasty each?  This is kinda fun to make this up as I go along.  Anyways, this is like a 1.  One sorta weird skinning scene is I'm sure what did it, it has as much disturbing content as a average monster movie.

Perhaps obvious by the title, this is a movie where Naschy is turned into a werewolf in Tibet and has to fight pirates as well as a Yeti.  Well, supposedly.  In the last 5 minutes of the movie they have a 1 minute fight scene in the dark that sucks.  

The thing with this, is despite the hokey Halloween mask effects and some weird campy stuff going on, this just feels like an absolute chore.  Nothing is explained and nothing seems to matter.  Things just kind of happen and you just keep watching.  It’s basically the opposite of engaging. 

Nasty Scale: 1/10

"For" or "Against" Video Nasty as a Concept:  Against

The House by the Edge of the Park - 1980

 Ruggero Deodato may be the only recurring director on the Video Nasty list...we'll wait and see if there's others.  But I know he did Cannibal Holocaust, which I will rewatch for this list, I guess.

House by the Park is a slightly similar vein to Cannibal, being like a trial in extreme filmmaking.  Its in the argument "for" there being a Video Nasty list of prosecuted films versus the argument "against" which I'll try to put all these into camps of from now on.  Evilspeak is against, Blood Rites is for.  

The reason this is an experiment and that is "for" Video Nasty is that this movie is basically wall to wall sexual violence.  It begins with a rape and murder and kinda just goes from there as serial killer and rapist Alex, a twisted and sadistic psycho who invites himself to a customers houseparty where he and his friend Ricky begin to get teased by the people at the party.  They react in the way they know how: with violence.

If you're a girl in this movie, you will be nude, raped and possibly injured or killed.  Its just what the movie is, and it made me really think about casting.  I realize that Hollywood is the goal of many a star-eyed naive person, but what do they think of these roles, that this is a step in?  I just don't see this being the launch pad for a real star, and this is low budget Italian schlock, how much were they paid?  I just wonder sometimes.

This is also a dialed up less stylized Funny Games, a couple of movies I like both of, and certainly the sexually charged home invasion angle is very prevalent.  Straw Dogs, etc.  The goal of these in part is to shock, offend and titillate, and 46 years later this movie is still doing it, which in effect is the sign of immense success.  An unnecessary twist ending was a strike against, but in the end I give it 4 stars.  

Nasty Scale: 10/10

Evilspeak - 1981

 This is the second one of these Video Nasties where I have had a thought about the labeling and targeting these were subject to.  Much like in Blood Rites, is it a lot of the incongruity and frankly the unexpectedness of these films level of violence that gets them labeled as problems?  Here you have a seemingly normal sci-fi fantasy film, why does it have a scene of pigs eating guts?  In Blood Rites its a Agatha Christie talky been there done that plot, why the grisly death scene?  

What I'm saying is that Texas Chainsaw was not on the Video Nasty list, and that's probably because they knew what they were getting in for, they were ready.  It didn't come of left field like it does in this movie and Blood Rites.  Its unexpected here.  Is that why they didn't like it?

Evilspeak I had seen before and had pretty much lumped in with the Ice Cream Man and a few other early Clint Howard B grade horror movies.  Movies that were capitalizing on his weird look and presence and yet real acting talent to have him be a top heel in some whatever level thriller.  

Which Evilspeak very much is, its some whatever level thriller, and thus the gut eating scenes are a bit pushing the envelope, this type of territory should be barely rated R, the type of thing you end up showing to 13 year old because its not that bad and you're a cool uncle or whatever.  The plot is some silly trash about Satan in a computer giving superpowers and theres a touch of nudity and its all very much the type of rated R thing people like me saw when they were 10...except for those few gore scenes.

Evilspeak is an interesting, out there thriller that is fun and off kilter enough.  Feels like the type of 80s trash we all grew up with.  2.5 stars.  Nasty Scale:  3/10

The Driller Killer - 1979

 Watching this and looking it up made me wonder, just how many directors who started out in porn are even left?  How about, how many directors that started in porn and achieved some degree of mainstream success?  It can't be all that many.  Truly a dying era.

The Driller Killer was the first real film of Abel Ferrara, a director who is an art house fave and had a few slightly almost mainstream successes.  He had directed porn before this and it was a pretty normal transition at this point to switch over to low budget horror.

Ferrara himself stars as Reno Miller, a mouth breathing weirdo who is sorta uninterpretable.  He seems like he's on some sort of drugged out trip, things affect him in bizarre ways.  Dissonant rock music, sexual misunderstandings, fussing over hanging a painting, homelessness.  These seemingly normal things just keep making him have some sort of break from reality which eventually turns him into the homicidal Driller Killer.

There's moments where talent shows through this thing, mostly in some editing choices and tinges of atmosphere, but overall this is a terrible slog.  A lot, maybe 50% of this movie is just a terrible band playing badly engineered rock music.  Another 20% is random people having inane, pointless, slurred conversations.  A mostly unexplored killer doesn't exactly give you a rock to hold on to either.

When the kills come, they're fine and an easy highlight to this, but that's mostly because the rest of this is almost pure drivel.  It made me think of how movies could be described by just some moments, and someone might come out of this proclaiming it had violence, gore, nudity, lesbian sex, mental disease, crossdressing, filth, etc.  What they would not say is those are 20 seconds each and the rest of the film is just stupid bullshit.  I'll give it 1 star.  Nasty Scale: 1/10

Blood Rites - 1968

 Also known as The Ghastly Ones. 

Well, no promises. That’s my intro to this, a random entry I could find online from the infamous DPP list of Video Nasties. These were the 39 actually prosecuted movies that ended up in court. Luckily a lot of them crossover with other things I’ve watched, such as a bunch of these are also Zombie series movies. Here’s the list.  Underlined titles are what I have seen, complete with links:

1. Absurd also known as Monster Hunter, Anthropophagus 2, and Horrible
2. Anthropophagous: The Beast also known as The Grim Reaper, Man Beast, Man-Eater, and The Savage Island
3. Axe also known as Lisa, Lisa and California Axe Massacre
4. A Bay of Blood also known as Twitch of the Death Nerve, Blood Bath and Bay of Blood
5. The Beast in Heat 
6. Blood Feast 
7. Blood Rites also known as The Ghastly Ones
8. Bloody Moon 
9. The Burning 
10. Cannibal Apocalypse  also known as Invasion of the Flesh Hunters
11. Cannibal Ferox also known as Make Them Die Slowly
12. Cannibal Holocaust 
13. The Cannibal Man 
14. Devil Hunter
15. Don't Go in the Woods 
16. The Driller Killer 
17. Evilspeak 
18. Exposé also known as House on Straw Hill
19. Faces of Death 
20. Fight for Your Life 
21. Flesh for Frankenstein also known as Andy Warhol's Frankenstein
22. Forest of Fear also known as Toxic Zombies and Bloodeaters
23. Gestapo's Last Orgy also known as Last Orgy of the Third Reich and Caligula Reincarnated As Hitler
24. The House by the Cemetery 
25. The House on the Edge of the Park 
26. I Spit on Your Grave also known as Day of the Woman
27. Island of Death also known as Devils in Mykonos and A Craving For Lust
28. The Last House on the Left 
29. Love Camp 7 
30. Madhouse (but not the one I watched!) also known as There Was a Little Girl
31. Mardi Gras Massacre 
32. Nightmares in a Damaged Brain also known as Nightmare
33. Night of the Bloody Apes
34. Night of the Demon 
35. Snuff 
36. SS Experiment Camp also known as SS Experiment Love Camp
37. Tenebrae also known as Unsane
38. The Werewolf and the Yeti also known as Night of the Howling Beast
39. Zombie Flesh Eaters also known as Zombie and Zombi 2

This is mostly so that I do not have to keep looking it up myself.  So like I said, a lot of the Zombie series is on here and a lot of other random stuff I've seen like The Burning and Night of the Demon. 

Plot wise this movie is the admittedly overdone "buncha people can inherit a fortune if they stay overnight in the creepy house" or whatever.  Fuck, I wonder what the originator of that is?  We've seen it before.  Its completely incongruous with the insanity of the first 5 minutes in which video nasty becomes apparent as a insane man with a meat cleaver murders two people in the woods.  

Which I'll say...is fucking NUTS with sped up footage and really great effects, its downright unsettling and no wonder it was censored!  And that nutcase is the helper at the house the family has to stay at.  A few minutes later we have ahead of its time topless scenes and Texas Chainsaw-esque disturbing mental disease and/or weirdness which is not to be underrated in terms of creep factor.  There's also a pretty violent rape scene that begins later and its like....yikes.

This is barely 70 minutes long and with all that stuff going on it flies by.  This feels like half a talky Agatha Christie early 60s "horror" and half a mid late 70s exploitation flick.  No wonder they freaked out!  The insane parts are really insane and then the rest is calm as a pleasant stream.  Which is to say its uneven 1000%, it barely gets more uneven than this.

But there is one more thing to say, and I would not have expected it.  This is also a huge proto slasher.  Absolutely.  This has a body count with a mysterious masked killer, it has a big reveal at the end with a exposition dump concerning the "why" of it all, it is hugely in that vein.

This movie is many many things, and all in all that's jam-packed into 70 minutes and suffice to say like, you will have a good time.  With one of the many things this is.  So I dunno what else to give it...?  

Nasty Scale: 9/10

Trollhunter - 2010

 Found footage came and went, and what were the standouts from this genre? Beyond Blair Witch, Paranormal Activity, and Cloverfield I would argue that this was the only other big one.

I heard about this movie pretty soon after it had come out as a comedy documentary Norwegian found footage film about trolls and I was immediately interested. I believe I rented this on Netflix DVD and have watched it a few times, and it’s been a few years so I re-watched it now. Trollhunter is truly the perfect mix of Christopher Guest meets found footage horror doc.

Early on in the film, we meet the three filmmakers, main character Thomas boom mic operator Johanna and cameraman Finn. They are investigating the poaching of bear, and they stumble upon a man they think might’ve done it, only to discover he is in fact something far more interesting than a common poacher.

The real reason for the crossover success of this is that this movie moves. I paused it just now and I’m 15 minutes from the end and I thought I was maybe 15 minutes into the movie. It has a fantastic pace and it really grips you with compelling characters and well written dialogue. This is not laugh out funny but it does have a funny wit to it, and one that is not like very much else I’ve seen.

They clearly had a pretty low budget and were selective about when to use CGI and in what way, and it really lends itself to the filmmaking style.  Lots of night shoots, nightvision cameras, darkness, and shadows. This is an expertise use of easy effect done cheaply that looks fantastic and has aged extremely well.

Abominable - 2006

 My little marathon kept going this morning with 2006's Abominable, one of many movies with that name.

Where to start...maybe with the first scene.  The scene in which some people go outside because of a noise and find some dead animal on the ground ripped apart and discover Bigfoot tracks in the snow.  The snow that was not there the entire time until now, suddenly is about 3 inches thick on the ground and I repeat WAS NOT in any previous shots.

This is an early indication of what's to come.  Matt McCoy stars as a handicapped guy going with his drunk abusive caregiver to a remote cabin for some R&R.  Once there, a group of women come to the cabin next door for party weekend and the abusive caregiver goes to the town to get drunk.  Alone in the cabin, McCoy start to see and hear bizarre things in the woods.  Could it be the CGI Sasquatch creature we catch a glimpse of?  

This is prime SyFy original movie territory back when that was the place for this sorta trash.  Younger me would'a cracked a Pabst and watched this in a back to back marathon with a few others on a Friday night.  Modern me is amazed that this is only 30 years after those 70s ones I just watched, and wondering where some movie trends started and why and how.  Like the credits in this movie specifically were very much "of the moment" in 2006, but where did that start?  And is it still done, just in places I don't see?

Abominable is paper thin, clearly they did not have enough script of plot for a full movie and a lot of the time you're just watching the main character look at the girls with binoculars because there isn't anything else to fuckin' film, so I guess that's what's happening. 

I considered not even finishing this because it was slow and boring.  The monster looks like total shit and there is not enough nudity or blood and guts to have it be that much fun.  So its just a straight 1.

Curse of Bigfoot - 1975

 Also known in the 90s as Teenagers Battle the Thing.

Who knows, dude.  Its the mood I'm in. That's why this sudden spring of Bigfoot movies.  This one I had at least seen something from or about, because this insane mask I had seen before.

When this is the level of special effect for your Bigfoot creature, the rest of the movie ain't going to be outshining it to a significant degree.  And boy, does this movie feel in a whole different ballpark of budget and capability than previously watched Bigfoot movies.  Sure, 1970s Bigfoot was dark and poorly acted, but this is like comparing that to vacation footage.

It could be this was a Rifftrax and I may have watched that at one point, but the plot of this was not familiar.  Plot wise, a teacher brings in an expert to talk to some students about ancient creatures, lore, and such.  The students embark upon an expedition and find a sealed tomb type area with a seemingly dead ancient creature in it.  The breaking of the seal brings it back to life, and it begins running amok and causing chaos.

This movie is certainly a lot more of the type of thing you would see on Rifftrax.  Its really two bit in nature, with extremely unchoreographed and unpracticed scenes that play out with makeup like what's seen above.  This is a fun trashy movie, its just SO bad dude, and I mean I love it, its just like WOW.

Apparently this was a movie made in 1963 which was expanded into this full length thing, which was released in 1975, and somehow also gets stamped with the years 1976 and 1978.  Its like no year wants to claim it.  But put it on late at night and enjoy the sleeze.  3 stars.

Update: I have since realized I watched this before and reviewed it. So who cares. It can have two reviews and two ratings. None of this matters. 

Sasquatch - 1976

 Also known as Sasquatch, the Legend of Bigfoot.

Why not do a double feature, I ask.  I started writing this because the narration says as if its nothing "After 3 months in the forests..." and I'm like.  Fuck.  You lucky fucks.

This movie is both a psuedo-documentary about Bigfoot as well as a love letter to the area in which Bigfoot supposedly lives, the Pacific Northwest.  Filmed outside of Bend Oregon standing in for British Columbia Canada, this talks at length about the beauty and unspoiled nature of the scenery, and you can tell that its earnest in its adoration for the area.

I'm reading a history book about the Pacific Northwest by Carlos Schwantes, which I would recommend to everyone.  The book more of a historical look than this fiction movie obviously- but legend, lore, and the culture that manifested in the area decades later is still interesting in its relevance to that.  This is yet another chapter in the bizarre history of the area, to be filed under a fascinating section of perhaps a different book, one about human psyche and human incongruity with nature.

We follow a rough and tumble group of backwoods explorers on a many months long journey on horseback through the PNW, and their various adventures therein.  Some minor Bigfoot threats aside, its about the nature, the animals, the pioneer feeling of exploring a forest unspoilt by humanity.  Its also set in my favorite part of Canada, the northern British Columbia, where vast miles of forest feel like they have never been set foot in by man, and are perhaps one of the last remaining places like that.

I'm bringing a lot of this to the movie from my own life, but there is a love and honesty present in this film no matter what, and its a more professionally shot, lit and acted than the previous entry Bigfoot.  Which I think elevates this to 4 stars.

Bigfoot - 1970

 Its odd how I specifically remember searching out Bigfoot movies at several points in my life to watch them, yet somehow this one escaped me?  I finally got it though.

Bigfoot had quite a cast, which Ebert even remarked about in his review.  John Carradine as a typical redneck yokel, film legend John Mitchum, Touch of Evil's Joi Lansing, and John Mitchum's son Christopher.  I dunno, must've meant more to Ebert than it does to me.  

Bigfoot is a pretty low budget, pretty damn insane 70s low brow redneck movie.  Bigfoot captures some women for breeding, and they blankly stare as they discuss the fact they're going to be raped by Bigfoot!  They seem to not care at all, unless Bigfoot comes up to them, in which case its screaming screaming screaming, which will have you reaching for the mute button.

Super grainy and awful quality, there is just something about this which is super fucking fun.  Its hackney, its dumb, it has a shiteating grin on its face.  But its something that if you get on its level and watch with extra buttered popcorn and maybe a cocktail or some friends, you'll have a damn blast.  Its not a great movie but it certainly is great to me.

All Through the Night - 1942

 Something in New Zealand made me think about Humphrey Bogart and I mentioned him to my family and it turns out they’re all fans also! We traded favorites and least favorites and it put me in the mood to watch some of his films again.

All Though the Night is described on the back as a proto film noir, and also as a loose satire of the type of films that it itself is. Those would be detective adjacent, mob adjacent films, noir adjacent character stories involving edgy characters, and situations that build to a climactic finish.

Bogart plays a man named Gloves who is a regular at a restaurant where he gets cheesecake every day. One day, the man that makes his cheesecakes is killed, and that brings Bogart into a bizarre situation of exploitation and Nazi presence in his little town. Gloves will have to use his cunning and his connections to solve the case.

The back of the movie box over sold the satire a little bit as well as the meta aspect a little bit. I shouldn’t have gotten my hopes up, but they truly made it sound like a romp and it wasn’t really. At an hour and 45 minutes it’s perhaps 30 minutes a little long, This movie made me miss some of the quick A to B old films that I normally like. 

This isn’t that bad and it certainly is unique among the types of things that was coming out. Maybe they should just rewrite the back of the box. I’ll give it four stars although I do think it’s a little bit too long no matter what.

Tombs of the Blind Dead - 1972

 Also known as. The Night of the Blind Terror and.. Revenge from Planet Ape???  This was apparently trying to cash in on the Planet of the Apes success and it sent me down a research hole trying to find if other movies did that and I couldn't find it and gave up.

The first of this foursome I've always wanted to see prompted a thought in my head.  Could be that one of the reasons these movies remain is that they established a new "type" when it came to zombies.  These are specifically undead templars, who ride horses and wear their cloaks and use swords.  They are specifically blind too, and this puts them in a strange realm between mummy and the skeleton warriors from some of the Ray Harryhausen Sinbad type movies.

Now, I loved Harryhausen as a kid and I love it now, even if these movies are not claymation, the movement and the style is probably directly in homage to those skeletons, and its like someone saw those movies and saw those skeletons and said "lets make a movie just based on these guys."  Lets!

A long preamble has a budding lesbian relationship end when one of the women jumps off a train, escapes to a church way out in the middle of nowhere, and gets killed by the templars who raise from the grave.  The group of friends she had go searching for her and get stalked by the templars themselves.

Again, the atmosphere of this thing is incredible.  This has long scenes of slowly moving skeletal creatures with chanting songs and strange slowed down eeriness and its used often, but does not get old because FUCK does it work!  It kicks ass, every moment you're watching that you're just in and there's no where else you'd rather be, nothing else you'd rather be watching.

Its a good intro to a series which I know gets better, so I'll give this one a 4.

Island of the Fishmen - 1979

 Also known as Island of Mutations, Something Waits in the Dark, and Screamers.

What is this, a Zombie movie?  With these alternative names?  Apparently this movie was slightly edited and shipped around to several different countries, with alternate names, and none of the versions were very successful.  Maybe the apt name should've been something like Lipstick on a Pig.

Fishmen stars Barbara Bach from James Bond, and in one of the versions it had a clunky sounding scene with Cameron Mitchell and Miguel Ferrer edited into the beginning.  I don't remember if my version had that, honestly.  I can't be bothered to check, either.  Okay I did check and yes I watched the US version that had these two in the beginning.

From the director of Torso comes this almost Lovecraft feeling story of a lost isle that has fish human hybrids on it, ala Dagon.  Barbara Bach and some others land there and its shadowy, inept chaos from there on in.

Shot with a negative lighting budget, the real question you'll be asking yourself is what is going on.  Now, this is not the worst thing I've seen by far but yeah its just another example of a truly amateur low budget schlockfest.  No nudity and no real violence either, its another one of these as well where I ask, could this be rated like PG?

Its fun low brow trash, I give it 2.5 stars.

The Demon - 1979

 This movie has more years on its title than almost any I've seen.  1979, 1980 1981, and 1985 are all seemingly valid.  Also known as Midnight Caller.

A evil shadowy figure haunts peoples dreams with claws on his hand...what is this?  A Nightmare on Elm Street?  No, its the other dream-haunting claw hand guy, The Demon.  Cameron Mitchell is this movie's John Saxon, the elder statesman brought in to fight the demonic entity.  He'll protect the leagues of topless women that The Demon is after in this strange flick from South Africa.

Shadow Killer or Shadow Demon could easily have been the title cause holy crap is this movie dark in color.  Shadows fill frames and the killer or main character or anyone are all bathing in darkness in this movie.  The Demon especially, who by the way goes completely unexplained, is only seen somewhat in the light at the end, also wearing a mask.  Not complaining, keep the horror movies dark is my middle name, just sayin'.

A bit slower than its 1984 cousin, this movie is certainly a bit more interminable and plodding.  We don't really have lore or explanation here, which also makes it feel that way.  So I can't really land on good or bad, it was certainly fun though, so I give it 3 stars.

Wake in Fright - 1971

 As soon as I started watching Australian movies, I knew that I would need to rewatch this one, a movie I’ve meant to rewatch for years now and that I finally now got around too.

It’s not just that it stars Donald Pleasense and it’s also not just that it’s a defragmenting story and study of masculinity, it’s also a very interesting dark film that has a lot more themes on a second viewing. There’s a lot I forgot about this and there’s a lot that I love about this movie, a movie that I saw referred to online as the best film ever made in Australia.

Straightlaced school teacher John Grant gets into gambling in a drunken night and loses all his money. His only friendships are a bunch of backwoods kangaroo hunters in this beer soaked sweat soaked underbelly of society study about masculinity in general. 

The strange hazing rituals, the homoerotic parts of masculinity, the ways in which we measure ourselves and each other, the embracing of the old and the new, the mixture of intellectual versus redneck, and certainly the need and want to fit in all are illustrated perfectly in a relatively light on dialogue film. 

Perhaps the only movie to have Donald Pleasense as a sex symbol, he has a bizarre, charismatic appeal, despite never really knowing what he’s talking about.  Thel other characters all sort of float around in a mysterious haze of potential threat or best friend. It is an odd feeling for this movie and one that makes you not really understand what’s happening with the main character or with anyone else, but not in a way which bothers you. Rather in a way that makes you have a certain amount of acceptance - Not necessarily resignation just acceptance. 

Films in general can allow for us as the audience to put ourselves in the shoes of a character, and I think that this is something that is only helped by ambiguity and minimalistic dialogue. I think in a certain way it’s the quietness of older films that helps us attach ourselves to them, it is their mysticism and their innate ambiguity that makes us pair ourselves to the happenings of the film. In that way, this movie feels extremely identifiable without having any amount of things in it that anyone can actually relate to. But feeling like an outsider, feeling social pressure, feeling mixed sexual desires, and feeling lost as major themes, anyone can attach themselves to in this. 

The feeling of this film is the feeling of a moment, those weird ones that you can’t really explain that stick with you despite the fact that nothing happened in them. Things do happen in this film and there are things that would stick with anyone but the same time their meaning and their interpretation is completely up for grabs. In that way it’s a masterpiece of strange evocative motion while being a little thin on explanation and plot, it’s certainly a great vibe film. 5 vibe stars.