Second viewing; first viewed between 1983 and 1986.
An escapee from an institution for the criminally insane returns to his hometown with murderous intentions. His potential victims are some babysitters and their boyfriends who are at the vicinity of the house where he committed the murder who led to his institutionalization 15 years earlier.
I was quite intrigued by the success enjoyed by this film, and also by the critical attention, both positive and negative, it has garnered. So I decided to give it another shot. Unsurprisingly, its significance continues to elude me. But I think I have come to a law of sorts regarding film hermeneutics. The more devoid of meaning a film is, the more meaning will be ascribed to it by film scholars and critics. The explanation is not so hard: an empty space has more room for stuff. Anyway, although films like this are strictly scare machines, they need a story, however shallow it may be, to keep things moving. Any story is bound to reflect themes and values of the time when it was conceived, and it is inevitable that intellectuals will see all sorts of ideological implications in how those themes and values are woven into the story, and how it relates to the violence that is the prime purpose of the movie. Also of note is that this film is not the independent product of its writer-director's mind; the real originator of the concept is its executive producer. In other words, it is also a strictly monetary operation. All that being said, this is the first time I have viewed it in its full widescreen format, and I acknowledge it is quite well filmed.
Rating: 30 (unchanged)
Tuesday, October 02, 2018
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment