*minor spoilers!*
Stephen King's short story "The Mangler" was probably unfilmable to begin with, but one would hope that with Tobe Hooper at the helm, it would have a chance. No luck. The result is a borderline-unwatchable mess, a major step down from the director's brilliant "Texas Chainsaw Massacre." It bombed at the box-office, doing no good to his already-sagging career. I cannot imagine why anyone would have thought the material would have made a workable film. I would be curious to know the behind-the-scenes history of the production. Who greenlit this thing? Was there not anyone who, at some point, questioned the wisdom of this endeavor? When Hooper watched the rushes, did he perhaps consider that he might be responsible for one of the most misguided horror projects of the decade? Were exhibitors self-conscious about displaying the poster? It's about a demonically-possessed, man-eating laundry machine for crying out loud! It was almost most certainly doomed from the start.
The script is muddled and badly paced, with a weak, confusing ending. Hooper seems to have forgotten a lesson from his TCM; that psychological terror and suspense are more effective than outright gore. Parts of "Mangler" are just plain disgusting, especially the infamous scene where that poor woman gets chomped up by the machine. In contrast, there's no real suspense or terror. The only thing he does right is the camerawork; even then, it seems like a desperate attempt to distract us from the rest of the movie. It's all a hack job, as schlocky as other ill-fated King adaptations. This is one author who needs to be more selective with whom he sells his work too, but then again, how could he turn down Tobe Hooper, of all people?
Given the circumstances, Ted Levine and Robert Englund do a fairly good job with the terrible script. Both performers have an undeniable charisma and screen presence. Englund, in particular, actually seems to be enjoying himself, certainly more than I ever could. They actually make it through intact, a minor miracle. In contrast, Daniel Matmor is irritating, and one wonders why Levine puts up with this clown in the first place, even if they are brother-in-laws. His interest in the occult is never explained, but that would be asking too much of the film. The guy reminded me of Kevin Smith, whose Silent Bob character would at least have had fewer lines to annoy us with. Every performer concerned is in desperate need of a new agent.
According to the film, the only way to defeat the machine is to exorcise the demon by throwing in holy water, sacred relics, etc. They should have sufficed with the negative of this movie.
* (out of ****)
Released by New Line Cinema
Stephen King's short story "The Mangler" was probably unfilmable to begin with, but one would hope that with Tobe Hooper at the helm, it would have a chance. No luck. The result is a borderline-unwatchable mess, a major step down from the director's brilliant "Texas Chainsaw Massacre." It bombed at the box-office, doing no good to his already-sagging career. I cannot imagine why anyone would have thought the material would have made a workable film. I would be curious to know the behind-the-scenes history of the production. Who greenlit this thing? Was there not anyone who, at some point, questioned the wisdom of this endeavor? When Hooper watched the rushes, did he perhaps consider that he might be responsible for one of the most misguided horror projects of the decade? Were exhibitors self-conscious about displaying the poster? It's about a demonically-possessed, man-eating laundry machine for crying out loud! It was almost most certainly doomed from the start.
The script is muddled and badly paced, with a weak, confusing ending. Hooper seems to have forgotten a lesson from his TCM; that psychological terror and suspense are more effective than outright gore. Parts of "Mangler" are just plain disgusting, especially the infamous scene where that poor woman gets chomped up by the machine. In contrast, there's no real suspense or terror. The only thing he does right is the camerawork; even then, it seems like a desperate attempt to distract us from the rest of the movie. It's all a hack job, as schlocky as other ill-fated King adaptations. This is one author who needs to be more selective with whom he sells his work too, but then again, how could he turn down Tobe Hooper, of all people?
Given the circumstances, Ted Levine and Robert Englund do a fairly good job with the terrible script. Both performers have an undeniable charisma and screen presence. Englund, in particular, actually seems to be enjoying himself, certainly more than I ever could. They actually make it through intact, a minor miracle. In contrast, Daniel Matmor is irritating, and one wonders why Levine puts up with this clown in the first place, even if they are brother-in-laws. His interest in the occult is never explained, but that would be asking too much of the film. The guy reminded me of Kevin Smith, whose Silent Bob character would at least have had fewer lines to annoy us with. Every performer concerned is in desperate need of a new agent.
According to the film, the only way to defeat the machine is to exorcise the demon by throwing in holy water, sacred relics, etc. They should have sufficed with the negative of this movie.
* (out of ****)
Released by New Line Cinema