5/10
With a decent budget, a competent director and decent acting, this could have been a very good film--as is, you can still enjoy the story as the writer was NOT a total idiot!
8 August 2009
Warning: Spoilers
I have seen a bazillion bad films, as I love watching and laughing at incompetent films. Horrible directors like Ed Wood, Ray Dennis Steckler, Ted Mikels and Al Adamson are personal favorites. However, the director of this film, Hershell Gordon Lewis, is an enigma. Sure, he's made some of the worst films ever, such as MONSTER A GO-GO, THIS STUFF'LL KILL YA and BLOOD FEAST, but he also made a couple films that despite rotten production values are quite original and entertaining, such as TWO THOUSAND MANIACS and YEAR OF THE YAHOO. YEAR came bundled with THIS STUFF'LL and the contrast between the two films is amazing.

While I would not go so far as to say that the direction is competent or the acting is uniformly acceptable, Jeffrey Allen's acting is 10000 times better than it was in THIS STUFF'LL KILL YA and some of the other actors weren't bad for amateurs. However, the most notable positive about this film is the writing--it DIDN'T suck!! In fact, despite lacking polish, the story idea was excellent and showed a lot of imagination. Sadly, Allen Kahn only made one other film before this one and none since.

Claude King stars as a country musician who has been convinced to run for the US Senate. The governor (Jeffrey Allen) is at first on board with the hotshots who want to run King but after a while, he is sick of the way these outsiders treat him. In fact, this election team is very slick but totally cynical and evil--treating everyone like dirt and turning King into a total phony. In some ways, this is like A FACE IN THE CROWD or BRUBAKER, but there is plenty of stuff to enjoy. I loved the way that the "unscripted" appearances and "live broadcasts" were so scripted that the handlers didn't even care what King's opinions were about the issues. And, King, so interested in getting elected, says nothing and goes along with this phony campaign.

There's a lot more to it, but I liked the film despite its many shortcomings. It earns a 5--mostly for writing. With just a modest budget and competent acting and direction, it would have earned much more. Clever and surprisingly interesting.

Also note that this film has perhaps the most gratuitous nude scene I've seen in a long time. It came out of nowhere and did nothing to further the plot.
4 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed