Tag Archives: Daily Grindhouse

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: House of The Dead (dir by Uwe Boll)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

You know things are going to be bad when the 2003 video game adaptation House of the Dead opens with a lengthy narration in which we’re told exactly who is going to die in the film and who is going to live. Narration is usually a bad sign, in general. Narration that gives away a huge chunk of the plot during the opening five minutes is even worse.

Things get worse when we’re told that a bunch of college students need to find a boat so that they can attend the “rave of the century,” which is being held on an isolated island. (The island, by the way, is known as the Island of the Dead but no one seems to be that concerned by the name.) From what we see of the greatest rave of all time, it apparently involves one stage, two speakers, and exactly 8 people dancing. The dancers are often shot in slow motion, which I guess is meant to make them look like they’re having more fun than they actually are. Myself, I’m wondering why anyone would hold the “rave of the century” on an island that no one can find. According to the banner above the stage, the whole thing is being sponsored by Sega, the company behind the House of the Dead video game that gave this movie its name.

Things quickly go downhill once the zombies show up and start killing everyone. It doesn’t take long for most of the disposable characters to get killed. The majority of the film is made up of people either running through the forest or hiding in a house or a boat. Because none of the characters really have any personality, you’re never quite sure who anyone is. Their deaths don’t really register because it never seems as if they were living to begin with. Watching the film, it’s hard not to feel that everyone on the island is a member of the living dead. It’s just that some of them haven’t realized it yet.

As mentioned above, House of the Dead is based on a video game and, frequently, the action is punctuated with heavily pixelated scenes that have been lifted straight from the game. On the one hand, you have to admire the film for being honest about what it is. On the other hand, you have to regret that the film itself is never as much fun as the game probably is.

House of the Dead was one of several video game adaptations that German director Uwe Boll was responsible for in the early aughts. Up until he retired from the film industry, it was regularly argued by online film critics that Boll was the world’s worst director. Boll responded to the criticism by challenging his most vehement critics to a boxing match. A few of the critics accepted the challenge and Boll actually did fight them, knocking all of them out. I imagine that’s probably every filmmaker’s secret fantasy.

Myself, I will say that I don’t think Boll is the worst director in the world. He’s not particularly good but there are worst directors out there. That said, House of the Dead is pretty bad. The dialogue is leaden, the characters are bland, and even the intentional attempts at humor fall flat. Seventeen years after it was first released, it still pretty much represents the nadir of video game adaptations.

Anyway, the main lesson of this film is …. well, I don’t think there really is a lesson to be found, other than that it might be a good idea to take names seriously. I mean, Island of the Dead? Can anyone really be surprised that the zombies showed up?

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: Dolls (dir by Stuart Gordon)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Sitting out of the middle of nowhere, there’s a house. And in this house, there lives an old man and an old woman. They appear to be very friendly, the type who will happily open up their home to anyone needing a place to stay and have a cup of coffee. They make dolls for a living. They make the type of dolls that smirk at you whenever you trip and that glare at you whenever you say that you don’t care about toys. They’re living dolls and they’re actually kind of vicious. Don’t get on their bad side.

That is exactly the mistake that a few people make when they arrive at the house on one stormy night. Two punk rock girls with exaggerated British accents make the mistake of trying to find something to steal. Uh-oh, here come the dolls! A self-centered man and his wife make the mistake of not caring about their daughter. The dolls aren’t going to stand for that!  Seriously, the dolls may be cute but if they don’t like you, you are doomed!

The dolls, however, do like the daughter. And they appear to be willing to tolerate Ralph, the goofy traveling salesman who made the mistake of picking up the two punk rock girls while they were hitchhiking. Will the dolls continue to like the daughter and Ralph or will they eventually turn on everyone in the house? They may be small but again, you seriously do not want to get these dolls mad.

First released in 1986, Dolls is a seriously strange movie from director Stuart Gordon and producer Charles Band. There’s a lot of good things to be said for Dolls. The house is atmospheric. The dolls are truly creepy. The acting really isn’t that bad, though I do think most viewers won’t necessarily miss the two punks girls.  The movie does take the characters and the dolls in some unexpected directions. But the movie’s tone is all over the place. It starts out as a broad comedy before then turning into a surprisingly violent and bloody horror film and then it turns into this strangely macabre family drama. The movie can’t seem to decide whether it wants you touch your heart or scar your soul. Imagine Home Alone if the movie kept all the heart-warming stuff but then had the kid brutally kill the burglars and laugh while stuffing their corpses in a furnace and you have some idea of what the tone of Dolls is like.

It’s an odd film but it’s hard not to like. Stuart Gordon’s direction is energetic and, since the movie only has a running time of 77 minutes, the whole thing feels like an extra weird episode of Tales From The Crypt or The Twilight Zone. Even the film’s mix of humor and disturbing violence feels strangely appropriate, as if the film itself is an adaptation of a particularly grisly fairy tale.

Watch Dolls and you’ll never look at a toy the same way again!

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: Food Of The Gods (dir by Bert I. Gordon)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Uh-oh! Something weird has bubbled up to the ground on an island near British Columbia and a farmer and his wife (played by John McLaim and Ida Lupino) foolishly decided to feed it to their farm animals! Soon, they’ve got giant chickens! And listen, that might sound like a good thing to some but I’ve spent enough time around farms to know that giant chickens are not a good thing! Seriously, normal-sized chickens are messy enough. Giant ones? I don’t even want to thinking about it.

Unfortunately, it’s not just the chickens that are eating the food. Rats are eating the food. Wasps are eating the food. All of the animals are turning into giants and now, they’re hunting humans! After his best friend is attacked and killed by giant wasp, a football player named Morgan (Marjoe Gortner) decides to investigate on his own. You would think that a football player would be busy preparing for his next game or something like that but no, not Morgan! Morgan’s determined to find out why there are giant animals off the coast of Canada.

Of course, Morgan isn’t the only one interested in the so-called Food of the Gods. There’s also Jack Bensington (Ralph Meeker), who owns a dog food company. Jack wants to sell the food. Why would Jack want to do that? Does he actually think that causing dogs to transform into giants who would undoubtedly try to kill their masters is somehow going to be good for his company’s reputation? Jack’s main motivation seems to be that he’s a businessman and, in this film’s moral universe, that automatically makes him one of the bad guys. But it seems like even an evil businessman would know better than to kill off all of his customers.

This 1976 film, which is loosely (very loosely) based on a novel by H.G. Wells, was directed by Bert I. Gordon and, if you think the plot sounds a little ludicrous …. well, it is. Nothing about the film really makes much sense but that’s kind of to expected from a Bert I. Gordon film. Gordon specialized in making films about giants destroying stuff. The films were never particularly good but Gordon obviously understood that American filmgoers love big things. Food of the Gods, as silly as it may be, apparently made a lot of money when it was first released.

Today, of course, it’s impossible to watch the film without noticing just how terrible the special effects are. Between the unconvincing use of super-imposed images and the obviously fake rats that are tossed at some of the actors, there’s not a single shot that doesn’t somehow look totally ridiculous. In fact, it’s all so silly and obviously done on the cheap that it becomes rather charming, or at least as charming as the superimposed image of giant wasp ever could possibly be. You have to admire the film’s determination to tell its story despite not having the resources to do so. As for the rest of the film, it’s dumb but it doesn’t take itself too seriously. If you’re specifically searching for a bad giant animal movie, The Food of the Gods is fun in its own goofy, nonsensical, low-budget way.

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: H.P. Lovecraft’s Monster Portal (dir by Matthew B.C.)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

After the mysterious disappearance of her father, Celine (Sian Altman) travels to his estate with her boyfriend, Rich (Louis James) and their friends, April (Sarah Alexandra Marks) and Nick (George Nettleton).  Celine wants to deal with her memories and figure out what led to her father disappearing.  Rich wants to help her.  Nick, meanwhile, just wants to get drunk.  April just wants to be anywhere but near Nick.  It’s a bit of a dysfunctional group.  Personally, I probably would have left Nick behind but I guess the hope was that Nick would lighten the mood whenever things started to get too heavy.

Upon arriving at the estate, they notice a few weird things.  For instance, the housekeeper (Judy Tcherniak) has a habit of chanting and she keeps talking about the old ones.  There are dead rabbits all over the place.  The housekeeper says that the cat must have killed them but there doesn’t seem to be cat anywhere nearby and, as Rich quickly notices, it looks more likely that the rabbits were murdered as a sort of sacrifice.  There are strange books and paintings to be found all over the house and there are black-robed cultists who only seem to come out at night.  And, of course, there’s the portal in the back yard, which leads to another dimension but also from which spring giant, sacrifice-demanding demons.  One should probably be careful about building one of those.  I mean, sure, a gazebo looks nice but is it worth losing your soul over?  It’s something to consider.

You can probably guess where H.P. Lovecraft’s Monster Portal is heading.  Just the appearance of H.P. Lovecraft’s name in the title should tell you all that you need to know.  (The film is also known simply as The Offering, which again kind of gives away the plot.)  To the film’s credit, it actually does make proper and respectful use of the Cthulhu mythos and, even more importantly, it frequently captures the feel of a H.P. Lovecraft short story.  Lovecraft often wrote about people who were investigating the mysterious sins of their family and, of course, he was never hesitant to toss in a robed cultist or two.  Even more importantly, the film captures Lovecraft’s view of humanity as just being an insignificant pawn in the grand scheme of things.  There have been a lot of films that have claimed Lovecraft as an inspiration but Monster Portal is one of the few to really convince you that it was made by fans of his work.

The film’s low budget is obvious in nearly every frame but the monsters themselves are actually pretty impressive and director Matthew B.C. does a good job creating a properly ominous atmosphere.  The estate itself looks great.  The acting is a bit inconsistent but, for the most part, Sian Altman and Sarah Alexandra Marks are sympathetic in the lead roles and Judy Tcherniak goes so over-the-top as the housekeeper that she’s actually a lot of fun to watch.  Monster Portal is an enjoyable tribute to Lovecraft’s work.

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: Ted Bundy: American Boogeyman (dir by Daniel Farrands)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

The 2021 film, Ted Bundy: American Boogeyman, is yet another film about the life and crimes of America’s first celebrity serial killer, Ted Bundy.

In this particular film, Bundy is played as being a handsome nonentity by Chad Michael Murray.  The film follows Bundy as he moves from Seattle to Utah to Colorado and eventually to Florida, leaving a path of death in his wake.  Investigating his crimes are Seattle Detective Kathleen McChesney (Holland Roden) and FBI profiler Robert Ressler (Jake Hays).  McChesney not only has to track down Bundy but she also has to deal with her sexist police chief and his idiot son, both of whom think that Bundy’s victims are to blame.

Ted Bundy: American Boogeyman is the latest true crime horror film to be directed by Daniel Farrands.  The frustrating thing about Farrands is that, if you can overlook the subject matter of his recent films, he’s actually a talented horror director who knows how to create suspense and who can be counted on to come up with at least one effective jump scare in all of his films.  That said, he keeps making films that are almost impossible to defend because they exploit real-life tragedy.  Farrands’s best film, The Haunting of Sharon Tate, worked because of Hilary Duff’s committed performance in the title role and the fact that the film itself was fully on Tate’s side.  However, Farrands’s The Murder of Nicole Brown Simpson was a tacky piece of exploitation that, despite Farrands’s strong visuals, appeared to have little compassion for the woman whose murder served as the film’s inspiration.

Ted Bundy: American Boogeyman is neither as effective as The Haunting of Sharon Tate nor as bad as The Murder of Nicole Brown Simpson.  For the most part, the film plays loose with the facts of the case.  At one point, McChesney even shows up at one of Bundy’s crime scenes and takes a shot at him as he flees.  (Tarantino also played around with history in Once Upon A Time In Hollywood but, by allowing Brad Pitt and Leonardo DiCaprio to kill the members of the Mason family, he also allowed their victims to live.  Ted Bundy: American Boogeyman, on the other hand, is willing to change history to allow McChesney to arrive at the crime scene but it’s not willing to change history to allow any of Bundy’s victims to survive.  It’s hard not to feel that the film would have benefitted from following Tarantino’s approach and allowing Bundy’s victims to beat him to death.)  There are a few odd scenes in which Bundy is showing fondling several mannequins.  The scenes appear to pay homage to William Lustig’s Maniac but again, it doesn’t seem to be based on anything the actual Bundy did.  The film hints at the intriguing idea of Ted Bundy being America’s first celebrity serial killer but it doesn’t really follow up on it.  The whole thing feels rushed and rather icky.  It certainly doesn’t add any insight into Bundy or killers in general.

That said, our longtime readers know that I hate to end on a totally negative note so I will say that the film uses its low budget to its advantage.  The sparse sets and the small cast give the film something of a surreal feel, with Bundy as an evil specter who randomly shows up to haunt the dreams of a nation.  Lin Shaye and Diane Franklin appear in small roles.  Franklin plays a distraught mom who asks McChesney to kill Bundy rather than arrest him.  Shaye plays Bundy’s overprotective mother and gives a nicely creepy performance.  As I said earlier, it’s not so much that the film is badly made as the subject matter is so icky and the script is so bereft of any new insight that most viewers will wonder why the film needed to be made at all.

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: The Bunker Game (dir by Robert Zazzara)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

The Bunker Game, which made its debut on Shudder earlier this year, opens with what appears to be a bit of alternate history worldmaking.   The viewer watches a black-and-white documentary that presents a world in which the Nazis conquered Europe during World War II but, ten years after Germany’s victory, the United States dropped an atomic bomb.  As a result, Europe is now an atomic wasteland.  A handful of survivors managed to find shelter in Italy, hiding out and forming a new society in an underground bunker that was built by Mussolini in the 30s.  The underground society is an authoritarian one, where mad scientists experiment on the citizens and storm troopers seem to be around every corner.  However, there is a small rebellion brewing….

Sounds potentially interesting, right?  Well, don’t get too attached to the alternative history spin because, within the first few minutes of the film, it’s revealed that the people in the bunker aren’t actually citizens of an authoritarian state and, while the Bunker is indeed real, the rest of Europe is just fine.  It turns out that documentary was just a part of an elaborate and very expensive game.  Instead of being the last refuge of the Third Reich, the Bunker is full of LARPers, people who have spent a good deal of money so that they can spend a week pretending to be …. well, Nazis.

Now again, this sounds like it could be potentially interesting.  Why would a group of people pay money in order to enter a real underground bunker and pretend to be some of the most evil people who have ever existed?  It’s an intriguing premise but, just as with the alternate history angle, don’t get to attached to it because it doesn’t take long for the film to abandon the whole LARPing plot.

Instead, unforeseen circumstances lead to the game ending early and most of the LARPers heading home. The Bunker Game proceeds to tell a fairly standard story about a handful of people who find themselves isolated in the now-deserted Bunker.  When one of their friends disappears, they split up to search for him and soon, some sort of supernatural force is killing them one-by-one.  The group is made up of identifiable types.  One person is quirky.  Another person is serious and professional.  Another is a stereotypical zoomer.  Another one is too uptight and obviously destined to go crazy before the movie is over.  For the most part, the film focuses on Laura (Gaia Weiss) and her cousin, Harry (Mark Ryder).  Harry is determined to leave the Bunker and never again deal with any LARPers.  Laura, meanwhile, finds herself strangely drawn to the Bunker, even once it becomes obvious that something is killing all of her friends.  Harry cannot understand why Laura would want to be part of the Bunker Game in the first place.  Laura cannot understand why anyone would want to live in the real world.  Most viewers will probably be able to guess where this is all going.

That said, The Bunker Game gets the job done.  The underground bunker is a wonderfully creepy setting and, even if they are playing types, the cast still does their best to bring their characters to life.  (Of course, all of them are playing characters who spent a lot of money so that they could pretend to be Nazis so, well-acted or not, most viewers will have limited sympathy for them.)  Though it’s hard not to regret that the film didn’t do more with its potentially interesting plot, director Roberto Zazzara does a good job of creating and maintaining a properly ominous atmosphere.  For what it is, The Bunker Game works well enough.  One can regret that it’s not thematically challenging while also acknowledging that, whatever flaws the narrative may have, the film still gets the job done.  Those who are just looking for a well-made horror film and who aren’t necessarily concerned with whether or not the plot makes total sense will probably enjoy The Bunker Game.

The TSL’s Horror Grindhouse: The Astrologer (dir by James Glickenhaus)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

Quite possibly one of the most boring film ever made, 1975’s The Astrologer tells the story of …. well, I’m not really sure what the point of it all is.

Basically, an astrologer named Alexi Abarnel (Bob Byrd) has figured how to combine the zodiac with 70s technology and, as a result, everyone’s potential for good and evil can be determined simply by typing their birthdate into a computer.  The U.S. government funds his agency, which is known as Interzod.  And let’s be honest, that does sound like the type of dumbass thing that the government would fund, especially when the Democrats are in power.

According to the stars, the second coming of Christ is only a few days away.  Alexi is convinced that he has married the woman who is destined to give birth to the Savior.  Because of this, he refuses to consummate his marriage because it’s very important that she remain a virgin.  However, he hasn’t bothered to inform her of any of this so poor Kate (Monica Tidwell) spends all of her time wondering why her husband hasn’t touched her in five years of marriage and why it’s also so important to him that she never tell anyone the actual date of her birth.

Meanwhile, a group of gypsies are traveling the country and, under the leadership of Kajerste (Mark Buntzman), they are both murdering people and also compelling people to commit suicide.  Interzod is concerned about Kajerste because of his “zodiacal” potential but Alexei is also concerned that he doesn’t have Kajerste’s exact birthdate.  But the fact that Kajerste is commanding his followers to kill people should be enough to clue Interzod into the fact that Kajerste is bad guy, regardless of whether he’s a Capricorn or an Aquarius.  Fortunately, Interzod has come up with a plan on how to kill Kajerste, one that involves implanting thoughts in his head via electrodes and tranquilizer dots.  A young congressman (Al Narcisse) wants to help because he’s so interested in Interzod’s work.  However, it turns out that the ludicrously complicated plan to take out Kajerste is …. well, ludicrously complicated.  If my tax money is going to fund Interzod, I would hope they would make better use of it.

The film’s plot definitely has the potential to be interesting but, unfortunately, The Astrologer is a very, very talky film.  It only has a 78-minute running time and the majority of the film is made up people having very long and very dry conversations about how Interzod works and why its work is important.  The problem is that there’s not really any need to convince the viewers that Interzod is important or to show us how it works.  No watching this film is going to be interested in an in-depth examination of a fictional government agency.  Everyone knows that this isn’t 60 Minutes and it’s not like the NSA has hand-picked the correspondent who is going to be reporting on them.  This is a film about spies, astrology, and a killer cult.  It should be a lot of fun but instead it’s incredibly boring.

That’s not to say that it’s a total waste.  This was James Glickenhaus’s first film as a director.  Glickenhaus went to direct some well-regarded action films in the 80s and there are a handful of isolated moments in The Astrologer where it is obvious that the film was made by someone who had a good visual eye.   A cult ceremony scene that is almost totally made up of freeze frames is nicely done.  And, as always, it’s hard not to admire the ambition of someone trying to make a metaphysical thriller and tackle the big questions of existence on a budget.

In the end, though, the most interesting thing about The Astrologer is its insistence on having its characters frequently use the term “zodiacal.”  Take a drink every time that you hear someone say, “zodiacal” but don’t drive afterwards.

6 Trailers For October 2nd, 2022

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

With Horrorthon underway, it’s time for a special October edition of Lisa Marie’s Favorite Grindhouse Trailers!  Today, I bring you 6 spine-tingling trailers from the 30s and the 40s!  Say hello to old school horror at its best!

  1. Dracula (1931)

First off, here is the original trailer for the 1931 version of Dracula!  Yes, it’s a bit grainy and it’s a bit creaky and …. well, it’s old.  But listen, if I had been around in 1931 and I saw this trailer, I definitely would have been at the theater on opening day.  “Do vampires exist?” the trailer asks.  No, they do not but who knows?  Maybe the trailer would have made me question my beliefs for at least a day or two.

Apparently, the odd scene with Edward Van Sloan and the mirror was taken from an outtake.  The scene itself is not in the film and presumably, that mirror was not supposed to fall off the wall.  Also, it’s interesting to note that Dracula was not a Halloween film but instead, it was released just in time for Valentine’s Day!

2. Frankenstein (1931)

Of course, Universal followed Dracula from Frankenstein.  Again, this is one of the original trailers for the film and not a trailer that was put together and released in later years.  The trailer does, at one point, say, “It’s coming back!,” so I’m assuming that this version was sent to theaters where the film had played previously.  The trailer features a few scenes that were cut from the film and also a few alternate takes,

3. Bride of Frankenstein (1935)

If you have a weak heart …. you better leave now!  The early Universal horror films are not necessarily thought of as being grindhouse films but this trailer is pure grindhouse.

4. The Wolf Man (1941)

In the 40s, Dracula and Frankenstein’s Monster were joined by a werewolf named Larry.  Here is the original trailer for The Wolf Man.

5. Cat People (1943)

In 1943, horror took a new, psychological turn with the original Cat People!

6. House of Frankenstein (1944)

Finally, in 1944, all of the great monster came together.  Before The Avengers, before the Justice League, before the Snyder cut, there was the House of Frankenstein! 

Next week …. more horror trailers!

6 Classic Trailers For Umberto Lenzi’s Birthday

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

This week’s edition of Lisa Marie’s Favorite Grindhouse trailers is dedicated to Umberto Lenzi, who was born, on this date, in 1931.  Lenzi was one of the most prolific of the Italian directors who came to prominence in the 60s, 70s, and 80s.  A craftsman at heart, he directed films in every genre.  Admittedly, he was never quite the critical favorite that Argento, Margheriti, Deodato, Bava, Fulci, and Soavi were.  That’s a polite way of acknowledging that Umberto Lenzi was responsible for a few very bad films.  But he directed some good ones, as well.  Even if he’s not as acclaimed as some of his contemporaries, I think every Italian horror fan has at least one or two Lenzi films that they will happily defend to the grave.

Today, in honor of Lenzi’s life and work, here are 6 trailers for 6 Umberto Lenzi films!  These trailers, by the way, could be considered NSFW so watch them at your own discretion.

  1. Spasmo (1974)

I will be the first to admit that I have shared this trailer quite often on this site.  What can I say?  I just love the way everyone keeps going, “Spasmo!  Spamso!”  Spasmo is giallo, one with the a plot that will keep you guessing.

2. The Tough Ones (1976)

Though Lenzi is probably best-remembered for his horror films, he also directed his share of violent, French Connection-inspired crime films.  The Tough Ones is a good example.

3. From Corleone to Brooklyn (1979)

From Corleone to Brooklyn is another one of Lenzi’s crime films.  While Corleone is a town in Sicily, there’s little doubt that the main purpose of the title was to trick people into thinking that this film was somehow connected to The Godfather.

4. Eaten Alive (1980)

Eaten Alive was one of the many cannibal films that Lenzi directed.  This is actually one of the better examples of that rather icky genre.  It’s certainly superior to Lenzi’s own Cannibal Ferox.  Ivan Rassimov as Jim Jones turns out to be perfect casting.  The trailer below is actually an edited version of the original trailer.

5. Nightmare City (1980)

This was Lenzi’s best-known contribution to the zombie genre.  Uniquely, for the time, Lenzi’s zombies were fast and clever.  The film was not acclaimed when it was originally released but it has since been cited as an influence on many recent zombie films.  This is probably Lenzi’s most effective film as a director, even if the ending will probably have you rolling your eyes.

6. Nightmare Beach (1989)

Finally, in one of his final films, Lenzi brought together the spring break genre with the slasher genre.  There’s some debate over how much of this film was directed by Lenzi and how much by a mysterious figure known as Harry Kirkpatrick.  When I reviewed this film and mentioned the controversy, the film’s star, Nicolas De Toth, replied that Lenzi was definitely the one who directed.  As he would definitely be in the best position to know, that’s good enough for me!

The TSL’s Grindhouse: Bad Georgia Road (dir by John Broderick)

Posted on by Lisa Marie Bowman

This 1977 film is, for the most part, set in Alabama so I don’t know why it opens with a shot of a car driving down a country road while someone on the soundtrack sings about running moonshine down a “bad Georgia road.”  Then again, I’ve been to both Alabama and California and it’s pretty obvious that, while the film may be set in the former, it was filmed in the latter.  Those hills and mountains in the background definitely belong more to Hollywood than anywhere in the South.

As for the film itself, it’s about Molly Golden (Carol Lynley), a spoiled New York fashion designer who inherits an Alabama farm from an uncle that she barely knew.  When Molly finds out that the land is worth $100,000, she promptly quits her job and moves to Alabama, accompanied by her friend and assistant, Larch (John Kerry and no, not that politician with the private plane).  Molly is planning on selling the land and then heading back north with her money.  Unfortunately, it turns out that her uncle died owing everyone in the county money so, as a result, his farm is worthless and Molly is now in debt.

What is Molly to do?  Fortunately, her uncle’s two farmhands — Leroy (Gary Lockwood, who once co-starred in 2001: A Space Odyssey) and Arthur (Royal Dano) — are onhand to explain to her that her uncle was a moonshiner.  Molly decides to become a moonshiner, too!  Her plan is for Leroy and Arthur to do all the work and for her to make all the money.

While all of this is going on, Molly is also falling for Leroy.  She doesn’t want to admit because she’s a sophisticated New Yorker while Leroy is a redneck slob.  This leads to some conflict between the two of them, as she’s always talking down to Leroy and trying to deny that she’s totally in love with him.  Eventually, in a deeply uncomfortable scene (all the more so because the films attempts to play it for laughs), Leroy literally forces himself on her and Molly realizes that she could be totally happy runnin’ moonshine with a barely literate hick.

I’m a Southern girl and, perhaps even more importantly, I’m enough a country girl that I usually enjoy a good moonshine and car chase film.  And Bad Georgia Road gets off to a good start with an enjoyable chase scene, even if the road that the cars are roaring down is clearly located on the West Coast instead of the Deep South.  But things go off the rails as soon as Molly and Larch show up in Alabama.  What there is of a plot plays out at a painfully slow pace and there’s absolutely zero romantic chemistry between Gary Lockwood and Carol Lynley.  On the plus side, Royal Dano is enjoyable eccentric as Arthur, an old-timer who may not be educated but who knows everything that needs to be known about both the Bible and moonshine.

Bad Georgia Road is the type of 70s film that was specifically made to play in Southern drive-ins, where audiences would undoubtedly appreciate the film’s portrait of a clueless Yankee getting outsmarted by a bunch of country folk.  (For me and probably most other people, that’s actually the main appeal of the moonshine genre.)  But even if you think that Molly is a totally smug and self-righteous New Yorker, she still deserves better than to get stuck with Leroy, a man who looks like he probably reeks of chicken feed and spilled beer.  Especially if you’ve seen his personable performances in films like Model Shop and 2001, it’s hard not to feel bad for Gary Lockwood while watching this film.  What did that bad Georgia road do to him?