THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT
Written and directed by Wes Craven
Starring Sandra Peabody, David Hess
Released in 1972
Written and directed by Wes Craven
Starring Sandra Peabody, David Hess
Released in 1972
It's sadistic revenge drive-in horror movie night here, where we bring you our famous in progress review of the first feature film bearing the writer/director credits for Wes Craven. As you may have guessed, the film is The Last House on the Left (1972), a movie based on the story conveyed in an Ingmar Bergman film called The Virgin Spring (1960). Bergman's film stirred a bit of controversy upon release and even found itself banned in parts of Texas because of its depiction of a particularly brutal rape. Craven's film was far more shattering and found itself awash in controversy that actually helped promote this movie (budgeted at less than $90,000) into the ten million dollar zone.
One thing must be understood going in. This is a horror movie. What happens in this film is horrible. You would not want to be one of the victims and you would not want to be one of the perpetrators. You would not want to be close to either group. Chances are you wouldn't want to be the parents of the victims, even though it's the parents who seek to balance the scales of justice. You certainly would not want to be the two idiot cops who are only in the film to confuse us, which is part of what I'll be bold and refer to as Craven's style.
One of the things about this film that continues to disturb many people all these years later is that the inserted scenes with the sheriff and his deputy have their humorous elements, yet those scenes are invariably inserted between incidents of vile torture and brutality happening not far away. Plus bad guy David Hess, who plays Krug, the leader of the sadistic gang, also gets to sing the songs in the movie and the songs are all upbeat bluegrass or country rock numbers. So on the one hand we are properly repulsed by some elongated and grisly stuff initiated by Krug, Weasel and their accomplices against Mari and Phyllis, two seventeen year olds out for a fun evening at the rock show. On the other hand, we have chirpy music and clownish cops punctuating the proceedings for no apparent reason other than to demarcate the distinction between the naive wholesomeness of the law and order boys and the depraved actions of some savage sex offenders. When Mari tells her Dad that nobody wears bras anymore, we're a little surprised at her candid approach with her pop. Yet we also suspect that what's really going on is that her fascination with her own developing physique is going to parallel with some unwanted trouble. After all, they didn't call this an exploitation film for nothing.
The two girls are out looking for some Colombian red bud smoking material when they happen upon Krug's junkie son. He says he can hook the two up and leads them to their doom. Krug and Weasel have escaped prison and joined Junior and Sadie on a crime spree of torture and delight. To give you one example (one that back then caused a lot of people to freak out--and I'll bet it still does), out in the woods, Krug orders Phyllis to piss her pants. She does it. She does it because she is afraid what will happen if she refuses.
I don't doubt for one second that there are bad folks out there who would get their kicks doing something very much like what happens in this film. I imagine they'd think themselves fairly cool and removed from Pleasant Valley Sunday, the way the four bad folks in this movie do. We're accustomed to seeing that kind of gang mentality in gangster movies from the 1940s. What no one was expecting and the reason this film remains noteworthy all these years later is that it is the parents who act out the revenge. And that, in a strange way, is an attempt to make a moral statement, something that did not always happen in a drive-in knife flick.
Moral statement? Am I nuts? Yes, possibly, but it also happens that in this particular case I may also be correct. That's because in its own occasionally sloppy way, The Last House is an allegory for certain atrocities that were taking place in Vietnam. When the cops finally get to the house where the parents have systematically taken care of business, there is not much doubt but what these two representatives of authority are going to cover up the crime. Now we are never explicitly told this and it must be admitted that subtlety is not exactly an overwhelming component of this movie. But one needn't be Kreskin to figure out that the cops are going to side with the parents because of what the bad guys did to the two young girls. So while this movie may go about its subject in a way that you will feel is somewhat less than admirable (and you may be right about that), it does suggest that the history of violence is that it (a) begets more violence, and (b) that people tend to be more sympathetic to what they consider revenge than to other motivations when it comes to violent behavior. Hey, at least this crazy thing offers an idea, which is much more than most of the grindhouse movies of that time were doing.
Incidently, Craven reportedly worked with Rogue Films on the 2009 remake, although you won't find his name attached to the IMDB listing, probably because the remake was so grossly inferior. The original, while not exactly earth-shattering in its visuals, does have the advantage of starring Hess, one of the most underrated villains you've ever loathed.
One thing must be understood going in. This is a horror movie. What happens in this film is horrible. You would not want to be one of the victims and you would not want to be one of the perpetrators. You would not want to be close to either group. Chances are you wouldn't want to be the parents of the victims, even though it's the parents who seek to balance the scales of justice. You certainly would not want to be the two idiot cops who are only in the film to confuse us, which is part of what I'll be bold and refer to as Craven's style.
One of the things about this film that continues to disturb many people all these years later is that the inserted scenes with the sheriff and his deputy have their humorous elements, yet those scenes are invariably inserted between incidents of vile torture and brutality happening not far away. Plus bad guy David Hess, who plays Krug, the leader of the sadistic gang, also gets to sing the songs in the movie and the songs are all upbeat bluegrass or country rock numbers. So on the one hand we are properly repulsed by some elongated and grisly stuff initiated by Krug, Weasel and their accomplices against Mari and Phyllis, two seventeen year olds out for a fun evening at the rock show. On the other hand, we have chirpy music and clownish cops punctuating the proceedings for no apparent reason other than to demarcate the distinction between the naive wholesomeness of the law and order boys and the depraved actions of some savage sex offenders. When Mari tells her Dad that nobody wears bras anymore, we're a little surprised at her candid approach with her pop. Yet we also suspect that what's really going on is that her fascination with her own developing physique is going to parallel with some unwanted trouble. After all, they didn't call this an exploitation film for nothing.
The two girls are out looking for some Colombian red bud smoking material when they happen upon Krug's junkie son. He says he can hook the two up and leads them to their doom. Krug and Weasel have escaped prison and joined Junior and Sadie on a crime spree of torture and delight. To give you one example (one that back then caused a lot of people to freak out--and I'll bet it still does), out in the woods, Krug orders Phyllis to piss her pants. She does it. She does it because she is afraid what will happen if she refuses.
I don't doubt for one second that there are bad folks out there who would get their kicks doing something very much like what happens in this film. I imagine they'd think themselves fairly cool and removed from Pleasant Valley Sunday, the way the four bad folks in this movie do. We're accustomed to seeing that kind of gang mentality in gangster movies from the 1940s. What no one was expecting and the reason this film remains noteworthy all these years later is that it is the parents who act out the revenge. And that, in a strange way, is an attempt to make a moral statement, something that did not always happen in a drive-in knife flick.
Moral statement? Am I nuts? Yes, possibly, but it also happens that in this particular case I may also be correct. That's because in its own occasionally sloppy way, The Last House is an allegory for certain atrocities that were taking place in Vietnam. When the cops finally get to the house where the parents have systematically taken care of business, there is not much doubt but what these two representatives of authority are going to cover up the crime. Now we are never explicitly told this and it must be admitted that subtlety is not exactly an overwhelming component of this movie. But one needn't be Kreskin to figure out that the cops are going to side with the parents because of what the bad guys did to the two young girls. So while this movie may go about its subject in a way that you will feel is somewhat less than admirable (and you may be right about that), it does suggest that the history of violence is that it (a) begets more violence, and (b) that people tend to be more sympathetic to what they consider revenge than to other motivations when it comes to violent behavior. Hey, at least this crazy thing offers an idea, which is much more than most of the grindhouse movies of that time were doing.
Incidently, Craven reportedly worked with Rogue Films on the 2009 remake, although you won't find his name attached to the IMDB listing, probably because the remake was so grossly inferior. The original, while not exactly earth-shattering in its visuals, does have the advantage of starring Hess, one of the most underrated villains you've ever loathed.
