31 Days to Scare ~ He Knows You’re Alone (1980)

1

The Facts:

Synopsis: A young bride-to-be is being stalked by a serial killer.

Stars: Don Scardino, Caitlin O’Heaney, Patsy Pease, Elizabeth Kemp, Tom Rolfing, James Rebhorn, Dana Barron, Tom Hanks

Director: Armand Mastroianni

Rated: R

Running Length: 94 minutes

TMMM Score: (7.5/10)

Review:  For years all I had heard about He Knows You’re Alone was the tiny trivia factoid that it was the screen debut of Tom Hanks.  Over the years it’s become a footnote to his resume and not much else, falling into the forgotten pit of early slasher films.  Usually, these movies earned their place on the bottom of the heap so when I finally caught this one I was pleasantly surprised to find He Knows You’re Alone to be a competent, if not outright totally entertaining, bit of ‘80s nostalgia.

It’s almost impossible to watch the movie now and try to bear in mind just how early it arrived on the scene.  Released in August of 1980, it came out three months after Friday the 13th and two years after Halloween.  Sequels to both these lasting franchises hadn’t been released and the clones and copycats hadn’t reared their low-budget heads yet so He Knows You’re Alone was still a newcomer to audiences looking for some scares.  Also, the focus on guts and gore hadn’t become de rigueur yet which is why the film is curiously absent of grotesque make-up and buckets of blood.

Leading with a strong opening that’s meta before it became a cliché, we quickly get down to business as a killer dispatches of a young lass at a movie theater.  This killer (creepily played by Tom Rolfing) doesn’t wear a mask so we always know who’s behind it all, but screenwriter Scott Parker has fleshed out the maniac and through flashbacks shows him to be a jilted lover triggered by any female ready to walk down the aisle.  While heading out of town, the killer happens upon a woman (Caitlin O’Heaney) saying goodbye to her fiancé as he departs for his bachelor weekend.  She’ll be spending time with her bridal party so they’re all vulnerable to the killer stalking them over the next few days.

While it draws comparisons in hindsight to Friday the 13th (even though it was filming at the same time) the movie obviously follows the rough outline set out by Halloween, the granddaddy of all slasher films.  The three women each have their own agenda for the weekend; one is going to get some (the delightfully slutty Patsy Pease romping around with her married professor lover played by the late, great James Rebhorn, I Love Trouble) one wants to get some (Elizabeth Kemp, looking to hook-up with a jogger played by Hanks, Saving Mr. Banks), and our bride still isn’t sure her fiancé is the man for her and entertains leaving him for a former flame (Don Scardino).

Director Armand Mastroianni plays it relatively cool for the first hour or so, peppering the film with the occasional suspense sequence but focusing a large amount of time on character development. They might be one-dimensional creations but they sure do get time to talk!  With a lack of blood and gore the film can feel a bit “soft” for the genre but I for one appreciated not seeing every last person disemboweled or sliced up.  I’m sure budget had everything to do with it but the restraint shown here is admirable.

Performances are strong and O’Heaney is a steely lead.  With her beady eyes and pointed features she comes off as an ordinary woman caught in an extraordinary circumstance.  I appreciated that when she starts running from the killer she doesn’t stick around the house to be picked off but instead runs as fast as she can into town and, admittedly, into the protective arms of her ex.  Kicking into high gear for a finale set inside a cavernous mortuary that stretches ever so slightly longer than it should, there is a nice wrap-up that allows our final girl to get up close and personal with her stalker.  For what it’s worth, Hanks is nice enough to have around even though he doesn’t play much of a part in the grand scheme of things.  Not making an appearance until the film is more than half over, rumor has it his character was supposed to be killed off but producers felt like the audience would find him too likable to be killed so he just kind of disappears near the end.

This is one that’s too good to be totally forgotten.  Though other movies would come around that would be scarier and gorier, there’s some fun stuff going on.  It may be too slow for audiences weaned on numerous jump scares and too tame for those with a bloodlust but I feel the film holds up nicely even when you do compare it to other films in the genre.  It may sit alone on a shelf during this time of year as more intense films are dusted off, but give this one a go if you have the chance.

In Praise of Teasers ~ The Game (1997)

game

I have a serious problem with movie trailers lately. It seems like nearly every preview that’s released is about 2:30 minutes long and gives away almost every aspect of the movie, acting more like a Cliff Notes version of the movie being advertised rather than something to entice an audience into coming back and seeing the full product.

In this day and age where all aspects of a movie are fairly well known before an inch of footage is seen the subtlety of a well crafted “teaser” trailer is totally gone…and I miss it…I miss it a lot. So I decided to go back to some of the teaser trailers I fondly remember and, in a way, reintroduce them. Whether the actual movie was good or bad is neither here nor there…but pay attention to how each of these teasers work in their own special way to grab the attention of movie-goers.

The Game (1997)

This clever teaser for The Game is so respected it even warranted its own special feature on the Criterion BluRay release of the film in 2012.  Rendered by computer animation, it teases a film of manipulation where the main character is no longer in control of pulling the strings of his own life.  Some may find that David Fincher’s 1997 puzzle box of a film loses something on repeated viewings once you know the twist but I find the movie a fascinating watch to see how it all comes together.

Missed my previous teaser reviews? Check out my look at Alien, Misery, Bram Stoker’s Dracula, Showgirls, Jurassic Park, Jaws 3D/Jaws: The Revenge, Total Recall, Halloween II: Season of the Witch, In the Line of Fire

Down From the Shelf ~ I Love Trouble

i_love_trouble

The Facts:

Synopsis: Peter Brackett and Sabrina Peterson are two competing Chicago newspaper reporters who join forces to unravel the mystery behind a train derailment.

Stars: Nick Nolte, Julia Roberts, Saul Rubinek, Marsha Mason, James Rebhorn, Robert Loggia

Director: Charles Shyer

Rated: PG

Running Length: 123 minutes

TMMM Score: (4/10)

Review:  On paper, I’m sure that writing team Nancy Meyers and Charles Shyer thought they had a winner.  Aping the same style of rat-a-tat comedy that worked so well for the likes of Spencer Tracy/Katherine Hepburn in movies such as Bringing Up Baby, I Love Trouble was intended to be a modern take on a classic concept.  Unfortunately, Meyers/Shyer have overstuffed their turkey of a plot with about 40 minutes of extra material and made more than a few blunders in the casting department.

At the time of its release, Roberts was the top movie star and could have easily been the only headliner to draw in crowds.  They wanted to see their pretty woman in light romantic fare and matched up with a swoon-worthy fella to recapture that magic.  Now, no one is saying that Roberts had to stick with that formula and to her credit I think she signed on to the film with the best of intentions.  It’s the addition of Nolte as her co-star that put a large hole in an already weighty ship.

Nolte is a strong dramatic actor, a ruggishly handsome dude that worked his way through the 70’s and 80’s in a string of diverse turns.  He’s so uncomfortable in this type of movie that it’s almost painful to watch him try.  It was well documented that Nolte took this film for the money and didn’t get along well with Roberts…and it all shows up on screen.  Though Roberts and Nolte give it their best effort and create a few interesting moments, the lack of chemistry is apparent to the point where you almost beg them not to kiss.

It’s not all their fault, though.  The script from Meyers/Shyer and Shyer’s direction are wooden and forced without a lot of cohesion. There’s a vague murder mystery plot that reporters Roberts and Nolte team up to try to solve (mostly for their own glory rather than any real dedication to the good of the public) and to say the reasons behind the murder were loony would be an understatement.  There’s a big to-do about growth hormones in cows and how it causes cancer…great stuff for setting the scene for romance, right?

The movie is way too long and should have been trimmed down from 123 minutes to 90…just enough time for the mechanics of the film to present themselves and run their course.  I remember seeing this film in the theaters when it was released and not being a huge fan.  I’ve been drawn to it several times since and will learn my lesson that it’s just not a very good film someday.  I do love bad movies but I do not love the trouble this one causes.