When I began to collect the films of Wes Craven there ended up being four those said films that I had never heard of. Four films that had fallen behind the shelf and stayed there for many a year, with only one of them being made after A Nightmare on Elm Street. Of these four films, I have very low hopes for this one (along with Invitation to Hell--another made for TV film).
Why such low hopes? Well, mainly because it is a TV movie made in 1978. That means incredibly low production values, a generic 1.33:1 aspect ratio and probably terrible acting. Another reason I fear this movie is, like I said, it seems to have entered the void of lost and forgotten films. A third reason to fear this film is that Craven's previous film, The Hills Have Eyes, didn't live up to the hype or even live up to his first film The Last House on the Left.
But in the duty of watching all things Craven (directed wise) Summer of Fear is next. I have no clue what it is about, although the alternate title Stranger in Our House does give me somewhat of an idea. I have shied away from reading anything about it as I don't want to be spoiled by any surprises the film might hold and don't want to be influenced upon the greatness or awfulness of the film.
Ok fellow readers it's time to watch review and discuss Wes Craven's third picture. It's loaded up in my DVD player and it's about to begin...
Review:
Film Rating: 63%
Breakdown (How Summer of Fear scored 63%):
Directing: 8 out of 10
Craven shows more skill and panache here than he did in both his previous films. Who would of thought a TV movie of all things would be his first shining hour. Summer of Fear shows Craven as a more confident director where he pulls out better performances from his cast and crew to make a better than average TV horror movie.
Re-playability: 7 out of 10
I'd watch this film again. It was fun and Fran Drescher was hot! Lee Purcell looked good too. I was taken aback at the quality of this film and was sad to see it end. Hell yeah I would watch it again. Not a hundred times but it is definitely rewatchable.
Originality: 6 out of 10
Summer of Fear: A girl suspects another girl of being a witch. An investigation occurs. Accidents happen. Death looms. How original is that? It's not very but it's done well enough to get past the been there done that seen it before routine.
Production Design (Special Effects/Sets/Locations): 6 out of 10
Once again, not much in way of special effects here. What we do see though is pretty good for a TV movie, especially one made in 1978. When a certain door explodes open it looks better than TV movies made 20 years later. Shockingly good production value at times. But otherwise we are left with wind blowers and stock footage that doesn't work that well.
The locations used are glorious and work well for the story. They feel natural and look good and could only of been enhanced if it was shot in widescreen. The only thing I thought could of been a set was the basement, which looked realistic enough, but everything else seems to have been shot on location.
The locations used are glorious and work well for the story. They feel natural and look good and could only of been enhanced if it was shot in widescreen. The only thing I thought could of been a set was the basement, which looked realistic enough, but everything else seems to have been shot on location.
Costumes and Make-Up: 5 out of 10
I can't say to much about the costumes. Generic 70's clothing, with Fran Drescher in short shorts. Nothing sticks out to much but nothing detracts either. The make-up on the other hand could of been so much better. Sometimes (most times) it just looks incredibly fake. When Linda Blair gets a rash it first looks good but as it heals it starts to look like stickers. The witch make-up? Meh, could of been better.
Script: 6 out of 10
A fun story, a fun ride and some great scenes. Sprinkle that with some clever dialogue and great character moments and we would have a great script. Summer of Fear comes close but is dusted with a few moments of god awful dialogue and a really corny wrap-up for our family. These dustings make for mediocracy at times but even still the picture comes off better than one would expect.
Cinematography: 6 out of 10
While not shot in widescreen, to it's detriment, Summer of Fear's cinematography is miles above the cinematography seen in The Hills Have Eyes. Things are framed nicely, there is no shake and most of all the lighting is perfect. I'm still baffled at the clarity of the picture that I just saw. Even still, with all those positives, the camera shots are still rather bland with not much happening in them. Like I said earlier, I'm sure a widescreen aspect ratio would of only benefited the picture. Oh well, it is what it is.
Editing: 6 out of 10
Like the camera work, the editing feels stronger and better than The Hills Have Eyes as well as The Last House on the Left. For the first time Craven has used an editor other than himself and although there is nothing at all special about the editing, at least this time around the shots tend to match up with one another.
Acting: 7 out of 10
Surprisingly the acting is pretty damn good here. Better than I expected and better than many a TV movie from this or any decade. Linda Blair fairs worst from the principle cast, but even still she isn't terrible. Lee Purcell is great, the rest of the family is great and the boyfriend is great. Unfortunately the sheriff is so bad he's hard to forget and MacDonald Carey isn't much better as Professor Jarvis, a small but essential role.
Music: 6 out of 10
Music: 6 out of 10
The music is okay. It's nothing to write home about. It's got a typical TV feel to it for the most part but there are a few cues that make things eerie or mysterious. I wouldn't and couldn't expect any better from a TV movie. I could and did expect worse but like everything else about Summer of Fear the music sure did exceed my expectations.
***ALERT: THE REST OF THIS REVIEW MAY CONTAIN SERIOUS SPOILERS: ALERT***
***ALERT: THE REST OF THIS REVIEW MAY CONTAIN SERIOUS SPOILERS: ALERT***
After:
Well, Craven proved me wrong yet again. This movie was much better than I expected. Sure Summer of Fear is a TV movie made in 1978 but it was so much better than that. Surprisingly, I found it to be a much better made movie than The Hills Have Eyes and was actually put together better than The Last House on the Left.
I was expecting a film filled with terrible acting, terrible dialogue, terrible cinematography and terrible effects. I was expecting a TV movie so poor that it had reason to disappea from the world for 25 years. I expected no effects and after what I witnessed with The Hills Have Eyes I expected an even worse film. But I was wrong. While not quite as good as his debut, Summer of Fear is a film that I found has hold up remarkably well and still works with modern audiences.
After a cheesy opening, complete with fade in's and fade out's and a seriously obvious stock footage car crash, Summer of Fear kicks into a solid story about a family (and town) who ends up being terrorized by witchcraft. Linda Blair is the only one who knows what's going on and is the only one who can stop it. The film never bores and even though there is some cheesy dialogue, and a weak ending that echoes back to the opening, I still really enjoyed this film. The final shot, the revelation that the witch isn't dead was satisfying to say the least, as her death scene seemed somewhat unjust. I mean she had extraordinary powers, so a car crash shouldn't of and couldn't of killed her.
Hilariously, the end credits are straight out of the original Star Trek television show but long before that there is so much to enjoy. Firstly, the film is fun and flies by at a break neck pace. Secondly, it is actually pretty eerie. And thirdly, it has a pretty good cast. I was wondering who the kid playing Peter was and when I looked it up I was amazed. He was young Clark Kent in Superman: The Movie. I knew he looked familiar. Then there was Lee Purcell, looking super sexy and menacing as the witch. But the biggest surprise, was a very young Fran Drescher in a small role. Wow! She was gorgeous. Who knew?
Thematically speaking, Summer of Fear doesn't connect to Craven's earlier work. Looking deep I guess you can see a slight connection with a 'monster/killer/witch' that tries to destroy an everyday family but that's a very common element in horror, Craven or not. As well, this be the first time that Craven has delved into the supernatural, shying away from a realistic story. Craven handles it well and directs the film with a steady and assured hand.
While not an Oscar (or Emmy) award winning film, I do recommend any horror buff to give it a shot. It'll make the time fly by and will jolt you in all the right places. It's surprisingly well acted for the most part, has a load of young and familiar faces and some super sexy girls. If you like horror (not just blood and guts) then give this film a shot, if you can find it. It's tame but effective and much better than you would expect.
After:
Well, Craven proved me wrong yet again. This movie was much better than I expected. Sure Summer of Fear is a TV movie made in 1978 but it was so much better than that. Surprisingly, I found it to be a much better made movie than The Hills Have Eyes and was actually put together better than The Last House on the Left.
I was expecting a film filled with terrible acting, terrible dialogue, terrible cinematography and terrible effects. I was expecting a TV movie so poor that it had reason to disappea from the world for 25 years. I expected no effects and after what I witnessed with The Hills Have Eyes I expected an even worse film. But I was wrong. While not quite as good as his debut, Summer of Fear is a film that I found has hold up remarkably well and still works with modern audiences.
After a cheesy opening, complete with fade in's and fade out's and a seriously obvious stock footage car crash, Summer of Fear kicks into a solid story about a family (and town) who ends up being terrorized by witchcraft. Linda Blair is the only one who knows what's going on and is the only one who can stop it. The film never bores and even though there is some cheesy dialogue, and a weak ending that echoes back to the opening, I still really enjoyed this film. The final shot, the revelation that the witch isn't dead was satisfying to say the least, as her death scene seemed somewhat unjust. I mean she had extraordinary powers, so a car crash shouldn't of and couldn't of killed her.
Hilariously, the end credits are straight out of the original Star Trek television show but long before that there is so much to enjoy. Firstly, the film is fun and flies by at a break neck pace. Secondly, it is actually pretty eerie. And thirdly, it has a pretty good cast. I was wondering who the kid playing Peter was and when I looked it up I was amazed. He was young Clark Kent in Superman: The Movie. I knew he looked familiar. Then there was Lee Purcell, looking super sexy and menacing as the witch. But the biggest surprise, was a very young Fran Drescher in a small role. Wow! She was gorgeous. Who knew?
Thematically speaking, Summer of Fear doesn't connect to Craven's earlier work. Looking deep I guess you can see a slight connection with a 'monster/killer/witch' that tries to destroy an everyday family but that's a very common element in horror, Craven or not. As well, this be the first time that Craven has delved into the supernatural, shying away from a realistic story. Craven handles it well and directs the film with a steady and assured hand.
While not an Oscar (or Emmy) award winning film, I do recommend any horror buff to give it a shot. It'll make the time fly by and will jolt you in all the right places. It's surprisingly well acted for the most part, has a load of young and familiar faces and some super sexy girls. If you like horror (not just blood and guts) then give this film a shot, if you can find it. It's tame but effective and much better than you would expect.
No comments:
Post a Comment