The blog is a serious look at horror films and appreciate that she also was struck by that one -- many, including Roger Ebert, thought it trash. As "guest" there notes, it was not exactly high art in various ways, but it definitely had some artistic qualities that an aficionado of the genre or of film in general might appreciate. That blog had various posts about the remake as it was developed, down to talking about the poster (the original spoke of "five" people when only four were involved).
But, then it seemed to skip over talking about the film when it came out! Asked about this in comments, she made a joke about how it wasn't worthy of comment. Watching it, I sort of agree -- the remake loses some of the bucolic, low budget feel of the original, pads on unnecessary material and the revenge killings are done in a particularly unbelievable and convoluted fashion. Realize the original wasn't totally believable there, but its simplicity had a certain powerful charm. Don't know about everyone, but for this fan of the original "cult classic," the remake was an insult.
Anyway, Night School isn't that sort of movie though both were made around the same time (this one a few years later) and were not mere "slasher" films (the other film was of the Death Wish revenge variety with that film's nod to seriousness; have not seen them, but the sequels supposedly are more pedestrian exploitation flicks). Key to Night School are the good leads (particularly the detective and Rachel Ward, who in hindsight is the most recognizable / in her first film role) and the atmosphere retained throughout. The movie has a sort of trick to it, which is handled well too. The blog post touches on that.
I was able to rent the film for $2.99 via a download on my television package, but it is also available cheap on Amazon instant download and I'd suppose Netflix. It was a nice little find.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thanks for your .02!