Rating: 
Summary: The extras are OK but buy it for the film.
Review: This is a film with some history! Over here in England the film was banned outright for many years and has only recently been released on DVD with a bunch of cuts made by the censor. The version of the film on this US (region 1) DVD is as close to Wes Craven's original cut as is possible. The extras on the DVD include previously unreleased footage from the film, much of which is silent due to the sound recording having been lost, a documentary about the making of the film, and a few bits and pieces of interviews and so on. To be honest you probably won't watch the extras more than once, they are OK but not worth the price of admission on their own.The real draw is the film. There are two versions included, identical in content, but in different aspect ratios. On one side an anamorphic widescreen version, and on the other a regular version for viewers with non-widescreen TV's. The plot is an old one, and serves as a good reminder to be careful around strangers, especially when they are scary psychopaths who are on the run from the law! The film was shot in the early 1970's so the clothes, cars and props appear quite dated, a bit like watching old re-runs of TV shows, and the special effects have a bit of a dated look to them too. That said, this doesn't really detract from the basic punch of the film which goes right for the breadbasket. What is surprising is that the film stirred up so much publicity and outrage when it was originally released but does not seem to arouse the same amount of hostility and emotion now. The film WAS shocking in the early 1970s. For some people it still will be. But for many of us now the film will not shock or outrage at all. Perhaps the film contains a hidden lesson, what shocks now will be tomorrow's everyday fare, and that's kinda scary. Buy this film because it is entertaining and shocking. It may not have the latest special effects, it may not have the most gore, but the film does make you think, and that's worth your money.
Rating: 
Summary: In response to NYC
Review: In response to the last review of this film, I believe you will find that this DVD is about the most uncut version of the film available (note that I specified "DVD"). The only other version of this film available on DVD ran for a total of 81 minutes in contrast to the 84 of this version. I had to laugh at your review. You first of all state that this movie is "sick" and "evil," then go on to ask if there is an unrated version of it available! I also had to laugh at the way you despise the two characters (Radice and Hess) for what they inflicted upon the two young girls, yet give no attention to the fact that they are murdered in equally horrendous ways, which you consider not to be "evil" or "sick." The bottom line of this is simply the fact that aside from the above, you are being dreadfully over-sighted, as this is purely a film, nothing more. Wes Craven had hardly any money to make this film with and due to the fact that "woodland" scenes were filmed in various back yards, the filming crew were regularly being thrown off properties as trespassers by the house owners and had to then re-locate. When you consider these facts, it is rather easy to see why Wes Craven added the rather jovial atmosphere and scenes to it which nobody of clear judgement and sound mind would ever take seriously!
Rating: 
Summary: This is a HARD ONE to watch!!
Review: This is the type of film that can only be viewed once in a great while for me cause of the true and disturbing nature of the plot. The story involves two blossoming beauties, one from the country and one from the city, who go into the city to check out a concert. What awaits them is relentless terror brought on by a group of sickos who have no regard for human life whatsoever. Actually based on Ingmar Bergman's Jungfrukällan (The Virgin Spring). So many other films have tried to use the same concept, but NONE come close to this. The DVD is a must own for the awesome extras, though the image and sound are dated.
Rating:
Summary: UUggh....ZZZ
Review: This is a snoozer. Wes doesn't have many good movies, and this is easily one of his worst. It was so boring and monotonous and it wasn't scary, disturbing, or suspenseful. I laughed at it. There was nothing scary at all about this...! I kept waiting for it to get scary, and it never did. It was boring and monotonous. It just plain [stinks]! See something else.
Rating:
Summary: The last movie you should ever let your kids see!
Review: Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! O.K. what kind of movie is this? It does not get any more disturbing then this movie, i just watched it last night. This movie is SICK!!! What really makes it bad is how realistic it is, those poor girls. These convicts are just the scum of the earth and in my opinion they got of easy at the end of the film. Great performances all the way around, their is not a weak performance in the movie. Krug, the convict leader is especially evil and vicious. His girl friend is also convincing as a disgusting, heartless, killer. The two teenaged girls also play their parts extreemly well, especially the daughter of the older couple. This movie gave me bad dreams and was way more unsetteling than Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th because the monsters in this movie were just human beings. These girls were so naive and foolish, (Message to everyone reading, when buying drugs from strangers never, NEVER, follow them anywhere to get it. Wait for them to come back with the drugs, stay in a public place. If anyone does try to convince you to go with them someplace to buy drugs, they are trying to set you up to be robbed or worse, immediatly break of communication with them and get away! Believe me I know about these things.) they were in over their heads, they were just kids even though they might have looked like women. The rape and pyschological torture scenes were beyond the beyond, espeically the one in the woods where the girls were made to have sex with each other. Both girls were brave in different ways, and the daughter of the older couple was even able to make these cold blooded, remorseless convicts feel guilty about what they had done, she shamed them with her purity in comparison to their filth. That scene is the best scene in the movie. The convicts get their just deserts I suppose but it does not make up for what the parents lost. The bumbling cops were the perfect compliament, tottaly inept, their foolish mishandling of the situation cost the girls their lives. I read a lot of reviews where people complained about these scense, claiming that they did not understand why these "comic" scenes were in the movie, Craven should not have tried to be "funny". Instead he should have concentrated more on the terror. Either these people are retarded or have no sense of irony. The scenes with the cops were in no way intended to be funny at all, they were meant to illustrate how stupid the police were and how badly they handled the situation. The happy, slapstick music and the banter between the Sherieff and the Deputy was meant to demonstrate the juvinille, country bumpkin, absurd mindstate of the police. They did not take the situation serioulsy and that is why the scenes with them are not serious. It is meant as a contrast to the horror of what is happening to the teenaged girl in the woods. While the cops are goofing of and teasing each other innocent lives are being lost. I also liked the happy music Craven used, it contrasted perfectly with the dead serious situation of the abuse of the girls in the woods and made it even more disturbing. The music hightened the tension of the film and made the viewer really feel the horror of the situation even more. This movie is BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD!!!! But not bad as in low quality, bad as in EVIL!!! The music during the credits was really distrubing. This movie seems like it was from hell or something, I dont know, this movie got to me and that is hard to do. I have seen "I Spit On Your Grave" but that was just basically well acted rape porn with a revenge twist. I dont know what this movie is, I do not know how to label or define it, it defies classification. It is not horror, drama, action, it is just EVIL. Some reviwers gave this movie bad reviews because they said it was badly acted and directed, to me that sounds like a pyschological defense mechanism to avoid the emotional truama this movie induces on the viwer. I can understand why someone would hate this move, espically women, and feel that it never should have been made. But I do not think anyone that is being honest with themselves can flippanlty disregard it and claim that it had no impact on them, that it was "funny". Only really, really, sick people would think this movie was funny. This movie is CRAZY! You cannot make movies like this anymore in America, only in the 1970s where directors truly free to really push the limits. This is by far Craven's best film, better than Scream or anything else he has ever made. This movie has an R rating, they must have bribed someone to get that. This movie was edited, I know their are scenes of violence and rape that were cut, especially the scene in the woods. Does anyone know if their is an unrated version of this film?
Rating:
Summary: Realism Arrives In Horror Movies.
Review: This 1972 production is one of the first films to present violence in the context of American society, and not in castles or anything. Wes Craven, who is recognized with his 'Scream' triology by masses, does a fine job in his debut. The movie's plot is as follows: A bunch of guys and a girl, think that they need more girls to their group for the sake of equalizing the number of girls and guys in the group, and of course having a little fun. We see two girls, who're to see a concert in a bad neighborhood. They want to have some 'grass', and ask someone in the street to have 'a cut'. He calls them to their house, and viola! They're trapped. It will be the next couple of violent hours where we see the girls being brutally harrassed, raped, and killed out in the woods. What makes the story more interesting is that it all happens in the walking distance of Mari's - one of the killed girls - house. The group changes clothes and knock on the family's door. In fact, they will be welcomed very well. However, things will change as the parents discover what they've done. The acting is not perfect; I must admit that. The soundtrack isn't either. In a lot of the violent moments, the music director chooses to put country folk music, which just doesn't make any sense. Had they put some real scary music, the effect would have been much more intensifying. However, 'Last House on the Left' is overall a successful production, which should be watched to see where we were before and where we are now in scary movies. In fact, I like the old movies.
Rating: 
Summary: scary,but not THAT scary.
Review: when i saw it for the first time around a year or so ago, well, when i just bought it from a region 1 dvd store, i was expecting it to be pretty scary. ...but...after viewing the the film i thought it had a few select disturbing scenes but that's about it. i mean the disemboweling scene was very graphic but other than that not much else was scary about it. for a very short film the scary scenes were over before they began. the ending where the leader krug got hacked up by the chainsaw wielding revengeful father, it didn't show any gory parts of him being killed. the special features had more scary bits in it to be honest. IF you want a MORE disturbing movie, watch texas chainsaw massacre for the billionth time, or THE EXORCIST, voted the scariest movie of all time. i did like the film, but it could've been a lot more scary and disturbing. mari's last name "collingwood" is of a football team called the "COLLINGWOOD MAGPIES" IN AUSTRALIA.
Rating:
Summary: Where Do We Begin?
Review: My husband and I rented this last night (thank God we had a Blockbuster freebie pass) and we were actually rolling our eyes and chuckling at the poor acting, poor film quality, etc. We both grew up in the 70's and can remember the trailers for this movie and how forbidden it was. Anyways, this movie is so unbelievably awful that we honestly don't know where to begin to help others with our review. None of the characters are convincing, and it is so boring that we cannot believe anyone was even upset by anything about it unless they paid to see it. It is that ridiculous. There are at least four times these young girls could have gotten away but don't even try. The one time the one girl does run away you almost could care less because when three chase after her how do any of them NOT get lost in the woods!? - none of them are from the area. The one girl who is left with a whining dope addict (who by the way is just beginning withdrawal symptoms) doesn't even try to run across the street to her own house!!! She even tells him "I live right across the street!" Ugh, the bad "guys" are stupid, and the parents just aren't very concerned that their 17-year-old supposedly left a concert at 2 a.m. and still hasn't arrived home by the following afternoon! The police officers are buffoons. And that famous "pay-back" seen with the mother in the woods with one of the escapees is just so bad, I don't even know how to review it. What's wrong with this picture? Well, just about everything. Listen, all this hype is of course going to make you want to watch it, we did too, but it is just one of those "mental" 1970's movies that is only popular because it was Wes Craven's first film.
Rating: 
Summary: Great story, lousy movie
Review: Because I am in the UK, this movie was banned from when it was first released and never given proper censorship to be released - until now. I have to say I was disappointed. Two 17 year old girls head out to catch a concert but on their way home they are captured by 4 escaped convicts and they are dragged into the woods not 20 yards from their house where they are subjected to severe brutality - rape, torture, humiliation and disembowerment before finally being killed in a very quick scene that lacks tension. I defy anyone to watch it and NOT feel emotionally disturbed. I do think Wes Craven's idea to release it was "here's a movie that pushes the boundaries - watch it if you dare". And he succeeded. Although I said above it's a lousy movie it's not because of what happens - it's how it's FILMED. The sheer fact that two young girls are subjected to ruthless brutality by psychos across the street from their house while their parents give a statement to the local sheriff in their livingroom is so disturbing, it makes your heart ache.It makes the viewer hooked on what's happening and feel sorrow for the victims and their parents who don't even know it's going on across the street from their own home. That's what a movie is all about - getting the audience hooked and interested - it's just a pity this one was handled badly. If this movie was re-made today with famous actors it would be an instant classic. This version is let down by poor direction,terrible music, some bad acting and a few comic moments that are so distracting it veers away from the horror that's supposed to be the imperative ingredient of the movie. Apart from the comic moments in it, the acting lets it down. The parents don't seem too worried that their daughter failed to come home 24 hours after a concert she went to, and when they find her body in the woods their reaction to the discovery of her death is very sketchilly performed. Wes Craven is a master horror filmaker - but with this he should have tried harder, without the comic elements. Go watch "Scream" instead!!
Rating:
Summary: Degrading but it's only a movie!
Review: I personally I think this is a blinder of a movie. I grew up watching horror films from the age of 8. Don't worry I haven't turned into "John Krug", if anything quite the opposite. Horror's have made me an all-rounded person, and i take them light-heartedly now. It is movies like this that I wish I had the opportunity of seeing when I was young. That may be a bad thing, seeing as though this movie is very sick in parts, but the one thing I always reminded myself when I was young, was movies were not real. In fact Arachnophobia scared me when I was 10 (and that was a PG) and then I was immune from horror movies for the rest of my life. I was ashamed that this movie was banned for 30 years in the UK, because I have seen a lot scarier films when I was 8! True what the four murderers do is absolutely disgusting, but afterwards we can relish in the parents getting their own back, which made me laugh and I loved every minute of it! This movie didnt scare me, but I thouroughly enjoyed it, the acting was superb and it is actually very funny in places. The sound isn't all that, but it actually gives it a documentary feel. It is a very true-to-life horror movie, which differentiates it from typical slasher movies and another thing to point out is that it is Wes Craven's debut. If you don't mind going back in time to relish in some good-old horror and you don't mind it of a true nature, OR that can tolerate violence to the extreme... then this should be in your possession RIGHT NOW! If you are a very sensitive college girl with a lot going for you, then I recommend you give it a miss! However be warned you are missing out on the best horror film ever made.
|
