The Last House on the Left

Rating:
Summary: Overratted and badly made.
Review: There is a lot of hype around this film becouse of the fact that Wes Craven directed it. After watching this movie I wonder how Craven ever put this movie behind him and gave us Nightmare On Elm Street. The plot is about three escaped cons on the run. A young girl is attacked by them and murdered in the woods next to there house. The killers then go the parents house to stay posing as travelers.The parents discover that there daughter was killed and they know who did it.They then plot there revenge. First is that this is a good premise for a movie, however we have seen this type of revenge movie done much better in movies like Mad Max, Rage, and in the more recent In The Bedroom. Craven's directing would get better so I am a little reluctent to dump to badly on him becouse unlike Lucio Fulchi, Dario Argento, and Ed Wood, He would get better, but that does not make up for this film. The killers are not frightening at all and the script fails halfway though the film. The score (of all things) is amazingly distracting and unneeded. The movie,mabey in the hands of Craven now, or another good director, could be a better film but until then we just have this auful movie....By the way a much better movie about parents coping and revenge was In The Bedroom. Forget this movie and go see that......

Rating:
Summary: Horribly censored
Review: When Wes Craven first released this film in theatres people were literally getting sick and throwing up in the theatre it was also X rated. He was forced to retrim no telling how many times so therefor some lucky people out there may have seen the original version that clocked in at 95 mins in the theatres , or the version that is the most popular in older video stores with a large quality of horror titles that ran around 89 mins. I sadly only saw the 89 min version and it was good , but not as violent as I would have liked it to have been since I am a very huge gore fan. When MGM rereleased this film two years ago I jumped up and ran to get it stupidly thinking it would be a fully restored version because c'mon there have been alot more violent , repugnant , and disturbing films since this came out in 1972. I was wrong , not only was this not the completely restored version I was hoping for , it was even more censored then the version I had been familar with in the local video store. This MGM version is 82 mins ,and so heavily edited , and you can really tell by watching how censored it is that it could pass for a PG-13 by today's MPAA standards. I really hope Craven someday lets the original X rated (NC-17 now) version at 95 mins see the light of day because this doesnt cut it for me

Rating:
Summary: At least he would get better....
Review: Wes Craven's first movie and also his worst. I saw this movie really wanting to enjoy it, however in the end it is just a bad, bad movie. As a matter of fact it is #9 on my worst movie list. The story is about three escaped con's who capture,rape and kill a girl in the woods next to her house. The girls parents find out about the killing and take there revenge.
This could have been a good revenge movie, even a drama if Craven just put a little effort into it. As we saw this year with In The Bedroom, a fantastic film also along the same premise (they both deal with the loss of a child, and a parents revenge) a movie like this can be a good, serious drama.
This movie is not only slow but it also has mabey the worst score I have ever heard. It is so distracting at time's that it take's away from the movie.

Rating:
Summary: Watchable, much-talked-about horror in a badly CUT release!
Review: I'm not really going to rate this Craven remake of Bergman as a movie. The full "Last House on the Left" would get about 4 stars from me, I suppose. But here I will concentrate on this VHS release only. As for the movie itself, yes, it's far overrated. But, in a way, I was expecting it to be. But I just wanted to see it, since it's one of those "musts" on a horror conneisseur's movie list :), even though it has plenty of bad elements - the wooden "actress" who plays Phyllis, the unconvincing parents, the dumb bumbling cops (supposed to be comical elements, I presume), and the music (composed by Krug :))), which is B-A-D (the opening theme is okay, and as a whole, the soundtrack might stand on its own, for this kind of music. But the point is that it absolutely does NOT fit the mood, for God's sake! Hence - it's bad *for this movie*, because it doesn't work in it and only takes away from whatever ambience is created). The movie's gritty look and bad sound quality don't really add to the atmosphere too much. But, as I said, it should be on the list of "horrors to see". Even with all its shortcomings, "The Last House on the Left" is still miles above that pathetic trash horror-wannabe known as "the Blair Witch"!

But that's all beside the point. What I'm rating here is this *release* rather than the movie - hence only two stars. Firstly, it's not widescreen, although as far as I can tell the original was. Secondly, it's CUT! The idiot censors were at work here, obviously. Gone are many scenes, including the famous "cow intestines", "give her a hand" and "gotta leave something" ones (the last one is partially present in a two second flashback), and that's what makes this release unacceptable. Sure, it's cheap, and certainly I wanted to see it so much that I even accepted the inferior quality of NTSC :), and I guess if I knew it was censored, I would've bought it anyway... but still, it's not okay. I hate censorship. If you don't mind this movie being heavily cut or, like me, just want to see it anyway, you might as well get it in this release, since it seems to be the only non-underground one available. Otherwise, you might want to wait for a full release, which is - reportedly - in preparations.

Rating:
Summary: Unrated, one of the most repugnant films of all times!!!
Review: When I saw "Last House" the first time, I almost puked...
This film is violent, offensive, disturbing, gruesome,
sick, bad, and ...
The acting is bad, the cinematography is awful,
the story is a means to an end and the music is
terrible... the whole movie just STINKS!!!!
One my list of the worst films of all times!!!!
Just bad!

Rating:
Summary: very good
Review: there are allot of people out there that say its a baad film thier wrong it's realistik although it is veary mean and dark But it shows the true nature of us all even though we hide it i would not advise the weak or young to watch it even the strong barly will last.

Rating:
Summary: DO NOT LISTEN TO THE HYPE
Review: I wish there was an option to give negative stars, but oh well. This movie is a classic example of the 70s movie made for about 50 bucks, the actors, I use that term loosely, were terrible, wes craven should have apologized to the rest of the world for this one. Some one told me this was one of the most "disturbing " movies ever made, i sure was disturbed that I paid 12 bucks for this pile. My advice, if you really want this movie, take 12 dollars from your wallet and set it on fire, thats pretty much the feeling you'll get from "last dump on the left"

Rating:
Summary: Difficult film to explain...
Review: This is one of those films that are difficult to explain or defend. While the film actually is based on The Virgin Spring (as opposed to Roger Corman's liberal use of Egdar Allan Poe's legacy to try to give a hint of art to his Vincent Price films in the early '60s) and Wes Craven's stated intentions about making a comment on the state of American society at the time do seem to be sincere, its still a hard film to really recommend. Basically, two teenage girls from the middle class are kidnapped, raped, and brutally murdered by a pack of degenerates who are then just as brutally and sadistically murdered by the girl's family. What set the film apart is the extreme (and close-to-realistic) nature of the gore and violence involved. People literally have gotten sick while watching this film and for good reason. I saw an edited version and still found it hard to take. As well, Craven makes it clear that the criminals and the avenging parents are pretty much only distinguishable by their social class. The parents, by the end of the film, take the same sadistic pleasure in their revenge that their victims took in their original crime. Its a grim message and not an extremely pleasant one. It also might be a lot more truthful than a lot of people want to admit. Still, I can't really recommend this film for that message. To get to it, you have to sit through some really repugnant, sadistic stuff and its hard to say that Craven's artistic intent can really be used as justification. (I guess the main problem is that I got the feeling that the filmmakers were basically getting off on the same violence they claimed to be condemning.) This is the type of film that everyone will have to make up their own minds on. So, in the end, a film that painfully betrays its low budget but manages to carry a very disturbing power to it and claims to, at least, contain a message that is still relavent. Not for anyone with a weak stomach but if you're a fan of gore films, (I'm not but I won't condemn anyone who is -- sometimes excess and shock has an understandable appeal) Last House is kind of required viewing. It doesn't really work as a horror film (I was never really scared as much as disturbed) but it does have a primitive, very raw power. Whether to see it is your own decision. I don't regret having watched it but at the same time, its not something I ever want to sit through again.

Rating:
Summary: Some things to know about The Last House On The Left...
Review: If you decide to purchase this film, please bear in mind that the current release has been severely cut. All of those viewers who claim that 'The Last House On The Left' is too violent and disturbing have no doubt seen a relatively uncut version. However, even the 'uncut' versions of this film are still edited somewhat. It would be virtually impossible to find a completely untouched version of the film, which is probably a good thing for most people. The TRUTH is that the acting IS below average, but not too hideous (there ARE worse performances out there), the soundtrack IS laughable, and the editing IS as terrible as many people claim it to be. However, the story isn't really all THAT bad. Wes Craven's intention was to depict the horrors of the real world, without too much censorship (cutting and fading to black at the appropriate moments, for example). Therefore, YES, the 'UNCUT' version of this film actually IS violent, gory, and at times, downright disturbing. The viewer is left feeling depressed and filthy afterwards. The only reason that one would want to view this film is strictly for the benefit of seeing Wes Craven's first piece. Other than that, you should probably skip this one ;)

Rating:
Summary: Craven's disturbing debut.
Review: I won't bother going into a detailed defense of Last House, because I've learned from past experience that it will simply fall on deaf ears. I'll just say this: while it would not have been appropriate for Craven to make more films like this one, Last House on the Left was a legitimate statement to make once, and one time only. Any further films in this vein would simply have been a cynical or misguided attempt to duplicate the first film without its inner meaning. While Craven's best films are, in my opinion, Hills, Elm Street, Serpent & Rainbow, and New Nightmare, Last House is still preferable to the fluff he is churning out now as a supposedly "respectable" director. I generally shy away from using this phrase, but "sell-out" is the only term that can accurately describe what has happened to Craven since the commencement of the Scream series. Success with the obnoxious, bratty, Drew Barrymore-worshipping Gen-X clan has ruined a once important genre director, as he continues to make well executed but insignificant chic slasher parodies.

Last House is one of the most disturbing films I've seen because of its honest representation of violence: it bounds the viewer "within the yoke of both victim and violator" (to quote Robin Wood). I would defend Last House to anyone who dares attack it. Directing Scream 3 may make Craven commercially respectable, but in my opinion it has hampered Craven's credibility as an artist. Only sophomoric film students could consider Craven's recent career a boost to his respectability; the rest of us can only regret what has happened.