THE PROWLER takes
place in the fictional town of Avalon Bay, a cozy little slice of
normal on the coast where nothing much happens, so little in fact
that the Avalon Bay police force consists of a single sheriff and his
deputy.
It's like any other
town really, except that back in 1945 two unsolved murders took
place. As a result, there has been a 35-year moratorium on college
graduation parties. Does that sound like a bit of an overreaction to
you? Well, the whole damn movie is built on an overreaction. See, the
two people murdered that night were Rosemary and her boyfriend Roy.
Their killer was Rosemary's ex-boyfriend, a soldier recently returned
from fighting in World War II. Rosemary sent the poor guy a Dear John
letter, informing him that she simply couldn't wait for him to return
home. I mean, what else was there for this poor guy to do? Move on
with his life? Nah, better impale them both with the pointy end of a
pitchfork. It's only rational. A fella needs closure in his life.
It wasn't uncommon
for horror films to use Vietnam vets for their antagonists. They were
usually portrayed as mentally unstable, disillusioned lost souls so
used to violence on the battlefield that they had a hard time shaking
their murderous urges after returning home. I was more than a little
curious as to how THE PROWLER would use a World War II veteran in its
narrative, only to find out that it didn't plan on using that angle
at all. It was just a bit of fluff, a reason to use a period setting
during the opening pre-credits sequence. Instead, we just have yet
another slasher film where a party acts as a trigger for someone
carefully hiding a past trauma, resulting in a handful of deaths.
Yay.
In all honesty,
those deaths are the only reason to even watch this horrible film.
Tom Savini's excellent splatter effects make up for 99% of everything
good about THE PROWLER. They're suitably nasty, still convincing and
actually quite mesmerizing to behold. But everything else about THE
PROWLER is an unmitigated disaster. Once the opening credits stop
rolling and we're into the film proper, we meet our two leads, Mark
the flirty deputy and Pam the boring blonde. Mark is being left in
charge while the sheriff (played by Farley Granger) goes fishing for
the weekend. The sheriff mentions that there was a murder committed
one town over and there's a possibility that the killer might pay
their town a visit but nahh don't worry about that. Evening comes and
the dance kicks off.
While everyone is
having a good time, Pam's roommate and her boyfriend are both killed
by the titular Prowler, a dude dressed up in WWII gear. After having
punch spilled all over her dress, Pam goes home to change, not
noticing the two dead bodies in her bathroom. She's chased a bit by
the killer, but is rescued by Deputy Mark. And thus begins the
arduous murder mystery angle of the film. They head to the home of
Major Chatham, a respected town elder, and start looking around inside, unaware that the
killer is inside the house.
Now, this sequence
is the perfect example of why THE PROWLER is such an abysmal waste of
time. This sequence lasts a full eight minutes. It begins with Mark
and Pam entering the home. We're given a few quick glimpses of the
killer hiding in an upstairs room. As Mark wanders around, Pam
discovers some pictures of Rosemary. Not once does anyone run into
the killer. Not once are we shown the killer stalking either
character. Not once does anything actually happen during these eight
minutes. The entire sequence is only there so we can learn a single
throwaway bit of lore, that Rosemary was the daughter of the Major. I
can only speculate, but I think that this sequence was meant to set
up the Major as a suspect. But that makes no sense at all. We've seen
the Major already. We know that he's pushing 80 and is in a damn
wheelchair. So what the hell was the point of those eight minutes?
The entire film is
padded out with junk like that and when it isn't padded out with
filler, it's just crammed full of shit that makes no sense. At some
point, the killer digs up Rosemary's grave, removing the body and
replacing it with the body of one of Pam's friends. Why? Who knows?
The film never explains it. Worse, Pam later discovers Rosemary's
body (well, skeleton actually) stuffed inside a chimney. Again, why?
Why did the director feel the need to lavish attention on two teens
making out in the basement, the camera going full-on Killer Cam
readying us for some more gory action, only to cut away from those
teens, never to return? Why does Otto, the simple minded red herring
of the film, just show up at the end, shotgun in hand, to save Pam?
How did he know she was in there? Was he just running through the
streets with a shotgun, randomly checking every other house until he
found her? Why the hell is the killer using a pitchfork of all
things? Do people living on the New Jersey coast line regularly have
pitchforks in their homes?
I could excuse most
of the idiotic shit this movie throws at the screen if it were at
least engaging or entertaining but it simply is neither. It is a mind-numbingly boring affair, padded to the extreme with suspense
sequences that fail to impress, characters without personality and a
central mystery that goes completely unexplored. The oh-so-ironic
finale just happens because the film needed to end, not because of
any kind of narrative crescendo. THE PROWLER is bottom of the barrel,
brain dead slasher inanity, a movie without pulse or purpose, garbage
garbage garbage.
But it does raise an
interesting question. THE PROWLER was released in 1981, the same year
as MY BLOODY VALENTINE and FRIDAY THE 13TH, PART 2, two much better
films. If you look at the release dates, MY BLOODY VALENTINE was
released in February, FRIDAY THE 13TH, PART 2 was released in May and
THE PROWLER was released in November. I have to wonder this: did
director Joseph Zito and his writers see those two films and actively
rip them off or are all the similarities just coincidences? The plot
set-up for THE PROWLER is nearly identical to MY BLOODY VALENTINE,
with parties triggering killing sprees and there is a scene in Zito's
film that directly mirrors a scene in FRIDAY THE 13TH, PART 2. In
both films, a woman hides underneath a bed from a masked,
pitchfork-wielding killer. And in both films, a rat comes scurrying
up to the hiding woman's face, causing her to freak out a bit.
Was
that scene intended as homage or was it just a rip-off? It doesn't
actually matter as its inclusion completely backfired. I wasn't
panicked while watching it. I wasn't on the edge of my seat. I was
simply reminded that I could be watching a movie that works, instead
of a movie too lazy to even try.
No comments:
Post a Comment
SPEAK YOUR MIND