Six northerners (a young woman, a school teacher and two married couples) are detoured into the small southern town of Pleasant Valley, population 2000. The date is April 1965, the centennial of the American Civil War's conclusion and a violent incident in the town's past. What do these "maniacs" have planned for their celebration?
Sadly, I saw the remake of "2000 Maniacs" (appropriately called "2001 Maniacs") before I saw the original, so I cannot avoid comparing the two in my mind. The old film has a classic non-Hollywood feel the newer one lacks, the newer film adds lots more sex and a fair amount of gore (and a racial aspect). Both are flawed films, not completely selling what I think they were capable of. While the newer film makes the character of Harper Alexander too hackneyed, the old film has two other characters that seem just too backwoods.
Both feature the "yankee cat" scene and the draw-and-quartering. The old one, surprisingly, features far fewer deaths -- which happens to be one of its weak points. The film is slow to build up, provides a few great kills, and is then too long in slowing down. Herschell Gordon Lewis can be credited for one thing, though -- he was quite capable of inventing new and terrifying ways to kill on film. Barrel roll, anyone?
Another reviewer praised this film as far exceeding "Blood Feast". He is wrong. The direction might be better, and it is certainly true that the returning actors (William Kerwin and Connie Mason) have greatly improved their acting skills. Especially Mason. But sometimes cheese wins, and this is one of those cases. If "Maniacs" was trying to be a real film, it failed. It seemed like they tried hard but did not achieve what was possible. "Blood Feast", on the other hand, comes off as being less serious and as long as the audience understands this it is more enjoyable. I will freely admit I love bad movies, but I can appreciate good ones, too, and "Maniacs" did not meet my standards.
Lewis fans will want to see this, because it is one of his classics. Again, not on the level of "Blood Feast", "The Wizard of Gore" or "Gore Gore Girls", so see those first. But if there was ever a film that deserved a decent remake, it was "2000 Maniacs". Unfortunately, it did not get one (see separate review for more on this). So we are left to try and enjoy the original. I did.
As of September 2011, you can have this film in your collection on Blu-Ray, thanks to Image Entertainment. Besides the new technology, there are commentaries from Lewis and producer David Friedman, as well as plenty of special goodies. I would strongly urge anyone to pick it up.
Sadly, I saw the remake of "2000 Maniacs" (appropriately called "2001 Maniacs") before I saw the original, so I cannot avoid comparing the two in my mind. The old film has a classic non-Hollywood feel the newer one lacks, the newer film adds lots more sex and a fair amount of gore (and a racial aspect). Both are flawed films, not completely selling what I think they were capable of. While the newer film makes the character of Harper Alexander too hackneyed, the old film has two other characters that seem just too backwoods.
Both feature the "yankee cat" scene and the draw-and-quartering. The old one, surprisingly, features far fewer deaths -- which happens to be one of its weak points. The film is slow to build up, provides a few great kills, and is then too long in slowing down. Herschell Gordon Lewis can be credited for one thing, though -- he was quite capable of inventing new and terrifying ways to kill on film. Barrel roll, anyone?
Another reviewer praised this film as far exceeding "Blood Feast". He is wrong. The direction might be better, and it is certainly true that the returning actors (William Kerwin and Connie Mason) have greatly improved their acting skills. Especially Mason. But sometimes cheese wins, and this is one of those cases. If "Maniacs" was trying to be a real film, it failed. It seemed like they tried hard but did not achieve what was possible. "Blood Feast", on the other hand, comes off as being less serious and as long as the audience understands this it is more enjoyable. I will freely admit I love bad movies, but I can appreciate good ones, too, and "Maniacs" did not meet my standards.
Lewis fans will want to see this, because it is one of his classics. Again, not on the level of "Blood Feast", "The Wizard of Gore" or "Gore Gore Girls", so see those first. But if there was ever a film that deserved a decent remake, it was "2000 Maniacs". Unfortunately, it did not get one (see separate review for more on this). So we are left to try and enjoy the original. I did.
As of September 2011, you can have this film in your collection on Blu-Ray, thanks to Image Entertainment. Besides the new technology, there are commentaries from Lewis and producer David Friedman, as well as plenty of special goodies. I would strongly urge anyone to pick it up.