The Candy Snatchers (1973) User Reviews

Well-done grindhouse film

[preppy-3 · 7/10 · 17 May 2013]

16 year old Candy Philips (played by 21 year old Susan Sennett) is kidnapped by a group of psychos--Jessie (Tiffany Bolling), REAL sick Alan (Brad David) and Eddy (Vincent Martorano). They contact her father and demand jewels in return for her...but her dad won't do it. Things unravel completely from there. There's also a subplot about an autistic child being verbally and physically abused by his mom.

This is clearly not for everybody. it was a complete ripoff of "Last House on the Left" but it's much better than that film. "Last" was sick, disgusting and badly made. "Candy" is sick but not as vicious or cruel as "Last". Also it's MUCH better made. It has a good script with many twists and turns, all the acting is good (especially by Bolling and Martorano) and the last 10 minutes or so go barreling out of control. This is unique in there's not one likable character in it...even Candy got on my nerves! It's disturbing and sometimes brutal but a very good grindhouse film. I give it a 7.

Little Known Exploitation Crime Gem

[TheAnimalMother · 7/10 · 4 July 2021]

This flat out must be one of the best virtually unknown and unseen films of the entire 70's. I recommend this to any film lover who can handle this type of twisted fare. The film is unique in multiple ways and the story is actually quite competent; That in itself is rare for films of this sort. I don't want to say too much about this film and give any of the great surprises away. If cult crime films interest you, do yourself a favor and check this out! 7.5/10.

A blazing sun in the wild universe of 70s microcinema.

[EyeAskance · 3 September 2003]

THE CANDY SNATCHERS is among the proudest components to the druthers of 70s drive-in cinema, a smart, slick production that's well mechanized and laden with dodgy allure...a highly original exploitation mini-masterpiece, and a classic of its kind.

With a turbo-thrust pace, this nail-biter of a kidnapping/ransom story is steeped in noir, and presents three appallingly churlish amateur criminals intent on purloining a generous haul of diamonds from the shady stepfather of kidnapped young Candy(an appealing pubescent girlie who spends the entire film in various stages of bondage wearing a Catholic schoolgirl uniform). Plans run afoul, however, as the plot twists and shifts like a roller-coaster flying hot off its rails. A mute little boy is a key sideline character whose odd presence seems entirely superfluous until the unforgettable, head-smacking climax.

You do NOT want to miss this one.

8.5/10

Not Quite The Lost Grindhouse Gem Of the 70s But,,,,,,,

[grimsbybkk · 7/10 · 7 December 2007]

What an oddball mixture we have here. The plot concerns 3 inept but vicious thugs including a very attractive blonde who kidnap a teenage schoolgirl in order collect a half a million bucks from her father as with all of these schemes things just don't go to plan, stupidity and mayhem follow. This movie has a look and feel of a 70s made for TV thriller punctured with scenes of violence and comic relief straight from the grind house " how to make a movie guidebook " The characters are all as amoral as you can get with the exception of Candy and a little mute boy!!! The pace of the movie moves a little too slow in parts particularly in the middle section but picks momentum big time during the almost " jaw dropping " conclusion. In fact the conclusion is what has set this movie apart ( I think ) from many other similar but easily forgettable movies from the period. It shows several shocking, intelligent and believable plot twists, with the last being the most shocking of all. This movie isn't as visceral as Last House on the Left or as controversial as Fight for Your Life but has more than a good deal of intelligence and directorial talent than most of the 70s offerings, So check it out. And with the recent Subversive DVD release of this not quite a classic but... It is no more one of those " lost gems "

a classic of 70's obscurity

[shaun j · 8/10 · 10 November 1999]

This is one film that unfortunately seems to be doomed to obscurity. However, it is a goodie, albeit a nasty one. Poor Candy is kidnapped by three losers, who are involved with incest, drugs, murder, rape, and now kidnapping! This film is very lurid and sleazy (as many 'gone' '70's films were), yet has a great plot involving a number of fun twists, and is well acted. Parts of the film are clear precursors to Tarantino (ie Reservoir Dogs), and David Lynch (the idea of the family being the source of anxiety and horror). Little Sean's mother could have easily fitted into 'Twin Peaks'. Worth hunting this one out.

Amazingly dark and nihilisic.

[planktonrules · 6/10 · 17 January 2015]

"The Candy Snatchers" is a cheap film that is a bit better than I expected. It's also far sleazier and dark than I expected--and it is definitely not to everyone's taste!

The film begins with three losers kidnapping a high school girl named Candy. The plan is to force her father to give them jewels from his store in order to ransom her back to the safety of the family. The problem is that mom is a total drunk and the step-dad couldn't care less about the girl. Heck, if she dies, that just means more money for him! So, although they anticipate an easy and quick deal, the crooks have picked the wrong family and the film is a tiny bit reminiscent of "Ruthless People" but with absolutely no comedy whatsoever...in fact it's sort of an anti-comedy! Why do I say this? Well, it's a very sick and sleazy sort of film in which just about everyone is totally awful! There are two rapes (one of which is awfully brutal and graphic), child abuse, violence galore and an ending that is among the darkest and most nihilistic I've ever seen. It really isn't my sort of film, as it's just too dark-- but I can respect what the filmmakers made---a well-crafted cheapie film about some amazingly soul-less scum.

By the way, the IMDb summary says that the little kid is autistic. Perhaps, as he is not verbal, but he shows few other signs of autism--maintaining eye contact and interacting with the world in a very non-autistic manner. Now I am not saying he was normal and his family was certainly awful...but autistic...probably not.

Simplistic, low budget exploitation stuff at its best!

[Boba_Fett1138 · 7/10 · 17 May 2012]

Of course this by no means is a great movie but within its genre it still works out as something great and enjoyable to watch!

Actually, when you start over-analyzing it, it's a poorly made movie but with this sort of movies you shouldn't read too much into stuff like that. They are made for entertainment and simple entertainment does this movie provide! It actually is one of the better exploitation movies out there to watch, which already makes this a must-see for the fans of the genre.

I say it's an exploitation flick but for normal exploitation movie standards, this movie is quite tame. There is a minimal amount of violence and there is some nudity and rape but nothing too graphic or hard to watch. It's more an exploitation flick with the setup of its story and characters and just overall atmosphere and tone of the movie.

It's hard to say why this movie works out so well really, since the story really isn't anything special or original and the movie can be quite random at times. I guess it simply works out as a good movie because it has a good flow to it and plenty of variety. It can be a slow movie at times but it never becomes a boring one. Maybe it also helps that the movie is being so simplistic with its story. It makes the movie pleasant to follow.

With these sort of movies it very rarely matters that they are cheap looking ones, with bad picture and sound quality and some bad actors in it. All of this only adds to the charm and appeal of these sort of movies. And this movie is very appealing and easy to like as well. If you simply want some good, fast, simple entertainment, exploitation flicks often are the ones to go to and this movie is perfect for that as well!

Strangely enough I also liked the fact that this movie featured no music in it. I don't know, it sort of made some of the sequences and moments in this movie stand out and made things ominous and more direct, like straight into your face, without any needless distractions to them.

A really enjoyable movie within its sort!

7/10

http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

Outdated kidnapping/crime story with mediocre actors

[Ed-Shullivan · 5/10 · 24 April 2020]

The story line could have worked but this film is definitely (out) dated for a 1970's retro kidnapping/crime film and unfortunately for its viewers, it is by no means a memorable crime film. The acting was mediocre at best which is why we have never seen any of this films stars subsequent film careers catapult to successes. Rather, their film careers fizzled out except for maybe actress Tiffany Bolling who at least had a few cameo appearances in a string of various television series before ultimately fading away 'a la Gloria Swanson.

I cannot recommend this film to anyone who enjoys a good crime film because this one fails on all counts.

A mediocre 5 out of 10 IMDB rating.

Quintessential 70's exploitation!

[Coventry · 9/10 · 10 September 2007]

"The Candy Snatchers" perfectly embodies why so many fans of the horror & cult genre worship the 70's decade! This is a hard-boiled and intense film, with a shocking and totally unpredictable storyline, utterly deranged characters and it literally doesn't take the slightest notice of political correctness and/or human emotions. Director Guerdon Trueblood and scriptwriter Bryan Gindoff take us on a wild & trashy 70's ride, covering controversial topics such as child abuse, mental handicaps, rape of minors, live burial, Vietnam traumas and brutal murders committed by unusual characters! A trio of ruthless thugs develops a seemingly waterproof plan to get rich with diamonds very fast. By kidnapping the cute 16-year-old stepdaughter of a diamond trader and demanding a huge ransom, they rest assured of success. Unforeseen complications arise when it turns out that the father isn't in a hurry to rescue his stepdaughter at all. Even more so, Candy's 'unfortunate' death would result in a huge financial triumph for him, so he sure ain't likely to come up with any type of ransom at all. The other – if possible even more brilliant – main storyline centers on a young and autistic boy who witnessed Candy's brutal live burial in a muddy grave with only a small tube for oxygen. He desperately attempts to warn his abusive parents about what he knows, but they're too caught up in their own crazy world of greed and self-pity. Purely talking in terms of grindhouse cinema-sickness, "The Candy Snatchers" leans damn close towards perfection! The atmosphere is constantly gritty, the violence & sleaze is very explicit and literally every character that walks through the screen is demented! Even the ones that only appear briefly, like the company manager who laughs hysterically at the poor boy's mental condition or the nasty gun store seller who deliberately ignores the reason why the gangster trio so urgently needs a shotgun. Sensitive viewers and/or people with a weak stomach beware, as poor young Candy goes through a hellish ordeal and the ending surely isn't cheerful. Even technically speaking, this production is far superior in comparison with the majority of 70's genre outings. Although obviously low-budgeted, the cinematography and editing are quite professional and the musical guidance is appropriately unsettling. The acting is top-notch, with an extra special word of praise for the director's young son Christopher in his first and only appearance on the big screen. "The Candy Snatchers" has recently been re-discovered and released in a fancy edition. The DVD is an absolute must have for every fan of the genre.

commercial exploitation

[trashgang · 4/10 · 20 October 2009]

What a fuzz about Candy Snatchers. For a long time it wasn't available on laser, VHS or DVD so it had a big cult following. It's a good movie but to say that it is an exploitation, no, I wouldn't say so. It isn't sleazy enough to be called an exploitation. Doesn't contain enough blood and nudity to be called that. It's only at the last minutes that you will have your exploitation. But the acting is good and it's funny to see what is happening to the kidnappers once the ransom isn't being paid because daddy doesn't bother about his daughter, why, see it in the movie, I never give away plots. But for an old movie as this the quality of the film strip is excellent. For me there wasn't enough in this flick to put it on a shelve and be proud of it, I guess for a lot of people out there they are watching for the nudity of Playboy Playmate Tiffany Bolling, but at the end of the day, there is a lot better out there in the region of exploitation

The film is slow, boring. The acting is plastic.

[shaunpearson2004 · 2/10 · 22 July 2006]

I read about the notorious The Candy Snatchers in a horror magazine here in the UK. The film apparently has been banned here since it's release back in 1973. Even to this day it is banned here in the UK and has never been available on VHS Video, Lazar Disc or DVD. Curious to see The Candy Snatchers I visited Amazon.com where it appears the film is freely available to US customers. So I ordered it and it arrived a few days later.

The DVD came with a poster and 3 picture cards. The DVD has a number of extras contained on it. The extra's include a photo gallery, trailer and an interview with the woman who played Candy in the film. There's appears to be a lot effort gone into making the DVD. The film. The picture quality is great. Clear, colourful and no sign of dirt. Hard to believe it was made all those years ago, back in 1973.

The film opens with a catchy country and western sounding song with featuring the lyrics money is the route to all happiness. To sum the film up, it's about a gang of 3 whole abduct a girl in order to obtain some diamonds from her father. I cannot see why the film was ever banned in the UK or became notorious. The subject matter, kidnapping of a school girl is distasteful. The film is comical, is filled with comical incidental tunes. Theirs is a small fight scene with the gang of 3 and a telephone engineer, the fight is very comical. There is no tension in the film and it drifts from one boring scene to another. Not a film I would recommend.

The film is no where near as distasteful similar films, I spit on your Grave or Last House on the Left, to name two. The film is not grim, like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre. Comparing Candy Snatchers to other bad/poor banned horror films, I'd say the film is little better than Driller killer.

A new definition for extremely bad.

[deloudelouvain · 1/10 · 31 December 2019]

I'm baffled by the amount of people that thought this was a great movie. I get it that there is always a couple of people that couldn't recognize a pile of dung if you rubbed it in their faces but in this case you have to be absolutely blind to not see that The Candy Snatchers is one of the lousiest movies ever made. Almost, no not almost but EVERY scene is badly done, badly acted, badly shot, it just become laughable after a few minutes into the movie. In fact the movie is categorized in the Crime, Horror and Thriller genre, but the only genre it could be in is comedy, a bad comedy then. All the scenes are bad, beyond bad, you would struggle trying to make it worse on purpose. That's actually the only fun I had while enduring this piece of garbage, the fun it procured me to witness how bad it was. It looked like the worst Derrick episode you could imagine. The acting is incredibly bad, you couldn't do worse if you really tried to. I read reviews with seventies obscurity, seventies exploitation, Quentin Tarantino etc... Please stop tricking people into watching those horrible mistakes in cinema history.

S10 Reviews: The Candy Snatchers (1973)

[suspiria10 · 8/10 · 16 November 2005]

S10 Rating: * * * * / * * * * * The Candy Snatchers is an interesting sort of film. On the surface is looks a bit like a standard movie-of-the-week thriller. It has 70's photography, 70's woka-woka music and so on. But the Candy Snatchers turns out to be a rather clever exploitation drama with a clever script. Three thugs hatch a foolproof scheme to get a briefcase full of diamonds by kidnapping a young schoolgirl and holding her for ransom. But the plan goes south when some unforeseen wrinkles appear. Even though the Candy Snatchers has a conventional feel to it the film is far from it. The director manages to make some good tension with the twists and turns of the thieves and Candy's plight. The acting is above average for this type of film. The thieves all have interesting personalities and most characters generate sympathy for them. The Candy Snatchers is a rare 70's treat that will satisfy exploitation fans and thriller fans alike.

Unpleasant

[glenmatisse · 5/10 · 3 July 2020]

I enjoyed the sleaze quotient, but this one left me really cold and felt like it was a waste of my time with no characters to latch onto a whole lot of ugliness. It's reasonably well made at least for a film of this budget and vintage.

Mind bending 70's Sleaze.

[geek3866 · 19 November 2002]

This is what you would get if you asked Jim Thompson to write a Three Stooges episode and then told him at the last minute he had to include a small child channeling the spirit of Harpo Marx. See it if you get the chance by all means.

The ending was absurd despite the only thing going for it.

[jordondave-28085 · 5/10 · 28 April 2023]

(1974) The Candy Snatchers SUSPENSE THRILLER

Low budget exploitation flick which is the kind of movie that can possibly be championed by the Quentin Tarantino's movie vault, centering on 3 ambitious kidnappers kidnapping the daughter named Candy (hence the title) of the owner of a jewelry store. I have to say that the way Candy was kidnapped was so blatantly absurd, it's not even funny, for all she does is after coming out of school, she then tries to hitch rides with total strangers so that she can sneak to go to a friend's place. I mean, if she's supposed to be so rich why does she even have to resort into hitching rides with total strangers. Doesn't she have any friends or perhaps have enough money to pay for a taxi. After the kidnappers kidnapped her, they then stick her into this pre-dug hole shaped like a cemetery drop with a steel hollow pipe so that she can have some air while being tied and blindfolded. They then send a letter to the father informing him that if they want to see his daughter again, that he would have to take some of the store's jewels before dropping them into an unknown trunk of a car. This ransom plot sounds simple, right. Wrong. (Spoilers) As it turns out, while viewers are baffled about why the father insists on Candy being dead, we soon find out that the so-called father is not really her father after all, but really a step father. And that the father only married her mother so that he can be associated to the family fortune, with Candy's getting to inherit all of the jewels once turning the age of 21. What's absurd is that this environment the producers call a mansion is really a nice house with no maid or butlers, and that the husband provides all the needs to his wife, even though he often cheats on her. All that means, is that the entire environment has been compromised to adapt to this nonsensical level. In this movie, Candy has no friends, and that the mother only believes whatever her husband tells her. And although, she goes to school, the school or her school friends don't even try to contact them as well. It's like the father has everything conveniently happening well for him. I was cheering for the boy to be the hero, but the ending says otherwise, as he is as disturbed and troubled as his parents are. There would've been at least one character to root for, but the movie says no, for they prefer a cliffhanging ending to get people to think. And although they're correct on that spectrum, I'm still capable to argue why this movie is inconsistent and not worth watching at all. While there's plenty of suspense, there's not so much consistency in terms of plot.

One of the best of the genre

[freakus · 9/10 · 27 June 1999]

Judged in its own genre (70's sleazy no-budget exploitation flicks) this movie is a classic. It's well acted, the plot is interesting, and the twists near the end are really creepy. This movie will send shivers down your spine not because of gore but because of the monstrous nature of some of its characters.

Tame exploitation flick with a ridiculous ending is mostly uninteresting

[Groverdox · 5/10 · 4 February 2023]

The details of "The Candy Snatchers" sound promising, especially for a nasty exploitation/drive-in type flick, but they just never really come together.

The movie is about a trio of psychopaths - two men and one woman - who kidnap a teenage girl because she is the daughter of a wealthy jewellery store owner. They want to ransom the girl for diamonds, but discover that the girl's father is in fact only her stepfather, and he doesn't care at all what happens to her.

This is actually a very interesting set-up for a noir-type story. The Coen brothers could do something good with it.

Failing that, exploitation filmmakers should be able to make something fairly memorable. Everybody in the movie is coldblooded and nasty, and not even the kidnapped girl appears as a sympathetic character. One of the crims looks set-up to be more sympathetic, bonding with the girl, but then he rapes his female partner-in-crime.

Central to the movie is a mute young boy. He's really the only interesting thing about it. What the movie does with the boy right at the end has to be seen to be believed. The ending was already a bloodbath, but the way they involve the kid (no spoilers) is ridiculous.

I have a theory that the real difference between exploitation and more mainstream films is that in exploitation movies typically you feel nothing for the characters and just watch them do sexy, or nasty, or bloody, things. You watched detached like a witness to an accident involving people you don't know. The days of sex/violent content being a sign that a movie is exploitation are long gone thanks to directors like Scorsese and Tarantino who invested their mainstream flicks with exploitation's unflinching violence.

Although it's not all that violent, doesn't have any sex I remember and only a brief scene of topless nudity, "The Candy Snatchers" fits this definition of exploitation film to a T. It's impossible to feel anything for the horrible characters. I just wish the movie had made me feel something other than boredom and bemusement.

Excellent film

[geotpf · 10/10 · 19 March 2005]

I can't praise the film more than everybody else already has-It's an excellent 70's exploitation film, and a wicked dark comedy in it's own regard. I just saw it at a one-time midnight (well, closer to 1 AM before the movie actually started) showing at the Nuart in Santa Monica, with Tiffany Bolling (who played Jessie), Bryan Gindoff (the writer/producer), and a couple of other crew members in attendance. If you can track this rare gem down, it's worth a look-and fortunately, at the showing they announced that a DVD will finally be released soon, mastered from the original negative, complete with commentary and interviews of the cast and crew.

"I never would have thought of this!" .. "I saw it on television."

[moonspinner55 · 3/10 · 30 March 2024]

Three kidnappers from Los Angeles, two men and a woman (parked in a van wearing plastic glasses and noses!), stake out a Catholic school girl who apparently hitchhikes home every day from class. Inspired by a true incident in 1968 Florida, the young girl is buried alive with a breathing tube while her snatchers contact Candy's stepfather for a ransom of diamonds--but, of course, he's a weasel who'd rather have Candy's inheritance money more than he'd like to have her alive. Written in shorthand by Bryan Gindoff and director Guerdon Trueblood, this low-budget suspenser (shot for just $250K) has acquired a cult following but isn't very exciting. Robert Maxwell's cinematography is clean and crisp, but the hysteria in the scenario (not just from the kidnappers and the victim but also from the deranged parents of a mute child-witness) is ear-splitting. Top-billed Tiffany Bolling (as ruthless kidnapper Jessie) later denounced the picture, calling it "a horrendous experience." She's right. *1/2 from ****

Mindblowing Crime Drama!

[jasongelt · 10/10 · 24 June 2004]

It's a shame this film is only available on bootleg VHS and DVD, because it's truly one of the great lost crime films of the '70s. Produced by blaxploitation auteur Arthur Marks, it makes no bones about being a full-bore exploitation movie: rape, dismemberment, murder, drug use and blackmail are all depicted in graphic detail. But these elements are underscored by a smart and bitter screenplay that etches believable characters moving through a plot that twists and turns like a serpent all the way to the deadly, surprising conclusion. Particularly impressive are Vince Martanaro as Eddy, the Vietnam Vet burned by the pointlessness of wage-slave living, and Ben Piazza as Candy's cold-as-diamonds wicked stepfather.

Special Weird Appeal notice goes to Christophe as the mute hero of the tale; his performance must be seen to be believed and puts most child actors to shame; imagine a six-year-old Macauley Culkin on mushrooms and you'll get the picture. The characters move angrily through a world of greed and debauchery, commenting on lost innocence, lost love, loneliness, poverty, wealth and the sticky lure of greed. The bitterly ironic theme song, "Money is the root of all happiness," lays bare the film's intent. The world that Guerdon Trueblood depicts is as bare, cruel and senseless as anything found in a Jim Thompson novel, but is softened by its understanding of human weakness and social injustice.

Each character thrashes in his or her own prison: Eddy, struggling with his desire to do the right thing and his craving for solvency; young Sean, trapped by abusive, selfish parents; Candy, bound and gagged in a shallow grave; her stepfather biding his time in a loveless marriage. Each of them seeks their own kind of freedom in a callous world where the fates are always against us. It's an epic human struggle, one that is well-suited for the screen, and The Candy Snatchers does it justice in its own small way.

"If this is one of them Smart-Alec god damned jokers...you should shove a salami up your ass!"

[alanmora · 10/10 · 17 January 2007]

Even though the cover art and the tag lines used to promote this film are obviously blatant attempts to cash in on the "Last House on the Left" craze of the time this movie stands on its own 2 feet as a drive-in classic. Until it's recent DVD release, this film was rare and hard to find but well worth the search. It's difficult to categorize this movie because of it's humor it's not quite a horror flick and yet because of it's sex scenes it's not quite a comedy. Then again it's the comedy aspect of it that makes it not quite and exploitation flick either. "The Candy Snatchers" is in a unique class of it's own but whatever you categorize it as one thing is for sure you will be highly entertained when you view this rare little flick! The acting is above average and the storyline evolves quickly...there is little or no wasted film time or "fillers" in this movie. to top it all off there is a classic surprise ending to this one that will have you laughing till you pee! Classic line in "The Candy Snatchers"=any word coming from the mouth of the pint-sized deaf/mute child in the film. Check out this one...you'll be glad you did!

Nothing like Last House on the Left.

[Kolobos51 · 3/10 · 21 April 2019]

Despite clearly trying to imitate the marketing of Wes Craven's The Last House on the Left, this movie is a mild, fairly standard kidnapping plot. It hits all the familiar notes and, honestly, just watch the Mel Gibson flick Ransom instead. It's better acted while neither deliver on pure exploitation levels.

Sweet!

[BA_Harrison · 8/10 · 11 October 2007]

If you're a fan of gritty 70s exploitation, but are looking for something a little different to your usual straight-forward sleaze, then try The Candy Snatchers. It's a weird and wonderful little film which starts off feeling like a TV movie of the week, but continually surprises with its unpredictable plot which gets quite nasty as it progresses, throwing in graphic murder and rape at the most unexpected of moments.

Tiffany Bolling, Brad David and Vince Martorano play a trio of lowlifes who abduct Candy (Susan Sennett), a pretty schoolgirl, and hold her for ransom. But when Candy's slimy stepfather (Ben Piazza) refuses to cough up for the girl's safe return, the kidnappers are forced to reconsider their plans. Meanwhile, a mute (and possibly autistic) boy, who has witnessed the criminals at work, tries his best to help save the terrified girl.

Smartly directed by Guerdon Trueblood, The Candy Snatchers is a real gem of a movie which delivers well defined characters, some lovely plot turns, and one hell of a powerful ending that will leave you absolutely gob-smacked.

The cast are also brilliant and there is not a bad performance in the whole film. Particularly worthy of mention are Bolling, who is great as Jessie, the beautiful blonde who definitely wears the trousers in the gang (tight as you like jeans, to be specific!), Brad David who is extremely chilling as Alan, the psycho of the group, and Christophe, who, despite being very young, puts in a marvellous turn as Sean, the lad who may be able to help poor Candy—if only he could speak!

And to make the whole experience all the more enjoyable, the film is blessed with a wonderfully fitting soundtrack (complete with funky 'wakka-wakka' guitars and a memorable folky theme song) and a hilarious speeded-up car chase.