MovieChat Forums > The Last House on the Left (1972) Discussion > Just saw today...not impressed

Just saw today...not impressed

posted 14 years ago by apbadogs-1
19 replies | jump to latest

I thought the acting was horrible, Krug should not have been paid, Weasel Podowski was almost as bad. Just horrible. I "love" how when a stabbing or other violence occurs the soundtrack music kicks in. Then the chainsaw scene at the end was ridiculous...dude, just charge him and start slashing...oh wait, it was for dramatic effect. The chisel/teeth scene did get me though! That said, I loved Deer Hunter, Deliverance, Godfather, and other films from that era, but this was just bad.

[–] zalpamex 14 years ago

yeah it was,it sucked!

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] dangermous 14 years ago

wow that was a bit of a snobbish reply. No ones opinion really matters besides the person watching it. It's always good to hear from both people who liked and disliked a film. that's why IMBD is good.

So many times over the years I've watched a film due to positive "reviews" and been badly disappointed. I suspect most of the "reviews" we see in the press and on tv etc are sponsored by the movie companies!! It's the only explanation as to why so many bad films get "good" reviews.

I watched this film 3 years ago and have to say i didn't enjoy it that much, it seemed cheap and tacky. 3 years later I've forgotten almost everything about it so it couldn't have been that good!

[–] captgage-1 13 years ago

Good point! Though I admire the idea of a critic winning the Pulitzer Prize.

[–] bureau203 14 years ago

Roger Ebert is a talentless hack. He liked Dogma and hated A Clockwork Orange. That tells you all you need to know.

And this film sucks. It is absolutely terrible in every regard - the plot, the absurd music, the awful acting... this film honestly looks like it was made by Mark Borchardt, and that is not a compliment.

"I've seen things that would make you want to write a book on how to puke."

[–] SoTyred 13 years ago

A Pulitzer for MOVIE REVIEWS?????????????????????????

jesus fing christ

**Skin that Smokewagon and see what happens!** Tombstone

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] GodzillaRAWRRR 13 years ago

So because Roger has a certain opinion on something, nobody is allowed a different one? He doesn't really like horror movies, he hated every friday the 13th even the good ones when they're so much better than last house. So the opinion of an actual horror fan should carry more weight than Rogers (:

[–] fatpie42 12 years ago

The movie can have as wonderfully emphatic critical praise as you want. That doesn't mean we are going to like it. Roger Ebert's views can carry as much weight as you like, I'm still not going to accept that this was great and that both Priscilla Queen of the Desert and John Carpenter's The Thing were bad. That point of view makes no sense to me.

[–] wildpeckinpah 14 years ago

@ apadogs - While I agree with your overall assesment of LHotL, it's rather unfair to compare it to The Deer Hunter et. al. Those were Hollywood pictures with Hollywood money. This was a meager-budget indie.

[–] 14 years ago

[deleted]

[–] lmi5177104 13 years ago

This movie is superior to the remake (though the remake was better than most of the garbage being churned-out of horror remakes-Hills Have Eyes for instance was better than the old ones, I'll admit).
The villains in this one FAR eclipse the ones in the remake in EVERY way possible. I'm not old, yet have to say most often time it's the young know-nothings w/ a limited attention span & lack of culture whom won't appreciate it, not to say there isn't exceptions, but typically... I mean, c'mon everyone talks about how 'brilliant' the grindhouse style movies like Planet Terror & Death Proof were, yet cannot appreciate this, which has the style and comes from the era of actually being the real deal. How can you not like Krug & Weasel in this one over the new junk?! It also spawned the name for one of the most famous horror icons, Freddy Kruger Lol

[–] Indydan13 12 years ago

I'm sorry, but what? Really, what?

I mean, sure 70's shlock acting was prevalent throughout, but I took it as a commentary to the fact a lot of late 60s and early 70s films were ignorant of the real horrors of life (daytime in NYC being compared to nighttime in Detroit a la 1995-ish) and the fact that it was a low budget film attempting to comment on the complicity and lack of exposure to the violent and horrific things going on in the big cities and rest of the world that the smaller towns/children of the 40s and 50s were privy to.

Yeah, the soundtrack kicks in at the horrific parts, that's horror filmmaking 101. You don't notice it until you're supposed to.

And if he slashed and fell over? Krug prove to be a superior fighter, so if the good Doctor lost his footing in an emotional slash with a chainsaw, he'd undoubtedly be disarmed and chainsawed to death.

Those other films cannot be compared to this. It was clearly low budget from a young horror filmmaker. If you compare it to those oscar winning/nominated classics, than yes, this blows. So too if you compare "Star Wars" to "Godfather". Keep in mind that many of the film techniques you learned in film school or from behind the scenes featurettes were developed AFTER THESE MOVIES WERE MADE, other than that, it was all experimenting. This had a grungy, snuff film feel throughout with ham acting to contrast fake, Brady Bunch styled, teenage afterschool specials with hardcore rape and murder. Sorry it didn't hold up to "The Deer Hunter", but at least enjoy the fact this tried to do more than "Saw II-VII", any "Friday the 13th" and succeeded in what IT wanted to do and not what YOU wanted to see, being privy to 40 years of film innovation.

That's my belief and I'm sticking to it.

[–] ma_marcil 11 years ago

For me, this movie was definitely horrible, and I really wanted to like it! Granted, you can't compare that with big budget movies, ok, but there have been a lot of other horror movies made with very limited budgets who managed, in my own opinion, to be very good despite the limitations. The first Halloween, Henry:Portrait of A Serial Killer, Behind The Mask:The Rise of Leslie Vernon, Angst (1983), The Last Horror Movie, Man Bites Dog and Ginger Snaps are just a few of the great low budget horror movies I saw, which for me all had infinitely better production values than the original Last House on The Left.

Bill Foster: I'm the bad guy?...How did that happen?

[–] ElectricWarlock 11 years ago

Well, I watched this movie for the first time five years ago (it doesn't feel that long, though. Time flies by fast) and I have watched it many, many times since then. There was a point where I used to watch it once or twice a week because I couldn't get enough of it. It is truly one of my favorite horror films that I've ever seen. It is brutal, realistic, and truly powerful. I also think the ending packs a punch. It begs to ask the question, if you become evil yourself to defeat evil, doesn't that just multiply evil? The parents had their revenge and murdered their daughter's rapists/killers, but they didn't feel any better after doing so. This on top of the ending makes it one of the most powerful horror films I've ever seen.

I will admit it is flawed and somewhat cheesy at times, but to me these flaws just add to the film's charm. It wouldn't be "Last House on the Left" without them. There's really no film like it and I love it no matter what people may say.

I've been waiting for you, Ben.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] YankeeDood 11 years ago

Naked Massacre is better, dude.

"I'm going to really enjoy this."

Jud, The Badass Indian (Lust For Freedom)

[–] e-bowen2 11 years ago

A lot of people really don't (and can't) take into consideration the time and context in which they were made. Some movies are good but just don't age well over the years. Some had a much bigger impact based on the timeline in which they were made.

"What happened to the American dream?"
"It came true! You're looking at it!"

[–] AmyJolamb 8 years ago

I've been a horror fan since I was about 15. We'd Craven has been a favorite of mine since then too. I first heard about this movie on Bravos 100 Scariest Movie moments. I think I rented this from Netflix. I watched it and I was shocked by what I saw. It was pretty brutal. I watched it again last night for the second time and still find it disturbing.