Editorials
Unearthing 30 Years of Gross ’80s Horror ‘Slugs’
As slimy and pest-like as slugs may be, they don’t exactly strike fear into the hearts of many. Unless, of course, they existed in the height of toxic waste mutation horror during the ‘80s. In the small town at the center of this underrated cult classic, typical garden variety slugs turn carnivorous, and after a string of gruesome deaths, it’s up to health inspector Mike Brady to discover the cause. If anyone will even believe him, that is. The premise sets up the promise of a fun ‘80s creature feature, but in the hands of director Juan Piquer Simon, the director behind the one of the goriest films of the ‘80s in Pieces, Slugs becomes something so much more twisted and gory. Released on June 5th, 1988, the Simon’s magnum opus nature-attacks feature, based on a 1982 novel of the same name, holds up well 30 years later thanks to memorable deaths and ooey gooey practical effects.
More straightforward narratively than Pieces, Slugs fits right at home with the likes of The Blob or Alligator, and other nature-attacks type creature feature of its kind. There’s no real method of madness to the slugs path of destruction, they’re simply animals made deadly by human thoughtlessness. But while it lacks that extremely bizarre nonsensical aspect that Pieces had, it makes up for with Simon’s penchant for glorious gore and weird character acting. In other words, it’s every bit as fun as Simon’s previous work.
That’s because you could count on Simon to get creative with the death sequences. Thanks to the toxic waste that the slugs picked up in the sewers (forget about logic here), their slime now has a paralyzing neurotoxin that makes it easy for them to devour their prey alive. Which is great, because slugs aren’t very fast. But more importantly, it makes for some gnarly flesh-eating sequences. Since slugs themselves aren’t inherently scary, Simon was sure to play on the fears of tainted produce, which lead to one of the best scenes in the film:
While the film sticks to the source novel somewhat close, Simon takes artistic liberties and adds in a few death scenes and flourishes. As a Spanish-American production, there’s a few scenes of obvious dubbing, and the character decision making skills are lacking. The dialogue is pretty terrible, in an unintentional sort of manner, “You don’t have the authority to declare Happy Birthday!” There’s also no named actor or actress here to effectively market the film either. All of this to say, that Slugs never really took off like it should have.
Despite an over the top, explosive finale, literally, the film ends with a wide-open cliffhanger for the return of the carnivorous slugs. It clearly never came to fruition, which is a shame, but it would have followed the sequel novel Breeding Ground, another gooey schlock fest that I would have loved to see in Simon’s hands.
It’s understandable that Slugs has slowly emerged as a more underground cult classic than overt fan favorite. It’s the sort of silly ‘80s schlock with not so great acting and a plot that’s pretty goofy. Yet, in Juan Piquer Simon’s hands Slugs has a lot of zany charm and oh, so much glorious gore. For fans of Pieces, and films that really showcased the golden era of practical effects, Slugs shouldn’t be overlooked. Especially with a crowd.
Having grown up in a religious family, Christian movie night was something that happened a lot more often than I care to admit. However, back when I was a teenager, my parents showed up one night with an unusually cool-looking DVD of a movie that had been recommended to them by a church leader. Curious to see what new kind of evangelical propaganda my parents had rented this time, I proceeded to watch the film with them expecting a heavy-handed snoozefest.
To my surprise, I was a few minutes in when Denzel Washington proceeded to dismember a band of cannibal raiders when I realized that this was in fact a real movie. My mom was horrified by the flick’s extreme violence and dark subject matter, but I instantly became a fan of the Hughes Brothers’ faith-based 2010 thriller, The Book of Eli. And with the film’s atomic apocalypse having apparently taken place in 2024, I think this is the perfect time to dive into why this grim parable might also be entertaining for horror fans.
Originally penned by gaming journalist and The Walking Dead: The Game co-writer Gary Whitta, the spec script for The Book of Eli was already making waves back in 2007 when it appeared on the coveted Blacklist. It wasn’t long before Columbia and Warner Bros. snatched up the rights to the project, hiring From Hell directors Albert and Allen Hughes while also garnering attention from industry heavyweights like Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman.
After a series of revisions by Anthony Peckham meant to make the story more consumer-friendly, the picture was finally released in January of 2010, with the finished film following Denzel as a mysterious wanderer making his way across a post-apocalyptic America while protecting a sacred book. Along the way, he encounters a run-down settlement controlled by Bill Carnegie (Gary Oldman), a man desperate to get his hands on Eli’s book so he can motivate his underlings to expand his empire. Unwilling to let this power fall into the wrong hands, Eli embarks on a dangerous journey that will test the limits of his faith.
SO WHY IS IT WORTH WATCHING?
Judging by the film’s box-office success, mainstream audiences appear to have enjoyed the Hughes’ bleak vision of a future where everything went wrong, but critics were left divided by the flick’s trope-heavy narrative and unapologetic religious elements. And while I’ll be the first to admit that The Book of Eli isn’t particularly subtle or original, I appreciate the film’s earnest execution of familiar ideas.
For starters, I’d like to address the religious elephant in the room, as I understand the hesitation that some folks (myself included) might have about watching something that sounds like Christian propaganda. Faith does indeed play a huge part in the narrative here, but I’d argue that the film is more about the power of stories than a specific religion. The entire point of Oldman’s character is that he needs a unifying narrative that he can take advantage of in order to manipulate others, while Eli ultimately chooses to deliver his gift to a community of scholars. In fact, the movie even makes a point of placing the Bible in between equally culturally important books like the Torah and Quran, which I think is pretty poignant for a flick inspired by exploitation cinema.
Sure, the film has its fair share of logical inconsistencies (ranging from the extent of Eli’s Daredevil superpowers to his impossibly small Braille Bible), but I think the film more than makes up for these nitpicks with a genuine passion for classic post-apocalyptic cinema. Several critics accused the film of being a knockoff of superior productions, but I’d argue that both Whitta and the Hughes knowingly crafted a loving pastiche of genre influences like Mad Max and A Boy and His Dog.
Lastly, it’s no surprise that the cast here absolutely kicks ass. Denzel plays the title role of a stoic badass perfectly (going so far as to train with Bruce Lee’s protégée in order to perform his own stunts) while Oldman effortlessly assumes a surprisingly subdued yet incredibly intimidating persona. Even Mila Kunis is remarkably charming here, though I wish the script had taken the time to develop these secondary characters a little further. And hey, did I mention that Tom Waits is in this?
AND WHAT MAKES IT HORROR ADJACENT?
Denzel’s very first interaction with another human being in this movie results in a gory fight scene culminating in a face-off against a masked brute wielding a chainsaw (which he presumably uses to butcher travelers before eating them), so I think it’s safe to say that this dog-eat-dog vision of America will likely appeal to horror fans.
From diseased cannibals to hyper-violent motorcycle gangs roaming the wasteland, there’s plenty of disturbing R-rated material here – which is even more impressive when you remember that this story revolves around the bible. And while there are a few too many references to sexual assault for my taste, even if it does make sense in-universe, the flick does a great job of immersing you in this post-nuclear nightmare.
The excessively depressing color palette and obvious green screen effects may take some viewers out of the experience, but the beat-up and lived-in sets and costume design do their best to bring this dead world to life – which might just be the scariest part of the experience.
Ultimately, I believe your enjoyment of The Book of Eli will largely depend on how willing you are to overlook some ham-fisted biblical references in order to enjoy some brutal post-apocalyptic shenanigans. And while I can’t really blame folks who’d rather not deal with that, I think it would be a shame to miss out on a genuinely engaging thrill-ride because of one minor detail.
With that in mind, I’m incredibly curious to see what Whitta and the Hughes Brothers have planned for the upcoming prequel series starring John Boyega…
There’s no understating the importance of a balanced media diet, and since bloody and disgusting entertainment isn’t exclusive to the horror genre, we’ve come up with Horror Adjacent – a recurring column where we recommend non-horror movies that horror fans might enjoy.
Looking for New Episodes of “Chucky” on Peacock? Here’s What Changed
‘Mountain Man’ – Joe Manganiello Will Battle Zombies in Upcoming Horror Movie
‘The Blair Witch Project’ – Original Stars Release a Statement Asking Lionsgate for Residuals & Recognition
‘Trap’ – Official Trailer Previews a Wild New Horror Experience from M. Night Shyamalan
‘The Exorcism’ – Russell Crowe Stars in Horror Movie Formerly Titled ‘The Georgetown Project’
You must be logged in to post a comment.