Quantcast
Connect with us
Horror Queers Sorority Row Horror Queers Sorority Row

Editorials

[Horror Queers] ‘Sorority Row’: Generic Slasher or Genius Comedy?

Published

on

Each month in Horror Queers, Joe and Trace tackle a horror film with LGBTQ+ themes, a high camp quotient or both. For lifelong queer horror fans like us, there’s as much value in serious discussions about representation as there is in reading a ridiculously silly/fun horror film with a YAS KWEEN mentality. Just know that at no point will we be getting Babashook.

***SPOILERS for Sorority Row follow.***

Synopsis for Sorority Row: A group of sorority sisters try to cover up the death of their house-sister after a prank gone wrong, only to be stalked by a serial killer one year later.

Queer Aspect: Sorority Row features some of the best reading in any slasher film ever made.

Don’t know what reading is? Never fear! Here is a definition straight (pun not intended) out of RuPaul’s Drag Race Dictionary.

Read:

  1. v. To wittily and incisively expose a person’s flaws (i.e. “reading them like a book”), often exaggerating or elaborating on the; an advanced format of the insult. The term is a reference to the film Paris is Burning.
  2. n. Criticism made to a drag queen.


Trace

Joe, I am so happy that we are doing Sorority Row for our off-cycle feature this month. As you (and many of our readers) know, I absolutely adore this film. In fact, it was the very first film I wrote about on Bloody Disgusting almost four years ago. I can practically see the comments now: “Sorority Row? Must be a Trace article.” I’ll try not to repeat things I wrote in that article, but I do want to re-tell this little anecdote about my first time seeing the film:

I only happened to catch Sorority Row in theaters because I got free tickets for it. I took two of my friends and we pretty much all went in with zero expectations. Once the credits started rolling I looked at one of my friends and asked him if he thought it was as much fun as I did. His response was a very reluctant (but equally enthusiastic) “YES. But no one is going to believe me.”

As evidenced by its dismal box office gross of $11.9 million (it had a $12.5 million budget), not many saw it and liked it. It’s not surprising considering no one wanted a film like Sorority Row back in 2009: remakes were a dime a dozen, slasher fatigue was just beginning to set in (this would rear its ugly head again when Scream 4 was released just two years later) and a been-there-done-that plot right out of I Know What You Did Last Summer showcased little imagination on display.

With all that said, Sorority Row manages to subvert any and all expectations by being a hilarious little slasher that knows exactly what type of film it is. Bolstered by a game cast (with Leah Pipes’ Jessica as the film’s secret weapon), the film boasts solid direction by Stewart Hendler (that opening credits sequence where the camera moves through the house is particularly inspired) and a snarkily funny script written by Josh Stolberg and Pete Goldfinger (they co-wrote 2010’s better-than-you-think Piranha remake…and last year’s disappointing Jigsaw). Maybe audiences just weren’t ready for a funny slasher film that still played it relatively straight, but damn if Sorority Row doesn’t play well with a crowd. And in a wonderful coincidence, fellow Horror Queer (and Buzzfeed editor) Louis Peitzman recently acknowledged the film, as well!

I don’t mean to oversell the film. This isn’t high art or anything; in fact, the film sticks close to genre conventions without reinventing the wheel. This is standard slasher fare, but it is a super fun time if you’ve got a few friends over for a few adult beverages.

Joe, the reason I picked Sorority Row for this month’s off-cycle post is because it feels like it was made for queer audiences. The film is so ridiculous at times that it borders on camp (examples include the catfight between Megan and Jessica or the moment when the killer just happens to be in the girls shower room when a random sorority girl learns of the prank gone wrong). There is also a tremendous amount of hilarious bitchery on display here. There are enough “yass kween!” moments here to make an Unauthorized Sorority Row Burn Book. And of course most of those burns are courtesy of Pipes’ Jessica! Here is just a small(ish) sampling of the treats we are awarded in the film (or you can just watch the supercut of Jessica’s one-liners that I graciously included at the end of my section):

Cassidy: If they weren’t roofies then what were they?
Claire: Vitamin B12.
Ellie: You know that helps prevent anemia?
Jessica: Too bad it doesn’t prevent bulimia. That’s something Megan could actually use.

Jessica: [after finding Megan’s corpse in the shower] Oh, she looks terrible.

Jessica: I’m gonna deal with you later!
Maggie: You might wanna deal with that hair first because it looks like shit.

Ellie: Megan’s alive, you guys.
Jessica: Ellie, you’re being borderline retarded* right now. *(This one hasn’t aged well)

Jessica: [upon seeing Mickey’s feet sticking out of the wall] It’s Mickey. I would know those ugly-ass shoes anywhere.

It’s just so good, and I’m more than a little surprised that more people haven’t caught on to how infectious the fun being had in this film is! What’s also surprising is how much confidence the studio (Summit Entertainment) had in the film. According to IMDb (so the reliability is a bit up in the air), they were going to make cuts to Sorority Row to make it PG-13 after the success of the abysmal PG-13 Prom Night remake in 2008. The studio changed its mind when they saw the final cut. This movie gets a bad rap and I simply don’t get it.

Joe, I’ve spent so much time going on about why I love this film that I haven’t actually started analyzing it or discussing the things that are problematic about the film (Chugs’ positive comment about roofie sex springs to mind). Or how all of the kills (as great as they are) center on the girls having something shoved in their mouths. Did you predict the identity of the killer? And (most importantly) what do you think of Chugs’ cold vagina? 


Joe

Awww Chugs! If only you weren’t basically a mirror image of Jessica, perhaps you would have lasted longer. Alas, Sorority Row frequently kills off its doppelgangers and therefore you had to go.

I probably spent half of my rewatch of this film trying to remember when I first saw it, but I honestly couldn’t recall when that was. I think my mental fugue is reflective of my overall indifference to Sorority Row. I remember latching on to several of the elements that you highlighted above, particularly the bitchiness, the gory kills, and that opening party shot (which unfortunately sets the bar a little too high because the film never really matches it again). I remember being pretty disappointed at the time and unfortunately I can’t say that my opinion has changed much. I appreciate its quirks and its delightfully gory deaths, but overall, I’m a bit “meh.” If our readers haven’t figured me out yet (and judging by the number of people who comment as though you write these posts alone, there’s a lot of them) I’m a bit of a script stickler. And boy howdy Sorority Row does not have a strong script!

It’s almost as though Stolberg and Goldfinger wrote a threadbare outline and then spent the rest of their time crafting delectably bitchy one liners for the girls (or perhaps there’s another draft or two down the mineshaft with Megan?). The problem is that plotting issues kick in right off the bat with the opening “prank gone wrong.” The fake-out that winds up being an accidental murder closely adheres to the 80s slasher formula, but it doesn’t really make a lick of sense (what exactly was the intended plan?), nor does Garret’s very sudden and odd decision to impale his dead girlfriend with a tire iron.

Thankfully the plot holes are mostly covered by the performances – minus Rumer Willis’ Ellie, who on the rewatch proved to be some serious dead weight. I remember wanting more Carrie Fisher on the first watch and seeing her channel Mrs Mac from Black Christmas as the drunk sorority house mother made her untimely passing hurt all over again.

But why does Mrs. Crenshaw disappear for this party when she clearly had no issue staying for the one that opens the film? Why is Maggie used so randomly, only to become a crucial character in the third act? Why is so much time dedicated to Jessica’s desire to marry into politics with milquetoast Kyle? Why is Kyle (and all of the other boys) so bland that I literally didn’t recognize him when he turns up in full-blown homicidal red herring mode at the film’s climax? And what, dear lord, was everyone smoking when they came up with Andy’s truly atrocious motivation for committing the murders? Sweet Jebus, that may be one of the stupidest reveals I have ever seen in a slasher and I have seen a lot of slashers. (To answer your question: no, I didn’t see it coming because I completely forgot about Andy. I kept waiting for Ellie to be outed as the killer because she was acting shady AF and I figured it was the only reason she stuck around).

So yeah…a few gaps in logic. More than the gripes about the lazy plot, though, I am legitimately confused about who the target audience for this film is? There is a lot of female nudity – topless extras, with pretty revealing outfits on our core cast (Maggie literally spends 90% of her screen time in panties and a man’s dress shirt). Sure, it was 2009 and the belly baring crop top with heels look was still popular, but the costuming, in particular, feels male-gaze ready.

The dialogue repeatedly takes jabs at the girls’ ironic dismissal of the sisterhood pledge that makes up the sorority motto, though the bitchiness is clearly meant to reflect the reality that girls can be just as mean and cruel. Cue this line:

Cassidy: I love you Jessica because you make being a bitch an art form.

Rewatching Sorority Row, the uncharacteristically frank depiction of women frequently came off like a cross between Gale from Scream and Blair from Gossip Girl – the bitch with a heart of gold who’ll cut you with a savage one-liner. These are, for all of their strengths and weaknesses, a group of memorably diverse feminist characters. That’s never more clear than the screen time breakdown between sexes: the girls rule the narrative while the boys are forgettable and barely present. This only serves to reinforce how frustrating it is that the killer is Andy. ANDY?! Come on!.

Honestly, I’m torn. Half of the time, the depiction of these women feels like the film is pitched at straight bros who want boobs. The other half feels aimed at girls interested in a band of diverse female protagonists who embody both the sisterhood and cruelty of female friendships. The result is a final product that doesn’t satisfy either audience fully. Throw in the multi-pronged phallic weapon and the aforementioned oral murder fixation and there’s some weird and wonky sexual politics at work.

At this point it’s probably best for me to turn it back over to you, Trace. Who do you think the film’s audience was? Were you as bothered as me by the plot holes, or is this just familiar slasher territory? And, most importantly, what do you figure was the cost of hair extensions for this film? (Hopefully not too much because Rumer’s are terrible).

Horror Queers Sorority Row


Trace

Joe, Joe, Joe. What a sourpuss you are! I know as a critic it is looked down upon for me to say that all of your criticisms don’t matter but….they don’t matter! I jest, I jest. You are correct to critique this film and I can certainly understand where you are coming from, but (at the risk of sounding like some of the commenters who complain about our reviews) this is one of those films where you’re just meant to sit back and enjoy the ride. Sorority Row perfectly encapsulates the spirit of the 80s slasher wave. Does that mean that this film is exempt from criticism? Absolutely not, but I am able to overlook all of the plot holes you mention because I just don’t take the film that seriously.

If I can dissect a few of your complaints though:

  • There wasn’t really a plan for the prank. Even Cassidy asks Jessica “How far are you going to go with this?” Does Jessica know? Probably not. She’ll go as far as she can until she gets the satisfaction that comes from pranking someone, I suppose.
  • Mrs. Crenshaw doesn’t stay for the party because it’s their end-of-year graduation celebration. It’s sort of an unwritten agreement between the house mother and the graduating sorority sisters. Consider if a rite of passage into adulthood and a show of confidence in their newfound maturity (haha).
  • All of the boys are so bland in order to make the female characters stand out that much more.

Where we disagree most, however, is in the reveal of Andy as the killer and Kyle’s usefulness as a red herring. You are telling me that you did not expect Kyle to be the killer? Admittedly, I had extremely low expectations when I saw Sorority Row for the first time so I fully expected the film to go the obvious route and make Kyle the killer. As you said, so much time was spent on his dad’s campaign trail and Jessica’s need to please him. It’s such an extended setup that it makes its total irrelevancy all the more genius, especially when Kyle does get a little axe-happy in the climax. He is a psychopath, but he’s not the psychopath. Andy’s motive is to kill anyone who knows about the secret so that he and Cassidy can have a happy life. Is it a stretch? Sure, but this boy be crazy so it fits with his character. The only real aspect of his motive that makes no sense is that he thought Cassidy would still want to be with him after all of this. I have no explanation for that. That is just the sort of ridiculousness that pushes Sorority Row firmly into camp territory though. It never fully crosses the line, but the intention is clear.

I do agree with you on one thing though: the target audience. All of the marketing for this film sold it as a straightforward slasher film, but this film is a horror comedy through and through. I tend to refer to it as Scream or I Know What You Did Last Summer meets Mean Girls. It may have more in common with I Know What You Did Last Summer plot-wise but the film is self-aware enough to justify the Scream comparison. The trailer leaned on the sisterhood among the protagonists, but certain scenes like the completely unnecessary shower room scene most definitely target young men. That being said, there isn’t a lot of female nudity in the film, as you say. You get a butt shot in the opening credits and a few pairs of breasts in the shower room, but nothing beyond that. It’s not like they’re spread out over the film; they are contained to just two scenes. Gratuitous nudity is clearly an homage to ‘80s slasher films though, which were filled with it. I’m surprised you can’t appreciate that since you’re so old and were actually alive during the ‘80s (insert winky-face Emoji here).

What is surprising is that none of the lead actresses have a nude scene, so it does make the random nudity of secondary characters feel even more gratuitous. Respect should be shown to the director and studio though, as this interview makes it clear that they never pushed for any of the actresses to be bare any skin (yet still had enough respect for the tropes of the slasher genre to cram some boobies in there).

The target audience for this film should have been gay men, but I suppose that’s a bit too narrow of a demographic to directly appeal to (see: our discussion of Hellbent last time). I don’t know if Stewart Hendler is gay, but my gut tells me he is (especially after listening to his commentary with four of the main actresses) He knew exactly what kind of film he was making, but whether or not that translated to the film is up to the viewer.

Joe, I hate that our format for these articles means that you will get the last word on Sorority Row. I know I won’t be able to change your mind on the film, as much as I would like to. Does it not push the comedy far enough to merit excusing some of its flaws? Do you not find Leah Pipes to be a revelation? All of the other actresses are solid (even Willis, who does just fine playing the weak, insecure Ellie…so much so that the film repeatedly calls her out on her uselessness through Jessica’s biting one-liners), but Pipes walks away with the film.

Horror Queers Sorority Row


Joe

I’ll admit that Pipes’ bitchiness is savage, but I’ll confess that I just don’t find her performance as striking as you do. It comes off as very typical acerbic head bitch to me and if you’re going to deliver shade and profanity, she doesn’t hold a candle to the gold standard, which is undeniably Rose McGowan in Jawbreaker. Now that’s a revelatory queen bee performance to me.

But you have helped to clarify a valuable point, Trace: individual mileage for comedy and camp (intertwined as they are) is extremely individual. You love this film – your impassioned defense of it is undeniable. When I watch it, I see a decent, albeit unspectacular slasher. What you see as a scathing near-camp delight, I see as a bit of a miss. What’s interesting is that we’re both right.

We chatted offline about how I don’t see the comedy as intentional and how I don’t believe that the film should require extratextual materials like interviews and commentaries to make its point. You disagree because the camp and comedy are so evident to you. I find this distinction fascinating, and I think it will be an interesting point to keep in mind moving forward, particularly as in our off-cycle choices (I’m thinking of a few of our upcoming picks, including several very campy slashers. Suddenly I’m intrigued to see whether we’ll agree or disagree on them).

If nothing else, I appreciated taking the opportunity to revisit Sorority Row again with your perspective in mind. I’ll freely admit that I judged the film too harshly on my first watch, and for that I’ll put a lot of blame on that trailer and advertising, which failed to infer that the film has any kind of comedic angle at all. Ultimately, however, for me the camp isn’t strong enough to tip it into good/bad territory and Jess, while impressive, remains more flat-out-bitch than guilty pleasure (though having suffered through at least one season of The CW’s The Originals, I’ll heartily endorse that she’s far too talented for the career she has unfortunately had).

One final thought, and it’s a silly one: a small, irrational part of me resents this film because Briana Evigan (lead Cassidy) doesn’t bring the same spunk and verve that she brought to Step Up 2: The Streets, which is a personal favourite of mine. If we’re talking about actresses who deserve a better career, both Evigan and Pipes deserve a spot on that list.   

Next on Horror Queers: We go overseas to discuss Erlingur Thoroddsen’s supernatural drama Rift!

Sorority Row is available to rent on Amazon Instant for $3.99.
And don’t forget to catch up on our previous Horror Queers articles right here!

A journalist for Bloody Disgusting since 2015, Trace writes film reviews and editorials, as well as co-hosts Bloody Disgusting's Horror Queers podcast, which looks at horror films through a queer lens. He has since become dedicated to amplifying queer voices in the horror community, while also injecting his own personal flair into film discourse. Trace lives in Denver, CO with his husband and their two dogs. Find him on Twitter @TracedThurman

Click to comment

Editorials

Neon-Soaked Cult Classic ‘Vamp’ Starring Grace Jones Still Has Bite 40 Years Later

Published

on

Vamp 1986
Grace Jones and Dedee Pfeiffer in Vamp

College kids, strippers and vampires—those were Donald P. Borchers’ only requirements when he approached Richard Wenk about writing and directing a movie for New World Pictures. As requested, Wenk cooked up Vamp (1986), a tailor-made blend of the decade’s teen movie craze as well as its horror boom.

Grim and earnest stories were still very much a part of the ’80s horror landscape, yet Vamp is something of a comedy. One difference between it and, say, Saturday the 14th, though, is the former avoids using schtick. Wenk’s movie proves that horror comedies also don’t have to subtract thrills from their recipes. Of course, it takes a minute before reaching that point; college antics and culture shocks preface this one macabre misadventure.

Vamp‘s initial setup is apt for a typical college-set, sex-driven comedy; to bribe their way into a fraternity house, two pledges (Chris Makepeace, Robert Rusler) go looking for some adult entertainment. Without wasting time on any further exposition, the characters embark on an all-in-one-night trip that quickly detours into terror.

To procure their elusive MacGuffin—a stripper willing to gyrate for some frat boys—Keith (Makepeace) and AJ (Rusler), plus a third wheel named Duncan (Gedee Watanabe), trade the safety of their remote college campus for the seediness of some unnamed city. The setting is recognizably L.A. by day, but as soon as night falls, downtown, along with the characters, slips into a kind of surreal universe. Director of photography Elliot Davis gave this early entry on his prolific résumé an unusual yet distinctive look; that Mario Bava-esque, magenta-green lighting is omnipresent, so much so that it’s almost its own character. 

vamp

Chris Makepeace and Robert Rusler in Vamp

The faint comparisons to Martin Scorsese’s After Hours are merited, although not just because of Vamp’s distinguishing nighttime aesthetic. Save for the primary characters, the supporting roles in Wenk’s movie are also quite colorful and transactional in their behavior. The difference here, though, is the additional urge to ruin Keith and his friends at every turn. Some of that harm is humorous and tolerable enough, whereas the moment Vamp dishes out its first fatality, it’s abundantly clear how this movie qualifies as horror.

Vamp falls into that category of horror movie that reveals its genre with a scream rather than a series of whispers. The opening scene can function as a hint of what lies ahead—things are not at all what they appear to be—but otherwise, Wenk is more than happy to hold off on the horror. When that time does come, though, it catches the viewer off guard. In addition to the pure shock value is that sudden decision to upend the movie’s foremost feature. Or so it would seem.

If afraid of major spoilage, those new to Vamp would be wise to stop reading here. There’s just no skirting around the fact that the central fellowship in this buddy movie hits a serious snag when AJ is killed. That development causes the story to become more of a “long, bad night” journey for Keith and his romantic interest. So while Wenk scores points for subverting expectations, there is also a touch of sadness in his decision. Because if Vamp does anything well, it’s making the characters likable.

Something that comes easily to Vamp—and other teen horror movies from this same era—is its ability to invent young characters worth caring about, or at the very least, are interesting and not so immediately off-putting. More impressive is how Wenk did all this without actually fleshing out those characters. Still and all, Keith and his kind are a grade above cookie-cutter, and in some cases, aren’t completely devoid of growth.

vamp

Grace Jones in Vamp

Vamp appeals with an assorted cast of characters. No two are the same, nor are they operating on the same wavelength. The cinematically extroverted AJ, whose actor conveyed charm and vulnerability in near equal amounts, comes alive when he’s at his most undead. Makepeace then makes the chronically cautious Keith a sympathetic fellow, even as he’s more and more affected by the night’s bizarre events. Meanwhile, Duncan is indeed the designated loser of the whole bunch, but Watanabe still manages to humanize him. As a bonus, the role didn’t require him to pull a Long Duk Dong.

As for Dedee Pfeiffer, she is plain adorable as the mysterious After Dark server nicknamed “Amaretto”. She spends all night fixing her dress strap while at the same time trying to get Keith to remember how he knows her. As their offbeat romance grows, it becomes another highlight of this movie. Whether or not Pfeiffer’s character is really a vampire also creates some welcome tension in the story.

Like a lot of its contemporaries, Vamp went on to become a bit of a cult classic. That current status is determined by several factors, but without a doubt, the casting of Grace Jones is the most considerable. The image of her writhing on that unique-looking chair, a Keith Haring original, springs to mind whenever this movie is brought up.

vamp

Chris Makepeace, Billy Drago and Paunita Nichols in Vamp

Prior to that first display of unequivocal horror, local vampire queen Katrina (Jones) took to the stage and delivered a strip show like no other. One would expect nothing less from that renowned model and performance artist. By now reports of Jones’ tardiness on set are no secret, yet it’s also hard to deny her commitment to the part of Katrina. It was, in fact, Jones who took charge of her character’s appearance—on top of Haring painting her body and that now-iconic chair, she had Andy Warhol handle her costuming. And not too many actors could seize a room’s attention without saying a single line of dialogue.

In 2022, Vamp received a retrospective novelization from Encyclopocalypse. This literary union of preexisting source material—Wenk’s original screenplay—and new ideas from author Christian Francis amounts to a more comprehensive visit to the After Dark Club. The basic story there is no different than what’s shown on screen; however, Francis gets creative with the characters’ origins and designs, and he enhances a number of key scenes.

The novelization expands on the urban and social decay of the main setting, and supplies a background for the After Dark Club. Sandy Baron’s character, Katrina’s emcee and familiar, is given ample motivation for sticking around; up until the fiery end, he is loyal to his friend and former business partnerSqueak, who looks like he wasfed through a combine harvester, and left as nothing more than a heap of mangled remains. Then there is Billy Drago’s character Snow, the leader of a street gang called The Dragons. His reason for menacing Keith and AJ is more altruistic than in the movie; he and his peers act tough to scare off any potential food for the vampires. 

vamp

Lisa Lyon in Vamp

If not for all the backstories, Francis’ Vamp would be a hell of a lot shorter. Instead, this tie-in read dives into how AJ met Keith—the orphaned Anthony Joseph hailed from a broken home back in Brooklyn—and how their friendship flourished over the years. Keith’s archership is no longer just an assumed part of his entire being; it’s a confidence-building extracurricular for a boy who got picked on before coming into the protection of the new kid in town. These supplemental, in-depth looks at the protagonists, plus their close connection, are maybe unnecessary. The movie already did a fair and concise job of addressing their platonic intimacy without the need for flashbacks and insights, specifically in that scene where AJ lays it all out as he sacrifices himself.

Where the novelization gets off course is its approach to the minor characters. Intermittently backstorying the likes of Katrina’s indentured servants, Seko (Leila Hee Olsen) and Vlad (Brad Logan), ends up disturbing the flow of the writing. Was it absolutely essential that readers know Vlad was the Grand Duke of the House of Romanov, or how Snow’s accomplice Maven (Paunita Nichols) became so dentally challenged? No, not really. However, one’s mileage with these random biographies may vary.

The novelization is a more substantial experience, but for a movie like Vamp, less is more. And as plentiful as they are, it never simply coasts on its campy charms, either. The character work sits comfortably in that realm between cursory and meticulous, the script is sharper than first realized, and Greg Cannom’s vampire makeup is straightforward yet effective. Most of all, the movie didn’t squander its out-of-the-box concept. Richard Wenk made his vision of acomic nightmare in which just about anything that can go wrong doescome true, and it is very enjoyable.

Continue Reading