Connect with us

Editorials

[Retro Nightmares] ‘Sweet Sixteen’ is an American Giallo That Defies Slasher Tradition

Published

on

Of all the films in the Retro Nightmares Cinema Series lineup, Sweet Sixteen likely wins the prize for most obscure. At the time of its original release, the golden era of slashers was waning, and most that were released in 1983 seemed to borrow from previous entries. It didn’t help that Sweet Sixteen was far more interested in the mystery surrounding its killer than reveling in gore. But it was a mystery that worked, and feels tonally and narratively like Sleepaway Camp, which was released only two months after. That’s because both feel more giallo-esque than traditional slasher, and had it not been for being upstaged by the shocking final shot in Sleepaway Camp, Sweet Sixteen might not have slipped through the cracks as it has.

The basic premise sees a new girl, Melissa (Aleisha Shirley), move to town just weeks before her 16th birthday. She’s a bit of a rebellious party girl, though, and any time she meets up with a boy in town, they wind up dead soon after.  It’s up to the town sheriff, Dan Burke (Bo Hopkins), to get to the bottom of it before the body count gets any higher. It sounds like a straightforward slasher, not wholly unlike 1981’s Happy Birthday to Me, but it doesn’t play like one.

Though the central driving force of the narrative is centered around Melissa, she’s not the main character. It’s Dan and his two teen kids, Hank and Marci, that become the leads as they sleuth their way through murders and disappearances. Likely because they’re squeaky clean compared to Melissa, something that would land her an early death in any other slasher. Sweet Sixteen itself isn’t very squeaky clean; there’s a lot of dialogue and racism themes that wouldn’t fly at all by today’s P.C. standards.

Most of the racism stems from the subplot involving character Jason Longshadow (Don Shanks), and his family’s ostracization. There’s also mention of an Indian burial ground. Both contribute to the film’s giallo leanings; it’s a level of convolution usually reserved for Italian slashers. More than that, it’s the way director Jim Sotos and cinematographer James L. Carter (Leatherface: Texas Chainsaw Massacre III, The Hitcher) rely on POV shots every time the killer goes into a murderous frenzy. Another signature of the giallo. Above all, though, is the somewhat left field, unpredictable reveal of the killer’s identity that pushes this over into giallo territory.

It’s fitting that Sweet Sixteen and Sleepaway Camp were released in such close proximity to each other; they’re spiritual siblings in many ways (though they are unconnected, to be clear). Both feature POV shots, twist endings, and a murder mystery that takes precedence over most story logic, complete with wacky misdirects and characters. Both have twist endings, too. Though Sweet Sixteen doesn’t have quite as memorable of a final shot as it’s sibling, it’s still a worthy and unique entry in the slasher catalog. And that it’s paired with the even wackier horror comedy The Convent means one night of riotous bloodshed on October 11, 2018.

The Convent and Sweet Sixteen will both be playing as part of Retro Nightmares in theaters Nationwide Thursday, October 11th. Get tickets at www.retronightmares.com.

Horror journalist, RT Top Critic, and Critics Choice Association member. Co-Host of the Bloody Disgusting Podcast. Has appeared on PBS series' Monstrum, served on the SXSW Midnighter shorts jury, and moderated horror panels for WonderCon and SeriesFest.

Editorials

Finding Faith and Violence in ‘The Book of Eli’ 14 Years Later

Published

on

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.

Continue Reading