|
|
 |
Grindhouse films are often shot in a poor quality style - whether intentional or not. Massacrator was no exception as it was shot on actual film stock, which gives the opportunity to scratch and otherwise destroy the footage in a way that is very difficult to accurately duplicated with digital. (Although Robert Rodriguez did his best to do so with Magic Bullet MisFire in Planet Terror.) The footage was sped up and seemed to create multiple jump cuts, which greatly matched the frantic mood of the chase and fight sequences.
This type of shooting, when used effectively, can also be beneficial in that it is often enhanced by techniques that would normally be considered bad filmmaking. In one shot, the camera appeared to have been either mounted on the motorcycle or held by its operator as it looked down at the handlebars as the bike moved. This type of shot would have been horribly shaky without any type of professional and expensive rig, but it really doesn't matter with this movie. The only downside to this particular style is that the more sensitive might be a bit dizzy or nauseous by the constant shaking and jerking.
The effects involving Elvis and his motorcycle rising from the grave looked great - I don't know how it was done, but there must have been a lot of creative thought put into that sequence. Elvis himself had all the moves down great, but he really didn't look like the King at all. Also, he and his bike were not affected by being dead for several decades. Given the mystique surrounding Elvis, that isn't strictly necessary, but a bit of 'Zombie Elvis' effect might hide the fact that the actor doesn't look like him at all.
When one thinks 'Silent Film,' actors like Charlie Chaplin, Buster Keaton, and even Mel Brooks usually spring to mind, as does black-and-white title cards and campy saloon-esque piano music. But, strictly speaking, this movie does fit the criteria as there is no dialogue, only a music bed.
As with the visual style, a lack of dialogue make for a much easier shoot, as audio can be very tricky with digital, let alone film. The music, rather than being the typical silent film fare, is a great intense rock piece. There are no lyrics, but it fits the movie perfectly.
Surprisingly, this film had only a $1,000 budget. It was used for film stock, special effects materials, gas for transportation and food for the cast and crew. Though the movie is less than five minutes long, film stock is horribly expensive - especially since digital video is so popular and affordable. And if this film stock was summarily destroyed to get the desired visual effect, there is always the risk of hurting the picture beyond repair and having to re-shoot. Plus many practical special effects can be more expensive, if not time-consuming, than computer effects.
Grindhouse is a style of film that fell out of popularity, but is now starting to make a comeback. It was notably used in the double-feature I mentioned earlier, though the style is often imitated for the purpose of appearing ‘edgy’ and ‘indie,’ as in the film Domino. (Which, ironically, also used actual film to create most of the effects and stylistic color in camera, rather than creating the look after the fact.) In the case of Massacrator, the style was put to great creative use, and was all the more true to classic Grindhouse by sticking with 35mm film and eschewing computer animation and effects.
Those with more sensitive stomachs might be a bit thrown by the constant shaking and jump cuts. Also, with all the humor underlying the film throughout, an audience might be a bit disappointed by the ending. Still, there’s an awful lot to enjoy here.
Grindhouse is a style that most people may not be familiar with, and even though its subject matter is often disturbing, the true film buff still has to acknowledge its uniqueness and creativity. Massacrator is delightfully sick; a great example of what can be accomplished by stepping outside the typical microfilm box.
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
Content |
8.4 |
Visual
Look |
9.4 |
Use
of Audio |
9.1 |
Use
of Budget |
9.1 |
Lasting
Appeal |
9.0 |
|
9.1 |
|
|
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
The
author of half a dozen screen plays, two novels, and a proficient
camera-woman in her own right, Monika
DeLeeuw-Taylor is Microfilmmaker's lead writing analyst and
one of our top film reviewers. When she's not writing a critique for
Microfilmmaker, she's writing screenplays for Viking Productions. |
|
|
|
|
|
