"Reaping The Latest Season's Crop Of Films"

---

The Deathmaster
starring Robert Quarry, directed by Ray Danton, , 1972
Distributed by Retromedia
DVD Reviewed By: Ryan Lies

Often, when a flick exists in the realm of legendary obscurity for so long it garners a reputation that it can’t possibly live up to. And while a lot of people probably haven’t heard of The Deathmaster before today, I had read many pieces on it over the last couple of years that lead me to believe it was one of the “greatest drive-in movies never seen.” Finally I found a copy of Retromedia’s newly released DELUXE WIDE SCREEN EDITION on DVD at my local Best Buy, so I snatched it up, kinda sorta expecting a bigger treat than I actually got.

That said, it wasn’t really all that bad a movie. In fact, I got quite a kick out of watching it. It’s just … well … it’s just not any better or worse than any other old B-movie.

Robert Quarry, who gained fame essaying the titular role of the Count Yorga films, plays a wandering, Charles Manson-esque vampire who happens upon a commune of hippies and precedes to seduce them with New Age musings and African drums. “Live for the day, man … and live FOREVER … literally,” seems to be his mantra. Or something like that. Anyway, a couple of the kids don’t buy into his vibe and they fight back, with mixed results.

I liked the whole Hippie-Manson-Cult angle to the story, and I liked Quarry in the lead. Can’t quite explain it, but he’s got a weird, Old World charm, even beneath the goatee and California Hippie garb. Although, to be honest, at times, I had to re-check the DVD box to make sure it WAS Robert Quarry in this flick and not William Shatner in a vampire costume. There were times I just … wasn’t … SO … sure.

So yeah, this one’s pretty cool. Not all that special, but a decent way to waste a Saturday night. Which is pretty much what these movies were made for back in the day anyway.

(Ryan Lies is a No-Fi "Staffmenber" and knows how to rock the Shatner too.)

---

Dracula Rising
starring Christopher Atkins, Stacey Travis, Doug West, directed by Fred Gallo, , 1993
Distributed by New Horizons
Video Reviewed By: Ryan Lies

This came out quite a while ago (isn’t it a bit disconcerting that a movie that was released in 1993 is now considered “old?”) but I just got around to yanking out of a box of unwatched videos and popping it into the VCR.

This was released through Roger Corman’s New Horizons company and it’s a blatant attempt to cash in on the popularity of Anne Rice/Francis Coppola style vampirism that flourished in the early to mid 90s. Even though I’m sure I’ll get no end of grief some people for saying this, I actually don’t mind Anne Rice, or, more generally, the “goth” vampire subgenre. I like a gory, messy balls to the wall blood feast like John Carpenter’s Vampires or Blade more, but I can dig on the quieter, angsty vampires who sit around and lament about losing their faith in God while sipping chartreuse.

But this movie just doesn’t cut it. It’s pretty to look at, and occasionally there are flashes of a good (or at least tolerable) movie underneath. But it’s just so empty, like a lifeless cadaver left behind by one of its protagonists.

Basically what you get here is the now-hoary old lovelorn- vampire –finds- his- reincarnated- love -in -modern-day- LA plot we find hitting the video shelves at a rate of about sixteen a week.

The cast isn’t very good. Christopher Atkins (he who is best remembered for having Brooke Shields watching him pleasuring himself on a rock in Blue Lagoon) is probably one of the weakest vampires ever! Never mind a cross or garlic necklace, I could flick this chump out of my way with one finger. And his servant, Doug Wert, or, as I like to call him “the dude in the red shirt,” is even more annoying.

The climax is the only fun part. It’s a silly, strange, surreal battle between vampires set in Hell, that looks like it was transplanted straight out of one of Lucio Fulci’s weirder flicks. The vamps duke it out with animated bolts of electricity. Honestly. I didn’t just make that up.

So if you must do it, FF to the end and just watch that. It might be worth it. But don’t say I didn’t warn you. This flick sucks … and not in the way it should.

(Ryan Lies is a No-Fi "Staffmenber" and tries not to pleasure himself on rocks a lot.)

---

Kill Bill - Vol. 1
starring Uma Thurman, Sonny Chiba, Chiaki Kuriyama, directed by Quentin Tarantino, , 2003
Distributed by Miramax
Film Reviewed By: Chris Beyond

After about a thousand years and even more hair fallen off of Quentin Tarantino's head, he's finally back with his latest epic...and it may indeed qualify for the word epic...

Kill Bill - Vol. 1 is the first half of the full film Kill Bill. When Quentin and the studio were happy with the last cut of the film, they realized that cutting it down even more would take away from the full scope of the film which strives to be "the ultimate exploitation film". Quentin felt that even a three hour version of the film wouldn't do it justice, but at the same time felt strongly that an explitation film shouldn't be longer than a couple hours anyway. So they chopped what was the final cut in half and split the film into two parts one of which just came out and the second part (Kill Bill -Vol. 2) will be released in February. So that's the backstory...is the film good?

From the get-go the film lets you know that this is not the real world. We are watching a movie and he wants you to know you are watching a movie. Even in a modern theatre, you feel like you're at the drive-in in the back seat of your parents' car. You might even a couple behind you making out with panties stuck to someone's ankles in the air (or in your hair if you're not lucky). The film gets right to the point with a fight between Uma Thurman's "Bride" charicter and Vivica A Fox's "Copperhead" character. In typical Tarantino style, this scene is out of sequence with the rest of the film and allows the "real life" of the characters slip in. The rest of the film follows suit slipping into black and white and back into color and even a long anime sequence. We meet strange characters that we feel like we've met before in other films (and we probably have). The music we hear when The Bride recognizes each of her would-be assassins sounds like a certain 70s tv show....and that yellow outfit... hmmmm... What about Daryl Hannah's character? Ever hear of a 70s rape and revenge film called They Call Her One Eye?

For me the film succeeds almost totally. It's funny and very gory...well, sorta. There are limbs flying all over the place, but the way the blood shoots out of the body is very cartoonish and very much like an anime film. The writing is not as pop-cultural as Quentin's other films, but the film itself digs very deep in the 70s style kung-fu, samurai, revenge exploitation film vaults. And speaking of kung fu,...just who is the titular "Bill" anyway? (,said I knowingly.)

So here's the rest... I love the way the film was shot with lots of nice pans across and above rooms and nice angles and blocking. Special kudos to Tarantino for casting a bunch of the kids from Battle Royale as The Crazy 88s gang and Chiaki Kuriyama as Lucy's Liu's schoolgirl henchman. This is a filmlovers film and if you like weird obscure movies, you'll find a lot to like in this film. See it with a friend or even alone...just remember that this is the first part of a full movie and it ends a little abruptly (which seemed to tick off some of the people in the audience who obviously didn't realize that a part two was coming soon...very soon).

This double feature is a perfect pairing of two lesser-known and completely wretched examples of one of my personal favorite subgenres: GUY IN A GORILLA SUIT MOVIES.

I love this crap. And I DO mean LOVE and I DO mean CRAP. Something Weird has done a bang-up job with two flicks that probably deserved worse (and probably deserved to be completely forgotten altogether.) There's lots of supplemental material to slake your APE-etites. Strange short films, insane trailers for other like-minded movies, radio-spots, Exploitation art galleries! All that, AND it’s digitally remastered! Holy wow!

Mighty Gorga is the story of a circus owner who’s having a hard time making ends meet, so he decides to take an old acquaintance up on an offer to hunt down a HUGE GORILLA in Africa, figuring it could bring in some revenue. SO he gets there, finds out the guy’s missing, teams up with his sexy daughter and then the adventure begins. Meanwhile, a local tribe is sacrificing virgins to this giant gorilla. Awesome!

Well, sort of awesome, anyway. The movie kinda sucks. But in a fun way. The plot is absolutely boring but there’s so many stupid treats along the way that you'll stay watching. I did, anyway. There's a lot of stock footage of jungle animals that was shot in a zoo and then transplanted into the jungle scene. And Gorga himself has GOT to be the worst ape costume EVER. Usually when he comes on screen he just stands around, waving his arms at a bunch of tree branches, like he’s stuck or something. There's even a point where he looks like he's playing with a booger on the tip of his finger.

At just pass the hour point he fights a fake plastic dinosaur and it’s just too cool for words.

One Million AC/DC was written by Ed Wood and is pretty much just a softcore porn with a vestigial story involving a fake plastic dinosaur that won't let some cavemen out of their cave. There's also a guy in a gorilla suit that kidnaps a chick and keeps her in his cave, doing “the business.”

Look out, at around 15 minutes and 8 seconds into it, there's a toy dinosaur that someone’s holding behind a rock, waving it around like it's scary. Oh my God, reason enough to buy this disc right there.

Yeah, this is a nice addition to the collection. Get it while it's hot!

(Ryan Lies runs around in gorrilla suits and is a No-Fi "Magazine" staff writer.)

---

Queen Kong
starring Barbara Allen, Suzy Arthur, Robin Askwith, directed by Frank Agrama, , 1976
Distributed by Retromedia
Video Reviewed By: Ryan Lies

Ouch!

Here it is, folks. What may be the unfunniest movie of all time! It’s great, worth the wait, don’t get me wrong! But damn is it BAD. To misquote RUN DMC here “It’s not bad meaning bad but bad meaning AWFULLY BAD.”

Long suppressed after Dino De Laurentiis sued, fearing it might cast a negative light on his silly big budgeted King Kong remake, this film is finally being released, for the first time anywhere! A lot of cult film enthusiasts and late night movie geeks have been trying to see this movie for a long time, and now they get their chance, thanks to Retromedia, those harbingers of the long forgotten.

Straight up, I enjoyed the crap out of it. Although I can’t say why exactly, because it was just plain awful all around. I’ve seen worse, to be honest. But whereas a lot of bad movies are accidentally fun to watch due to their ineptness, Queen Kong tries to be funny in a campy way and just comes out all sorts of terrible. Which should make it even more of a hoot, but that’s not why it’s entertaining, either. It’s just entertaining, I think, because it just shouldn’t exist at all. There’s a certain element of brain dead, ham-fisted temerity behind this production that you kinda have to get a kick out of it. Like, Who the hell did these people think they were? I mean, really?

The theme song starts things out just right with some wacky lyrics along the lines of “Queen Kong is the chick with all the hair” and “She’s a genie who ain’t teeny / She’s the queenie queenie for my weenie.” (Anyone know where I can get this on CD?)

The film itself is basically a feminist retelling of the King Kong story, only this it’s a renegade female film director who finds herself the dopiest guy on earth and plans to make hi into a star. They journey to a country called Lazanga Where They Do the Conga, in hopes of filming a jungle adventure film. When they get there, they run into some natives who worship a gigantic, man-eating gorilla named … yep … Queen Kong. They of course abscond with the ape back to civilization to make a quick buck. Queenie, naturally, has fallen in love with the dopey film-star to be, and when she gets jealous of other chicks hitting on him, she breaks free and kooky chaos ensues. And, did I mention this is also a musical?

But it’s the jokes you’ll remember, and cringe at, the most. NOTHING IS FUNNY. Not a single thing. And it’s embarrassing to watch at times. Kinf of like watching your little cousin’s second grade play slowing turning into a fiasco right before your eyes: it isn’t funny cuz the kids are all crying but DAMN is it funny!

I want you all to watch this, though, and get back to me on it, because I’m willing to bet that the “prehistoric bagpipe” joke is the UNFUNNIEST JOKE OF ALL TIME. I dare any of you to find a joke that’s less funny.

Queenie fights a dinosaur at one point, and you know I love that! And I just can’t help but adore and marvel at the limitless incompetence on display here. The fact that this was made at all … the fact that some jackass sat down and thought “Yeah, this is a GREAT idea for a flick!” … well, that’s what made it worth it my friends. Every minute of it. Such brainless hubris should always be celebrated in the world of cinema.

I've been looking forward to this film since Augusta passed a preview DVD to me a couple months ago. I was a little worried about the video footage I saw on the dvd, thinking that it would all look that way, but this is actually a nice looking documentary that uses video AND film to tell the story of L.A.'s Velvet Hammer burlesque group which is the most visable burlesque group in the country and features va-va-licious ladies of all curvy shapes and all luscious sizes.

For those of you who don't know what the difference between burlesque and "stripping" is, this film aims to explain just that. Where most stripping is all about showing you "the vag", burlesque is all about "the show" itself. (True burlesque doesn't even have full nudity!) In showcasing The Velvet Hammer, this film celebrates the resurgence of burlesque itself... ...and if you haven't been able to tell from all 39 issues of No-Fi so far, I love the art of burlesque from tough, but bubbly, broads to the bawdy comedy and everything in between (hopefully me), It's all good when done right and The Velvet Hammer always seem to know the formula backwards and forwards and when to turn it upside-down.

As a documentary, this film succeeds in almost every way. Different aspects of the group and the art of burlesque are broken down into short sections focusing on things from specific events that the group performed at, their origins, the spooky french maids that clean up after the performers (one of the best sections of the film ) to eyelashes, burlesque dos and don'ts, and burlesque bloopers. It was shot really well (and the stag reel loops featuring the performers are modern classics!) and the transition from video to film was excellent. You always knew who everyone was (and there are a LOT of people in the film) and they all had interesting things to say. What it all boiled down to is that there are a lot of women (and men) just trying to have fun in a way that doesn't put down the performers or its patrons; as tends to be the case in most strip clubs. But perhaps this in itself is a sticky point for some people...

I went to a screening of this film with a friend of mine who has worked in the "dancing" field...not burlesque, but "dancing" at strip joints. She is one of the nicest people I know and is not what you would consider to be a typical "stripper" as she is naturally pretty and very smart (...and also a No-Fi "cover star", but I'm not going to say which one...and it's not obvious either). She had some issues with the film as some of the girls in it dismissed non-burlesque dancers (especially the ones who do lap dances) even though they themselves are still basically taking off their clothes (although not as many). Personally I see a difference, but its all a matter of personal opinion. I've been in a couple real strip clubs and it always felt a little icky. The guys were creepy and the girls looked like zombies. Seriously guys were just looking right into the gals' vaginas and the gals were just yawning, swaying around like they weren't even there. You go to a burlesque show and EVERYONE is having fun from the performers to the crowd (which is usually 50 percent or more female). I my friend's point about how some of the people in this movie were a little harsh, but I didn't get a "we're better than them" vibe from the film overall. If anything, maybe they could have gotten some outside perspective from the fans or non-burlesque "dancers". The only other problem I had with the film is that it seemed that the voices were out of sync with some of the interviewies at times.

To sum it up, this is a good film to see with a group or even a date! It's funny and just plain fun which is totally what the spirit of burlesque is all about. There is something for everyone and you just might find yourself hootin' and hollerin' with the rest of the cool cats and kittens n the audience!

Doris Wishman had a thing for rape scenes. (She's dead now, by the way.) I like a bunch of Doris Wishman films, and this film is a classic in its own weird way, but there are just so many rape scenes in her films and especially in this one. What was up with that? This film is about a man who has a certain "organ" transplanted from a frisky dead friend onto his lower region that seems to take over whenever he sees women's tacky gold earrings. What transpires is rape scene after rape scene while an investigator tracks down the man responsible for these crimes. In typical Doris Wishman fashion most of the dialogue in the film happens off camera or the camera focuses on the person being talked to while the person talking almost always off camera. By the way, why is that particular transplant considered "amazing" with all the harm it causes. The dvd cover is cool, though. The color and film transfer is great and the sound is really clean. You can see those oddly blocked rape scenes in clean glorious technicolor. I guess you could say the film is stating that men are really controlled by their penises...or in this case transplanted penises, but I think the truth behind the film is that Doris saw all the bucks she could make from the film and just went for it.

This is a Something Weird Video dvd, so there are some good extras (although not as many as their more recent releases). There are a bunch of trailers, a couple'a educational short subjects, and a gallery of 60s sexploitation art with grind-house radio spots. Get this for a nonromantic evening of jawdropping ridiculousness.

(Chris Beyond is the creator of No-Fi "Magazine" and just wouldn't donate "that" organ.)

---

April Fool's Day
starring Deborah Foreman, Griffin O'Neal, directed by Fred Walton, , 1986
Distributed by Paramount Home Video
DVD Reviewed By: Ryan Lies

For some inexplicable reason I have always liked this one. Always thought the poster art was one of the best of the 80s. Love the bad acting, the ridiculous, yet somehow satisfying "twist" ending.

I was geeked when I saw Paramount was putting this out on DVD, but holy god does this DVD suck! Actually, Paramount sucks! Yeah, thanks for the super cool Jones Trilogy and Godfather trilogy boxsets and the awesome Star Trek SE’s you’ve been putting out … but screw you on the rest! All you get here is the movie and no extras whatsoever. Not even a g.d. trailer! Come on!

Ah well, I bought it anyway, and to its credit, the movie itself looks sharp. Better than the videos did, anyway. And if you like the movie as much as me, then I suppose somewhere in there it’s worth it. I hear there’s an uncut version of this, although that could just be geek apocrypha. Either way, all you get here is the original 88 minute theatrical cut.

Within that 88 minutes, you get some goodies, though. You get characters with names like Muffy and Chazz, great creative murders, a well scene that’s actually more thrilling than the one in the pointless American Ring remake, a great 80s new wave tune called "Too Bad You’re Crazy" played over the end credits … And some absolutely astonishing dialogue! At one point, one character is describing another character as having only two emotions: "Collar up, and collar down." Wow. And there's another astonishing bit of character description where one guy tells someone else about another guy (I can't keep these one dimensional "characters" straight): "Before the night is over, someone will pull his wang," and they cut right to a close up of a hot dog sliding out of a package! Man, oh man. EDITING, folks. It breathes life to the lines. Why the Academy gave the Best Editing Oscar to Platoon that year and not this is beyond me.

And topping it all off, you get the stunning Deborah Foreman in the role of Muffy. And I swear she looks just like this girl I lived next to growing up, who I had a little crush on. So that was weird. For me, at least. You won't recognize her, so you won't care.

But you should love April Fool's Day. No joke. (Ha! You didn’t think I'd go there, but I did, dammit, I did!) It's even got a requisite cat-jumping-out-and-scaring-somebody scene. And once you see the "twist" ending, it changes the whole thing into a completely different movie that you can't watch the same way EVER again! That's evolution, folks. Why wouldn't you like it?

(Ryan Lies is a No-Fi "Magazine" staff writer and goes by the name Muffy too.)

---

New Gladiators
starring Fred Williamson, Jared Martin, Eleanor Gold, directed by Lucio Fulci, , 1983
Distributed by Troma
DVD Reviewed By: Ryan Lies

While this will never be considered one of Fulci’s better efforts I found it to be, at the very least, one of his most entertaining. This man made a lot of flicks, and some of them are downright arduous to sit through (Aenigma, Sweet House of Horrors … I’m looking at you!). In between his strange masterworks like The Beyond and The House by the Cemetery, and all the unwatchable dreck, are a multitude of average and a-little-better-than-average movies that divide fans of the maestro. New Gladiators falls into this middle ground. Some think this movie sucks. Some celebrate it for sucking. Some just dig it.

For me it’s got a lot more to celebrate than to fault. First off, the cast is pretty cool. Primarily blaxploitation stalwart Fred Williamson and veteran TV thespian, Jared Martin. I really dug ole Jared in this one! For some reason I can’t quite explain, he rocked. They both seem to be having a good time with this wacko movie and I give them both props for that. And the actress who plays Sarah, Eleanor Gold, is SMOKING HOT. Seriously. I’ve never seen her in anything else, but she’s incendiary! I want her for Christmas.

Essentially the plot is an amalgamation of Mad Max, Rollerball and The Running Man (even though the film version didn’t come out until later, King’s book was out in 1982, so it’s possible the screenwriters ripped some of it off.) Prisoners in a post-Apocalyptic future are forced to duke it out in an arena, to the death, on the highest rated TV show in the country. Ratings are starting to slip a bit so the producers need to get more blood into it. Prisoners eventually revolt and escape and battle the bad guys amongst chintzy miniature cityscapes and coliseums, all to the rhythms of a classy, campy Riz Ortolani score.

The battle royale itself is fun stuff, but we never really get a sense of its scope or impact or scope cuz we never get to see any audiences reacting to it. Only the nefarious producers, who sit up in their observation deck and grimace every time one of their minions is bested by our heroes. Just the tip of the ice burg if you want to start tearing this thing apart. But I don’t and I won’t, so forget it. This movie’s just whole bunches of fun. My fave scene involves Fred Williamson being forced to train in the strobe lights, to deliriously bad syth music, by fighting what look like the hockey-uniform clad bad guys from Strange Brew. Totally rad!

Troma released this on DVD, so of course the movie is “introduced” by co-founder and president Lloyd Kaufman, who states that New Gladiators is the “Best movie ever made,” and even gets a jab in at Ridley Scott’s Gladiator, saying Troma beat him to the punch almost a decade earlier.

Anyway, get this DVD, it’s only like 10 bucks. If you’re a Fulci fan this will serve as an interesting side note to a very tumultuous and arguably haphazard career. If you have no idea who Fulci even is or why I’m talking about him, then you can still get a kick out of this 80’s B-movie silliness, especially if you dig flicks like Warrior of the Lost World, The Ultimate Warrior or Texas Gladiators 2020.

(Ryan Lies is a No-Fi "Magazine" staff writer and runs Barter-Town too.)

---

Run Ronnie Run!
starring David Cross, Bob Odenkirk, directed by Troy Miller,, 2002
Distributed by New Line
DVD Reviewed By: Chris Beyond

I've had a bootleg copy of this film for over a year and was aching to review it, but wanted to wait until a theatrical release was announced. Plus I knew that it wasn't a final cut of the film and since I liked the film and I like Bob & David (from the HBO comedy series Mr. Show), I didn't want to review it before they were finished with it.

So Run Ronnie Run is based on one of Mr. Show's few ongoing sketches (they never ran things into the ground like Saturday Night Live always does) about a trashy guy named Ronnie Dobbs who became famous for always ending up being chased by the police on the "Cops"-lke tv show "Fuzz". The movie tells the whole story (well, except for his fatal battle with the fictitious disease Intittleitis) from his humble drunken beginings to his drunken life of fame. He is discovered by a British inventor (Bob Odenkirk in a really bad "Britishy" accent and fake beard) named Terry Twilstein who develops a whole show around him where Ronnie is the sole criminal being chased by the coppers. But will Ronnie be able to stay drunk and get arrested with all the new celebrity friends and clean living surrounding him?

Now the big difference between the cut I have of this film on video and this new DVD is the timing. The version I had on video was funny but dragged a bit and this version seems right on...although it does seem maybe a little too short. I guess it suffers from some of the same problems as the movies Saturday Night Live makes from its sketches. It's hard to stretch out something meant to last only a few minutes. But unlike most of the SNL films, this one has better writing and less of an emphesis on having a love story plot. Also the music is pretty bad thoughout the film. They took out the song that was in the bootleg verson I had on video called something like "Music Makes The Credits More Interesting" that was actually pretty funny. Now it's just some generic music. It has some extras including the (dvd/video) trailer and a bunch of deleted scenes...which is really weird. Since the movie was never released, isn't the whole film like one big deleted scene? Weird. Anyway, this is a really funny film and worth a rental or purchase of you're a big Bob & David fan. I just wish there were some commentary or something else for my 20 bucks. And this has nothing to do with anything, but why does Dr. Phil have a diet book and does shows on dieting when he is fat himself?

(Chris Beyond is the creator of No-Fi "Magazine" and runs to and from danger always.)

---

Sixteen Candles
starring Molly Ringwald, Anthony Michael Hall, directed by John Hughes, , 2002
Distributed by Universal
DVD Reviewed By: Chris Beyond

For whatever reason when I think of this film, I think of Jr. High when an ex-girlfriend of mine was in this creepy guy's house at the end of her street. I think she said that we was depressed and wanted to talk to her and I had to wait outside. She was in there an awful long time and I was worried because she told me that he was always trying to make out with her (and he was waaaay to old for her). I knocked on the door and the creepy guy came out, looked both ways outside the house, and went right back in, closing the door behind him. When she finally came out, she said she was using his restroom. I asked why it took so long, she said that that "there was a lot of blood too," to which I quoted the bratty little brother in this film by saying, "Your period!" What a messed up story. You know there was something else going on there, but all I could do was quote one of my favorite movies and pretend that I didn't know what was going on.

So here's this film Sixteen Candles. It's the story of a girl (Molly Ringwald post Facts Of Life) in the mid eighties who turns sixteen, but her family doesn't even remember her birthday as they are too busy getting ready for her older sisters wedding. She likes one of the popular boys in school, but she doesn't think that he even knows that she exists. There is a boy who likes her (Anthony Michael Hall post Vacation), but he's one of those nerdy kids and who wants to hook up with one of those? Anyway in the film we meet her family and friends and all sorts of crazy characters along the way including one character who we all thought was funny at the time, but realized was a little too much of an Asian stereotype later on. Let's talk about that. This film has a lot of extreme characatures...from REALLY over the top "nerds" (I prefer the term "Riot Nrrrd" that one of our original writers, Marc Fischer, came up with) to mean jocks to ditsy blondes. So there is this character named Long Duck Dong. He's a crazy horny Asian kid who does all sorts of wacky stuff. Perhaps it wouldn't have been so bad if a big "Gong!" didn't follow a couple of his scenes. Is he as bad as Tim Conway's absolutly racist "china-man" stereotype in Breakfast At Tiffany's? No, but there could have been a few better steps taken to ensure that kids weren't compared to him while growing up (read all about it in a back issue of Giant Robot). I related to Anthony Michael Hall's character as the nrrrdy kid just trying to get a girlfriend. I too wanted Molly Ringwald's panties to hold over my head with pride. I still do. That's weird, huh. (By the way isn't it weird that a girl would just hand over her used panties to some guy?)

Anyway, this is a VERY VERY VERY barebones dvd edition of the film. There isn't even a trailer!!! What's the point of even putting it on DVD? Well at least (and I mean very least) they restored the original soundtrack to the film (the video versions replaced many of the songs with generic music) and they restored a couple Long Duck Dong jokes, but that may not be such a good thing. No commentary? No nuthin'?!? It's in letterbox and it's sorta cheap as far as new DVDs go so I guess that counts for something, but I have a feeling that Mr. Hall & Ms. Ringwald are more than available to do commentaries all over the place. Still a well written film and although it has some messed up values, it's a pretty good story too.