Shocker (1989)

Load of rubbish!!

Best movie of this year hands down!

The joyful confection is coated in a sparkly gloss, bright enough to gleam from the darkest, most cynical corners.

The first must-see film of the year.

Shocker sees horror director Wes Craven attempting (but failing) to replicate the success he enjoyed with A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984), bringing to the screen another supernatural psycho in the form of serial killer Horace Pinker (Mitch Pileggi), who uses black magic to free his spirit as he is being zapped in the electric chair. Transferring from body to body, Pinker is able to continue his grisly murder spree, AND have a little fun with Jonathan Parker (Peter Berg), the high school football star who was instrumental in Pinker's arrest.Craven not only rips off his own ideas, using dreams as a major plot device, but also mimics the horrible tongue-in-cheek style of the later Elm Street movies, his killer a wisecracking figure unable to be destroyed by normal means. The result is a real stinker of a movie, boasting a lousy central performance from Berg (whose whiny nasal delivery is unbearable), lots of dreadful visual effects, and a plot that makes very little sense, all capped off with a sequence that is easily one of the worst things Craven has ever committed to film (and that's saying something): a battle that takes place inside a television set, with Pinker and Jonathan travelling through several TV shows, the plucky high-schooler eventually using the TV remote to control his enemy. I'm not entirely sure what Craven was aiming for, but the result is embarrassing in the extreme—even worse than BB the robot in Deadly Friend.N.B. I just remembered the moment where Pinker disguises himself as a massage chair, which is as bad as, if not worse than, the TV channel hopping scene.

Wes Craven's Shocker is one of the best Horror films of the late 80s and early 90s that deserves a second chance. A great mixture of Horror,Comedy,Wonderful direction, excellent soundtrack,great special effects and an unforgettable villain,Shocker is Wes Craven at his best an most underrated.Shocker tells the story of a college football player named Jonathan Parker(Peter Berg)who after a hard day of practice has a nightmare about a serial killer named Horace Pinker(Mitch Pileggi)who kills Jonathan's family and has been murdering families for months. Unfortunately,Jonathan's nightmare comes true. With Jonathan's help,Pinker captured by the police and sent to the electric chair and even though Pinker is electrocuted and dead,Pinker's soul is still loose thanks to black magic and electricity giving Pinker power to posses people's bodies and get revenge on Jonathan. Now Jonathan has to figure out how to stop Horace Pinker and get rid of Pinker once and for all.Wes Craven's Shocker was Craven's attempt to jump start another Horror film series that revolved around the character Horace Pinker that can rival Freddy Kruger and the Nightmare On Elm Street franchise,after Craven wasn't able to make money off the Elm Street films. Although Shocker made a profit at the box office,it wasn't enough to make a sequel or a series. But that doesn't stop Shocker from being the great, wonderful and Underrated Horror film that it is. The first ten minutes of the film set the tone for most of the film,giving us viewers a world where a city is on edge and Horace Pinker is murdering families during the night and the news and media shows us the horrifying images of Pinker's murders. While it is grounded in reality,Shocker also has nightmarish feel to it where the characters are not safe from Pinker's wrath and the way Craven shows violence in this film and his other films is brutal and harsh. What I also love about Shocker is the Comedy that Craven injects in the film especially when Pinker starts to possess people's bodies,because it's so over the top,insane and filled with maniacal energy and you think as a viewer that the film could not anymore crazier or insane. I also like the pot shots that Craven takes at the media and television where Craven makes fun of the media and their constant reporting on Pinker's whereabouts and that they're televisions always on and all over the place. You can say that Craven's exploration of the media was a precursor to his later films like New Nightmare and the Scream films. Horace Pinker is such a great memorable villain and is one of the most entertaining villains in a 1980s Horror film and is a classic invention from Wes Craven because Pinker is a killer who has a sadistic joy in killing people spitting out funny and insane one-liners and showing no remorse or feelings for what he does. Pinker is so over the top and off the wall you never knew what Pinker was going to do next and you can't talk him down. I believe that if Shocker was a box office hit Shocker would have gotten more sequels and Pinker could have been a major Horror icon and while Horace Pinker wouldn't necessarily be as big or huge as the big three 1980s Horror film icons(Freddy,Jason,Michael Myers),I think Horace Pinker would have been known and recognized by Horror fans. The violence and gore in this film is bloody and brutal and fits in with the film's tone,but you can tell the film's violence was cut(the film was originally rated X and had to be submitted 13 times to get an R rating). One of the main criticisms of Shocker is that it's too similar to the first A Nightmare On Elm Street and while they're maybe some similar styles and a few connections(same director,opening credits,dream sequences,main villains)both films are different and should not be compared. The final 15-20 minutes of the film are among the funniest scenes you will see in Horror film and is filled with such wild imagination and creativity. It is an ending that will stay after the film ends and is a classic Wes Craven ending.The acting from the cast is great. Mitch Pileggi is excellent as Horace Pinker,with Pileggi bringing a scary,over the top and funny brilliance to the role. Peter Berg is wonderful as Jonathan,the hero of the film with Berg bringing depth to the performance. Michael Murphy is effective and believable as Cop Donald Parker,Jonathan's Father. Cami Cooper does a good job as Alison,Jonathan's girlfriend and has a good chemistry with Berg. Sam Scarber(Cooper)and Richard Brooks(Rhino)give good performances as well. Also lookout for cameos by Ted Raimi(Packman),John Tesh(TV Newscastor),Heather Langenkamp(Murder Victim),Dr. Timothy Leary(Television Evangelist) and Wes Craven himself(Neighbor).Wes Craven's direction in the film is excellent with Craven using great camera angles,constantly moving the camera and giving the film a good visual style. Great direction,Craven.The score by William Goldstein is effective and creepy and fits with the films tone. Great score. The film also has a great soundtrack with songs by Megadeth(No More Mr Nice Guy),The Dudes Of Wrath (Shocker),Saraya(Timeless Love),Bonfire(Sword&Stone),Dangerous Toys(Demon Bell-The Ballad Of Horace Pinker)Iggy Pop(Love Transfusion)and Dead On(Different Breed). An excellent Hard-Rockin' Heavy Metal soundtrack.The special effects are well-done and work for the film and hold-up well years later.In final word,if you love Horror films or Wes Craven I highly suggest you check Shocker,a great,underrated Horror film that deserves a second chance and is Wes Craven at his best. Highly Recommended. 10/10.

Wes Craven is one of my favorite directors. the plot of "Nightmare on Elm Street" was brilliant, and decades later, "Wes Craven's New Nightmare" was just as brilliant, IMHO. I even love "Cursed." So I really wanted to like "Shocker." but that's only possible if you ignore some truly major inanities.For instance: from the beginning, it's obvious that Jonathan has information about the killer and can help find and capture him. But Jon's cop father refuses to believe him, and keeps telling him to "go home, this is MY job." Why? Or the scene where Jonathan dreams himself into the next murder, with one of his football buddies to wake him just in time (for-- what?). How does he know the murderer's going to strike right then? In fact, Jonathan's psychic abilities overall are hit and miss: he dreams some of the murders, but he's happily playing football while his girlfriend is being slaughtered. Why didn't he feel that one coming? And when Jonathan searches for the necklace that somehow (it's never explained how) will keep him safe...I just had to laugh. Seriously? He's going to dive to the bottom of a lake, AT NIGHT, and find that tiny necklace? And speaking of that, why is he loving ghost-Alison half the time, but scared witless of her the other half?It's not all silliness, though. There are some things to recommend this movie. It's definitely gory, for those of you who like that. There is some humor, and the Zelig-like trip through the TV programs was quite interesting. And there are some nice scenes of autumn in the suburbs: the leaves swirling in the wind, the witchy little kids running across the street (again, unexplained), the moon through the trees...And anyway, a bad Wes Craven horror movie is still better than a good non-Wes Craven horror movie.

To say Wes Craven has made his share of terrible films is an understatement; in fact, one could say that for every "Nightmare on Elm Street" there is a "Hills Have Eyes 2" and for every "Scream" there is a "Cursed." But like most of his late '80s/early '90s output, "Shocker" is a film that slips under the radar. It is neither bad nor good, neither offensive nor effective. It's just a crazy, mixed-up little film amidst a mid-career crisis.Mitch Pileggi stars as Horace Pinker, a TV-repairman turned mass murderer with a bad limp. Business is fine and good for Pinker until local high school jock Jonathan Parker (played by Peter Berg) hits his head a little too hard and starts seeing visions of the bad guy doing his dirty deeds. With the kid on his trail, it's not long until Pinker is riding the lightning; however, he quickly proves that you just can't keep a good serial killer down and starts hopping bodies in the afterlife whilst continuing to blaze his trail of carnage.It's quite obvious from the get-go that Craven was trying to ride the slasher wave enjoyed partly by his own Freddy Krueger. Not only is the film similar stylistically and thematically to its big brother, it also borrows a few exclusive traits, namely the one-liners and dreamscapes. Thankfully Pileggi is up to the task of being a ruthless character who enjoys his share of dirty work, and for the first half of the movie we are treated to a truly frightening and seemingly unstoppable presence. It's a shame then that the movie peters out in the second half, making way for ridiculous scenarios and inane plot-twists, culminating in a "so bad it's good" chase scene through TV channels that feels like it belongs in a different film altogether. It's an often confusing film and a mixed bag for sure. In fact, one can't help but feel the movie is too scripts crammed into one. The first half is a nice, suspenseful slasher flick, while the second feels like its fantastical sequel that takes things a bit too far. Perhaps Craven had a premonition regarding the film's box office take and figured it best to get it all wrapped up in one film.There's a bit of social commentary and satire running throughout the film, but sadly it's lost amongst the mean-spirited violence and the constant throbbing of its heavy metal soundtrack. It's ironic then that these distractions are the film's strengths. Once you turn off your brain and stop trying to analyze the inanity of "Shocker," it can be enjoyed as the schlocky shocker it truly is.