Death Line (1973)

Best movie ever!

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

"Raw Meat" (aka "Death Line" in the U.K.) is, well, quite well done. This slab of grisly early '70s goodness comes hot off the grill from director Gary Sherman, who would go on to direct "Poltergeist III" and the little-seen "Dead & Buried." The film stars the inimitable Donald Pleasence as an inspector sent into the dark and dank recesses of London's subway system in search of a missing person. As he unknowingly hunts the flesh-craving transient below, he must battle with tea bags, a competitive and dismissive M-15 agent (played by Christopher Lee) and some serious alcoholism. Unlike its grim subject matter, Sherman's film is brimming with character. From the flashy, slightly seductive opening sequence, to the scrappy special effects and unmistakable sense of humor, there's quite a bit of meat on this bone. Even during the film's slower spots, Sherman (who also conjured up the original story) throws enough at the audience to keep us on the hook. The film is unusually witty and quirky, which helps some of the its rawer ingredients go down a little more smoothly. Also, there's a surprisingly organic relationship between the film's two younger supporting characters (David Ladd and Sharon Gurney), which stands in stark contrast to a creepy turn by Hugh Armstrong as the Cannibalistic Humanoid Underground Dweller. Balancing this all out, of course, is Pleasence, who brings his A-game to one of his most colorful characters. Within a minute of his introduction, you're chuckling and reaching for the remote to make sure you heard him correctly. The man is a true pleasure to watch and makes the whole trip worth the price of admission. Likewise, his shared screen time with fellow horror legend Christopher Lee is fleeting yet smile-inducing.It might seem quaint now, but at the time of the film's release (45 years ago, to be exact), flesh eating fiends weren't very common. A year later, Tobe Hooper's seminal "Texas Chain Saw Massacre" would change all of that, but without a map, Sherman's film finds its way through the dark with considerable confidence. It's not all scares and there isn't much shock value to be found by today's standards, but the entertainment value is high. "Raw Meat" is definitely something worth chewing over. Not to put too fine of a point on it, but it's a bloody good time.

Do not let the title of this movie mislead you; I know it sounds like yet another dumb horror flick, but it isn't. This is one of the better horror movies I have seen in a while. The story is set in England, and something disturbing is happening in the subways. People are beginning to disappear, but nobody can find the bodies. Initially, it is a bit of mystery as to who or what is doing this, but the film eventually lets the audience in on what is happening. I won't tell you the rest. The story is fairly simple, but it is done very well. One other aspect that stood out for me was the performance by Donald Pleasence. To me, he did a fantastic job of playing a bitter and cynical police detective.

When an important government agent goes missing at Russell Square Tube Station in London, Inspector Calhoun (Donald Pleasence) and Detective Rogers (Norman Rossington) are assigned to the case. They discover previous disappearances in the same area, and also bring in American student Alex (David Ladd), who along with his girlfriend Patricia (Sharon Gurney), were the last people to see him alive. Lurking in a caved-in and disused tunnel near to the Tube Station is a plague-ravaged cannibal who has remained there since the cave-in years before.Known as Death Line in the UK, this film had completely eluded me until it turned up in the Grindhouse Project. It is shocking that this is so little-known, as it is an astoundingly accomplished and wittily scripted little British horror film, complete with a genuinely unsettling atmosphere, gruesome violence, and that quintessential Britishness. The first time I realised I was watching a gem is when I witnessed the technically impressive tracking shot that occurs around twenty minutes in. It is a magnificent introduction to the monster, as we move around half-decomposed bodies, dripping taps, and rats. The set design department should be proud, as everything looks real; the dampness, the stench and the squalor.The horror is not the only factor that makes this a very good film; the script, by Ceri Jones, is full of wit and great subtle touches. The two policemen are constantly taking the p**s out of each other and have great chemistry, and it all plays out so naturally. Pleasence looks like he's having a ball, whether it be the scene in which he steals whisky from a dead man's house, or when he's getting p****d in the pub and refusing to leave. And Rossington makes for a great straight-man. Even Christopher Lee pops up in an inspired cameo as MI5 agent Stratton- Villiers. A true underrated gem, then, and here's to a mass re-discovery and a cult following.www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

Don't get me wrong. I love British horror movies, I'm a huge fan of Donald Pleasance and Christopher Lee (although the latter has nothing but a glorified cameo), but I don't feel this one lived up to its brilliant premise.It starts off very promising, with a great title sequence, the first attack happens quickly and the mood is set within the first ten minutes. Then sadly the movie just sort of lingers, with several overlong sequences leading up to a finale that is merely okay. It could easily have been edited down with at least 10 minutes, and although I still found the end product mildly entertaining I can't help but think about the amazing potential it had. Pleasance as a police inspector facing cannibals living in the London underground? That alone sounds like the coolest British film ever made. Well sadly it's not.A key factor when you want to create an effective horror film is to keep the threat constant, to have it sort of luring in the background in every scene. Well for me the monster(s) didn't seem threatening enough, as a matter of fact it came off more sympathetic than monstrous. So when the villain in a horror movie doesn't frighten you, what are we left with to scare us? The empty underground tunnels? Christopher Lee as an arrogant MI-5 operative? Not likely. It has some good effective gore though, I'll give it that.There is some fun acting from Pleasance and the supporting cast (like Clive Swift of later "Keeping Up Appearances"-fame), but too many of the characters also seem a bit wasted as most of them have little if any effect on the main plot itself. After all the American student is the guy who actually makes an impact on the plot, the police itself is too busy drinking tea and harassing bartenders.But I'm guessing the filmmakers were aware of what was missing when they released the film with false advertising and a poster that LIES.*MILD SPOILERS BELOW, NOT RELATED TO THE ENDING* The original vintage poster showed a whole group of cannibals, giving off the impression that we're in for some "living dead"-type horror action, where the threat is VERY real and dangerous. Instead we're treated to ONE single cannibal grieving his mate. Where the Heck is the scary HORROR? More than anything else I felt sorry for the poor cannibal, the last of his kind.The film wins on atmosphere and that wonderful British quirkiness, but that's about it.