It's an interesting point that they make; in these movies, women who act or dress a certain way are "asking for it". 40 plus years later, that mindset is very real.
I remember seeing this episode when I was 14. Ironically, this episode gave those movies more publicity. Also, I finally saw I Spit on Your Grave a few years ago. I could not finish it. I felt sick watching it and regretted watching it.
Halloween is an all time favorite of mine. I remember going to rent I Spiit On Your Grave from my local video store back in the day. I was carded! Lol. Only time ever that that happened to me...I was like 21 ...old enough to drink😂😂. That movie wasn’t scary...but very disturbing. Can’t recommend that one. One of my favorites was My Bloody Valentine...loved it. Scared the hell out of me. Watched it a few years back....I guess the scares are lost in my childhood.
What made this all possible in the late 70s and early 80s was what I call The "Charlie's Angels" compromise. Entertainment producers figured out that they could appeal to horny young men looking for bare skin as long as they give something to the feminists also. So, Charlie's Angels could show competent independent women (for the feminists) as long as they were hot models who ran around in bikinis. In the case of these movies, the feminists wanted to bring the issue of rape into the national discussion. (In the 50s and 60s is was essentially prohibited to acknowledge that rape was even a thing.) The male perpetrators are all portrayed as irredeemably evil and get defeated in the end (for the feminists) as they titilate the male audience. In "i spit on your grave " the woman comes back and brutally kills all the evil men. Looked at that way, it's really a feminist story. That compromise was what this was all about. Of course, the feminists constantly change their mind about what they want and don't want in entertainment, but thats a different issue. What I'm describing held sway around 1980.
Friday the 13th had a woman killer! Lol. They did not mention that in this review. What really happened was all these directors/producers saw that Halloween made big bucks while costing very little to produce...so they copy cat-ed the formula for the gravy train.
"When a Stranger Calls" was a thriller, not a slasher movie. I think it was unfair for them to use it as an example, especially as the first movie they showed a clip from.
Nick Halloway he didn’t review the howling until later. Just like motel hell. But, they were right in the sense that so many of the cheap horror films of that decade were essentially devoid of any real value
This has become, in four decades' time, the most divisive installment of any of the programs Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert have ever done-regardless of your opinion on either the critics or the films.
Undoubtedly. This is my least favorite episode out of everything they have done. But this is not the first special show they did on horror films. In late 1979, they did Take 2 episode devoted to monster movies and they compare those from the past, to those of today, similar to their Invasion Of The Outer Space Movies episode in 1980.
No doubt. I'm a big fan of these critics and their entertainment value. And I'm no fan of slasher movies myself. But, I think they did take it too far by calling them "hate women" movies. I think they're just "Halloween" ripoffs and nothing more.
These guys were great back in this era. I used to sneak watch these movies as a kid ...they scared the 💩out of me. NOW...they are so tame...bloodbath??? Lol not at all. I watched Terror Train the other day , a movie that kept me up at night as a kid...I fell asleep this time around while watching it. Zzzz. Lol.
I used to watch these guys when I was a kid. Even back then I knew they were clueless when it came to horror movies. Interesting video, thanks for posting!
Siskel and Ebert performed a huge public service in making this episode. It took some guts to speak out so forcefully against a relatively popular and profitable wave of movies built on lazy and cynical attitudes towards sex, violence, and women. As Ebert pointed out on the show, the problem wasn't sex or violence as subject matter, but the calculating way these pictures exploited sex and violence to sell dehumanizing "thrills" to the audience. Some moviegoers went for the voyeurism. Many were there simply to laugh at the carnage without giving a moment's thought to the victims. Some even explicitly identified with the killers and rapists, a reaction that's unsurprising when these movies spend so much time showing terrified women from the *perpetrator's* perspective. The vast majority of people who weren't teenage boys had enough sense to avoid these movies like the plague, . Movies like this show us some of the ugliest aspects of society, and I'm thankful that Siskel and Ebert called them out as the sickening and misogynistic garbage that they are.
How many times do I have to tell people on the Internet? The rise of the slasher genre has less to do with the women's movement and more to do with Halloween making so much money.
We've already mentioned that in a few other videos on this subject. This was definitely not their finest half hour. One of Roger's lines that struck my attention was "We worried about whether additional publicity will help them out at the box office." Well, to Roger's dismay, the answer is YES to some of them. I Spit On Your Grave became sort of a cult hit partly because of Roger's review. Roger may've also involuntarily helped extend the Friday the 13th series.
When it comes to Prom Night, they forget to mention that one of the central main characters that is targeted is male. The promotional campaign for the film was bad because they were promoting it as a bunch of girls being killed. That’s not the case at all.
Roger was a critic in the purest sense of the word and he recognized what made movies magical and spellbinding but this definitely wasn’t his proudest moment. He and Siskel didn’t say anything constructive and even though there was some really puerile shit that came out which seemed to be written by an incel with a chip on its shoulder (I’m looking at Pranks/Dorm That Dripped Blood), 90% percent of slasher flicks in the ‘80’s were cheesy, harmless fun. Judged against an objective metric, they weren’t particularly “good” in the way a Halloween or a Black Christmas are but there wasn’t always some misogynistic subtext or tacit anti-feminist message. ISOYG’s director Meir Zarchi even said it was a pro-woman screenplay and Camille Keaton said the actors who played the rapists were the most respectful with whom she ever worked which is telling now that more and more “respected” actors are being exposed as sexually aggressive pervs every day.
These guys never realized that their hatred for slasher movies were the best promotion those movies ever had, just like putting warning labels on record albums. It made the kids want them that much more.
These 2 intelligent film historians wasted a lot of energy and clout attempting to derail the slasher craze of the 80's. Bc of their intelligence, they should have reaslised the public would everntually demonetize slashers by losing interest, as they did in in the late 80's. Just like the beach movies of the 60's, occult fims of the 70's....slashers were bound to run their course.
Very bizarre that they included The Howling, which is a werewolf movie, and some would argue, a parody. It’s clever, self-referential and funny. Joe Dante is far from a “hack.” Strange. And also funny is the fact that they rant about 80s slasher films being a reaction to the rise of the women’s movement, which was definitely a misguided take, considering that most of their venom was directed at I Spit on Your Grave, which was made by a feminist. Further, horror films have always been easy targets, but many of these films are now considered classics, and this episode is a classic example of critics overreacting and assuming that politics were the driving force behind these films. Nothing more than box office receipts drove these films. It’s funny that now, this episode (and most of the other critic’s reactions from this same timeframe) are as much a part of 80s horror film canon/history as the films themselves are. I wonder what Gene & Roger would think if they could rewatch this episode today.
Love these great classic specials by siskel and Ebert
I remember watching this. I'm old.
It's an interesting point that they make; in these movies, women who act or dress a certain way are "asking for it". 40 plus years later, that mindset is very real.
I remember seeing this episode when I was 14. Ironically, this episode gave those movies more publicity. Also, I finally saw I Spit on Your Grave a few years ago. I could not finish it. I felt sick watching it and regretted watching it.
The remake was worse if you can believe it.
@@williamhowe1 Worse as in incompetently made or worse as in more sadistic?
@@Campbellzilla Both.
Halloween is an all time favorite of mine. I remember going to rent I Spiit On Your Grave from my local video store back in the day. I was carded! Lol. Only time ever that that happened to me...I was like 21 ...old enough to drink😂😂. That movie wasn’t scary...but very disturbing. Can’t recommend that one. One of my favorites was My Bloody Valentine...loved it. Scared the hell out of me. Watched it a few years back....I guess the scares are lost in my childhood.
I think producers and directors were aware of the complaints about the violence towards women and came up with the idea of the " final girl ".
What made this all possible in the late 70s and early 80s was what I call The "Charlie's Angels" compromise. Entertainment producers figured out that they could appeal to horny young men looking for bare skin as long as they give something to the feminists also. So, Charlie's Angels could show competent independent women (for the feminists) as long as they were hot models who ran around in bikinis. In the case of these movies, the feminists wanted to bring the issue of rape into the national discussion. (In the 50s and 60s is was essentially prohibited to acknowledge that rape was even a thing.) The male perpetrators are all portrayed as irredeemably evil and get defeated in the end (for the feminists) as they titilate the male audience. In "i spit on your grave " the woman comes back and brutally kills all the evil men. Looked at that way, it's really a feminist story. That compromise was what this was all about. Of course, the feminists constantly change their mind about what they want and don't want in entertainment, but thats a different issue. What I'm describing held sway around 1980.
Friday the 13th had a woman killer! Lol. They did not mention that in this review. What really happened was all these directors/producers saw that Halloween made big bucks while costing very little to produce...so they copy cat-ed the formula for the gravy train.
"When a Stranger Calls" was a thriller, not a slasher movie. I think it was unfair for them to use it as an example, especially as the first movie they showed a clip from.
Right
A thriller can still be a slasher movie just like the original Halloween being a thriller and a slasher movie
But, Gene liked The Howling.
Nick Halloway he didn’t review the howling until later. Just like motel hell. But, they were right in the sense that so many of the cheap horror films of that decade were essentially devoid of any real value
@@justinbergmans36 ya no value to 2 guys who dont like gore in horror movies.
Different film. Just had the same title. That one (the werewolf film) came out the next year.
@@sha11235no it was the werewolf movie with Dee Wallace he was mentioning look at the movie poster and tagline they show.
@@119Agent I'll take a look at it again.
This has become, in four decades' time, the most divisive installment of any of the programs Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert have ever done-regardless of your opinion on either the critics or the films.
Undoubtedly. This is my least favorite episode out of everything they have done. But this is not the first special show they did on horror films. In late 1979, they did Take 2 episode devoted to monster movies and they compare those from the past, to those of today, similar to their Invasion Of The Outer Space Movies episode in 1980.
No doubt. I'm a big fan of these critics and their entertainment value. And I'm no fan of slasher movies myself. But, I think they did take it too far by calling them "hate women" movies. I think they're just "Halloween" ripoffs and nothing more.
@@cliffordshafran9250 Apparently, this is where the whole "Siskel and Ebert hates horror myth" comes from. Well, this and their Phantasm review.
By the way Jesse, I read your research on Gene Siskel's newspaper reviews on Newspapaers.com. Keep up the good work!
These guys were great back in this era. I used to sneak watch these movies as a kid ...they scared the 💩out of me. NOW...they are so tame...bloodbath??? Lol not at all. I watched Terror Train the other day , a movie that kept me up at night as a kid...I fell asleep this time around while watching it. Zzzz. Lol.
I used to watch these guys when I was a kid. Even back then I knew they were clueless when it came to horror movies. Interesting video, thanks for posting!
There are intelligent classic horror movies. These slashers were just sick and obnoxius garbage, were then and are now
Siskel and Ebert performed a huge public service in making this episode. It took some guts to speak out so forcefully against a relatively popular and profitable wave of movies built on lazy and cynical attitudes towards sex, violence, and women. As Ebert pointed out on the show, the problem wasn't sex or violence as subject matter, but the calculating way these pictures exploited sex and violence to sell dehumanizing "thrills" to the audience. Some moviegoers went for the voyeurism. Many were there simply to laugh at the carnage without giving a moment's thought to the victims. Some even explicitly identified with the killers and rapists, a reaction that's unsurprising when these movies spend so much time showing terrified women from the *perpetrator's* perspective. The vast majority of people who weren't teenage boys had enough sense to avoid these movies like the plague, . Movies like this show us some of the ugliest aspects of society, and I'm thankful that Siskel and Ebert called them out as the sickening and misogynistic garbage that they are.
The trend of seeing things from the killer's point of view had been going on ever since Psycho (1960)
How many times do I have to tell people on the Internet? The rise of the slasher genre has less to do with the women's movement and more to do with Halloween making so much money.
We've already mentioned that in a few other videos on this subject. This was definitely not their finest half hour. One of Roger's lines that struck my attention was "We worried about whether additional publicity will help them out at the box office." Well, to Roger's dismay, the answer is YES to some of them. I Spit On Your Grave became sort of a cult hit partly because of Roger's review. Roger may've also involuntarily helped extend the Friday the 13th series.
@@cliffordshafran9250 I wrote that post a few months ago. That was very repetitive of me.
1:03 Don't answer the phone.
1:10 DON'T ANSWER THE PHONE.
Today it would be "Don't answer the fucking phone!"
"I Spit..." was pretty inept. It probably would've sunk without a trace if it weren't for these two condemning it to high Heaven.
Prom Night(1980) was remade as a tame PG-13 teenybopper horror film in 2006!
Why was Prom Night remade? The 80s original was mediocre at best. Another one that was remade for questionable reasons was My Bloody Valentine.
When it comes to Prom Night, they forget to mention that one of the central main characters that is targeted is male. The promotional campaign for the film was bad because they were promoting it as a bunch of girls being killed. That’s not the case at all.
Right
That movie did suck
IIRC, Siskel liked "The Howling." Surprised he called out the tagline.
Roger was a critic in the purest sense of the word and he recognized what made movies magical and spellbinding but this definitely wasn’t his proudest moment. He and Siskel didn’t say anything constructive and even though there was some really puerile shit that came out which seemed to be written by an incel with a chip on its shoulder (I’m looking at Pranks/Dorm That Dripped Blood), 90% percent of slasher flicks in the ‘80’s were cheesy, harmless fun. Judged against an objective metric, they weren’t particularly “good” in the way a Halloween or a Black Christmas are but there wasn’t always some misogynistic subtext or tacit anti-feminist message. ISOYG’s director Meir Zarchi even said it was a pro-woman screenplay and Camille Keaton said the actors who played the rapists were the most respectful with whom she ever worked which is telling now that more and more “respected” actors are being exposed as sexually aggressive pervs every day.
These guys never realized that their hatred for slasher movies were the best promotion those movies ever had, just like putting warning labels on record albums. It made the kids want them that much more.
You don’t know they never realized that, this could’ve been a secret sponsorship and they knew the right advertising methods
They were being too critical here.
That's the idea.
Uno reverse card
@@williamhowe1 No it ain't.
@@martykeaton182 You rather they lied to you?
This is a bad discussion.
I think Gene and Roger were ahead back then fighting against this really disgusting movies that offered meaningless non stop violence against women.
If that guy in the theater was 50 then, he’s likely in his 90s now. Probably on Facebook joining certain groups…
I think he's dead, like sadly Gene and Roger.
Roger did like Motel Hell. Maybe Gene didn't know that?
When A Stranger Calls was good I don't care what they say.
Don't worry guys Nancy was coming...smile
These 2 intelligent film historians wasted a lot of energy and clout attempting to derail the slasher craze of the 80's. Bc of their intelligence, they should have reaslised the public would everntually demonetize slashers by losing interest, as they did in in the late 80's. Just like the beach movies of the 60's, occult fims of the 70's....slashers were bound to run their course.
Very bizarre that they included The Howling, which is a werewolf movie, and some would argue, a parody. It’s clever, self-referential and funny. Joe Dante is far from a “hack.” Strange.
And also funny is the fact that they rant about 80s slasher films being a reaction to the rise of the women’s movement, which was definitely a misguided take, considering that most of their venom was directed at I Spit on Your Grave, which was made by a feminist. Further, horror films have always been easy targets, but many of these films are now considered classics, and this episode is a classic example of critics overreacting and assuming that politics were the driving force behind these films. Nothing more than box office receipts drove these films.
It’s funny that now, this episode (and most of the other critic’s reactions from this same timeframe) are as much a part of 80s horror film canon/history as the films themselves are.
I wonder what Gene & Roger would think if they could rewatch this episode today.
That's a different film with the same title.
Never really get why they even watch the movies if they never even liked them anyway.
That was their job.
@@Seantendo true they are getting payed for it.
They actually loved movies. Watching crappy films were a majority of their job
@@justinbergmans36 they never liked alot of the 80s horror.
Because it was their job.
alot of women feel titilated by the danger of these movies, not just men
Siskel strikes me as a hardcore liberal. lol
He sure seemed like it but I think a lot of it has to do with his anger from being subjected to bad movies.
They probably both were.