★★
“Cover not necessarily representative.”
While technically a 1993 release, the copyright date on this is five years earlier. That seems about right, because a more eighties movie, you would be hard pushed to find. The hair! The synth score! The fashions! But, to be fair, this makes it ahead of its time in some ways. It definitely predates Heathers, with which it shares a number of elements in common. It takes place in small-town Texas, where Lincoln High School is home to a group of female vigilantes called The Sisterhood. They take it upon themselves to act as moral enforcers, punishing with violence those who sleep around, take drugs, etc. Their latest recruit is Misty (Greene), recently arrived in town.
However, Misty is barking mad, the result of a lifetime of indoctrination by her evangelical and fundamentalist minister father. While The Sisterhood go no further than beating up those they find guilty, Misty is… more enthusiastic. The predatory lesbian gym teacher? Stabbed and pushed off a roof. The rapist football player? Suffocated and left dangling from the goal-posts. Detective Bill Griffin (Campitelli) doesn’t know what to make of it. Not least because his wife, Molly (Gebron), is currently undercover at the school, trying to bust open a drug ring. You’d think that might have merited attention from The Sisterhood, but apparently not. I guess they are too busy holding quasi-Satanic initiation ceremonies, which look they might have strayed in from the director’s cut of Spinal Tap.
Molly isn’t exactly convincing as a teenager, despite dressing from the “Sexy Punk Rocker” aisle at Party City. But that’s alright, because the pupils at the school also look closer to their mid-life crises. Naturally, she ends up becoming one of the targets for Misty’s big finish, after she gets kicked out of The Sisterhood for being too extreme. There is certainly a lot to unpack here, and it definitely feels like there are a plot or two in excess of what the director could handle. In more skilled hands, this would definitely have had potential as a cult classic, mixing religion, morality and violence. But this was apparently Watkins’s debut, and little of the potential is realized.
He doesn’t even have the decency to deliver gratuitous nudity. I mean, staging a meet for the drugs outside of a topless bar? Sheesh. That’s your B-movie license revoked, right there. Greene is likely the best thing here, selling both of her personalities effectively: shame this was her only film. The rest of the cast vary from competent enough to “Was there really nobody else available for the role?” It is just in desperate need of executing its ideas with considerably more energy than Watkins can bring. Lean into the insanity more, play up the exploitation elements (for despite the title, it is neither brutal nor furious) and this would have the potential to become one of Quentin Tarantino’s favourite movies. Someone needs to remake it along those lines.
Dir: Fred P. Watkins
Star: Lisa-Gabrielle Greene, Tom Campitelli, Annette Gebron, Karen Eppers


I’m always amused when I check the reviews on the IMDb for a film, and they are almost all “Totally amazing!” or “Worst film ever!”. The former tend to come from the movie’s friends; the latter, from people miffed by the positive reviews, and seeking to counter them. The reality is usually somewhere in the middle, and that’s the case here. Given this was reportedly made for forty thousand dollars – and those are Australian dollars, which right now is about 67 US cents – it’s quite impressive, and certainly doesn’t look low budget, despite a cast of basically three and a single location. However, it’s a film where, if anyone had behaved sensibly, proceedings would have been all over in about ten minutes.
This was certainly not what I expected. That, in itself, would not have been a problem – I’m quite used to, and indeed do not mind, films which confound my preconceptions. I respect what this is attempting to do as well, which is a different take on the revenge movie. The problem here is fumbled execution: more on the directorial, writing and technical fronts, though in some of the performances too. Even allowing for the obviously limited resources this had to play with, by the end, it was definitely a struggle to get through, with a lack of narrative thrust in particular, meaning it failed to hold my attention. That’s a bit of a shame. Only a bit, mind you.
★★
This is Broomfield’s second documentary around the topic of Aileen Wuornos, having previously made Aileen Wuornos: The Selling of a Serial Killer. It’s a glorious doc – one of my all-time favorites – but is more tangential, being about those around Wuornos, seeking to exploit her situation for their own personal gain. He thought he was done with the topic, but he was called as a defense witness during Aileen’s final appeal against the multiple death sentences, largely because among those exploiters was her lawyer at the time, Steve Glazer. But around appearing in the witness box, Broomfield decided to make a second documentary, this time focusing on the woman at the centre of proceedings, all the way up to her execution by lethal injection in October 2002.
What I love about Broomfield’s work is, he goes where the story leads him. Some documentarians – and I’m looking at
The first half of this is better than average, setting up an intriguing scenario that feels as if it might be going somewhere. Unfortunately, the second half manages to go almost nowhere, the hard edge honed to that point being severely blunted. We end in something which feels more appropriate for an “Aren’t All Men Bastards?” marathon on the Lifetime channel. It centres on Tess (Rulin), a pregnant woman returning to her new home in the countryside on the bus – her husband having forbidden her to drive. However, she ends up collecting the wrong suitcase, picking up an identical one belonging to another passenger. When she gets home and opens it, she finds a severed head. Worse, the case’s owner is now at her door.
I guess some credit is due here for going against type, at least. Molly Reese (Stack) is not your typical vigilante. She’s actually a doctor who works in an emergency room, and suffers a debilitating mental blow when her husband and daughter are both killed in an accident. She subsequently goes to a very dark place psychologically, telling her therapist she has thoughts about killing people. This is particularly unfortunate, after she is unable to save a local mob-boss, and his gang decide she is to blame. For Molly gets to put all those murderous impulses into action, under the guise of self-defense, and then proceeds to take the fight to the gangsters, all the while becoming increasingly unstable.
Written, directed by, and starring husband and wife team Sam and Johnna Hodge, this is the kind of film it would be easy to deride as poverty-row garbage from the bottom drawer. There’s precious little plot, some of the performances are painfully amateur, and it seems to exist mostly as a show-reel for spraying around corn syrup with red food colouring in it. And yet… If Chris and I made a movie – something we have discussed – it might well end up being not too dissimilar to this. On the other hand, if we had a spare $55,000 lying around – the budget here, according to the IMDb – we’d probably go on a nice holiday instead.
The “erotic thriller” now seems almost as quaint a part of cinema history as beach party films. It feels partly as if the Harvey Weinstein scandal made nudity and sexuality taboo in Hollywood. The rise of the Internet also provides easy access to all the naked flesh anyone could possibly want. Regardless of the cause, there are no longer big budget films like Basic Instinct or Wild Things being made, let alone being #6 at the North American box-office for the year, as Instinct managed [that said, United Artists paid $2 million for the reboot rights earlier this year. We’ll see; I’m not optimistic]. So in some ways, this feels like a throwback, drawing influence from Brian de Palma and Paul Verhoeven.
I’m tempted to be very snarky, say something like “The torment here is entirely on the viewer’s end” and make that the totality of the review. However, that’s a dangerous precedent, one I don’t want to set. Before long, I’d be phoning it in, and churning out nothing but single sentence reviews. I would instead spend my time sitting on the couch, eating Doritos and scrolling idly on my phone, before dying prematurely of a heart attack, and turning Chris into a grieving cat lady. Do you want that to happen, Torment? Do you, really? However, it probably does say something that such morbid speculation is still considerably more fun than either watching or writing about this.