I honestly enjoy B movies, I like a good laugh. But this movie made me want to jump into oncoming traffic. Where was the dialog? There was so little that there may as well not been any at all. And the purple broad spoke in such re tarted riddles she may as well been speaking a foreign language. And of my god if I see another five minute montage of TREES!! I am gonna go insane. Visual art and poetry? The only thing that was remotely like that was the end where the guy came out of the houses vagina! Which I might add was funny as hell. I love a good crappy b movie but this one made me feel cheated and ripped off. I almost tried to get my 5$ back.
10 Reviews
Last Suck On Dull Street
CHUDtheBUD26 November 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Makes one wonder in what century this movie is suppose to take place as we see people wearing white blouses, white and weird-shaped dresses and bonnets ... a women gets killed by her husband because of their, um, crazy son? I'm guessing because I dozed off a minute or two. The murdered woman returns speaking directly into the camera narrating the entire movie. We see a young married couple holding hands skipping through fields and forests and sharing an apple for lunch. Later the woman is tied and tortured by the same guy. She escapes and kills him with an axe and yells ... something. We see a close-up of a birds nest with red pulsating meat inside which transforms into a man. Woman & man hold hands skipping through fields and forests. The End. Suck. Suck. Suck. Why must most Indie Horror suck? I mean, they get the gore right but the rest is dressed in artsy fartsy boredom. I'm surprised my brain did not explode but damn - talk about suck, dull and boring. Gets my vote for worst film I watched this year. Here are crimes LAST HOUSE ON HELL STREET committed: #10 BORING. Don't try to pass your film as art because HELLO! it's not. You are NOT David Lynch. But if you must insist to be "different" PLEASE make it somewhat enjoyable. #9 DUCKS. Symbolism for Married Bliss. Nice try. Since I don't believe in marriage footage of a sitting duck just annoyed me even more. #8 NATURE-FOOTAGE. Yes! do I ever love seeing footage of trees, branches and twigs! Mother nature is so exciting. #7 SOUNDS OF SILENCE. When people's lips move but there's no sound they A: have nothing important to say or B: the sound-editor screwed up or C: it was intentional. Which is even worse. #6 UPSIDE DOWN FOOTAGE. Just another lame attempt to pass as art. #5 REVERSAL FOOTAGE. See #6 #4 WHERE THE HOUSE HAS NO STREET. Not trying to nitpick but since this movie is called LAST HOUSE ON HELL STREET where's the street? #3 REVERSAL FOOTAGE ... AGAIN. We do get to see one scene three times even. What gives? Not a good scene either. #2 SCHMACK VIRGIN. No, I'm not cussing. That's the name of the lead actor. #1 JOHN SPECHT. Guilty as charged.
Total Shite
TrickTaylor15 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
The first clue to the quality of such a movie as this is found right on the movie box. One can tell that it is shot on video tape rather than film. Bad sign. This isn't porno. I'm not sure exactly what they were going for here, but I'm guessing the budget for this puppy was about $25,000, most of which went to the actress who was willing to bare her breasts. The story is some convoluted mess about a murder, 2 lovers, and a house that possesses one of them. Tortue comes to the girl, and to the watcher, with endless amateur video tricks and shots of trees, lots and lots of trees. One is never really sure what is going on because the characters don't speak. Narration is done by the voice of a slain woman what had died in the house previously.
This maybe one of the worst movies I've ever seen, but the sight of the guy crawling out of the vagina made of sticks is one that sticks with you (no pun intended).
Chalk this up to one of the number of horrid horror films that are being made for no money, have no production values, and are being released to an unsuspecting public. Too awful even for die hards.
This maybe one of the worst movies I've ever seen, but the sight of the guy crawling out of the vagina made of sticks is one that sticks with you (no pun intended).
Chalk this up to one of the number of horrid horror films that are being made for no money, have no production values, and are being released to an unsuspecting public. Too awful even for die hards.
Brandt Sponseller
garrison_ulvander9 October 2006
Warning: Spoilers
With a name so terrible I couldn't have expected anything otherwise. This is the worst movie I have ever seen, and to give it anything other than a 1 is blasphemy. To call anything "successful" or "artistic" is an exaggeration. A failure, although attempted, is still a failure. Watch it again, and pay particular attention to the opening credits - a 5 minute long montage of "scenery". And the virtually invisible plot, masked only by the horrifying "negative" shots of that girl who talks as if reading from cue cards.
I didn't actually respect anyone else to have actually seen this film, but now that I have, and one that actually gave this film any sort of praise astounds me.
I am a student film-maker, and my 3 minute projects shot in class are superior. I could $hit a better show.
PS - Notice the title, "Last House on Hell Street", and the complete lack of either a house, nor a street in the film. It was a shitty shack in the woods. They couldn't even get the title right.
Peace
I didn't actually respect anyone else to have actually seen this film, but now that I have, and one that actually gave this film any sort of praise astounds me.
I am a student film-maker, and my 3 minute projects shot in class are superior. I could $hit a better show.
PS - Notice the title, "Last House on Hell Street", and the complete lack of either a house, nor a street in the film. It was a shitty shack in the woods. They couldn't even get the title right.
Peace
What we're they thinking??????
dwaltz69697 March 2003
When you are going to use the words 'Last House' you are treading on sacred ground. LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT and LAST HOUSE ON DEAD END STREET are classics in the shock genre. Both of them cross the lines of good taste on a regular basis. Bearing that in mind this film should be along the same lines. Especially, since it's put out on the Sub Rosa Extreme series of titles. I P*** On Your Corpse I S*** On Your Grave (Or something like that) was at least edgy, gory and put in a little erotic frisson for good measure. This one boasts that it's a unique mix of expressionistic visual poetry and intense grueling horror. I didn't get that from this. It was dull and I used the fast forward a lot. The sad part is that I didn't miss anything by doing that. I'm not sure what they were trying to do but the title needs to be changed to something else. Maybe PANSIES MAKE STUPID MOVIE ON HELL STREET or THIS MOVIES SUCKS REALLY, REALLY BAD maybe even FOR GOD'S SAKE DON'T WATCH THIS MOVIE! Hopefully this was just a learning experience for the cast and crew and they'll come back with something better. Maybe home movies or 70 minutes of static.
Sub Rosa's prescient version of The Village?
BrandtSponseller19 February 2005
"The Mother" (Robin Garrels), who appears to be from the late 1800s, is killed by "The Father" (John Specht), after she gives birth to Kyle (Schmack Virgin). I didn't quite make out what was supposed to be wrong with Kyle that caused "The Father's" rage, but by appearances, maybe it was that Kyle was born a redneck in the late 20th Century. The death of "The Mother" causes her to turn into a perpetually present, annoying narrator with the ghost-like power to untie a knot in a rope as long as it's not too substantial. There is some silent-film like material about Kyle and his fiancée Jessica (Leah Schumacher), and something about Kyle becoming possessed, putting Jessica in danger etc.
First, before I start the review proper, let me say that I really like the name "Schmack Virgin". In an ideal world, it would be the name of a long lost member of the band Throbbing Gristle (worth checking out if you're unfamiliar with them and you're into weird stuff). This reference has more significance than you might think for this film, but more on that in a minute.
Although Last House on Hell Street still earns an "F" (1 through 4 is "F" territory in my rating system), it's a big improvement over producer/director/actor Specht and writer/actor/composer Garrels' film Insaniac (2002). Garrels still can't seem to write a story to save her life, and her performance is still horrible (as is every other actors' performance here), but there are things that Specht and Garrels get right, if you view the film in a certain way.
Admittedly, Garrels may not be trying to tell a traditional story here--in literature about both this and Insaniac, as well as some material actually in the film, it is suggested that Garrels is trying to take a more poetic approach, but in that case, why is most of Last House on Hell Street constructed as if it has a traditional story, but just not a very extensive or good one? Poetic intent is fine, but ability needs to be exceptional to pull it off in a low budget film like this. I suggest that Garrels should work on learning how to write an engaging story. Mix more poetic elements in with that, but tell a more linear, pithy story that an audience can get interested in. A self-aware sense of humor might help, too.
But, I mentioned that there are positive qualities to this film. If one forgets about the almost non-existent story, it easy to watch Last House on Hell Street as an occasionally effective minimalist music video. Although we're still just dealing with home video cameras, Specht and crew actually achieve some interesting visuals. Most of the film is shot and edited using various "extended techniques", including negative images, intentional blurriness and grain, intriguing shifts and lines in the frame and so on. All of it worked for me. Further, there is a better production design sense in this film compared to Insaniac, with some nice set-ups in the basement of the titular house (which is really more in "Hell Field"), and a great scene featuring Kyle being reborn through a bizarre symbolic vagina that's part Cronenberg, part Blair Witch. There is also lighting apparent in some shots, unlike Insaniac, and occasionally it is fairly artistic.
Part of watching the film this way is the music, obviously. Although Garrels and David Burnett's compositions, when they attempt anything more traditional and tonal, tend to sound very amateur (neither seem very sophisticated with traditional melody, harmony or rhythm), the music is actually pretty good whenever they move closer to Throbbing Gristle-meets-Brian Eno territory, and that's the bulk of the music in the film.
To get value out of the film as a minimalist music video, you have to be a fan of that kind of stuff (Gristle and Eno) as well as Stockhausen, John Cage, Steve Reich's early work, John Zorn, and so on. The extended technique visual style parallels that sensibility. Of course, a lot of people dislike that kind of music and "flashy" cinematography, so these elements will not be saving graces for them. If you don't have the disposition or calm/patience to enjoy Eno's Thursday Afternoon (1984), you're not going to like this film either.
But there are a couple other things Specht does right. One is the opening murder scene. While it's not exactly well acted or very elaborate in terms of special makeup effects, it's staged and shot well enough that it's pretty effective. There are a couple great locations (such as the river) that were well shot and should have been used more. And there is a slight amount of gratuitous nudity, which I'm always happy to see.
However, none of that is enough to bring the film up to a "D" (a 6), or even to make the film "so bad it's good" (a 5). It's not bad/ridiculous enough for that. Plus for most of the things done right, there are things done wrong. The awful storytelling negates the admirable minimalist music video. A ridiculously amateur zoom in and out shot of the moon negates more professional shots in the basement. The extremely padded opening and closing credits (to achieve an actual running time around 67 minutes, not the stated 70) and the horrible pacing for the story negate the few clever montages. The half-assed insertion of a couple ancillary characters (one who gets bonked in the head while he has a metal bucket on it, providing one of the film's only humorous (though unintentionally so) moments) negates itself.
You might think the film sounds worth checking out for its badness, but do yourself a favor and avoid that unless the music video sounds like something you might like.
First, before I start the review proper, let me say that I really like the name "Schmack Virgin". In an ideal world, it would be the name of a long lost member of the band Throbbing Gristle (worth checking out if you're unfamiliar with them and you're into weird stuff). This reference has more significance than you might think for this film, but more on that in a minute.
Although Last House on Hell Street still earns an "F" (1 through 4 is "F" territory in my rating system), it's a big improvement over producer/director/actor Specht and writer/actor/composer Garrels' film Insaniac (2002). Garrels still can't seem to write a story to save her life, and her performance is still horrible (as is every other actors' performance here), but there are things that Specht and Garrels get right, if you view the film in a certain way.
Admittedly, Garrels may not be trying to tell a traditional story here--in literature about both this and Insaniac, as well as some material actually in the film, it is suggested that Garrels is trying to take a more poetic approach, but in that case, why is most of Last House on Hell Street constructed as if it has a traditional story, but just not a very extensive or good one? Poetic intent is fine, but ability needs to be exceptional to pull it off in a low budget film like this. I suggest that Garrels should work on learning how to write an engaging story. Mix more poetic elements in with that, but tell a more linear, pithy story that an audience can get interested in. A self-aware sense of humor might help, too.
But, I mentioned that there are positive qualities to this film. If one forgets about the almost non-existent story, it easy to watch Last House on Hell Street as an occasionally effective minimalist music video. Although we're still just dealing with home video cameras, Specht and crew actually achieve some interesting visuals. Most of the film is shot and edited using various "extended techniques", including negative images, intentional blurriness and grain, intriguing shifts and lines in the frame and so on. All of it worked for me. Further, there is a better production design sense in this film compared to Insaniac, with some nice set-ups in the basement of the titular house (which is really more in "Hell Field"), and a great scene featuring Kyle being reborn through a bizarre symbolic vagina that's part Cronenberg, part Blair Witch. There is also lighting apparent in some shots, unlike Insaniac, and occasionally it is fairly artistic.
Part of watching the film this way is the music, obviously. Although Garrels and David Burnett's compositions, when they attempt anything more traditional and tonal, tend to sound very amateur (neither seem very sophisticated with traditional melody, harmony or rhythm), the music is actually pretty good whenever they move closer to Throbbing Gristle-meets-Brian Eno territory, and that's the bulk of the music in the film.
To get value out of the film as a minimalist music video, you have to be a fan of that kind of stuff (Gristle and Eno) as well as Stockhausen, John Cage, Steve Reich's early work, John Zorn, and so on. The extended technique visual style parallels that sensibility. Of course, a lot of people dislike that kind of music and "flashy" cinematography, so these elements will not be saving graces for them. If you don't have the disposition or calm/patience to enjoy Eno's Thursday Afternoon (1984), you're not going to like this film either.
But there are a couple other things Specht does right. One is the opening murder scene. While it's not exactly well acted or very elaborate in terms of special makeup effects, it's staged and shot well enough that it's pretty effective. There are a couple great locations (such as the river) that were well shot and should have been used more. And there is a slight amount of gratuitous nudity, which I'm always happy to see.
However, none of that is enough to bring the film up to a "D" (a 6), or even to make the film "so bad it's good" (a 5). It's not bad/ridiculous enough for that. Plus for most of the things done right, there are things done wrong. The awful storytelling negates the admirable minimalist music video. A ridiculously amateur zoom in and out shot of the moon negates more professional shots in the basement. The extremely padded opening and closing credits (to achieve an actual running time around 67 minutes, not the stated 70) and the horrible pacing for the story negate the few clever montages. The half-assed insertion of a couple ancillary characters (one who gets bonked in the head while he has a metal bucket on it, providing one of the film's only humorous (though unintentionally so) moments) negates itself.
You might think the film sounds worth checking out for its badness, but do yourself a favor and avoid that unless the music video sounds like something you might like.
Watch this movie! Seriously
brandonlewislaw17 July 2012
I saw Only Shack on Deserted Field about 7 or 8 years ago. I remember this movie because of the joke I played on my friends with it. Being as it was the worst movie experience of my life, I felt a strange sense of anger. I was bitter. I felt that I had been wronged, and I wanted others to feel my pain. I then burned 2 copies and gave them to 2 of my friends who love horror movies. I told them I had just come across an amazing horror movie. Their reaction goes without saying. Halloween holds the title of greatest film ever for me. Any horror movie I see I rank on a scale of Last House on Hell Street-Halloween. It's my own scale of 1-10 ranking, if you will. 8 years later and hundred of horror movies later, my scale remains intact. With that being said, I recommend this movie. Why? We see average and below average horror all the time. It passes the time and pretty much goes in one ear and out the other. I absolutely guarantee this movie will forever stick with you. After you see this, you will never utter the lines "worst movie I've ever seen" again. If you do, please pass the title along, I would love to see something that beats this.
Not sure what I just watched
bmoviep6 January 2017
Warning: Spoilers
"The Last House on Hell Street" doesn't seem to know why it exist and plays out as if the creators were writing the script as it was being filmed. Some guy marries some woman and the two decided to have their honey moon in the middle of a field. Seriously, they had no plans beyond laying in a field. The couple luckily comes across an abandoned house, where they take refuge. However, it turns out that this house is actually cursed by the guy's mother, who became a ghost after she was murdered by the guy's father. Apparently in this universe, being murdered causes your face to become distorted by cheap color effects. The guy then goes crazy (Jack Nicolson in "The Shining" style) and tries to kill his wife. Luckily for the woman, her husband turns out to be completely incompetent at the art of murder. I guess he did not inherit that skill from his father. Somehow the woman manages to kill her husband, causing the house to re-birth him. I'm not kidding. This house literally grows a womb and gives birth to a dead man. The couple then walk off into the sunset together as if nothing ever happened. This is by far the worst film by Eric Stanze that I've seen. It's boring, makes little sense, and is just plain weird at times. The plot consist almost entirely of the characters trying to find things do, just to transition to the next scene. Luckily even Stanze himself admits this movie is terrible, so it shouldn't be used to judge his films as a whole. Still, "The Last House on Hell Street" manages to be one of the most bizarre films I've seen in awhile. Unfortunately, it does not manage to be entertaining.
MR. CLEAN RETURNS
nogodnomasters14 May 2019
Warning: Spoilers
First off there is no Hell Street. In fact there isn't a street. Kyle (Schmack Virgin) is born with a mark. Dad, who looks like a fat Jim Kramer (CNBC) kills mom because she needs to be cleansed. Afterwards she narrates almost the entire film, except those parts they opt to play some backward masking. Kyle becomes engage to Jessica (Leah Schumacher) and they go out in the meadow to search for her brother Nicholas who wouldn't be there. Jessica wears a flowers in her hair and a white dress that doesn't get grass stains. When they get near an abandoned house, Kyle, like his father decides he needs to cleanse his woman.
What the film really looks like is a mentally challenged individual inherited an old farm house and a camera with filters.
The camera filters and the sound was irritating, making the film impossible to watch. They were unable to shoot a plot, so a dead woman read it to you. About an hour in length. A minus star rating.
Nudity (Leah Schumacher)
What the film really looks like is a mentally challenged individual inherited an old farm house and a camera with filters.
The camera filters and the sound was irritating, making the film impossible to watch. They were unable to shoot a plot, so a dead woman read it to you. About an hour in length. A minus star rating.
Nudity (Leah Schumacher)
Different Is Good
kellycoronet27 October 2005
Different is Good I really love indie films, and a friend of mine let me check out Insaniac (another John Specht/Robin Garrels collaboration). Production-wise, it was a little rough around the edges, but the writing and the performances were great, so when I heard that Garrels and Specht collaborated again on this, I had to check it out.
Well, Last House wasÂ…different. Not that different is a bad thing. I wasn't expecting anything like this though. It doesn't play out like a normal movie. There's a story, but most of the film is filled with bizarre imagery and quirky soundscapes that all felt kinda poetic in a way. I'm a little surprised this got released on DVD since it's a very non-traditional movie that will definitely rub mainstream moviegoers the wrong way. Kudos to Sub Rosa for putting this flick on DVD. If you're looking for a regular, linear storyline, you should probably steer clear of this one, but if you're looking for something strange and unusual, you might want to give this one a try.
Well, Last House wasÂ…different. Not that different is a bad thing. I wasn't expecting anything like this though. It doesn't play out like a normal movie. There's a story, but most of the film is filled with bizarre imagery and quirky soundscapes that all felt kinda poetic in a way. I'm a little surprised this got released on DVD since it's a very non-traditional movie that will definitely rub mainstream moviegoers the wrong way. Kudos to Sub Rosa for putting this flick on DVD. If you're looking for a regular, linear storyline, you should probably steer clear of this one, but if you're looking for something strange and unusual, you might want to give this one a try.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
