Der Killer mit der Bohrmaschine

I never thought an actor from a campy Saturday morning kids show (Land of the Lost) could find a project even worse, but here we are! I saw this movie at the drive-in back in 1978. Bad acting? Yes! Bad script? Yes Bad lighting and sound? Yes. Horror? A little bit thanks to an item we all have in our homes, a toolbox. Cheap, expliotive trash like this can be enjoyed on a certain level if you check your brain at the door. I think everyone involved in this movie had a late payment on their new car pending or were dire need of some quick cash. Wesley Eure mutters the funniest line in the whole movie! After examining blood stains around an apartment in a rather inquisitive manner he finds a vibrator and picks it up and says "disgusting"! Blood and brains on the wall is okay but I guess a sex toy was just too much for his delicate psyche. Speaking of which the scene in which the victim uses her toy in the bathtub was quite erotic for a 1970's film. Cute, perky Pamelyn Ferdin was attempting to break into adult roles after years of playing kids roles but she should have held out for a better part or at least a more memorable one. Her character gets kidnapped and spends most of the movie gagged, I guess she did get an early copy of the script! After viewing this movie again the 90's I wanted to go to my toolbox and beat myself over the head with my rubber mallet.

The Toolbox Murders starts out with 20 minutes or so of grisly and very well done kill scenes, all of which involve tools. If you like violence, then you'll love the introduction of this film. I personally don't have a preference when it comes to nudity in horror films (since it's overdone and pointless 90% of the time), but if you're a sucker for that sort of thing, then you'll appreciate the introduction to this film for that as well. After the kills are complete, however, many people will be bored by the lack of action that takes place on screen until the final moments of the movie. The middle portion of this movie is a lot of talk with little or no gore. I didn't mind this, because I found the dialog between the killer and the kidnapped girl to be very interesting. "What's it like?" the killer asks, referring to dying. The girl responds that "everything is purple, like a lollipop, and you can't see God, and there are people flying around, and you can see all of their thoughts, and you know the answers to all of their questions, but you can't answer them because nobody can talk." I enjoyed listening to this conversation, and although I'm sure I didn't get it word for word, there is something creative and maybe even worthy in here. Lots of people complain that the acting in this movie is terrible. These people cannot be horror buffs, as I have seen countless other films in which the acting is much MUCH worse. I would go as far to say that the acting in this film is very decent. If you have the attention span to sit through 'slower' moments of this film, then you'll find something to enjoy in it. I give The Toolbox Murders an 8/10.

"The Toolbox Murders" follows a series of killings in a Los Angeles apartment complex, which culminate in the kidnapping of a 15-year-old girl, Laurie (Pamelyn Ferdin) who resides there with her family. From thereon, police attempt to unravel the crimes with the assistance of the building owner (Cameron Mitchell) and his employee nephew (Wesley Eure).

While it has been often written off as cheap exploitation fodder, "The Toolbox Murders" is something of a minor unsung achievement, especially when you examine the context. It was made and released pre-John Carpenter's "Halloween", and while it definitely riffs on "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre," it does deserve some credit for being an early adopter of the slasher mould. The main criticism of the film (not unwarranted) is that it makes the shift from slasher flick to police procedural at the midway point, which is a bit jarring on a tonal level. The last half of the film mainly focuses on young Laurie being tied to a bed and subject to the religious ramblings of the villain.

This issue aside, where "Toolbox" excels is in its elaborate, effective death sequences, and moody cinematography. The film is shot remarkably well by Gary Graver, and the murders--most of which occur in a slam-bang succession in the first 30 minutes--are effective and disturbing. The locations make for '70s overload, full of furnishings and styles that evoke "The Brady Bunch," but there is a seedy L.A. aesthetic to the film that gives it a gritty and sometimes unpleasant edge. Some moments, particularly the surreal, foggy flashbacks that help explain the killer's motive, predate similar sequences in Paul Lynch's "Prom Night," released two years later.

The performances here are better than the material warrants, especially from Pamelyn Ferdin (best known for her voice roles in the "Peanuts" cartoon and as Fern in "Charlotte's Web," but also in the fantastic 1971 film "The Beguiled"), who proves herself a legitimately talented young actress. Cameron Mitchell hams it up here big time, but his performance is enjoyable and over-the-top.

All in all, I truly believe that, despite its shortcomings, "The Toolbox Murders" is an underrated entry in the slasher film canon. While it does make a downshift in pace and tone in the latter half, it remains a nasty, hard-edged odyssey through the shiftier characters of '70s Los Angeles. Slasher fans will no doubt love the first half, though the second will leave them divided. My suggestion is to take the film on its own terms, and remind oneself that it was made before the slasher prototype was fully edified with "Halloween," which came in the latter part of the year. 7/10.

I heard about this film at the start of last year and instantly became deeply intrigued by it. I was overjoyed to see it finally released on the 'VIPCO' video label (here in the UK) but, alas, this all seemed to be in vain. I guess overall it was somewhat of a bathos and failed to rouse any serious interest in me whatsoever. The acting was, at the best of times, marginal and the plot...let's say it wasn't exactly ground-breaking: At the same time though I doubt that director Dennis Donnelly (who has also worked on episodes of 'Dallas' and 'Airwolf'...if I recall from my childhood) was attempting to change the world with the tale of a deranged Ski-mask wearing killer wielding, amongst other items, nail guns and chisels. The killings portrayed are rather nasty and bloody but, as I am now aware, are slightly cut here in the UK. I doubt (sincerely) that if they were shown in their entirety it would have made any valuable difference.

Perhaps what I found most disturbing about the film itself was the general visual aspect ( - vague I find you asking yourselves). The film looks very much dated now, which for some may not be a problem but it tended to make me feel decidedly 'sickly'. By this I mean that it just reminds me far too much of photos from my childhood *shudders*...with its ghastly floral interiors and fashion sense. I guess this is just a reflection of my own personal dislike towards nostalgia and is no serious reason to comment negatively on the film.

To conclude, 'The Toolbox Murders' is a tedious and poor (sorry to be harsh) horror flick at best. At times it appears to imitate Tobe Hoopers classic 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' in the sense that the film was, allegedly, based on 'real' events. It also follows a fairly congruous and typical narrative: a series of murders followed by an abduction and, inevitably, torture...only to have the attractive protagonist narrowly escape death. The fact that 'The Toolbox Murders' focuses on the notion of the 'family-gone-wrong', a la 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre', or Pete Walkers 'Frightmare', for example, only seems to strengthen this argument more. The main problem: it falls flat on its face in trying to do so. I consider myself to be a die-hard horror film aficionado but this was just unfulfilling; certainly not to be mistaken as a 'cult classic'.

"The Toolbox Murders" is a late-'70s slasher flick that I watched some years ago and could remember nothing about. That's probably not a good sign.

I will say one thing for it: it's sleazier than most. Three girls disrobe in the opening twenty minutes. The last one gets fully naked and stays that way for a decent stretch. We also watch her masturbate in a bathtub.

The killer has a pretty lame mask. Hell, Michael Myers' was just a painted William Shatner mask they got at a joke shop, and it became iconic. The one in this movie is just a woollen ski mask.

The movie does have a decent gimmick, though, which is alluded to in the title. Yes, the killer uses a toolset to dispatch his victims, first a claw hammer, then a nailgun - which is used much more convincingly than the one in "The Nailgun Massacre", even if they forgot to tell the actress playing the victim to look scared while he uses it.

But get this: for the third victim, the killer just smothers her with his hands! Was the toolbox too heavy or something?

The protagonist seems to be a guy who looks like a third-rate Luke Skywalker clone whose 15-year-old sister is kidnapped, presumably by the killer. He doesn't appear too worried. He teams up with a guy who looks a bit like John Stamos, but less charismatic. They decide to do some snooping of their own to find the kidnapped girl, and discover a vibrator in the masturbating woman's house, as if to underline what a sex freak she was (?).

The movie then makes the regrettable decision of revealing the killer's identity to us. Some slasher movies do this, granted, but here it seemed unnecessary. We get a long, boring scene with the unmasked killer and the kidnapped girl.

He seems to talk about the masturbating woman from before. Apparently he's some kind of religious crazy who wants to punish women for doing "unnatural" things, like masturbating. How did he even know she did that?

And if the movie is just going to show us the killer's identity, what was the point of the mask, which certainly wouldn't have helped his homicidal efforts? The only people who see him get killed. Anyone else would have been immediately suspicious seeing a man with a mask running around. If not for that, probably nobody would have even noticed him.

There's also a "twist" at the end which is so out-of-nowhere that you just feel cheated. A "good" character turns evil. Why? They don't even bother giving you a shot of him making the revelation of what's supposed to be the turning point. And what a turnaround. It just feels stupid and tacked on.

Then there's a laughable text-edit ending that tells you the movie was based on a true story and what happened to the characters in real life or some such garbage. Sometimes when a movie is supposed to be "based on a true story" I actually look it up to see if that's really the case. This time, I don't think I'll bother.