Madman

I remember seeing the commerical on t.v. when I was young, and it scared me. It's a shame movies today can't do the same. Well, I saw it on video, and it was scary, and the madman was scary, but!!! the acting is lousy, Overlook that and we have a scary little forgotten chiller from 1981. The year in which a lot of horror came out.......

I first saw this in the early 90s on a vhs.

Revisited it recently.

Well, most will agree that this is a rip off of FT13 n The Burning but this one has some moments of lol.

The film is tedious, there is zero nudity inspite of a lousy sex scene in a hot tub.

The moustachioed guy's girlfriend acted terrible n her chase was more lengthier than the final girl.

Some hilarious description bah our killer : face wise he is more like the blind chap from Rituals (1977).

He runs like a kid but walks limping and the best part is the way he hides for his prey. (While waiting for the moustachioed guy's girlfriend).

Watch out for his sharp long nails by which he tears a female's cheek. By the way his dungaree n strength inspired Victor Crowley.

There is a character Richie who stalks the mad serial killer and he disappears from the screen at 28th min and later appears aft 60th min and within that screen disappearance time, many murders happen n he is still alive stalking the killer. He again disappears from the screen and again mayhem ensues n voila, he reappears just before the end credits.

The editing is horrendous as scenes keep cutting abruptly.

Some surprisingly old camp counselors anger legendary ax-murderer, so he makes a successful come-back.

Obvious Friday the 13th knock-off, but hey, it manages to be worth a few laughs. As low-budget as this film is, it does well with what it has, making a fairly good villain and possessing an atmospheric spookiness. Gore-seekers will find plenty of blood flying in this one, the gore FX are pretty nicely done for a low-budgeter. The locations are decent and the electronic music score ain't bad. Dig that clunky theme song!

The films biggest flaw is in its casting. While leads Alexis Dublin (better known as Gaylen Ross) and Tony Fish are OK, the supporting cast are completely awful in their wooden performances. I suppose we're not watching this movie for the acting though.

Still, Madman is an enjoyable tongue-in-cheek slasher movie.

** 1/2 out of ****

Madman is nowhere near as good as some would have you believe, but it does have a slow, creepy atmosphere. The one bit that I will always remember is when you see Madman's silhouette in the trees. That one shot of him alone saves this from being just a regular boring slasher film. It creeps you out enough so that the rest of the film seems ever more creepier as he stalks around the woods killing everyone off. There are plenty of dull moments including a love scene used for padding, and a lot of the time you will be waiting for something to happen. There is a hilarious scene where one of the girls hides herself inside a refrigerator. The ending somewhat spoils the creepiness that had been built up throughout, as we get to see Madman in full light and he just looks like a regular person in a rubber mask. It just goes to show how it's better to leave such things to the imagination.

This is an essential film for any slasher fan, but beware, it's only for those able to tolerate a slower paced slasher.

I think that a complete guide of the slasher subgenre it's almost impossible to write: because of its very simple&cheap formula, a lot of movie have been produced since the beginning of the 80s.

Among these, one of the earliest and most appreciable is MADMAN by Giannone, which is a very honest low-budget flick with some variations from the original (Cunningham's) model and a more fairy-tale oriented atmosphere (the nominal villain really looks like an ogre). Of course, as many other similar features, it has its flaws - acting, for example - but that's not what you seek from such kind of movies. The special effects are pretty well done and they're obtained with very simple solutions. Giannone's style is good, especially in the use of deep focus and the cinematography is genuinely inventive (the green painted leaves!). Eventually, it's better than many others.