Soultaker

Soultaker is better than the average MST3K fodder. It is a B+ movie. A movie that has a pretty decent premise, but falls short on execution. Much like some of Roger Corman's work, it just misses being better than it's budget.

Let's start with the one positive and interesting concept of the movie: You aren't truly 'dead' until a soultaker / angel of death catches you.

That being said, here's the negative: 1)The Soultaker's are pretty much inept. They seemingly can't catch you even though you're dead. 2) They need to get right next to your "not alive but not quite dead" body in order to use their soul-sucking condom device. 3) The seemingly all powerful god-of-soultaker's just sits around while his lackey continually fails. 4) The lackey Soultaker even fails when disguised as the victims own mother?!?

These are just a small sample of problems with the script.... not even to mention the acting issues. However, I still must give credit to the young star/screenwriter Vivian, she did a better job here (in her early 20's at the time) than many "moviemakers" do their whole careers....

After seeing both the original version and the MST3K version, I can recommend both. The original version can be very much appreciated as an ambitious attempt by a young screenwriter to do something different. The MST3K version can be enjoyed simply as a movie with poor execution being rediculed...

Now I did watch this when it first came out on VHS, and all my friends and I thought it was a pretty good movie, but then again, we were teenagers. But honestly, not that good of a movie in retrospect. Sort of a hair metal, Dokken version of Carnival of Souls. But a bad movie does not exactly mean it is unwatchable; however, this one seems to lack the charm a lot of the regular Mst3k fodder usually contains. But if it was on cable, and I was bored and drinking beer--sure, I'd watch it again. But then again, I've watched Howling VII about five times now, so maybe you really shouldn't be listening to me.

Anyone else think it kind of sad that the director supposedly commented on his own movie? And why did he feel the urge to use caps lock so much?

This really isn't such a bad little movie. The basic story is quite interesting: five teenagers on their way home from a summer festival crash their car and awaken to find themselves unharmed. However, one of them is missing, and a mysterious man in black is stalking the rest of them down one by one and seemingly killing them. What the kids don't know, but soon come to realize, is that they are lost souls, thrown from their bodies at the moment of the accident. Their physical comatose selves are in the hospital, and the two remaining survivors have only a short time left to get back into their bodies before the Angel of Death comes to claim them.

A low budget, bad 80s music and an overly drawn out ending are the films only major flaws, but the acting is quite good and the story (written by star Vivian Schilling) is well thought out. Schilling went on to write a book entitled "Quietus" which is a sort-of sequel to this film.

Worth checking out at least once, with or without the MST3K commentary.

"Soultaker" is not a good film--that I won't even try to argue. However, I know bad films and currently have reviewed more bad films than anyone on the planet. And, compared to the many, many horrible movies I've subjected myself to, it just isn't THAT bad. So why, then, is it currently #40 on IMDb's infamous Bottom 100 List. In other words, of the thousands and thousands and thousands of eligible films on the site, only 39 have a lower overall score than this one! This means it's horrible, right? No. This means it was featured on "Mystery Science Theater 3000" and fans of the show assumed it was horrible because it was on the show. Sometimes movies on "MST3000" are bad or sub-par and that is all. This would also explain why "Girl With the Gold Boots" is also on the list, even though it's among the director's BEST! Too often people just assume the films they make fun of are that bad--but seeing it without the running comments reveals that SOME of the film isn't bad- -such as the main plot idea.

The plot is VERY simple. A total jerk is driving like a nut and wrecks his car--killing himself and the three others in the car. As their bodies are lying dead in the wreck, the souls of the four are alive and well and walking about--though no one can see them. Soon, a guy who looks almost exactly like an old version of Emelio Estevez shows up and starts sucking souls out of the four bodies. He dispatches one but stops when he sees the girl--she is the reincarnation of a girl he loved when he was alive--before he became a grim reaper! During his hesitation, the three manage to escape and run from him. This is funny, as Estevez' character NEVER runs and they constantly run--yet he always catches up to them--just like the guy from Halloween!! Can the three manage to elude the reaper and manage to be reunited with their bodies?

The film is funny to watch because of the clothes, BIG hair and styles of 1990. And, the acting isn't very good. And, it's a chance to see Joe Estevez, the black sheep of the Sheen/Estevez clan because he is a politically conservative guy--unlike his older brother Martin Sheen. But the idea of the plot is interesting--even if most of the rest of it isn't. Not bad enough to make any worst of list--but bad enough to laugh at and marvel at the amateurish way it was made.

Ok, I just had to say a few words here. Yes, I'll disclaim myself as a HUGE MST3K fan....HOWEVER....I am also a sincere student of fine films. With that said, I'd like to address the previous comments regarding City of Angels "ripping-off" Soultaker. City of Angels is a REMAKE of Wim Wenders' WINGS OF DESIRE. It was made in 1987. Three years prior to Soultaker. So....in essence, Soultaker could be said to be "ripping off" WINGS OF DESIRE. But, in truth, it is not a rip off, it is merely a shadow (no pun intended) of many movies that deal with the subject of the afterlife.

Now, on to the meat of things. No, this is NOT the worst movie ever made. That title goes, without reservation, to Red Zone Cuba. Cut, or uncut, it is still Hollywood's biggest embarrassment. However, as it stands, Soultaker is not the BEST movie ever made, slashed for MST3K, or not.

But, come on people (and you know who you are). ANY movie, good, mediocre, bad or horrendous is fair game for movie critics and at-home MSTies everywhere. Who hasn't, after the 98th showing, ripped a little on Star Wars? Even Citizen Kane, Gone with the Wind, and Casablanca have been spoofed! Humor can be seen in ANY film (yes, even APOCALYPSE NOW is not exempt to a few quiet, open-for-comment, moments.)

Honestly, Soultaker is not that bad. Not good, but not that bad. The acting is decent, the story flows, and I have to admit that I actually paid more attention to the story than I did to the bots. I know, I know, that's treason in MST-land, and my head could be in danger of being lopped off at any moment (or at least jettisoned into space).

Let's all just admit that bad and mediocre movies just add to the tapestry of filmmaking and that they are ALL fair game to a little criticism at worst, and a little humor, at best.