Spring Break Massacre

Definitely the best line in the movie.

I'm a bit unsure about exactly why this movie was made. I gave it an extra star simply for putting some $$$ in the pockets of Linnea Quigley and Reggie Bannister, even though they may be too embarrassed to put it on their resumes. Still, we all have to eat. Even Reggie must have a mortgage payment.

Where was I? Oh, yeah. This is pretty bad. Most of it looks like a home movie and there's no sense of atmosphere like you would see in the original "Massacre" series. (Take your pick..."Sorority House" or "Slumber Party" or some other.) You're never scared and you don't really care what happens to this bunch of d-bags.

I have to give special attention to the sound. The music score is pretty bad and often wildly inappropriate. As an added insult, the post-production sound is extremely obtrusive. (Check out the dialogue around 15 minutes into the film. The sound is great...just like in a studio. Unfortunately, the actors are playing volleyball at a lake.)

I would avoid this. Watch the originals. It's not even for completists.

A homemade indie slasher from Iowa, of all places. This one is really poor and throughout features stilted acting from the non-professional cast, a heck of a lot of small talk and hanging around, and a lot of deaths kept off-screen for budgetary reasons. It's entirely dull and without merit, and not even the presence of a couple of '80s veterans, Reggie Bannister and Linnea Quigley, can help.

I reckon some would say punished. If they believe that or just think that is the right answer, is a different question. The movie itself is quite predictable for anyone who has seen at least a couple of other horror movies. If you have you may recognize Reggie Bannister. A nice addition to any movie. Apart from blood and violence though the movie also has nudity (which is mostly expected from movies like this one).

Whatever you make of that (and the excuses the ladies get naked), the movie tries to be funny and self aware. Some of those jokes even work I'd say. But anyone who doesn't like funny in their horror movies will be mad already. So while there are some ingredients that a certain group of people might like, overall this isn't really that good or living up to the quite funny title it has

I'll try to be brief, and not give SPRING BREAK MASSACRE any more attention than it deserves.

SPRING BREAK MASSACRE could be described as an homage to SLUMBER PARTY MASSACRE, in the sense that the distributors went to the trouble to imitate that film's video box art. Apparently they felt that was as much effort as homage required. This makes sense, once you realize that the filmmakers thought that the actual making of a horror film required no more effort than finding a roomful of inexperienced actresses willing to do nude scenes, then filming them running around screaming.

The tacked-on presence of 80s horror stars Reggie Bannister and Linnea Quigley in the film is obviously meant to be the big bone thrown to horror fans. Instead, seeing them in such an amateur production just inspires sadness.

Cynical productions such as this only exist to snatch up the money of unwary horror fans who think "Well, how bad can it be?" Trust me, the answer is "Way TOO bad." SPRING BREAK MASSACRE isn't even worth a couple of bucks just to check it out (trust me on this one; when I was young I too was a "show me" kind of fan). It isn't "so bad it's good". It's just a piece of crap to be forgotten.

If you're the kind of viewer who likes incredibly bad acting, home video cinematography, and lots of planted good IMDb reviews, then SPRING BREAK MASSACRE just may be the movie for you. If, on the other hand, you expect a film to fill a full 76 minutes (including blooper padding in the closing credits) without insulting your intelligence, then you may want to look elsewhere.

I'm going to be straight about this one. It is stated on the sleeve as a return to those "Eighties slashers" and also to the "slumber party's". First of all, slashers from the eighties do have gory shots and are really scary. Secondly, if you but names in it like Reggie Bannister or Linnea Quigley people do want the action they were given in those heydays of horror. But this one surely doesn't deliver. Oh yes, there's a lot of tits to be seen in all kinds from hanging to small to C cups but that surely doesn't make a horror, oh yes, it's gratuitous but there are some rules to follow. I've been grown up in the eighties and I have seen my amount of slashers and if girls go naked then they show it all. Here we only see tits whatever but if they show a shower scene with two chicks in it then I suspect they are naked but no can do here, they still were there knickers then it's a huge turn-off for those flesh flutes to play, if you know what I mean. Why Linnea has been cast is still a mystery for me, she's a few minutes on the screen, so it's for a teaser she's in it. The so-called slashing doesn't deliver too, it's okay but if you state "eighties" then I want to see the knife going in and some gore added. Oh no it isn't here. And to be honest, the storyline sucks and the acting is mediocre. Face it, in some scene's the titties do act better than the girls and let me don't mention the boys at the bar, what a terrible acting. Some people see it as a comedy, well tell me where to laugh. No no, it's not because you but some nudity in it and famous names from the eighties that you have a horror. Indeed, what a massacre it was.