Schoolgirls in Chains

This bizarre slice of "Drive-In" cinema takes obvious influence from films such as Psycho, and handles the graphic and unsettling themes of incest, rape, torture and necrophilia. The film wallows in its sadistic nature, and it's rather unsurprising that Schoolgirls in Chains has suffered banning in several countries, including the UK (although it's not an official Video Nasty). It has to be said, however, that it really isn't all that good; as while the themes comes across in a way that is as sick and as sleazy as possible; the whole piece is actually rather boring on the whole. If you go into this film expecting something along the lines of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre or The Last House on the Left, you will no doubt come out disappointed; as Donald M. Jones' film is as good as neither notorious film. The plot follows the antics of two deranged brothers who take delight in holding schoolgirls captive by chaining them up in their basement. However, they're not content with merely holding the girls; as the brothers' sick and sadistic nature means that they have to subject the girls to a number of humiliating games.

As you would expect from a film with a title like "Schoolgirls in Chains", the atmosphere is very sleazy; and shots that see the young, innocent girls wearing a collar pretty much sum the film up. Director Donald M. Jones (probably a pseudonym) stays away from making the film overly erotic, however, and it's probably a good thing that Schoolgirls in Chains doesn't depict the actions of its lead characters in a favourable light. Jones' direction is solid, but since this film was made for the drive-in, you can't expect any directorial brilliance - and this film doesn't have any. The acting is similar in that it's nothing to write home about, although both Gary Kent and John Stoglin get to have fun in their absurd roles. Stoglin plays the retarded side of the pair of brothers, but it's Gary Kent who wins most of the plaudits where the acting is concerned for his portrayal of the more subdued side of the pair. The locations are well used, and the house in which most of the film takes place is suitably rural and isolated. Overall, this film isn't bad and will no doubt appeal to exploitation fans; but it's not as great as similar seventies genre efforts such as The Last House on the Left and House on Straw Hill.

Although this Grindhouse-era sleazer is the genuine article, and features enough griminess and mysogeny to merit its title, the film's relative tameness and tediousness made for a fatiguing watch. As such, this trash is recommended only to genre completists. The women are mixed, from very hot to rather plain, and they seem to be dispatched in order of their overall sexiness. That said, however, there isn't a lot of violence here, with the majority of the encounters relegated to generic harassment and lame-o psychological domineering. The story involves a pair of backwoods brothers, whose mentally ill, incestuous mother has twisted them into dementia. After years of abuse, the brothers eventually find solace in kidnapping young women and keeping them captive in a makeshift cellar, visiting them periodically for faux-childish "playtime," which involves anything from kiddie-style doctor scenarios, unwholesome "hide-and-seek" stuff, with the brother's shooting one girl as she runs away; and miscellaneous intimidation and humiliation. There is a decent amount of nudity, but no more so than your average grindhouse flick. The dialog and scene structures are repetitive, and the story is basically a joke. In the end, this one looks fugly and sounds fugly, and you'll spend the majority of the time just admiring the 70's skin. Been there, done that, friends, and I've seen it done a whole lot better than "Schoolgirls in Chains." Unless you just have to see every entry from the sleazier end of the Grindhouse front, you can pass on this one. ---|--- Was this review helpful?

Schoolgirls in Chains (1973)

** (out of 4)

Two brothers, one a good-looking, seemingly normal man (Gary Kent) and the other a retarded, child-like man (John Stoglin) are sent by their mother to kidnap women and keep them chained up in their basement. Mommy does all of this so that her retarded son will have someone to "play" with. This film certainly fits into the exploitation genre but it isn't as wild or as sexual as the title would make you believe. During an interview on the DVD the director lets it be known that this title was just thrown on by the producer so that it would draw people in. Overall the film isn't too bad but it contains a "twist" in the story, which is so obvious that it really slows the film down because we have to wait eighty-minutes for the characters in the film to pick up on it. If I named the movie or director that this is ripping off then it would be a dead giveaway but I'd be shocked if anyone didn't have it figured out by at least the thirty-minute mark. I picked up on it right when the first clue happens and I'm sure many others will as well. Other than that the film actually delivers some decent performances and direction. The most interesting scene is one that seems to have been copied later in HALLOWEEN. There's a scene where the retarded brother is stalking a future victim and he walks from the front of the house to a side window to look in on a couple making out on a couch. This whole sequence is very close to what we see at the start of HALLOWEEN so it was interesting to see it being done here five years before the Carpenter movie. The low budget actually helps the film because it creates a nice atmosphere and really makes the movie seem all the more realistic. Kent gives the best performance in the film and Stoglin is good too even though his performance is more off the wall during certain times. The nudity in the film is rather low, although the retarded brother does like to play "doctor" with his female victims. There's really nothing too special here but there is enough where fans of drive-in exploitation will want to check it out.

A good entertaining movie with interesting characters It's not a masterpiece but it's worth watching. The thing that spoils it for me is the abysmal soundtrack!

Two very disturbed brothers kidnap women, take them to their secluded farmhouse and lock them in the basement. They seemingly do it for their mother (a la PSYCHO), who is only seen from behind, sits on a rocking chair and says, "Ah, it's good to have two fine boys!"

Johnny (John Stoglin) is the mentally adolescent one in overalls who bounces up and down, likes to be pushed around in a wheel barrow and, more importantly, likes to play "games." The sick games include doctor (where women are stripped naked, fondled and get a syringe stuck in their ass) and topless leap-frog (?!) John is also a voyeur who watches a young couple have sex, then kidnaps the girl.

The other brother is Frank (Gary Kent), who is depressed, impotent and sulks around a lot in deep thought. He seems fairly normal except during scenes where he rants about his mother, kills and tries to rape a captive. In one scene he relates an outrageous flashback to how his mom drove his fiancée away by telling her that "We make love! We make love like two lovers!".

The sickly chained up women in the basement have rats crawling on them while they sleep, are beat, sometimes killed and constantly humiliated and subjected to the sick games of brother Johnny. They're referred to as "pets", "toys" and "playmates" by their captors. Yes, this film (the video I picked up was titled LET'S PLAY DEAD) is very trashy, offensive and misogynistic, but cult/sleaze movie fans will love the depravity at work in this entertaining and mostly forgotten gem of the 1970s exploitation circuit.