Voodoo Academy

As a director, David DeCoteau has an extensive resume ranging from laughably cheap horror films ("Creepozoids"), late-night Cinemax adult "entertainment" ("Beach Babes From Beyond"), gay-film-fest favorites ("Leather Jacket Love Story"), and lame horror films ("Curse Of The Puppet Master"). That he uses about five aliases while directing should be a sign, but there is something indescribably alluring about watching a movie that is, simply, 100% pure trash. DeCoteau does not disappoint in this respect with the supernatural film "Voodoo Academy."

The plot centers around Carmichael Bible College, which apparently only enrolls six students each term. The college is run by the odd Mrs. Bouvier (Debra Mayer) and classes are taught by Hollis CarMichael (Chad Burris), an ex-Catholic priest who espouses a religion resembling a bizarre and clunky hybrid of Christianity and Scientology (check out the electro-charged confessional). However, as we learn before the opening credits even roll, Bouvier is in reality a wicked voodoo priestess and Hollis her nefarious assistant. When one of their rituals results in the death of a student, the duo recruit wholesome, clean-cut Christopher (Riley Smith) to fill his place. From the beginning, Christopher suspects something is amiss, and he soon begins to find out that dark and sinister forces are at work.

The film itself is an unabashed ode to trashy, campy dialogue as well as young men in designer underwear. Indeed, most of the film consists of scenes where at least one of the students is topless, working out, bathing, or simply skulking through the shadows in Ralph Lauren boxer briefs. That these students look quite good without their clothes on is an added bonus and is in fact the main reason anybody should even begin to rent or buy this film. Even Hollis -- a priest! -- has a topless scene. The plot, as little as there is, is telegraphed in the opening sequence, the actors by and large are wooden, and the special effects are imminently laughable. Never mind the lack of dramatic tension, the often grainy and washed out look of the film, and the absurdity of the premise, which features several scenes that exist only to present footage of the students touching themselves.

Still, this film has much to offer. As mentioned before, the film is pure trash in the best sense of the word. Few movies offer this degree of ridiculousness and remain watchable. The boys are all quite attractive and fit, and it's nice to see male flesh on display in horror films for once. And as horrible as the acting and dialogue can be, it's still better than sitting through another showing of "Star Wars Episode II." It's also nice to realize that filming this picture prepared Drew Fuller (who plays Paul St. Clair) for his role on the equally trashy but beyond redemption TV series "Charmed."

A note to viewers: This film should only be watched in its unedited form (the DVD is labeled "Lunar Edition" and "Director's Cut"). There is a massive amount of homoeroticism in this film, and the edited version removes most of it. And if you cut out the shirtless young men, you lose most of the reason the watch this film.

5 out of 10.

In reviews and user comments I've read online about these films,

the writers will say things like `It's almost as if it's gay.' and `It

seems sort of gay.' The equivocal reactions are understandable.

Allow me to be more bluntly clear: This is a horror film which,

unlike Hollywood films, is more intent on pleasing a gay male

audience than a straight one (though technically none of the

characters are gay.)

In `Voodoo Academy,' along with his film `The Brotherhood,'

director DeCoteau has created what might be called `the non-gay

gay film.' These are films which are clearly designed to appeal to

a gay audience, yet nevertheless stop short of being overtly gay.

On the surface, they seem intended for a straight audience. The

characters are not gay and they don't engage in any romantic

activities together. (And certainly the marketing makes no

indication of a gay angle.)

Yet at the same time, it's clear that something is going on here.

There are lots of gratuitous shots of young men in designer

underwear. There's no straight romantic subplots and hardly any

women. Unlike Hollywood films, which bend over backwards to

please a straight audience (and avoid any possible hint of gay

subtext), these films are clearly more interested in pleasing a gay

male audience than straight ones.

As for the film itself, it's not very good. A bland young man enrolls

in a small (6 students) college, where something strange is going

on. Long stretches of the film are given to providing expository

information which ultimately proves irrelevant. Scenes lack

tension. And the overall story is fairly dumb and ends abruptly.

The technical stuff is good, but the acting is wooden and the

scenes just drag.

It's just basically about six kids that attend Carmichael Bible School and the two owners are trying to make them into voodoo dolls. About three fourths of the movie is the guys rubbing their own bodies. The cast of the six kids was okay, but he two adults were terrible in my opinion. Especially the Rev. Carmichael. He wasn't a good actor at all. When I rented this I was expecting a good horror film, but it defiantly wasn't anything like what I expected at all. I really suggest that you do not get this movie. It is probably the worst movie you'll ever see, because it's defiantly one of the worst movies that I've ever seen. The only reason I rented it was because I think Riley Smith (Christopher Sawyer) is hot.

And a few more "no"s on top of that. Voodoo Academy is, without a doubt, the least ambitious film of all time. What exactly is it trying to do? Tell a story? Obviously not; as has been pointed out, most of it's just barely-legal guys rubbing themselves. Could it, then, be an attempt at subversive homoeroticism? Well, maybe, if not for the fact it never ever ever goes beyond the most innocuous and nonthreatening forms of male contact. (Which is, to the delight of none, repeated about eighty thousand times.) Well, it is sort of a horror movie; is it trying to scare us? Not unless the director meant to do so through the utter tedium and vacuousness of his "work."

Never in my life have I enjoyed a movie less. This is the most boring and unnecessary thing I've ever seen. It's like Voodoo Academy takes the genres of horror, zombie, and gay movies, puts them in a grinder, then runs them through a coffee filter--only instead of it being the kind of coffee filter that filters out coffee beans, it's the kind that takes out everything vital, edgy, or in any way interesting. The result is 74 minutes of film every bit as exciting as a glass of warm water--only without the ability to rehydrate you after the 10-day gin binge that will inevitably befall you if you watch this abomination of human effort.

You can't hold too much against this knowing that it was made in four days, and I had expected it to be campy anyway. (It's not all that campy in reality. With the exception of Kevin Kalisher and Huntley Ritter, who don't take themselves seriously, the rest of the cast plays it halfway straight; Riley Smith is exceptionally bad.) The ridiculous story is actually paid attention to, which kind of shocked me; I assumed the whole purpose with these ultra-low-budget horror movies was to cater to the basest sexual fantasies and not give a damn about the story, but they use lots of words like "technological" and "physicality" in the script to get their point across. (Although it's possible that the story is important only to explain why there's so few cast members.) Nobody cares about this stupid storyline, and the only things that are interesting in the film are the mocking of cults and the soft-core homoeroticisms (which aren't all that edgy). I would have enjoyed it more if there were just some random killings for no reason. The film is grainy, with a TV-quality look and acting level. There are a few "sexy" scenes that are alright -- the boys writhing in bed in their boxers, feeling themselves up; or being tied down and making orgasmic faces while wine is poured on them -- and some of them are kinda funny. And I liked the digs at L. Ron Hubbard and the intended irony of a story about religious cultists told with intense gay overtones, but it still isn't any good. 3/10