Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueIn a Canadian village, women are being killed by a psychopath. Chief Superintendent Rich and Superintendent McLane have no leads in the case until McLane shoots a suspect. From that moment o... Tout lireIn a Canadian village, women are being killed by a psychopath. Chief Superintendent Rich and Superintendent McLane have no leads in the case until McLane shoots a suspect. From that moment on, the killing spree seems to have ended, but apparently the killer picks yet another vict... Tout lireIn a Canadian village, women are being killed by a psychopath. Chief Superintendent Rich and Superintendent McLane have no leads in the case until McLane shoots a suspect. From that moment on, the killing spree seems to have ended, but apparently the killer picks yet another victim.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
- Johannes Krantz
- (as Frank Brannan)
- Ida Swanson
- (as Hjordis Petterson)
- Orphanage Worker
- (non crédité)
- Ellen
- (non crédité)
- Policeman with Sling
- (non crédité)
- Girlfriend in Cinema
- (non crédité)
Avis à la une
There was a plot here, not much of one but lot of grade-Z films don't have that subtle little thing. Plus there was a kinda twisted motive for the copycat killer that made some logical sense. Again, not a feature of some bad films I've seen.
The acting was pretty standard and Chris Lee could have phoned his role in, Rod Taylor played his usual 'tough straight guy' part and Valerie Perrine was...er...Valerie Perrine again...nice eye candy but little else.
Main fault really is this type of film had been done many times before and done far better. Still, it passed the time and I resisted the urge to fast-forward, which is always a good sign.
And by the way, I don't think it was his wife's knickers that Rod Taylor was sniffing, looked more like her nightie to me. Not that most men would blame him for having a sniff of the knicks....we're strange, complicated creatures we men! In this instance I assume the idea that he was smelling his wife's perfume on her nightie to show the viewers this was the only way he could get close to her anymore? Then again, maybe he's just a pervert.....
N.B. My referring to another review by Chrisie in which she mentions the knicker sniffing may be confusing since that review has been deleted for some unknown reason.
The main problem with the script is that it tries too hard to lend psychological depth to the narrative when its outcome is fairly obvious and predictable from the start. Cop Taylor discovers wife Perrine is having an affair with his closest colleague at the same time as he is investigating a spate of throat-slashings. But since the murders, following the same modus operandi, resume soon after Taylor's execution of the serial killer and Taylor himself had been the last to handle the latter's 'kit' (razor and featureless mask – at one point, the latter is amusingly stated that it makes the wearer look like Yul Brynner; if anything, it actually reminded me of the assailant of THE TOWN THAT DREADED SUNDOWN {1976}!), there is little doubt as to the identity of the second murderer, given the lawman's state of mind!
This effectively dilutes the proceedings of both tension and interest, especially since our anti-hero goes on about his Police business regardless, i.e. probing locations and witnesses for possible clues to the killings he is himself clearly responsible for, and even adding further red herrings in the unconnected razor assault on a drug-dealing barber committed by a gangland collector! Alas, all the satirical socio- political points brilliantly made by Elio Petri via an exact same scenario in the Oscar-winning INVESTIGATION OF A CITIZEN ABOVE SUSPICION (1970) are completely bypassed here in favour of the lowest common denominator (read gratuitous softcore nudity). That said, we are still spoon-fed the protagonist's having the cloud of suspicion over himself: he happens to have a similar razor as the murder weapon and one of the people he questions actually says that the current perpetrator has a similar build as his and, all the while, the bed-ridden Lee (having been shot by the first slasher before being machine-gunned by an already- unbalanced Taylor) contemplates whether the dead man's spirit could have found a new 'vessel' in order to continue his apparently motiveless killing spree (but which Taylor perversely suggests might be brought on by sexual inadequacy)!
The snowy backdrop (supposedly Canada but really Uppsala, Sweden – that is to say, Ingmar Bergman's birthplace!) is undeniably attractive and unusual for this type of fare; however, this is continuously undercut by the kitschy 1980s fashions and settings (including obligatory and awfully-scored disco-bar and strip-joint sequences) and some hilariously overstated moments (notably Taylor and Lee's reactions at, respectively, his wife's infidelity – captured from a distance via binoculars – and his friend's guilt – by the symbolic throat-slashing of "Playboy" centrefolds conveniently stashed in a drawer of his work-desk!).
The finale, then, emits a false air of cynicism by not only having Taylor frame his duplicitous pal for the murders (he foolishly re-enacts the slaying of a woman witnessed by her young son who, of course, exclaims "That's him!" upon seeing the masked assailant) but by the fact that he is allowed to get away with it (though assured by his superior that he is on to him)! For the record, Lee would re-unite with Mattsson on the director's subsequent effort, i.e. THE GIRL (1986), which also happens to be my next entry in the ongoing tribute I am paying to the recently-deceased Horror icon (incidentally, Rod Taylor also passed away earlier this year – so I got to watch MASK OF MURDER for his sake as well)
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThis movie was shot in Uppsala, Sweden. The birthplace of Ingmar Bergman, and the set of Fanny and Alexander (1982).
- Crédits fousFrank Brennan's name is spelled correctly during the opening credits, but incorrectly as 'Frank Brannan' during the end credits.