Expérimentations humaines

Human Experiments (1979)

** (out of 4)

Rachel Foster (Linda Haynes) is a musician who finds herself performing in a small rundown town. As she's trying to leave the next murder she stumbles across a crime scene where she's arrested for murder and sentenced to prison. Not only does she have to struggle with being innocent in a dirty prison but soon she realizes that the prison doctor (Geoffrey Lewis) is doing bizarre experiments on people.

If you go through the infamous "Video Nasties" list then you'll probably notice a handful of titles that are rather lame and you'll be asking yourself why they're on the list. I've yet to watch everything on the list but I must say the fact that HUMAN EXPERIMENTS is on there is somewhat of a joke. This is basically a women-in-prison drama that turns into a mild horror film at the end but both elements are done in a rather tame way so the fact that this film made this list is rather questionable.

The women-in-prison and mad scientist sub-genres weren't anything new in 1979 and sadly this film doesn't offer anything fresh to it. I will say that the film is a disappointment if you're expecting a bunch of sleaze, torture and gore but once you get past that you'll see that the film is mildly entertaining for what it is. In all honesty, this here is more drama than anything as for the majority of the running time we're watching the lead character adjust to her new life, trying to make friends and of course going through some familiar prison drama.

The horror elements basically start during the final portion of the film as we see them done to Rachel and we see the impact that they have on her. This sequence is decent for what it is but there's no question that it's rather tame considering some of the other films in this genre. I wouldn't say Haynes gave a wonderful performance here but it was at least good enough to hold your attention throughout the picture. It was funny seeing Lewis in a film like this and especially since he was making his way with Clint Eastwood during this era.

HUMAN EXPERIMENTS is well-made for the most part and it kept me entertained while I was watching it but at the same time the movie is mainly remembered for being on the Video Nasties list.

Anyone who has waded through the infamous video nasty list will no doubt come to the conclusion that an alarming number of the films really have little to no shock content whatsoever. Human Experiments is a perfect example of this. It's really extremely difficult working out what exactly it was that the British censors objected to here. Maybe they just chucked every woman in prison flick onto the list irrespective of substance? Hard to say but there truly is no troubling content in this film. And that is a real shame because there isn't an awful lot in this film of any real interest. Its video nasty status is clearly its only real selling point so you may feel a little short changed with this one.

Its story has a female country and western singer wrongly accused of slaughtering a family and sent to a correctional facility where she is subjected to experimental aversion therapy techniques.

It starts quite well but once we reach the prison things start to become really quite uneventful. For a woman in prison flick there is a very low level of sexploitation content. The 'human experiments' of the title are somewhat underwhelming to say the least. The main shock scene is certainly the part where the heroine is covered in insects and spiders. I personally found that somewhat disturbing so fair enough on that score. This scene comes late in the movie and it does have to be said that in the latter 20 minutes or so things do pick up a bit. Better late than never I suppose. It ends with a strange and senseless ending. In the final analysis, this isn't very good but it's offbeat enough to bring it up to the level of mediocre.

A women's prison doctor with a thing for creepy crawlies torments an innocent inmate. The main actors here all had careers beyond grindhouse, so the acting is better than most. I found the script unclear at points, and pointlessly interrupted three times by musical numbers, twice to showcase the leading lady's vocal skills--not bad, but out of place here--and somebody must have owed something to the band that plays a gratuitous concert for the ladies, apropos of nothing.. For a women's prison movie they certainly didn't take much advantage of the obvious opportunities for sexploitation. Prisoners are stripped, of course, but they all abide by the prohibition of physical interaction as barked to them by the matron over the loudspeaker. And it's even coitus interruptus alone as, just as our gal's about to stick her hand in her panties, it's lights on for a surprise rollcall. Talk about torture by deprivation! Add up the plus and minuses and you come up with something middling.

I like hardcore horror, but this banned film (sometimes marketed as a women in prison movie) is not very interesting and may be Scientologist propaganda.

Shocker scenes include the discovery of a massacred family and the full frontal nude spraying of inmates. Otherwise I found little of interest other than a scene involving the bloody and semi-topless lead covered in real live bugs, many of which were huge and bizarre.

Is the main character being psychologically tormented by an evil doctor or is she seeing things that are not there? I didn't really care, but it's all resolved at the end. Quite a far fetched and annoying end at that.

Under-rated 70s actress Linda Haynes ("Coffy", "Rolling Thunder") gets top billing in this so-so W.I.P. (Women In Prison, for those not in the know) exploitation-thriller. She's lovely and appealing, and is a sympathetic character in this tale of an aspiring young singer-songwriter who ends up jailed for multiple murders (due to largely circumstantial evidence). The place she gets sent to is one of those typical hellholes common to cinema, and there the nefarious prison shrink (top character actor Geoffrey Lewis, "Thunderbolt and Lightfoot"), who's in cahoots with the warden (Mercedes Shirley), conducts bizarre "rehabilitation" experiments.

"Human Experiments" is stacked with cliches / expectations of the genre, such as the standard leering redneck types (like the hotel & saloon owner Aldo Ray ("Pat & Mike")), the appreciated birthday-suit shots, lesbianism, a catfight, and the overwhelmingly seedy environments. It's not exactly hard to feel bad for Rachel and disgusted with the slimy Dr. Kline. There is a little bit of gore, as well, and director Gregory Goodell capitalizes on peoples' aversion to insects and arachnids by inundating poor Ms. Haynes with a variety of creepy-crawlies. She gets put through the ringer, which might account for "Human Experiments" ending up on the notorious "Video Nasties" list.

Overall, the movie is reasonably entertaining, although this viewer would be lying if he said that very much of interest ever happens. At least the evil shrink Dr. Kline provides a fresh spin on a genre that had flourished throughout the 1970s. The ending provides some satisfaction, but is not really well-thought-out.

The better-than-average cast does help, complete with appearances by the likes of Ellen Travolta (Johns' older sister), Jackie Coogan ('The Addams Family'), Lurene Tuttle ("Psycho"), Darlene Craviotto ("I Never Promised You a Rose Garden"), and Marie O'Henry ("Three the Hard Way").

"Human Experiments" is absurd, amusing, and in general a hoot, if too tame for hardcore exploitation lovers.

Six out of 10.