Maniac

Co-written by, and starring Joe Spinell, 'Maniac' is a grim, bloody and horrific journey into the world of a psychotic murderer. Spinell gives a bravura performance as Frank, a deeply disturbed individual haunted by childhood memories of his mistreatment at the hands of his mother.

As a result of his lousy upbringing, Frank is now a first-class loony tune; he slaughters women (although the occasional man gets in his way and ends up dead too) and removes their scalps, taking them home to place upon the mannequins that he keeps in his apartment.

When Frank has his picture taken in a park by photographer Anna (played by the gorgeous Caroline Munro), he tracks her down and almost manages to pass for normal for a while, wining and dining the sexy snapper and being quite charming. But it's not long before the real Frank emerges, and has a go at adding Anna to his long line of victims.

The direction by William Lustig, whilst not exceptional, does the job it was supposed to do; the film never drags and there are one or two edge-of-your-seat moments and a couple of nifty scares.

'Maniac's gory death sequences, by legendary horror make-up legend Tom Savini, are real showstoppers, and include ultra-realistic scalpings, amazing exploding heads and vicious bloody stabbings. The majority of Savini's work on the film is stunning, with only the final decapitation being less than perfect.

'Maniac' is a great example of low-budget 80s splatter and will appeal to all those who enjoy their horror down and dirty with buckets of gore.

It's a showcase for sweaty character actor Joe Spinell, who appeared in a lot of major films (The Godfather Part II, Taxi Driver) in small roles, and larger roles in more dubious fare (Starcrash). The story was inspired by the Son of Sam killings, with Spinell as the ranting, depraved killer. The film was notorious for its (at the time) very graphic killings, featuring the work of make up FX legend Tom Savini.

The movie's appeal will be limited, but if one enjoys that particular brand of late-70's/early-80's NYC grime and sleaze, it's a must-see. Director William Lustig made several other genre films (Vigilante, Maniac Cop) before starting the Blue Underground home video company, who are the prime source for Italian genre films on disc (horror, giallo, spaghetti westerns, crime thrillers, etc.).

I can't say that "Maniac" isn't an interesting movie. It presents itself as an "exploration of the mind of a madman" in much the same way that the 1934 "Maniac" did and with about as much candor (which is to say none at all). "Maniac" is undeniably a classic of its type: an early-80's slasher/splatter movie stripped down to its absolute essence. It's probably the purest, the cruellest and the most corrupt example of the genre ever to exist on film. In fact, it exaggerates the cliches and easy criticisms of the genre to such an outrageous extent that it often seems more like a straw-man set up to deconstruct the mechanics of slasher movies than an example of the real thing. But don't be fooled. Although "Maniac" pretends to assume a sort of artistic gravity and a seriousness of intent, it's a Hershell Gordon Lewis movie at heart.

The film itself consists of almost nothing more than a prolonged series of suspense-building set-ups, each of which climaxes in a beautifully executed and lovingly presented piece of state-of-the-art special makeup gore. The special effects makeup, by George Romero regular Tom Savini, is truly spectacular. A scalping presented early in the film and a shotgun blast to the head presented later are especially memorable. Tom is even allowed a small part in the film, which culminates in probably the finest "exploding-head" effect ever presented on film (for the special makeup fan, it is truly gratifying to see this master craftsman allowed to "execute" himself in such a fitting manner). More than anything else, it is the gore which has earned the film what little fame (or infamy) it can be said to possess.

All that said, Maniac remains an extremely troubling film. Many of the comments posted here mention its "cheapness", a description based largely, I suspect, on the poor treatment the film has usually received in it's home video presentations. But as made abundantly clear in its recent repackaging as a remastered, widescreen, "director's cut" fan item, Maniac is anfairly well-crafted film. Its pacing is deliberately austere, and it very effectively generates an atmosphere of grimy, claustrophobic tension. In its technical finesse and industrial chill, "Maniac" resembles a George Romero movie made by Brian DePalma. Each shot appears to have been carefully framed, and the cinematography is generally fine, occasionally even excellent. In many respects it's an accomplished piece of filmmaking, especially when measured against slasher/splatter exploitation movies as a genre. The harsh and grating soundtrack, which borrows heavily from the John Carpenter school of minimal synth arpeggios, is probably the film's weakest point technically, but only if you ignore the acting.

In the title role, writer/star Joe Spinell turns in an amazingly overblown and dull-witted depiction of a man at war with his own demons. (Don't get your hopes up, though. It's not even good for camp laffs.) The character wobbles back and forth between raving, drooling monsterhood, and everyday-joe-ness without justifying the transitions or making either state really credible. Many writers seem to argue for the validity of the central performance, and, measured against films like "Friday the 13th", "Maniac" may seem like a reasonable and nuanced portrait of mental instability. In any broader context, however, the performance is absolutely atrocious. Furthermore, the script insists that we accept the villain as a professional artist, rather than the janitor or plumber he in every resembles. The supporting parts are equally underdeveloped and wooden, drawing clear attention to the fact that character development is not of much interest to the filmmakers.

Joe's performance would be bad enough if the filmmakers didn't insist on placing him in the middle of almost every single shot. "Maniac" never strays outside the killer's view. There is no pursuit, no detection, no "good guys" at all. We (the audience) know the victims only as the killer knows them. They exist only as fodder for their own exquisitely rendered death scenes. Which gives the movie a certain purity and simplicity, but exacerbates a repulsive sort of audience dynamic. The killer is the only real identification point in the movie. We see much of the action in straight point-of-view. Which could be said to draw attention to the viewer's complicity with the spectacle, but this is clearly not the filmmaker's intent. Instead we are forced to INDENTIFY with the killer. We wait on the edge of our seats for the explosions of blood and agony just as he does.

Fundamentally, "Maniac" isn't really interested in much besides the depiction of violence and pain. Violence and pain appear not as mechanisms by which the audience can be manipulated, but as simple ends in themselves. "Maniac" is the purest expression of the dominant 80's "violence as pornography" horror film aesthetic. It delivers extremely strong levels of brutal violence early, to set up audience expectations, and continues to bring the gore throughout its running time. Its very capably handled suspense sequences are based not on the classic "will the bad thing happen?" tension, but on a more modern "how will the bad thing be presented?" tension. And that's all well and good. Grand guignol is a big part of the function of the contemporary horror film. As an audience, we know what's gonna happen, we just agonize over (and at the same time anticipate) the precise congruence of knife and girl that will finish the scene. What makes "Maniac" so dispicable is the black haze of cruelty and lust that rises off the whole thing. The film's basic misogyny and frustrated desire are so fundamental to its nature that it seems almost pointless to mention or criticize them.

It's this pitiless, leering quality that makes the movie so uncomfortable to watch or enjoy in any traditional sense. With many Italian Zombie/Cannibal films of the same era (most notably Ruggereo Deodato's "The House at the Edge of the Park" and "Cannibal Holocaust") it shares a quality of prurient moralism that is extremely queasy at heart. The film seems to glower down on the atrocities it presents with a sort of cold puritanism, but ultimately cannot conceal the glee and fetishized sexuality in it's gaze. What's more, it seems totally unaware that such issues might even be considered (unlike "Cannibal Holocaust" which exploits issues of viewer culpability for cheap effect).* "Maniac" is an extremely self-conscious movie that remains, somehow, utterly unaware of its own psychodynamics. An ugly, witless and nearly inhuman piece of work.

* For reference, see "Man Bites Dog", which exploits viewer culpability to great effect.

*** caveat ***

I admit that these criticisms will seem tediously familiar to anyone who has followed the progress of the horror film over the past thirty years. These are not new arguments and perhaps not interesting ones. Please keep in mind, though, that this review was written by someone who LOVES horror movies and gore flicks, but who f***ing loathes slasher movies and the depiction of suffering for "entertainment's" sake. Most horror fans probably wouldn't find "Maniac" as distasteful as I did. I'm not arguing that movies make people kill. I don't hate horror movies. I don't hate gore. I just hate this movie.

"Maniac" is one of the few horror movies that I have seen that actually got under my skin a little. It made me feel uncomfortable while I watched what was happening on screen, and very few movies have ever done that to me. The movie follows a psychotic murderer as he wanders the streets of New York City, in cheap restaurants, rundown apartment complexes, and subway stations, searching for his next victims, each of them savagely murdered.

The plot for this movie may not seem very scary, but the way the movie is crafted is genuinely grisly and really made me feel uncomfortable. Rather than going from the victim's point of view as they are slashed to pieces (like most horror movies tend to do), this movie rather focuses on the actual killer himself. We learn about the abuse that he suffered as a small child at the hands of his domineering mother, which is presumably the reason he's become a murderer, taking out his own personal revenge on other people. The one thing about this movie that was so interesting was how the audience got to enter the mind of the killer, so to speak. Joe Spinell gave an excellent performance as the maniac in this movie, he portrayed a tormented human very well. There are some very grisly murders throughout the movie, all of which are fairly gruesome. But the most disturbing aspect to the film was the sense of psychosis that the killer is experiencing.

"Maniac" is surely similar to "Psycho", which makes me wonder whether or not the writers of this film were basing the plot on the real life serial killer Ed Gein, who also grew up with an abusive mother and suffered psychological problems later on as an adult, which ultimately drove him to grave-robbing and murder. There are some striking similarities between the story of this film and Ed Gein's life.

Overall, "Maniac" is one grisly, nasty movie. It displays the psychological torment that many real-life serial killers suffer from and does a good job at it, leaving it's audience uncomfortable in their seats. And from what I have seen, not many movies do that. 7/10.

Poor Frank.

As a child, Momma was a mean hooker who used to lock him in the closet while she turned tricks. She loved those men and their money more than she ever did her own son. How's a sweet & innocent child to recover?

Kill em all!! That's how!!

As an adult, Frank Zito now wanders the lonely streets of New York nightly, looking out for his next victim. Whether it' a hooker, a cheating spouse, a snooty model, or just someone out and about in the late night hour, Frank's M.O. is always the same : Kill em, Scalp em, take their head of hair home, and nail it onto one of the several female mannequins around his scummy apartment.

Good boy Frank!

Now Frankie doesn't have to be lonely anymore. He has a department store full of victims around his apartment, all to himself! They will never leave, and will be kept always by Frank.

This guy has a lot of heart, and it shows.

Maniac isn't the fastest paced movie, but it has some of the most awesome graphic violence that 80's horror produced (thank you Tom Savini!). The late Joe Spinell (who also co-wrote) is simply irresistible as Frank Zito. He's terrifying, childish, maniacal, and downright lovable as the crazed New York madman.

Maniac is gritty, dark, horrifying, and directed in many parts as a "documentary" film, allowing the viewer to see things through Franks eyes. You feel like your right along for the ride with this fine gent!

It's a beauty of a horror film, one not to be forgotten after the credits roll.