Sisters of Death

Five women, who were once members of a secret sorority, are invited to a lavish ranch in a remote area north of Los Angeles. It seems like a celebratory reunion until things turn deadly. What's going on and who's responsible?

"Sisters of Death" was shot in 1972, but not released until 1976-77. It starts off as an occult-oriented flick involving beautiful women, but morphs into a sorta Ten Little Indians situation with elements that would influence the forthcoming slasher craze, just don't expect a lot of gore.

The highlight is the five women, played by Claudia Jennings (Judy), Sherry Boucher (Diana), Roxanne Albee (Penny), Sherry Alberoni (Francie) and Cheri Howell (Sylvia). You would think that Claudia Jennings would win out on the beauty front, but actually Sherry Boucher and Roxanne Albee surpass her (Boucher is, interestingly, a Jennings lookalike). Elizabeth Bergen is also on hand as Elizabeth in a small role.

While there's no Starsky and Hutch, as amusingly suggested, the two guys sure are reminiscent of them (that particular TV series wouldn't debut until a few years after this flick was shot). It's somewhat similar to "The Beast Must Die" (1974), just without the werewolf angle. Like that movie, not enough focus is put on fleshing out the characters, which makes them uninteresting and this isn't helped by the one-dimensional location.

The entire mid-section of the flick is relatively dull, but things perk up in the end with a twist or two.

The movie runs 1 hour, 27 minutes, and was shot in Paso Robles, California, which is about 200 miles north of Los Angeles.

GRADE: C.

This PG-rated see-how-they-die thriller reunites five sorority sisters seven years after the death of a fellow pledge during a hazing ritual gone terribly wrong. Responding to anonymous invitations to gather at an isolated desert villa, the girls soon learn the day of judgement is at hand - and begin to die one by one.

Made in 1972, but not released until 1978, SISTERS OF DEATH is a passable time killer, but lacks interesting characterizations, thrilling setpieces or the trademark extremes that made drive-in going such a singular thrill. With a film like Bava's BAY OF BLOOD pulling out all the stops, SISTERS OF DEATH is just too tame. Still, the cast is game; check out Claudia Jennings (former Playboy Playmate of the Year), Arthur Franz (MONSTER ON CAMPUS) and Joe Tata (the wistful frycook on TV's "Beverly Hills 90210).

A handful of years before "Halloween", "Friday the 13th" and other movies that claim to have started the slasher-genre, there was "Sister of Death"… More than a decade before sorority-themed slashers like "House on Sorority Row" etc, there was… "Sisters of Death"! This movie was even shot (not released, though) before "Black Christmas", and that classic horror film is more or less regarded to as the granddaddy of ALL crazy murderers on the loose flicks! Then why doesn't this movie enjoy the status of a genre milestone? Well, quite simply because it's crappy! Immensely entertaining…but nevertheless crappy! Seven years after that dreadful, life-ruining evening where a group of sorority babes accidentally killed their newest member (guns aren't toys, ladies!), the five remaining members all receive invitations to a reunion. They all go, even though it's unclear who invited them, and end up in an isolated mansion in the middle of nowhere. It doesn't take long before they meet their killer, who turns out to be the revengeful father of the murdered girl. Simple, straightforward plot and five incredibly sexy female leads! How on earth could this go wrong? Well, due to some really poor plotting, a total lack of continuity and weak directing, Joseph Mazzuca still somehow managed to mess it all up! This is the type of movie in which dumb characters do incredibly stupid things for absolutely no reason, so they pretty much all deserve to die. There are occasional flashes of sheer tension, but even more imbecility and lameness. And, like another reviewer already pointed out, there's should at least have been some nudity. What's the point of casting nothing but gorgeous sorority coeds if they're not taking their tops off? Stay clear, unless you're a fan of low-budget and forgotten 70's trash.

Seven years have passed since a sorority sister was killed as a result of a Russian-roulette-type initiation, which was ruled an accident. Then, five members get anonymous invitations to a reunion at a place to which the girls are taken from a central meeting spot by two guys. Although the duo has been paid only to transport the quintet, the pair is with the girls when the fence around the estate closes, locks and electrifies. They learn that their captor is the father of the initiation victim, and the remainder of the movie shows how most of them get knocked off - with a minimum of gore. Although much of the film (especially the first half) is slow-moving, I wasn't discontent at having spent the time to view it. In fact, I watched it a second time, thinking that maybe I missed something as far as the ending was concerned. Did somebody believe that THAT was gonna provide the most compact conclusion? I came away questioning it's logic.

Years after a pledge is accidentally killed in an initiation ceremony, the unrepentant and generally unsympathetic sorority sisters are called to a reunion at a remote house where they find themselves locked in by an electric fence and stalked by a killer. The identity and motive of the killer is pretty predictable, but there's still some unexpected surprises regarding his possible accomplice. This movie generally has a bad reputation, but I kind of liked it. The revenge-for-a-fraternity/sorority-prank-gone-wrong is a hoary old cliché in horror movies nowadays but it was pretty original back in 1972 when this movie was made. Similarly the fake class reunion plot was used in many other horror movies in subsequent years, some better ("The Redeemer"), some worse ("Slaughter High"). And it was even parodied at least once (in "National Lampoon's Class Reunion").

The movie also features an early starring role for drive-in queen Claudia Jennings. Jennings is less experienced (albeit also less drug-addled) than she would be in her later roles, and some will no doubt be disappointed that she doesn't take her clothes off. As a general rule it is a bad idea to cast a Playboy Playmate in a lead role and not have her undress (witness "Barb-wire" with Pamela Anderson or ANY movie with Jenny McCarthy). But while Jennings may have been well above average relative to other Playmates when it came to her naked charms, she was in a class by herself when it came to acting talent (with Shannon Tweed maybe a very distant second). She was probably the only Playmate in history who could have made it as a successful actress WITHOUT having been a Playmate. She's definitely the best thing in this movie as she is the ONLY remotely sympathetic potential victim.

The one thing I didn't like about this movie was that it was more in the style of an action movie than a horror movie (it takes place almost entirely in daylight, for instance). It kind of reminded of those stupid female action movies they make today for emasculated fanboys where 105 lb. fashion models go around wielding guns and beating everybody up. But this was the 1970's when feminism was still pretty feminine, and Jennings was one of the few actresses who was always believable in these scrappy roles. Sure this movie could have used some full-frontal nudity, but it's still pretty decent.