Johnny Frank Garrett's Last Word

Being from the area where this murder and subsequent execution happened, I've always been pretty interested in the story. There is enough doubt in the outcome of the case to make a movie that would be really fascinating. This one isn't.

I get it, they attempted to make a horror movie. Instead, they made a confusing movie that wasn't all that scary. I think I would have been less irritated had they not tried to link it to an actual murder. What is actually scary about the Johnny Frank Garrett story is the possibility an innocent man was executed and that it could happen to anyone. There's a documentary out there by a local lawyer, though it's somewhat slanted, it is pretty informative.

There were a couple of good actors in this film and I think they did their best with the content provided. Sadly, there just wasn't much there to work with.

According to the prosecution, on the morning of October 31, 1981, Johnny Frank Garrett raped, strangled, and killed 76-year-old Sister Tadea Benz in the St. Francis Convent of Amarillo, Texas. This film asks: what if he was innocent, and what is he was able to affect his accusers from beyond the grave?

The concept behind this film is an interesting one. The case is real, and was the subject of a documentary from director Jesse Quackenbush. What the writers did here was take the documentary as inspiration and a jumping-off point, and in the process gave the ghost of Garrett a voice.

For genre fans, the first thing that will be obvious is the inclusion of a few choice names. We have an ambitious district attorney played by Sean Patrick Flanery (Boondock Saints). We have director Simon Rumley, who shocked viewers with "P is for Pressure". Perhaps most interesting, though, is the composer: Simon Boswell, a prolific musician who got his start with movies thanks to Dario Argento.

Rumley came on board with the script already written, but he was a wise choice if the producers wanted someone to put their own stamp on the material. Rumley prefers to see his work as "extreme drama" rather than horror, and this project gives him plenty of opportunity for social commentary: the Texas death penalty, a miscarriage of justice, strong religious overtones… there is a message under the veneer of a revenge story.

Some critics have complained of "schlocky, bad acting", and Curt McCarl specifically said it's "shameful that an opportunity to tell an honest story was wasted on this schlock." Yes, multiple reviews have used the word schlock. And, sure, some of the acting is a bit over-the-top. But the film has a style all its own and some practical touches (including the lethal injection needle and the teacher's makeup) that should be applauded for their authenticity. Even the effort to get 90s-era computers and whatnot was probably no small task.

"Last Word" is not going to be the must-see horror film of 2017, but it certainly has its merits and is worth a look. If nothing else, it might bring increased attention to the documentary and original court case. And with Simon Rumley being a rising star, it never hurts to get acquainted with his work now (if you haven't already).

I have sincerely no clue what other reviewers thought that was confusing about this movie. I just don't get it. To me Johnny Frank Garrett's Last Word was much better than what I expected from a movie with a title like that. Simon Rumley did a great job directing this interesting story, the cinematography was spot on, made it all look very professional for a low budget movie. The way it was shot is better than most of the movies in this genre, the sound effects fitted perfectly to create an evil ambiance. The horror parts were certainly good enough to keep any horror fan watching it till the end. The acting wasn't bad either so to me this movie deserves a much higher rating than it actually gets. A good surprise for me.

The movie is based on a true story. A nun was raped, beaten, and murdered in her convent bedroom in Amarillo, Texas, on Halloween night 1981. The police arrested Johnny Frank Garrett, a developmentally challenged (possibly) 17-year old. Johnny maintained his innocence throughout but was found guilty and sentenced to death. The trial was a quickie featuring a corrupt D. A., inept defense counsel, a psychic, suppressed evidence, and an impatient jury all too eager to get home for dinner or maybe to church for a prayer meeting.

On the night of his execution ten years later -- he now looks like Charles Manson -- he scribbles out a florid, over-the-top letter damning the people and their families who helped send him to his demise, putting a curse on them and their future generations.

And here's where the what-if starts. What if his spirit or whatever possessed him came back for actual vengeance?

The filmmakers have the answer. They start by killing a few of those on Johnny's "cursed list." First his grade school teacher and a character witness in the trial - apprently not very helpful to his case - commits suicide in front of her elementary school students using pencils, of all things.

An 80-year old "church lady" juror tumbles down a flight of stairs in the dark. The husband of a psychic involved in the trial is killed in a suicide car crash.

One of the jurors, loving father and husband Adam Redman (hunkish Mike Doyle) engages in some dot-connecting and takes it upon himself to break the curse when his son is suddenly struck with nightmares, seizures, and a life-threatening heart ailment with just days to live. Adam, you see, was the lone holdout for not guilty, but quickly, weakly folded under pressure from the other eleven jurors.

The violence and creepiness escalate as Adam tracks down another possible suspect and confronts the cartoonishly evil district attorney Danny Hill (Sean Patrick Flannery).

The movie throws off a heavy handed Texas Gothic vibe. The flashback scenes are done in a vague sepia tone. The jury looks like something out of rural Texas 1950. Some of the homes and buildings look dated and cluttered. Kudos to Shreveport, Louisiana for serving as a spooky stand in for Amarillo. Cult classic Carnival of Souls also gets a mention in a seedy motel room segment.

To be sure, the acting is often over-wrought. The psychic, played by Sue Rock, is especially outlandish. The D. A., who has an oddly Deep South, not West Texas accent, is deliciously, comically malevolent. The teacher is in - what is the clinical term? - stage five cray-cray.

But the real problem which prevents this from being better than a 6-rated film, is Johnny, played by Devin Bonnée. If he is cursing people, yet is apparently a good soul since he did not murder the nun, why not start by offing the D. A. and a few of the police? Why go after some old lady juror who was just acting on the evidence presented? Or the little boy who had no direct connection to the trial, who was not even born? And if he has such beyond-the-grave superpowers, why not out the actual killer?

So, it's entertaining in a mindless sort of way. I saw it on a bad-weather Saturday night. Good stay-at-home viewing for when you want to just zone out and not think very much.

I thought this was going to be the typical revenge from beyond the grave flick. I was wrong. This was a pleasant surprise. "Based" on factual events stories are usually horrible and full of cliches. This could almost pass as believable. the story telling, acting, script, directing was above average. definitely not your typical slasher type flick. The only problem I had was with the colouring of the film. Other than that, I'd highly recommend.