Sweet Sixteen

This was not generally a well-regarded slasher movie back in the 80's since it did not contain a lot of graphic violence or gruesome Tom Savini-type special effects. It is more of a murder mystery. And though the identity of the murderer is pretty obvious, it is nevertheless pretty effective. It has a great small-town setting (whereas most other slashers were set in suburbia) and an effective atmosphere. Parts of it are quite masterful like a scene near the end (prominently featured in all the promotional artwork) where the central girl and a male admirer go skinny-dipping at night in a lake lit only by a single cross-shaped key light. (It's unfortunate that most slasher movie fans are such gore-hounds that they don't appreciate the more subtle elements of horror movies like cinematography, setting, and atmosphere). The story is also a pretty different in that all the victims in this movie are young MALES rather than promiscuous young females. And they all meet a sticky end because they're sniffing around the new girl in town, played by Aleisha Shirley (but then it's kind of hard to blame them).

The adults in town are played by such stalwart character actors as Bo Hopkins (as the town sheriff) and Susan Strasberg (as the mother of the new girl). Dana Kimmel from "Friday the 13th Part III" plays the sheriff's daughter who befriends the new girl and eventually solves the mystery. For a long time Kimmel, a devout Mormon, was blamed for "Friday the 13th Part III" being so tame compared to the rest of the series (as if they couldn't have just replaced her with another actress). Fortunately, this ridiculous rumor has been discredited by several recent books on the "Friday the 13th" movies. Mormon or not, she's definitely good in these virginal "final girl" roles. Aleisha Shirley was not as good of an actress as Kimmel, but she was certainly effective in teen femme fatale roles (she also appeared in the pilot episode of the HBO series "The Hitchhiker" as a teenager who seduces her mother's boyfriend). She actually looks a lot more like "sweet 20-something" than "sweet 16" in this movie, but her frequent nude scenes allow the movie to make up in skin what it lacks in gore.

I'm kind of surprised they haven't re-made this, although I read about a movie in Gorezone magazine called "All the Boys Love Mandy Lane" that seems to have a very similar plot (for some reason though it hasn't been released in the US yet, despite the presence of a currently hot actress, Amanda Heard, in the lead role). Oh well, the "original" is available on DVD now, so check it out if you get a chance

Beautiful teenager Melissa Morgan is a bit of a wild child, quickly attracting the attention of most of the local boys; however, those lucky enough to get close to her have a nasty habit of turning up dead.

This rather obscure 80s horror opens in classic stalk 'n' slash mode with a gratuitous shower scene, the 'sweet 16' of the title, schoolgirl Melissa (played by Aleisa Shirley, actually a good few years older than 16), giving herself a thorough wash for the benefit of the viewer. Normally, such a scene would be followed by the young woman, clad in a towel, leaving the shower to be stalked by a masked maniac, or would at least end with a false scare, but here there's no such payoff; it simply exists to get some gratuitous T&A on the screen, as does a later moment when the lovely girl goes skinny dipping.

Not that I'm complaining, because without the occasional spot of nudity from Shirley, this would be a lot less enjoyable, the actual horror content being fairly lame...

There are a number of killings throughout the film, but these are unexceptional stabbings shot in a frenzied manner at night, making them very disappointing for gore fans. The rest of the film consists primarily of dull police procedure, as Sheriff Dan Burke (Bo Hopkins) slowly pieces together clues to discover the identity of the killer, plus some clichéd racial tension between the town's rednecks and local Indians, none of which is particularly thrilling. In short, be grateful for the nekkidness when it happens.

4.5 out of 10, rounded up to 5 for IMDb.

Greetings And Salutations, and welcome to my review of Sweet Sixteen; here's the breakdown of my ratings:

Story: 1.00 Direction: 1.00 Pace: 0.50 Acting: 1.25 Enjoyment: 1.00

TOTAL: 4.75 out of 10.00

Sweet Sixteen is one of those films that tries to be different. Sadly, in doing so, its effort is obvious and adds to the list of handicaps within the movie.

The story is your standard mysterious killer on the loose whodunnit. Regrettably, the writers fail to make the murders, the victims, or their stimuli piquant enough. I never cared about who was getting offed or who was committing the murders or their motives for the bloodshed. And induced disinterest is a terrible thing for a whodunnit. One reason for the indifference was the characters. You have your typical cowboys hating on the Native Americans - The customary rebellious Native American and his classic Grandfather figure, who is nonchalant with the whole situation. Another handicap in the story was its structuring. You can guess which person is questioned first by the Sherriff for the killings. Even though the Sherriff is proud to be part Native American, he still pursues Longshadow. In truth, the writers lean heavily towards him being the perpetrator. They could have easily chosen to make a stand about the racial unfairness of the area. They do hint at it a couple of times but never get their gnashers into the meat of the matter. It's a shame as it would have made a good hook and added some much-needed thought-provoking. Then there are the characters who are only around to drive the narrative in the writer's preferred direction - Like Dr John Morgan and, to a certain degree, even the Sheriff. There appears to be a lack of a leading character in this tale.

The direction is your routine affair. Most scenes are point-and-shoot with very little in the way of embellishments. And the tempo is your commonplace saunter. As with most films of this style, a varied pace and imaginative lighting and camerawork would have gone a long way to making the picture more intriguing. I found my attention drifting several times.

However, the most heat in this lukewarm picture is the cast. We have some serious talent in the roll-call. It's a shame the writers couldn't provide a better script and that the director couldn't guide them correctly. They all give their best with their bestowments. And, in some little way, it lifts the movie a tad.

Sweet Sixteen is not a great movie and nor is it ghastly. As such, I'd recommend it for one watch, though only if there's nothing more pressing for you to do, like learning to dance an Irish Jig.

Please feel free to visit my Killer Thriller Chillers lists to see where I ranked Sweet Sixteen.

Take Care & Stay Well.

A dynamite cast gives this minor thriller some real class. The story progresses in a logical manner as sheriff Bo Hopkins tries to figure out some very perplexing stabbing murders. Don Stroud plays the town heavy and Indian hater. Several "red herrings" are floated by the audience, any one of which would have proved more logical than the "out of thin air" ending. The ad lib conclusion is ridiculous and not believable. "Code Red" has done a good job quality wise with the DVD. Having an interview with Bo Hopkins on the extra features is another plus. I just wish someone had ditched that awful, confusing, and unsatisfying ending. - MERK

Sweet Sixteen is a 1983 American slasher film directed by Jim Sotos and starring Bo Hopkins, Susan Strasberg, Dana Kimmell, and Patrick Macnee.

Melissa Morgan is new in town and meets Hank Burke and Johnny Franklin outside of a bar. Johnny winds up murdered the same night and murder and mystery seem to follow Melissa everywhere she goes.

This is a largely obscure and forgotten 80s slasher movie. Being a big fan of slasher movies myself, especially 80s. I knew I would get something out of the film. The film however is rather slow and meandering as a whole, the lead actress is especially uninteresting and doesn't bring much to the film in terms of charm or humour. I never found myself being especially involved in the plot of the film or how it ended, I enjoyed the film for what it was and I love the 80s aesthetic in general. It's worth a watch if you're into the genre, but otherwise you can take it or leave it.