Lurkers

After emotionally / psychically being abused by her mother, Cathy would hear tales that the lurkers would come and get her if she was naughty. These lurkers were ghostly figures that hanged around the apartment building and only she saw. While, playing with friends the skipping rope strangely finds itself around Cathy's neck with little concern from the other children. Then a mysterious lady shows up and everything goes back to normal. Then we skip 15 years into the present where Cathy is in a relationship with a photographer, Bob. They're happily in love, but there's something lurking under the surface and Cathy starts getting recurring nightmares of her traumatic childhood.

Roberta Findley might not have a great rep behind her films, but surprisingly I enjoyed "The Oracle", which made me grabbed this particular flick. The shame was that I didn't quite get into this shonky trash, despite an interestingly offbeat concept. Sadly I found it quite tough going as its terribly talky without really going anywhere with the idea. Sure, chat is fine, but when it strings you along and along with even more lifeless chitchat. The overall silliness of it shows up strongly that your hoping it would break out the madness, but it hardly eventuates. When it does. It's not for long, and back to pointless chitchat we go. Throw in plenty of redundant build-ups and odd stretches that fill like nothing more than fillers to pad out the running time. This only dragged out the slow pace even more. It should have been more fun than it was, as I found myself to be either bored or baffled.

The plotting of the flat story was a convoluted jumble (It skips in between a whole lot of elements) with many uneventful happenings. It's a nasty little item that doesn't explicitly show it, but it's grim and mean-spirited in nature. After a genuinely creepy and tight opening couple minutes when Cathy was a child and throw in some motherly love. Some inspired touches creep up here. It never seemed quite sure where to go and its poor execution shows it up immensely. The look and feel of it is quite amateurish and it can't seem to shake it or work around it without embarrassingly telegraphing to us.

Now it's better to leave the moronic script alone! While, the overwrought music score is quite a groaner and like something that would fit nicely in a silent film. The only real component technical aspect had to be that it was actually pretty well shot and caught the grimy locations. The acting was very indifferent and Christine Moore in the lead role was the only one to give a reasonable turn. Roy MacArthur had a bit a fun with his performance and lightened it up when on screen.

This forgettable, drab feature definitely squanders every opportunity to make something fulfilling out of this idea.

This movie, which is ostensibly a horror movie, fails on several levels: it does not make you care about what happens to the characters, it does not scare you, the atmosphere is not interesting. In other words, it's boring. A horror movie doesn't necessarily have to be really scary (most aren't), but it must NEVER bore you.

As one of veteran exploitation director Roberta Findlay's 1980s horror movies, "Lurkers" is overall dull and draggy for the most part. There just isn't much "horror" in it, and it moves along at too slow a pace, with characters who are largely uninteresting. It DOES have its creepy and disturbing elements, but it takes until the end for this movie to finally start getting more watchable.

Beautiful Christine Moore plays Cathy, a classical musician who as a child had seen her mother murdered, and had even almost died herself. She'd also seen ghostly individuals emerge from the walls of her bedroom. Now, 15 years later, she's engaged to supposed nice guy photographer Bob (Gary Warner), but strange things are now occurring, and she's reminded of her childhood home and traumas.

One thing that does give "Lurkers" some passing interest is the scene where two models, played by Ruth Collins and Annie Grindlay, converse about the stock market (!) while undressing. It has no relevance to anything else in the movie but is so unexpected that it's rather amusing. As for the rest of it, there may not be enough of value for rabid horror fans. Ed French supplies some enjoyably gruesome makeup effects, and there's a sadistic creep (Tom Billett) who chases women with a sledgehammer. The electronic music score by Walter Sear is unbelievably awful at some points. The acting is tolerable at best; Moore has some appeal even if she's not much of an actress.

Horror lovers may want to see this for completions' sake, but it's not exactly a must-see.

Five out of 10.

New Yorker Cathy is haunted by visions of her murderous mother and a mysterious little girl. Good thing she has photographer Bob as an anchor. But for how long, given her horrific delusions.

The logic of this horror flick appears to be that if a spoonful is good, then a truck full has to be better. But it's not. The piling on of scenes, themes, and effects soon gets tedious. That is, how many kissy-faces do we need to show that Cathy loves Bob, or that Cathy is full of delusions if that they be, or that darkness can be dangerous. Too bad, because the basic idea of a hell-house has potential.

With a tighter script and more strategic use of effects, there's a good movie core lurking within. As it is, the producers appear unable to deal effectively with structure, and that includes color photography for its own sake. Now, I'm not up on post-70's horror films. But if you want to check out how similar material can be effectively done, check out Val Lewton's 1943 classic The Seventh Victim. That tight little B-film also shows why audience imagination is horror's most powerful source. And that's especially important given today's overpowering appeal of special effects.

I quite liked Roberta Findlay's film "The Oracle" so I thought I'd give this one a go, especially as I thought the VHS cover looked quite cool. Sadly it turned out to be rather boring. It actually has quite a good storyline behind it, but is just done in a very boring way. Which of course means little gore and suspense, and too much talking.

I sort of like the cheap and dirty feel to it - I've always thought cheapness adds a murky atmosphere to horror flicks, take "Midnight" by John Russo for example. It's a shame Findlay didn't go for blood and gore over the "talky" bits as that would have made it much more watchable. Using better actors would also have lifted it out of boring mediocrity.

Overall, Lurkers may be of interest to those who collect rare horror flicks, but gore and suspense fans should stay away.