Incidents de parcours

This is not your run-of-the-mill slasher film. This is a well developed, well-paced suspense-type horror. If what you like it lots of blood and cheap scares punctuated by incidental music, then you should skip this film. If you like a horror involving a few good characters, and a really talented monkey, then take a look. The tension builds slowly. There are a lot of interesting characters, who are neither "good guys" nor "bad guys" (this includes the killer). The acting is not all that great, but the script is solid. That the monkey may be the best performer in the b=cast says more about the monkey than the human castmembers!

This movie's not going to have a fan base larger than Night of the Living Dead or Dawn of the Dead, but it is another example of Romero's uniqueness as s film maker. An original story with an original cast, Romero adds to the horror genre by going somewhere where no other film maker has gone before. Monkey Shines cast includes Christine Forrest who shows her finest performance as the nurse. Worth checking out, so check it out.

Offbeat horror film has a paraplegic being given a capuchin monkey named Ella as a companion. Only problem: the cute little monkey has been subjected to genetic experimentation, and has a mind of its its own. Pretty soon, the monkey is up to no good, and the paraplegic is becoming telepathically linked to the increasingly evil simian. George Rnmero made this little gem. The cast is largely unknown, although watch for a young Stanley Tucci as one of the paraplegic's surgeons and John Pankow as the paraplegic's buddy (and mad scientist). A weird little tale that takes its time to get to the nasty stuff, which is just fine with me as the killings are pretty routine.

"Monkey Shines" is an honorable effort that doesn't quite work. It deserves credit for originality, but falls short of the mark.

The concept is interesting, but the execution leaves much to be desired. A paralyzed man's life is made easier with the help of Ellie, a monkey trained to help disabled people get by with their daily lives. However, she used to be a lab animal who has had human brain cells injected in experiments. A bond forms between the two, and she acts out his violent desires.

The final act does a good job in delivering the goods, but the film takes too long to get going, diluting the overall effect. In fact, at times one almost forgets it's supposed to be a horror movie. When it gets going, it works, although the very ending is a bit much.

I'm still not sure the sci-fi gimmick was necessary. Surely they could have done pretty much the same things without it? Something more supernaturally orientated perhaps? Still, I admired Romero's willingness to take chances and try his hand at a more subdued thriller. Jason Beghe does a credible job in the role, and we are offered a rare glance at the frustrations of the disabled. A tighter film would have better achieved the director's goals.

**1/2 (out of ****)

An Orion Pictures release

If you're looking for body count, blood, or bogeymen, this film is not for you. It is more of a psychological thriller than a horror film, though it was billed as horror, likely because of the pseudo-science gimmick that provides the basis for the conflict in the plot.

While the film tends to wander a bit (i.e. a sub-plot involving the research head that gets dropped 3/4 of the way through) it stays fairly well focused on the main character and his problems. Aside from the lead, the most effective acting was done by the monkey(s), but the "real" actors do a pretty good job of carrying their own. It gives you a little insight into what it's like to be quadriplegic. For a late 80's movie, the style of filming was well done, there is very little cheese, and the special effects didn't overreach.

The premise seems a bit farfetched to our currently more sophisticated and informed sense of what's possible on the genetic engineering front. After all, this movie was made 15 years ago. If Romero had gone with either a supernatural cause or a plain animal jealousy angle, it might be less dated, but then again it might have been a little less believable to begin with.

Not very horrific, not startling or scary, but worth seeing if you don't mind a slightly slow-paced thriller. I gave it a higher than average score (6 out of 10) just because it didn't make me say "oh, please!" too many times unlike other movies from that time--particularly horror films--are prone to do. For example, the pivotal moment is fully supported by plausible input earlier in the film, it's not one of those miraculous developments pulled out of nowhere in the last few seconds before the climax.