Another Son of Sam

Law-enforcement agents hunt down a rampaging, kill-crazy asylum escapee, and the psychopath's mother offers her aid in his capture. Not much else to be said about this one except that it's a VERY strange presentation dusted with quirky stylistic touches(scenes end in abrupt freeze-frame fadeouts, lumbering "point of view" camera-work abounds, and several scenes conclude with a perplexing audio/visual dissonance). These aesthetic flourishes, however, are so erratic and unfamiliar that they may be nothing more than the salient indicia of inept amateur film-making. Oddly enough, it's the movie's eccentricity/unique mishandling which makes it more-or-less watchable. Had there been even the slightest bit of aptitude applied to this project, the result would have been a garden-variety grindhouse psycho-on-the-loose mess. It's bad, to be sure. BEYOND bad, actually...but something about its clunky, infelicitous artsy inclinations becomes oddly inveigling.

A helicopter features prominently during the film's climax. It's a real, honest-to-goodness helicopter, which is surprising to see in such a remote-controlled-toy-helicopter sort of picture. There's also some deliciously tacky filler featuring the charismatic Johnny Charro...a lounge singer in a poly-dacron bellbottom onesie, unzipped past his navel to showcase a bird-sanctuary of deep-shag chest chair. He's Engelbert Humperdinck, Evel Knievel, and in-extremis Elvis all rolled into one. Sideburned 70s machismo personified...you never had it so good.

Most people will dismiss this uncharted thriller as a toilsome slasher genre prototype...and they're probably right. I maintain, however, that there's a charmingly disadvantaged quiddity to ANOTHER SON OF SAM, though I can't quite put my finger on it.

3.5/10

As embarrassing as it is to admit, I was listed as production manager on this film... my very first! As a matter of fact, it was the first feature film for almost everyone who participated. Watch carefully, and you even get to see me in one of the opening scenes, as a soon-to-be-murdered asylum attendant named... "Cely" (my own last name).

Originally titled "Hostages" this picture was changed to "Another Son of Sam" by the Producer-Director who wanted to cash in on the serial killer in the news at the time. Nothing could have helped. I don't even think this picture was good enough to be shown on "MST 3K!"

The film was shot primarily with a collection of old Mitchell cameras and early Arriflex hand held cameras. Matter of fact, the shot of the helicopter during the hostage siege was filmed with my own WWII era Arri. The picture was filmed entirely in Charlotte and Belmont, North Carolina in the mid seventies. Most of the "Stars" were local TV newscasters, and the rest of the crew were just inexperienced enough or gullible enough to believe former stuntman and Producer-Director, Dave A, Adams' delusions of adequacy.

If you enjoy watching this kind of picture, you might love the work of another North Carolinian, the legendary Earl Owensby.

When I was a teenager, this movie was in one of my local video stores. Although the title and the artwork of the box intrigued me, all the same I got the whiff that the movie was a real stinker, so I never rented it. But the other day, it was broadcast on Turner Classic Movies (of all places!), and I decided to watch it since it would be free. Well, all I've got to say is that I was a very smart teenager. Actually, the movie is even worse than I imagined it to be. Your twelve year-old son or daughter could write, direct, or even edit their own production more competently than these results. There's hardly any story here, with the screenplay ridiculously padded despite the movie running less than 75 minutes long. The scenes with the psychopath doing his thing are so ineptly staged that you don't get the least bit of feeling of horror or even mild creepiness. You also don't get a sense of what this psychopath is like, given that we don't really see him until the final few minutes of the movie. And what's with all the freeze-frame moments, slow motion moments, or for that matter scenes that abruptly end or start? While the ineptness of the movie does occasionally generate unintended chuckles, for the most part this movie will test the patience of even the most forgiving viewers. The only people I would recommend to watch it are independent filmmakers about to start making their own movie - it would reassure them that while they may end up making a bad movie, it would in no way be as bad as this movie.

Yes this is a regional movie filled with actors who either weren't actors or did small theatre work. Yes this seems like a movie made in the late 1960's not in 1977. And yes the title doesn't have anything to do with the movie which is more like Richard Speck than "Son of Sam." Finally it's an exploitation movie with almost no real exploitation, there is no nudity at all and the violence that occasionally happens is done so poorly it doesn't have much of any impact.

Having said all that the basic idea is solid and a bit unusual, the killer is trapped in the building early on with police sneaking in to try to find him. The killer is mostly only seen in bits and pieces--wearing kind of goofy brown loafer shoes. But the use of shadowy eye and eyebrows moving amid shadows while an electric tone/music drones on is rather novel and occasionally effective. Also the movie uses freeze frames to end scenes rather frequently rather than dissolving of cutting away. Also a few of the murder scenes come when you don't expect them. And the movie moves along pretty well, or well enough that you don't have to fast forward--if you don't just stop watching because of the cheapo production and acting.

These odd elements and the general crudity of the production gives it some grit. The budget is so low--they don't seem to be able to really purchase or rent even one really convincing police uniform, let alone the motely mismatched SWAT uniforms on display.

It also has and probably always had, sort of poor lab work with flat lighting and, now, faded and shifting colors, but this too now is seen as part of a Grindhouse Esthetic--in that way time has been kind to this movie.

It may be barely a movie but it tries, if doesn't succeed, at some style and has a few surprises, so can't say it's totally worthless, especially for those who will watch something that lacks the easy slickness of Hollywood films that can have no real ideas to offer.

I never met the cast but I did meet the editor. Dave Adams convinced me to pour money into this project and I have never seen the final version of the film. I was unaware it is available for purchase and this is the first web site I've found since 1977 that acknowledges the film. Dave Adams dropped off my radar when he moved back to Charlotte and he has never responded to my letters or calls. Is he still alive and if you know his whereabouts, what is he doing today? Where does he live and is he still in the film business? I knew the film was rough but it was made during a time when interest was high on serial killers so Dave thought the public interest would swarm to the movies to see this film just out of curiosity.