Mutanti

Good times, you'll think. One of my friends lent the DVD to me and expressed they didn't understand the hate towards the film. I've had my chances to grab it, but the not-so-flattering comments left me to pass it up, but after hearing it wasn't that bad (and I seem to share the same thoughts about particular horror films with this friend). I dived right in to it. As it stands it wasn't great, but nonetheless it was entertainingly simple b-grade fun in a post-apocalyptic backdrop.

Charles Brand in only his third feature paves the way for outrageously ham-fisted splatter effects and make-up artist Stan Winston formulates a nasty, icky looking slug-like parasite with a mean looking grin. The criticism against his design is unfair… sure it isn't first-rate but with budget associated (as this is truly low-rent feature produced by Embassy Pictures) it's an acceptable effort. Trying to be different around that time was adding a new gimmick that it would be in 3D for movie-going audiences. Sadly the DVD doesn't come with the 3D version. Anyhow it didn't destroy the mood in any way. What can really hurt it though, was that the script is slipshod and it never truly gets in any sort of groove and comes up being a little too sparse and repetitive in its actions. The atmosphere remains non-existent and tension doesn't come by easily, but Brand (unintentional or not) engraves a grimy edge to it all (with Mac Ahlberg's well-executed panning of the camera) and throws about some graphic diversions. It's hard to forget Broadway siren Vivian Blaine's encounter with a parasite and some slow-motion passages are rather funny. Richard Band's shivering score feels like it's on a loop, but seems to suit it.

There are earnest performances from the likes of Robert Glaudini, Luca Bercovici, Al Fann, James Davidson, Cherrie Currie and a quick show-in by Cheryl Smith. Demi Moore in her first on-screen role doesn't make much of a dent, but it's far from awful.

In the end it's immensely forgettable, but lately watching these modern (and sometimes leaden) Sci-fi original TV features is making me appreciate this schlock far more.

I've just bought the DVD for "Parasite". The widescreen DVD is totally superior to the old vhs rental copies, and the fun of this awesome 80s prediction film only gets better with age. The debut of Demi Moore isn't even nearly as interesting as the campy story of a scientist meeting a bunch of strange early eighties punk bikers (who have to be the stupidest gang I've ever seen)and unleash a big wormy looking monster with teeth. The story is fun and scary at the same time. The world was going to come to and end in '92, well that was '83 thinking anyway. There's no end to the fury of bad films you love being promoted to DVD. This one of them.

In the post apocalyptic 1992 in order to keep control of the populace, the Merchants force Dr. Paul Dean to create a parasite. The doctor realising its deadly potential goes on the run studying the parasite so that he can find a way to destroy it.

Director Charles Band (of the excellent Puppet Master (1989)) offers a plodding film, with the terror scenes few and far between. The small town setting feels like an episode of the Dukes of Hazard, The Fall Guy or the A-Team and sandblasts Mac Ahlberg's cinematography of any atmosphere. With a Planet of the Ape (1968) vibe Richard Bands music hits all the right notes, along with with some of the parasite effects which notably Stan Winston had a hand in designing and creating.

Robert Glaudini does a great job as Dr. Paul Dean, Demi Moore does her best with the overkill trio of writer's basic dialogue as Patricia Welles. Band is on a directing high is when he's borrowing elements from Alien (1979) and an exploding fuel tank from James Bond movies.

Maybe it would have fared better in a Western setting with cowboys instead of gangs and a mad scientist rather than the 80s doubling for the post atomic disaster 1992 with a small town and a fast sleek car.

Overall, fanatical horror B-film fans may get something out of this, even those curious about the handful of effects or Moore's early role.

It isn't necessarily fair to begin making judgments about a movie within its first minutes, but sometimes it's very easy, for good and for ill. By the time one-quarter of the length has elapsed plot still hasn't shown up (and it won't meaningfully show up for a good while yet), and half the scenes we've gotten up to that point were rendered in slow motion. The obvious 3-D gimmick, which never survives in a picture beyond its initial release, just comes off badly. Charles Band's direction is so lethargic generally that it's a wonder the cast weren't falling asleep in the middle of the shoot. We are shown the world, and some characters in it, and we're given small pieces of information, but even as we close in on the halfway mark there still hasn't been any significant explanation, and we can only accept the goings-on at face value. "Insufficient" might be the best word to describe the writing in all regards, but "weak" is a fair one, too. Despite their overall reputation, the Band family has made some genuinely enjoyable, good films every now and again. 'Parasite' isn't one of them.

It's not until we're five-eighths through the runtime that substantial plot really shows up, by the way. In fairness, it's not like this is all bad. I see the skill that did go into it. The cast are very much limited by the material and Band's direction, but they try to make the most of it - including a fledgling Demi Moore, and Cherie Currie. The crew turned in good work generally, including effects and special makeup, sets, and costume design. The story may take a long time to truly show up, but there are some fun sci-fi horror vibes to be had all the same. Richard Band's original music isn't half bad. And hey, there are actually some splendid idea in the screenplay; there was real potential here. Would that the direction carried more vitality, and more than that, that the writing had bothered to give us any reason to care until the title was already more than half over. There's value here, but it's condensed and miniaturized, and presents as sloppily and with as little excitement as it possibly could. All the best efforts of the cast and crew can't overcome writing and direction this meager.

Really and truly, this could have been a good movie. I see what it does well. It flounders in some crucial ways, however, and for far too much of its length, so the entertainment that it can ultimately offer is just all too little. I'm glad for those who like 'Parasite' more than I do, and for that matter I want to like it more than I do; then again, maybe I'm being too kind. One way or another it's hard to especially recommend this except for those who are diehard fans of the genre or someone involved, or those who are direly curious. Oh well.

No, this is not a very good movie at all. However, I saw it when it was first released in 1982 in 3D, and not once since then, and I still remember some creepy scenes. The big gross-out in the movie -- when the dripping parasite falls down on you from the ceiling in 3D!! -- had me squirming in my seat in 1982.

I saw a number of films during the short-lived 3D revival of the early '80's, and, believe me, there were very few kick-ass uses of the 3D effect anywhere, but Parasite had one of the better ones. (Most of the other good 3D moments are in House of Wax with Vincent Price. Even Hitchcock couldn't figure out what to do with the gimmick.)

By the way, in 1982 no one had ever heard of Demi Moore. Did we predict big things for her after seeing her in this? Yeah, right.