User reviews

When a couple of kids vacationing with their family in the desert are discovered deceased without apparent cause, an eminent herpetologist (Chew) is recruited to assist baffled police. Assigned a freelance photographer (Chauvet) to document evidence, covert enquiries lead the pair to discover that a secret military testing site might be responsible for the apparent aggressiveness of the local rattlesnake population. Sounds more exciting than it is, unfortunately.

Talky, clichéd time-filler at best, with little in the way of suspense or action; "Rattlers" may not rattle any pacemakers for shock value, and at times tends to look more like a glorified reptile lecture, than a motion picture. Sam Chew is tepid as the tertiary scientist reluctantly seconded to the Mojave desert to provide authorities with a professional opinion on the cause of two suspicious deaths. Chew does a realistic job of looking totally ambivalent about his task, whether it's the dialogue or the method he employs that's driving that motivation is unclear. His offhand approach is flawless, and his male chauvinist streak is neatly contrasted by his tenacious and equally independent tent buddy (Chauvet) who adds some dimension to the acting.

Little attempt is made to have the rattlesnakes realistically interact with the cast, either through props or stunts, and thus, the audience is treated to limited action, totally bereft of thrills or suspense. Even the scene in which Kaye is bathing, while a rogue rattlesnake stalks her, affects no suspense or shock value, despite the elaborate set-up and staging. But the most peculiar feature of the film, is the scene in which, amid all the simmering tension, the two leads digress to Las Vega$ for a night of fun and frivolity on the roulette tables. Like an intermission, no segway or explanation - just a random sojourn to the casino capital for a brief repose, and then it's back to the hard core snake facts and the job at hand.

Earnest in its attempt, there are some dedicated performances in the supporting ranks (Gold, Jostin and a brief but 'memorable' appearance by Kaye who was once a Hollywood most-promising-newcomer in the mid sixties) but this is a snake-movie, not a political thriller, and more action was desperately needed to combat the often soporific dialogue and somnolent storyline.

Okay, I'm exaggerating when I call this a classic, but I like these '70s revenge-of-nature films. I remember seeing the trailers for films like "Rattlers" and "Grizzly" and "Empire of the Ants" on TV when I was a kid. But would my parents ever let me attend these gems? Heavens no! So now I'm making up for lost time as an adult, rediscovering these terrible films from my youth. In many ways these films are like a time machine to another era--an era with bad clothing, terrible dialogue, cool cars, and in-your-face feminism, buster! While you can't really destroy the plot of "Rattlers" (rattlesnakes attack people, duh!), I would urge you to watch the film for the "performance" of the main female lead. You haven't seen cardboard until you've seen her. Wow. Awesome.

A small desert community is ambushed by aggressive killer rattle snakes. Did that tin drum that the government secretly buried in the desert have anything to to with all of this? Hmmmmmmmmm.....maybe. Certainly no Academy Award nominations to be given here, but it's handled fairly well for what it is. The "girl in the snakey bathtub" scene became a thing of minor lore with schoolkids back in the 70's...today it's strictly "PG" fodder, if that.

Compared to several other films that emerged within this rather obsolete nature-horror sub-genre, you'll probably agree that there's worse trash than RATTLERS. Besides...if you find yourself bored by it, you'll find it's a perfect movie for playing "count the boom mic shadows".

4.5/10

Rattlers is an suspenseless creature feature that goes on for too long, even though it only lasts 82 minutes. Long story made short, something in the desert is turning rattlesnakes into killing machines. A male female research team is called in to find out what.

Although the beginning of the film has a rapid series of snake attacks, midway through it gets bogged down in conspiracy subplots and a budding romance between the two leads. When people watch a movie called "Rattlers" they want to see snake bites, not gumshoeing.

To make matters worse, the characters talk about how gruesome the victims' bodies are, but the corpses are never shown. The film might be rated PG, but keep in mind this is a 70s PG, which could be stretched for a lot of gore (e.g. Jaws). Also, there is no real final confrontation with the snakes, which is a prerequisite for this kind of film.

When Sam Chew (*gesundheit!*) Jr is the star of your movie, you can pretty much tell you are in for a painful viewing experience. Although I must admit, Sam does steal the spotlight in Being from Another Planet a.k.a. Time Walker in the climactic scene where you really have to hand it to him (OUCH, that stings!).

This 70s romp takes place mostly in the desert and even more so in poorly lit, almost pitch black scenes - a staple grade for any B movie. There's stock footage, helicopter POV shots, and no acting required. The manic colonel played by Dan Priest provides more ham than a Subway $5 special. For the Wooden Plank award, I was going to give it to the Dan Balentine as the pilot, but this honor goes solely to Elisabeth Chauvet who provided me with plenty of migraine inducement. Still, she does provide visual enrichment and I'm sure Sam didn't mind pitching a tent with her (literally!). As for the rest of the movie, the rattlers and snakes shine as the real stars here. I clapped and applauded as vicious snakebites helped in thinning the herd. They also provided for much of the fun. Think of Rattlers as one of those nature documentary specials...except not very good.

I had the pleasure of seeing this film at the Mayo Center for the Performing Arts in Morristown, NJ presented by Cinematic Titanic. Having been a huge fan of these guys, it was a surrealfully hilarious pleasure seeing them perform live. Never before have my temples and neck muscles ached from loud out laughing as they played to packed house. The Titans are highly recommended!

Now, we know who put those snakes on the plane.

Two kids are killed after falling into a den of rattlers, and the sheriff immediately calls in a snake expert (Sam Chew Jr.). They fell in a rattler den, for goodness sakes! Some good snake scenes, sch as the rattler crawling up the plumber's (Tip McClure) pants, and some ridiculous ones, like the mom (Jo Jordan) in the bathtub getting attacked and not standing up so we could see her.

As you would expect the dialog was terrible, and some scenes ridiculous, like the mine shaft explosions. Someone called it the "Plan Nine From Outer Space" of snake movies. I could not say it better.

This movie begins with two kids climbing up the walls of a canyon and falling into a rattlesnake pit. Because they are so disfigured by the repeated snake bites the local sheriff calls in an expert by the name of "Dr. Tom Parkinson" (Sam Chew Jr.) who works at a nearby college. Although puzzled by the numerous bites he doesn't really offer much help until other cases begin to emerge. After that he and a female photographer named "Ann Bradley" (Elizabeth Chauvet) are led by their investigation to a top-secret army compound which seems to be in the in the middle of all of the incidents. Now, rather than reveal any more of the movie and risk spoiling it for those who haven't seen it I will just say that this wasn't terribly bad as far as films of this nature are concerned. Personally, I didn't think the acting was too bad considering the awful script and some of the ridiculous scenarios the actors were given. That said, although I typically enjoy movies of this type I thought this particular film wasn't nearly as good as it could have been and I have rated it accordingly.

A snake expert and photographer are tasked with investigating a series of fatal snake attacks in the Mojave Desert. Their detective work leads them to a nearby military base.

I found Rattlers to be a lot of fun. Its story is simple but it basically works. It never gets boring and essentially delivers the requisite snake action you would expect. Its budget restrictions means that some of these scenes might seem a bit clunky at times but it didn't bother me to tell you the truth. The story kept me interested the whole time and the explanation for the psychotic snakes was ultimately decent enough. I guess you could say that Rattlers essentially does what it promises to do and that is present a film with a series of snake attack scenes. For those of you with a taste for low budget 70's American horror films then this one should suffice. There is also a bit of male/female bickering about the merits of liberated women which puts it firmly in the decade it was made but which is also quite amusing to watch now.

After a series of fatal rattlesnake attacks, sexist reptile expert Tom Parkinson (Sam Chew) and feminist photographer Ann Bradley (Elisabeth Chauvet) are hired by the local sheriff to investigate, the pair eventually discovering that the snakes have been accidentally exposed to a top-secret biological weapon that has increased their aggression.

This one kicks off with two young boys being bitten to death by numerous rattlers, followed soon after by a dog meeting the same fate; with children and cute pets biting the big one, Rattlers looks set to be a whole load of mean-spirited 'animals attack' fun. However, barring one memorable scene featuring snakes in a bath-tub, the rest of the film doesn't fulfill its potential.

Too much of the running time is dedicated to the dull investigative work carried out by Tom and Ann, as well as their blossoming romance, when what viewers of this kind of trash really want to see are lots of terrifying reptile attacks, AND the grisly aftermath: the reality is little interaction between human and reptile, and absolutely no sign of the hideously swollen victims covered in puncture wounds.

This is a wonderfully awful flick about rattle snakes. Hence the name. These aren't just ordinary rattle snakes though...No siree. These rattle snakes can strike at, bite through and pop an army jeeps tires as it flies past them going 50 miles an hour. Yep. Discarded toxic waste has made these suckers tough. (Although you wouldn't know it to look at them.) A snake guy and a female photographer are around to keep the movie moving forward to it's exciting conclusion (Which I forgot or fell sleep during)

This movie also answers the question... What do you do when the plumber tells you he is going to be changing out the pressure regulator on your pipes? Yes that's right, the correct answer is wait 2 minutes until he is under the house and then strip naked and take a bath. (What it doesn't answer is how you can magically fill the tub when the pressure regulator is in-line with your water pipes and has been removed, but lets just assume this lady has dual main water feeds.)It also answers the question do rattle snakes like to take bubble baths...and the answer is, "of course" you big silly.

If you have not had the pleasure of witnessing this movie...you must. You will cringe at the rattle snakes nearness.

This is really a zero star film, but I got two stars of ironic entertainment out of this hilariously bad nature-gone-wild story about a deadly horde of rattlesnakes. A scientist discovers that the titular snakes have become infected by nerve gas dumped in the desert by the military, causing them to become highly aggressive. The film does get points for doing the unacceptable act of killing off children in the opening scenes, and it gets bonus points for filming those opening death scenes in a most supremely incompetent manner. Overall, "Rattlers" is not scary, has a ridiculous story, but is a must-see for connoisseurs of bad cinema.

They have yet to make a good horror movie about poisonous snakes, but this 70's anti-classic is so bad it almost approaches goodness. It's kind of the "Plan 9 from Outer Space" of killer snake movies. They couldn't really afford too many snakes or the special effects to create venom-bloated corpses, so they substituted a bunch of nonsense about military tests making the rattlesnakes go crazy (although they never explain why the snakes all hunt in packs or how they sneak up on their incredibly stupid victims). But speaking of incredibly stupid, the heroes are a male chauvinist herpetology professor and a feminist photographer, who of course fall madly in love while hunting down the killer snakes. The sexist professor insists that his job is no place for a woman, even though, aside from the snakes, all he really does is drive around the Mojave Desert, and I don't know what the female photographer is supposed to be photographing. For some reason, these two geniuses seem to do all their hunting at night (when you're hunting rattlers I guess you don't want them to see you coming). They sleep in a tent for no other reason than to wake up surrounded by snakes. Then during the climax of the film they suddenly take off to Vegas to whoop it up while the rattlers run amok. (Your snake-fighting tax dollars at work, I guess).

The most famous scene involves a young housewife being attacked in the bathtub. However, this scene is neither scary nor sexy--laughably stupid perhaps. I actually liked the opening scene with the two little boys the best, but it was pretty much all downhill from there.

Killer rattlesnakes of the American Southwest gather up in large numbers and start unprovoked attacks on people, and it's up to a male expert on reptiles and a female photographer to find out why and stop them. "Rattlers" has a thin, one-note script that can barely sustain even the 79 minutes of its running time, and the snake-attack scenes aren't anything to write home about either, though at least the snakes are real which is instantly preferable to the obvious CGI we would probably get in a similar film today. The print I saw was in pretty poor shape, and made a constant crackling sound, as if someone was burning it up; the movie is not offensively bad (apart maybe from the scene near the end where the two heroes are enjoying a carefree romance in Vegas without having done anything to stop the snakes first!), but it is so unremarkable that if someone DID burn the master print up few people would probably notice. On a side note, the female lead is absolutely gorgeous. I was somewhat surprised to find out that she never made another film. (**)

Any horror movie that features the death of two young children – albeit taking place largely off screen – within the first five minutes can't be completely worthless in my humble opinion. Still, another five minutes and the world's most pathetic Cobra catch later, you might start fearing that "Rattles" may be worthless after all. Somewhere in the South- Western desert a bunch of rattle snakes attacked and painfully killed two young boys who were out on vacation with their parents. Since this was already the second deadly snake-related incident in the area in a short period, the local sheriff calls upon the help of Los Angeles university professor and snake-expert Tom Parkinson. Well, he may know a thing or two about slithering serpents, but he's also one of the worst actors I've ever seen in my life! The number of animal and human deaths caused by venomous snake bites alarmingly increases and our dreadful professor, along with a sexy female photographer, heads out into the desert to investigate. "Rattlers" is a very rudimentary type of 70's eco-horror feature. Every character that gets introduced, apart from the main ones of course, exclusively serves as snake bait and to get killed in imaginative settings, like a bathtub or an airplane cockpit. There's not a whole lot of suspense and the terrible acting performances are infuriating, but at least the script is never too boring. Quite the contrary, it is way too silly and nonsensical to be boring! The film doesn't really bother to explain in detail why the rattle snakes all of a sudden became so aggressive and bloodthirsty, but maybe that's because the professor is a bonehead who prefers to take his photographer out on a date in Vegas (during a tremendously hilarious let's-fall-in-love compilation) while they should be researching! Oh well, it's a cheap 70's creature-feature, so it's bound to have something to do with a military experiment gone wayward. Some other interesting things I've learned from watching this film is that snakes can apparently bite through the moving tires of a jeep! How about that! Oh, and I also learned that it's perfectly okay for drunken army medics to make extremely sexist remarks against liberated photographers.

A film I got from the Mill Creek Drive-in 50-pack collection. Mutant rattlesnakes attack people while Sam Parkinson, a noted herpetologist, and Ann Bradley, photographer and die hard feminist are hot on the trail in search of the answers.

The film started out just "OK" then entered Ann Bradley into the picture and I was turned off. Ann Bradley is quite irritating with her in your face feminism. As soon as you are introduced to the character Ann Bradley you will hear a sermon all about women's lib with a crappy attitude towards men and basically the world. She's hateful and irritating. If she was not in this film then I might like it better. I could not stand listening to her gripping yakety-yak - I was wanting a horror film not a film on feminism. She ruins an otherwise "OK" but not great film.

2/10

This One Came From the Studios of "Nudie Cutie" Mogul Harry Novak. Known for Higher Than Usual Production Values in the Nudie Genre, His Films had a Beautiful Color Palette and a Higher Sheen Than Most of Novak's Contemporaries.

In This One, He Produced One of Those "Nature Nasty" Pics Popular in the Seventies. Here it is Snakes, Snakes, and More Snakes. You Can't Blame Them Though Because the Evil Military was Meddling in Things Best Left Un Meddled, Searching for a New Nerve Gas. Yikes is This 1917? Oh Yea, Viet Nam.

Anyhow, Novak Forsakes Human Females for Sheddable Reptile Skin Here and Tries Hard to Make it All Work Enough for Inclusion on a Double Feature at at the Drive-In. The Thing Almost Succeeds but the Snakes Only Know How to Do Two Things, Rattle and Bite and This Gets Old Fast.

Easy to Ridicule with Clunky Editing and Storytelling with Limited Talent On Hand the Movie Has Little to Recommend Unless Ripping it Apart is Your Idea of Fun. Otherwise it is One of those for Genre Completists Only. Casual Viewers Can Miss the Boos and Hissing Without Missing Much.

This (you might guess from the title) is one of them 'revenge of nature' films from the seventies. After two kids are killed in the desert by rattle snakes (somehow the bodies managed to roll away down the hill away from the pit, but let's not dwell on that), the local police draft in a snake expert to find out what's going on. After wandering about a bit, and picking up a two hundred dollar paycheck, he acknowledges that yes indeed, those kids were killed by rattlesnakes. With a bit of a shrug, he heads back home.

Soon after, a whole army of snakes descend on a farm and kill everything on it, so the local police think that it's probably best to bring the expert back to track down these snakes. This time he's accompanied by a female photographer (Cue the old 'You're…a woman?' bit, and they find out a bit more this time, including the shenanigans of the local army base and their possible involvement in the new aggression of the rattlesnakes. Can our sexist expert and his sidekick stop the snakes in time? And what's the army got to do with it? Not exactly big on action, kills, or even gore, Rattles is still entertaining enough due to a very high cheese level (rated PG, for Parmesan, grated), bad acting, nonsensical situations and general daftness. I loved how our heroic duo had a quick holiday in Vegas for no real reason and then just headed back to their tent in the desert just in time to get attacked by snakes. Or when a cobra escapes our expert's lab and his boss nearly craps his pants in fear. The emergence of a crazy army officer and the subsequent gunfight were good too, plus the 'snakes in the bath' bit.

Overall, a very tame film, but sometimes, when the acting is this bad and the situations hilarious, you can forgive the lack of action. I found Rattles to be quick a fun, daft, film. Also quite refreshing was the fact that the filmmakers didn't resort to killing any real animals, which is a bit of a change from your usual seventies films.

Two boys fall into a pit of rattlers in the desert. They are killed. Sheriff Gates calls in Dr. Tom Parkinson from an L. A. university. He is joined by photographer Ann Bradley.

This is a low grade horror indie. The snakes are the most interesting characters in the movie. It's too bad that they don't get more screen time. There is an awkward political bent against women's lib for some reason. I don't know why he has to take her with him. The movie tries to explain it but I don't get it. There is a good early scene with Dr. Tom catching an escaped snake but then it gets boring. There is a snakes in a tub scene but that one is really campy. The plot gets too stupid and not in a fun way. This is boring.

This campy movie is something to watch. But it can give you the heebie jeebies as well. It deals with rattlesnakes that have been chemically altered by a known nerve gas that was going to be used by the military. The snakes first kills are two boys in the desert. Then a family who doesn't make it to dinner. The son and father are killed in the barn. The mother, in the house. A herpentologist is helped with a photographer to investigate the snake attack. The culprit: an Army colonel who keeps the chemical in a secret cave. Of course, he was later "permently discharged" for his actions.

It's fun, but it's not for the faint at heart.

2 out of 5 stars.

What's this? A Harry H. Novak production that is rated PG? Yes Virginia, it's true. This movie is much less exploitive and explicit than other Novak productions. There's only a little blood, and the one scene of nudity comes from a brief look at a skin magazine one character is reading. While I can understand why Novak tried for something more respectable - it's often a lot easier to gather an audience for a PG movie than an R - he forgot to make the movie interesting. The main problem with the movie is that it's very boring. There's far too much chat and not enough action. And the action and horror that's in the movie comes across as quite flat. I'd never thought I'd find a Harry H. Novak movie that was boring, but that's what we have here.