Claysaba
Excellent, Without a doubt!!
KnotStronger
This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.
Lidia Draper
Great example of an old-fashioned, pure-at-heart escapist event movie that doesn't pretend to be anything that it's not and has boat loads of fun being its own ludicrous self.
guessano
This movie deserves a higher rating. Not sure why some people are so negative about it. This is a classic horror flick. Wes at his best. This is so underrated!
Tango and Cash
Oh yeah! Four terrible movies in a row - all thanks to my curiosity and iTunes rentals. "Shocker" was the 4th one.I wasn't expecting "Citizen Kane," but nothing whatsoever in this movie made sense. Well, maybe some parts did but I couldn't watch more than 30 minutes of it. It's just such a stupid movie, and I tried to hang in there for the camp and the B-movie pathos, but it was too bad. Awful movie, very surprised it has a 5.3 instead of a 3.5 rating.Football players hurts himself. Then he is able to see the future. Bingo! The worst serial killer in American history is in jail, on death row - and they allow him to have candles, a television, and somehow jumper cables or something in there! Bingo!! Cha-ching!! Because that makes sense.My favorite part of the first 30 minutes though was when 7 or 8 policemen chase the physically handicapped villain. He burns past them like Usain Bolt. Cha-ching!! Dear lord, I wonder what absurdities come in the next hour of the movie. I use "wonder" loosely, however, because I will never watch this piece of trash again. I paid $3.99 to rent it - worst money I have ever spent.You guys really like this movie? Like actually like it? It was unbearable to me after 20 minutes, one of the dumbest things I have ever seen. Forced myself to watch another 10 minutes, and I was done."Shocker" - you are a very, very, very bad movie.
gretz-569-323863
Wes Craven is one of my favorite directors. the plot of "Nightmare on Elm Street" was brilliant, and decades later, "Wes Craven's New Nightmare" was just as brilliant, IMHO. I even love "Cursed." So I really wanted to like "Shocker." but that's only possible if you ignore some truly major inanities.For instance: from the beginning, it's obvious that Jonathan has information about the killer and can help find and capture him. But Jon's cop father refuses to believe him, and keeps telling him to "go home, this is MY job." Why? Or the scene where Jonathan dreams himself into the next murder, with one of his football buddies to wake him just in time (for-- what?). How does he know the murderer's going to strike right then? In fact, Jonathan's psychic abilities overall are hit and miss: he dreams some of the murders, but he's happily playing football while his girlfriend is being slaughtered. Why didn't he feel that one coming? And when Jonathan searches for the necklace that somehow (it's never explained how) will keep him safe...I just had to laugh. Seriously? He's going to dive to the bottom of a lake, AT NIGHT, and find that tiny necklace? And speaking of that, why is he loving ghost-Alison half the time, but scared witless of her the other half?It's not all silliness, though. There are some things to recommend this movie. It's definitely gory, for those of you who like that. There is some humor, and the Zelig-like trip through the TV programs was quite interesting. And there are some nice scenes of autumn in the suburbs: the leaves swirling in the wind, the witchy little kids running across the street (again, unexplained), the moon through the trees...And anyway, a bad Wes Craven horror movie is still better than a good non-Wes Craven horror movie.
Anonymous Andy (Minus_The_Beer)
To say Wes Craven has made his share of terrible films is an understatement; in fact, one could say that for every "Nightmare on Elm Street" there is a "Hills Have Eyes 2" and for every "Scream" there is a "Cursed." But like most of his late '80s/early '90s output, "Shocker" is a film that slips under the radar. It is neither bad nor good, neither offensive nor effective. It's just a crazy, mixed-up little film amidst a mid-career crisis.Mitch Pileggi stars as Horace Pinker, a TV-repairman turned mass murderer with a bad limp. Business is fine and good for Pinker until local high school jock Jonathan Parker (played by Peter Berg) hits his head a little too hard and starts seeing visions of the bad guy doing his dirty deeds. With the kid on his trail, it's not long until Pinker is riding the lightning; however, he quickly proves that you just can't keep a good serial killer down and starts hopping bodies in the afterlife whilst continuing to blaze his trail of carnage.It's quite obvious from the get-go that Craven was trying to ride the slasher wave enjoyed partly by his own Freddy Krueger. Not only is the film similar stylistically and thematically to its big brother, it also borrows a few exclusive traits, namely the one-liners and dreamscapes. Thankfully Pileggi is up to the task of being a ruthless character who enjoys his share of dirty work, and for the first half of the movie we are treated to a truly frightening and seemingly unstoppable presence. It's a shame then that the movie peters out in the second half, making way for ridiculous scenarios and inane plot-twists, culminating in a "so bad it's good" chase scene through TV channels that feels like it belongs in a different film altogether. It's an often confusing film and a mixed bag for sure. In fact, one can't help but feel the movie is too scripts crammed into one. The first half is a nice, suspenseful slasher flick, while the second feels like its fantastical sequel that takes things a bit too far. Perhaps Craven had a premonition regarding the film's box office take and figured it best to get it all wrapped up in one film.There's a bit of social commentary and satire running throughout the film, but sadly it's lost amongst the mean-spirited violence and the constant throbbing of its heavy metal soundtrack. It's ironic then that these distractions are the film's strengths. Once you turn off your brain and stop trying to analyze the inanity of "Shocker," it can be enjoyed as the schlocky shocker it truly is.
