Text © Richard Gary / Indie Horror Films, 2019
Images from the Internet
VHS Nasty (aka VHS Nasty: VHS
Lives 3)
Directed by Tony Newton
Shlock Films / Vestra Pictures
95 minutes, 2019
I’m on a bunch of horror Facebook groups where
I mostly keep good company; it seems, however, that the holy trinity of big obsessions
of modern horror fandom is Freddy, Jason and Michael. Maybe Chucky playing the
cameo as the baby Jesus and Pennywise as the nanny, as well. While I will not poo-poo
on anyone’s tastes, and I actually quite like those films, too, compared to
some of the stuff that was coming out on VHS in the 1980s, it pales in comparison.
Mother’s Day, Cannibal Holocaust, Faces of Death, I Spit on Your Grave, and
any of several Italian cinema releases, were all beyond the realm of WTF
at the time.
In America, we had passed through the days of
the Hays Office, a gatekeeping film industry body that set strict guidelines on
what can and cannot be seen or said onscreen. It ended in the late 1960s, when
the Rating System was started. Everything exploded in the ‘70s and took hold
into the VHS period of the ‘80s, as the pendulum swung the other way. Meanwhile,
in England, where this documentary originates, there were some restrictions,
but nothing as harsh or consistent (Hollywood was the main output for cinema,
so the focus was stronger there) until the advent of VHS, where control of the
British film viewing was taken away from theaters by marketers and video
stores. The film industry and government were not pleased.
The British government set up a censorship
board against what was deemed as “video nasties,” or films this august group of
older women decided the rest of the populace should not see, as they considered
them too violent, sexually explicit, or sexually violent. If I may digress for
a sec, the different between gatekeeping and censorship is that the former is
set up within an industry to police it (the Hays Office; the Ratings Board),
while censorship is from an outside organization (e.g., church groups,
government); either way, the control is usually over-enforced.
This film focuses on the effect of British “nasties”
on modern day filmmakers who were exposed to these pariahs in their youth,
including the likes of Jim Towns, Jason Figgis, Shawn C. Phillips, Domiziano Christopharo, Tony Newton (the director of this release) – all of whom have had work that has been reviewed on this blog – as well as many others. The biggest name to
contribute here, even though he is also an indie director, is the irrepressible
Lloyd Kaufman (who only lends his voice). This international group of talking
heads discuss what it was like to be a fan and try to get hold of this illicit
merchandise, and its effect on them. Note that all of them are involved in the
independent side of filmmaking, where all the truly interesting releases are
now coming from (in my opinion), much as the nasties were back in the
day. For example, one of the banned films from back then in England (but not
the States) is Texas Chain Saw Massacre, a touchstone to many of the
people interviewed.
There is a bit of
repetition as these monster menches discuss their memories of watching these
delights, and it is quite fascinating. What also drew my attention was looking behind
them at their collections, some with mixed media (VHS, DVD, Blu-ray), masks, posters
and other film memorabilia. This is the kind of trivia I find fascinating along
with the main subject matter being discussed.
I also found it quite relatively
beguiling the various levels to which some agreed on some censorship in certain
cases. Child abuse, of course, is a given, but one, for example, says he can
see more censorship leaning towards the human slasher than the fantasy of Evil
Dead (yes, that was also on the nasties list thanks to a certain
tree branch). On one hand, I can understand the general difference between human
monsters vs. zombies and creatures; but where would you fit in supernatural unkillable
killing machines in a human form doing unsupernatural murders (again, Jason, Michael
and their ilk). This could be an interesting debate.
Also, while some are
opposed to any censorship, others believe it’s okay to put a sticker on
the box (this would be more classic gatekeeping than censorship), like the PMRC
wanted to do to music around this time in the States. With films though, if you
listed “necrophilia” on the sticker, as one person interviewed suggests be done,
that is kind of a spoiler to what goes on in the film; and as someone else
points out, for others it would just make it more enticing to watch or own.
Because of the
illegality of renting these nasties, it created a black market of
bootleg versions of the films of various and dubious qualities, and many a fan
was turned on to the horror genre not quite making out what was on the
screen thanks to murky visuals. I remember even the legit copies of VHS not
exactly being clear due to the medium itself. Add fifth generation copies, and
yikes.
One of my favorite parts
of this was each relating their favorite films, why that was so, and what was too
much for them, if anything. That is not to say there is still that level of
video nasties out there, such as much of the catalog of extreme video labels
like Unearthed.
Someone in this film
mentions that when censorship is employed, eventually whatever they are trying
to repress becomes the norm. While I believe that to be an oversimplification, on
some level it’s true that it becomes more widely accepted in the long run.
Others interviewed include
Dustin Ferguson, Peter Goddard, producer John West, Nathan Hill, Gary Smart, Christopher
Griffiths, Jimmie Gonzalez, Richard Mogg (with fake blood on his face), Mathew
Fisher, and Richard Chandler. It’s definitely a boy’s club, sadly, with the
exception of actress Julie Anne, who appears right near the end. I wish
there would have been more women involved, as they are quickly becoming a large
part of what used to be a male dominated fan base.
As for added visuals,
there are short clips from a smattering of the trailers mentioned in the documentary
(Don’t Look in the Basement, The Texas Chainsaw Massacre, etc.), some
artistically altered stills from said pix, and some decent editing (i.e., the
interview clips are not long, but fortunately they don’t zip by as if they were
for someone with the attention span of a flea, either). There is also a low background
sound of reels feeding into a projector and some VHS visual “noise” added to
the images.
My only two complaints
are that the descriptive cards for each person are only shown once, and with my
memory, it would have been a help to repeat them at some point; the other, as I
said before, is that there needs to be more women interviewed, as women are
fully integrated into the horror genre, I’m happy to say.
This film is actually
part of a trilogy (so far) that includes Newton’s tome, VHS Nasty: The
Essential Guide Book to Video Nasties, and also his Horror Movie Poetry
book related to these films. I would like to see it expand to a fourth, perhaps
as a documentary about the filmmakers, cast and crew of the nasties themselves.
They’re dropping like flies as time passes (Romero in 2017, Craven in 2015,
Fulci in 1996, etc.), so this is a good time to do it. Meanwhile, this
documentary of their influences is still a milestone.
No comments:
Post a Comment