John Chard

Nov 4, 2013

7.0

Lake Ends In The Road. The Last House on the Left is directed by Dennis Iliadis and adapted to screenplay by Adam Alleca and Carl Ellsworth from the story by Wes Craven (co-producer here). A remake of Craven’s 1972 film of the same name (itself influenced by Ingmar Bergman’s The Virgin Spring), it stars Tony Goldwyn, Monica Potter, Garret Dillahunt, Sara Paxton, Spencer Treat Clark and Martha MacIsaac. Music is by John Murphy and cinematography by Sharone Meir. During a family vacation, teenagers Mari (Paxton) and Paige (MacIsaac) are viciously set about by a gang led by recent prison escapee Krug (Dillahunt). When bad weather forces Krug’s car to career off the road, the gang, unbeknownst to them, seek refuge in the vacation home of Mari’s parents. When the parents realise what their new lodgers have done, they begin to enact bloody retribution. It’s pointless going on about remakes of old horror films, they are here to stay and we continue to watch them in the hope that they will strike a chord with us. With The Last House on the Left, remaking it, to me at least, is understandable given the 72 film is not exactly a great classic itself. True enough to say it has that grainy grunginess that was so befitting the decade’s horror movies, marking it out as an unsettling experience without really living up to its “terrifying” reputation. In fact if you put both movies together they still wouldn’t have enough class in them to give Bergman’s movie a run for its money. So the remake then, all glossy and big budgeted, with name actors in the principal roles, it is by definition routinely packaged for the modern day audience. However, that doesn’t take away from the fact that what unfolds on that screen is challenging us, it really does do its job. The pertinent question exists, are you capable of such violence having had violence inflicted on your loved ones previously? What would you do in the same situation that Mari’s parents find themselves in? We have been privy to what was meted out to poor Mari and Paige, and the impact is most distressing. There is good cause to argue that Iliadis and his production team go too far in grabbing our attention in readiness for the “revenge” factor later on. Certainly I myself was uncomfortable watching it, as I was with the I Spit on Your Grave remake, but it’s about getting a prescribed response, however close to the knuckle it is. It’s not a film anyone can feel comfortable about recommending, surely? But I know it put me through a gamut of emotions, even making me feel bad about myself the next day. That is quite often the power of cinema, and clearly the banner that Craven and Iliadis held aloft during the publicity tours for The Last House on the Left. Today I give the film an uneasy 7/10, it’s uncompromising and unapologetically violent, but also laced with flaws. On another day I may find myself rating it considerably lower…

JPV852

Sep 25, 2023

8.0

Pretty good suspense-thriller-horror with Sara Paxton, Aaron Paul, Garret Dillahunt and Tony Goldwyn giving fine performances. Can't say it was exactly 'entertaining' given the SA scene but seeing them get their comeuppance was. I've never seen Wes Craven's 1972 original so I don't know how it compares, but thought it was alright, just won't revisit outside of watching with the new commentary track on the Arrow Video release. **3.75/5**

Wuchak

Mar 23, 2025

9.0

**_Beauty and the Beast_** I admit I originally had no interest in seeing this '09 remake of 1972's "Last House on the Left," which involved the rape/murder of two girls and the ensuing wrath the parents of one of the girls (loosely based on Ingmar Bergman's "The Virgin Spring" from 1960). Why not? Because the original movie was just so dumb. I know many hail it for being "disturbing" due to the vile, sadistic villains and the humiliation, rape and gory murders -- but I didn't find it disturbing at all. Why? Because the preposterous storyline accompanied by the goofy music and bumbling cops made it impossible to take serious. Consequently, just like I don't consider the violence in, say, a Road Runner cartoon disturbing -- because it's impossible to take seriously -- so I didn't find "Last House" disturbing. Dumb? Yes. An interesting early 70's curiosity? Yes. Disturbing? No. Apparently director Dennis Iliadis and writers Adam Alleca & Carl Ellsworth understood the blatant flaws of the original because this remake overcomes them all and is a near masterpiece of filmmaking. Without knowing what it was, I stumbled upon this remake last summer while channel-surfing in a motel in the heart of Nebraska; the opening caught my attention and I became engrossed. About 40 minutes into the story it dawned on me that this was the remake of "Last House on the Left." Although I couldn't finish the film, the first thing I did when I got home was secure a copy for viewing. What makes this remake so good? For one thing, the filmmaking itself is top-of-the-line -- the cinematography, music, cast, acting, mood, suspense, etc. all work together to make a superior piece of cinematic art -- yes, even though it's "just a horror flick." I was particularly impressed with the way the film juxtaposes the beauty of nature & people or family with the hideousness of human evil. Take, for example, the opening scenes of the beautiful woods & music followed by the thug's murderous escape and the later sequence where a fleeing girl is shot while swimming through a lake. The film was incidentally shot in Helderberg Nature Preserve, Western Cape, South Africa, of all places. Gorgeous locations, to say the least, and a fine stand-in for somewhere-in-the-sticks, USA. The character of Justin was another great element. Through no fault of his own he's the teenage son of the main scumbag. It's clear that Justin hates the perverseness and hypocrisy of his "family life" and craves normalcy and genuine love. He's in torment but is too afraid of his father to overtly act (and understandably so), but he does what he can, when he can. The message of Justin is that people are not cursed to follow the wicked/foolish ways of their bloodline. Simple wisdom and force of righteous will breaks the curse. Redemption is there, if you want it. I also liked the way the film depicts the duplicity of the thug gang, particularly the leader Krug (Garret Dillahunt). He's the ultimate POS but watch him cover-up his intrinsic wickedness with his knack for social acclimation -- a fake smile, innocent smalltalk and a well-placed "Amen." The film successfully shows how some people aren't what they appear to be; they're the express opposite! Not to mention the flick is a good reminder to always be on your guard. Don't be naive; not everyone's like you or me. Some people will happily abuse, rape and kill without a second thought. They're scum, pure and simple (by their OWN foolish choices). If you have daughters make sure they view this, even though some parts are hard to watch. Also, the numerous preposterous elements of the original story have been fixed. The family is vacationing in a wilderness area and there's only one town nearby. The daughter successfully steers the criminals close to her home, unbeknownst to them. The thugs aren't dressed-to-the-nines when they show up at the parent's doorstep, not to mention they have a legitimate reason ("There's been an accident"). The goofy elements of the original -- the silly music and bumbling cops -- have been eliminated altogether. The film has a serious, realistic vibe and therefore the horrific events are taken seriously. There are a couple of clichéd horror aspects I could do without, specifically the scenes involving a garbage disposal and a microwave. They're a bit silly and needlessly stretch the believability. But then it struck me that they're types of universal/divine judgment & justice, which works for me. Another aspect that improved upon the original involves one of the victimized girls, but I don't want to give it away. At the end of the day, this '09 remake is vastly superior in every conceivable way and proves that remakes can and should be made when/if appropriate. In ways it's even a masterpiece, a brilliant showcase of beauty and the beast. Don't miss out just because you thought the original was a dubious. The theatrical version runs 110 minutes and the unrated version four minutes longer; both versions are featured on the DVD (I haven't seen the unrated version since the theatrical was more than enough for me, if you know what I mean). GRADE: A