Customer Reviews


27 Reviews
5 star:
 (7)
4 star:
 (7)
3 star:
 (3)
2 star:
 (4)
1 star:
 (6)
 
 
 
 
 
Average Customer Review
Share your thoughts with other customers
Create your own review
 
 

The most helpful favourable review
The most helpful critical review


3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars "You sick mother..."
This film is gross. It's revolting. It's crude. It's one of the coolest flicks I've ever had the pleasure of viewing. Two lil girls go out to a concert and end up getting kidnapped by a gang of escaped convicts who take them into the woods and have a little over-the-top fun with them, taunting them, humiliating them, violating them, and finally killing them. It's too bad...
Published on June 1 2002

versus
1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars The Last House on the Left
The Last House on the Left

An original concept, but like many horror movies the delivery falls short. Tries to be disturbing, insightful and raw. In reality though full of bad acting, bad directing and especially bad plot holes/continuity and editing. That said there are still some redeeming horror scenes though sporadic. In the end I only recommend this...
Published on May 8 2009 by The Critic


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

3 of 3 people found the following review helpful
5.0 out of 5 stars "You sick mother...", June 1 2002
By A Customer
This film is gross. It's revolting. It's crude. It's one of the coolest flicks I've ever had the pleasure of viewing. Two lil girls go out to a concert and end up getting kidnapped by a gang of escaped convicts who take them into the woods and have a little over-the-top fun with them, taunting them, humiliating them, violating them, and finally killing them. It's too bad the parents find out about it, because they soon plot revenge. MGM finally will be releasing the most complete version of LHOTL on earth. ...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


1 of 1 people found the following review helpful
2.0 out of 5 stars The Last House on the Left, May 8 2009
By 
The Critic (Vancouver, British Columbia Canada) - See all my reviews
The Last House on the Left

An original concept, but like many horror movies the delivery falls short. Tries to be disturbing, insightful and raw. In reality though full of bad acting, bad directing and especially bad plot holes/continuity and editing. That said there are still some redeeming horror scenes though sporadic. In the end I only recommend this purchase for people interested in completing their collection of Wes Craven's films. If you're interested in experiencing much better disturbing horror I recommend "the Audition or Irreversible"
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


2.0 out of 5 stars As scary as a bucket of cotton candy..., Nov. 8 2014
Verified Purchase(What's this?)
I honestly thought I'd love this because I'm a Wes Craven fan, a horror fan, and furthermore my one friend (who is a movie maven) recommended this. I saw critical reviews of this and I was pre-judging and saying 'those people don't know what they're talking about'. Well, now that I've actually SEEN this, I can say it sucks. Yes, SUCKS.

Wes was just getting his feet wet here, so it's hard to blame him fully. Though even in much later films he has made he always seemed to have this 'goofy' element creep in. Which can be cool but often detracts from the horror part.

Basically what was probably a 10/10 script got delivered in a shoddy fashion. The story is great, disturbing, and very humanly possible. However, this movie had kinda crappy acting in spots and they played this ATROCIOUS yokel schmokel music that was SO campy that it made it all seem like a joke. It was not scary at all. I know sometimes playing upbeat music can add special contrast and accentuate the sinister but this music just sucked and ruined so much. For example, playing a quiet music box type thing (which is normally s'posed to sound 'pleasing') during a dark moment makes it so much more badass. Playing cruddy howdy do country music makes it seem like a bad outtake from America's Funniest Home videos.
Haven't seen the remake of this movie, but dang this had so much potential to be so raw and potent but it ends up being limp. The one main thing I liked was the ending, it was kinda fun in a psycho way. The whole movie is worth seeing once maybe.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars The last movie you should ever let your kids see!, June 17 2003
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! O.K. what kind of movie is this? It does not get any more disturbing then this movie, i just watched it last night. This movie is SICK!!! What really makes it bad is how realistic it is, those poor girls. These convicts are just the scum of the earth and in my opinion they got of easy at the end of the film. Great performances all the way around, their is not a weak performance in the movie. Krug, the convict leader is especially evil and vicious. His girl friend is also convincing as a disgusting, heartless, killer. The two teenaged girls also play their parts extreemly well, especially the daughter of the older couple. This movie gave me bad dreams and was way more unsetteling than Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th because the monsters in this movie were just human beings. These girls were so naive and foolish, (Message to everyone reading, when buying drugs from strangers never, NEVER, follow them anywhere to get it. Wait for them to come back with the drugs, stay in a public place. If anyone does try to convince you to go with them someplace to buy drugs, they are trying to set you up to be robbed or worse, immediatly break of communication with them and get away! Believe me I know about these things.) they were in over their heads, they were just kids even though they might have looked like women. The rape and pyschological torture scenes were beyond the beyond, espeically the one in the woods where the girls were made to have sex with each other. Both girls were brave in different ways, and the daughter of the older couple was even able to make these cold blooded, remorseless convicts feel guilty about what they had done, she shamed them with her purity in comparison to their filth. That scene is the best scene in the movie. The convicts get their just deserts I suppose but it does not make up for what the parents lost. The bumbling cops were the perfect compliament, tottaly inept, their foolish mishandling of the situation cost the girls their lives. I read a lot of reviews where people complained about these scense, claiming that they did not understand why these "comic" scenes were in the movie, Craven should not have tried to be "funny". Instead he should have concentrated more on the terror. Either these people are retarded or have no sense of irony. The scenes with the cops were in no way intended to be funny at all, they were meant to illustrate how stupid the police were and how badly they handled the situation. The happy, slapstick music and the banter between the Sherieff and the Deputy was meant to demonstrate the juvinille, country bumpkin, absurd mindstate of the police. They did not take the situation serioulsy and that is why the scenes with them are not serious. It is meant as a contrast to the horror of what is happening to the teenaged girl in the woods. While the cops are goofing of and teasing each other innocent lives are being lost. I also liked the happy music Craven used, it contrasted perfectly with the dead serious situation of the abuse of the girls in the woods and made it even more disturbing. The music hightened the tension of the film and made the viewer really feel the horror of the situation even more. This movie is BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD!!!! But not bad as in low quality, bad as in EVIL!!! The music during the credits was really distrubing. This movie seems like it was from hell or something, I dont know, this movie got to me and that is hard to do. I have seen "I Spit On Your Grave" but that was just basically well acted rape porn with a revenge twist. I dont know what this movie is, I do not know how to label or define it, it defies classification. It is not horror, drama, action, it is just EVIL. Some reviwers gave this movie bad reviews because they said it was badly acted and directed, to me that sounds like a pyschological defense mechanism to avoid the emotional truama this movie induces on the viwer. I can understand why someone would hate this move, espically women, and feel that it never should have been made. But I do not think anyone that is being honest with themselves can flippanlty disregard it and claim that it had no impact on them, that it was "funny". Only really, really, sick people would think this movie was funny. This movie is CRAZY! You cannot make movies like this anymore in America, only in the 1970s where directors truly free to really push the limits. This is by far Craven's best film, better than Scream or anything else he has ever made. This movie has an R rating, they must have bribed someone to get that. This movie was edited, I know their are scenes of violence and rape that were cut, especially the scene in the woods. Does anyone know if their is an unrated version of this film?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars The last movie you should ever let your kids see!, June 17 2003
Whoa! Whoa! Whoa! O.K. what kind of movie is this? It does not get any more disturbing then this movie, i just watched it last night. This movie is SICK!!! What really makes it bad is how realistic it is, those poor girls. These convicts are just the scum of the earth and in my opinion they got of easy at the end of the film. Great performances all the way around, their is not a weak performance in the movie. Krug, the convict leader is especially evil and vicious. His girl friend is also convincing as a disgusting, heartless, killer. The two teenaged girls also play their parts extreemly well, especially the daughter of the older couple. This movie gave me bad dreams and was way more unsetteling than Nightmare on Elm Street or Friday the 13th because the monsters in this movie were just human beings. These girls were so naive and foolish, (Message to everyone reading, when buying drugs from strangers never, NEVER, follow them anywhere to get it. Wait for them to come back with the drugs, stay in a public place. If anyone does try to convince you to go with them someplace to buy drugs, they are trying to set you up to be robbed or worse, immediatly break of communication with them and get away! Believe me I know about these things.) they were in over their heads, they were just kids even though they might have looked like women. The rape and pyschological torture scenes were beyond the beyond, espeically the one in the woods where the girls were made to have sex with each other. Both girls were brave in different ways, and the daughter of the older couple was even able to make these cold blooded, remorseless convicts feel guilty about what they had done, she shamed them with her purity in comparison to their filth. That scene is the best scene in the movie. The convicts get their just deserts I suppose but it does not make up for what the parents lost. The bumbling cops were the perfect compliament, tottaly inept, their foolish mishandling of the situation cost the girls their lives. I read a lot of reviews where people complained about these scense, claiming that they did not understand why these "comic" scenes were in the movie, Craven should not have tried to be "funny". Instead he should have concentrated more on the terror. Either these people are retarded or have no sense of irony. The scenes with the cops were in no way intended to be funny at all, they were meant to illustrate how stupid the police were and how badly they handled the situation. The happy, slapstick music and the banter between the Sherieff and the Deputy was meant to demonstrate the juvinille, country bumpkin, absurd mindstate of the police. They did not take the situation serioulsy and that is why the scenes with them are not serious. It is meant as a contrast to the horror of what is happening to the teenaged girl in the woods. While the cops are goofing of and teasing each other innocent lives are being lost. I also liked the happy music Craven used, it contrasted perfectly with the dead serious situation of the abuse of the girls in the woods and made it even more disturbing. The music hightened the tension of the film and made the viewer really feel the horror of the situation even more. This movie is BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD, BAD!!!! But not bad as in low quality, bad as in EVIL!!! The music during the credits was really distrubing. This movie seems like it was from hell or something, I dont know, this movie got to me and that is hard to do. I have seen "I Spit On Your Grave" but that was just basically well acted rape porn with a revenge twist. I dont know what this movie is, I do not know how to label or define it, it defies classification. It is not horror, drama, action, it is just EVIL. Some reviwers gave this movie bad reviews because they said it was badly acted and directed, to me that sounds like a pyschological defense mechanism to avoid the emotional truama this movie induces on the viwer. I can understand why someone would hate this move, espically women, and feel that it never should have been made. But I do not think anyone that is being honest with themselves can flippanlty disregard it and claim that it had no impact on them, that it was "funny". Only really, really, sick people would think this movie was funny. This movie is CRAZY! You cannot make movies like this anymore in America, only in the 1970s where directors truly free to really push the limits. This is by far Craven's best film, better than Scream or anything else he has ever made. This movie has an R rating, they must have bribed someone to get that. This movie was edited, I know their are scenes of violence and rape that were cut, especially the scene in the woods. Does anyone know if their is an unrated version of this film?
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars Realism Arrives In Horror Movies., June 11 2003
By 
Burak Kilic (Istanbul, TURKEY) - See all my reviews
This 1972 production is one of the first films to present violence in the context of American society, and not in castles or anything. Wes Craven, who is recognized with his 'Scream' triology by masses, does a fine job in his debut.
The movie's plot is as follows: A bunch of guys and a girl, think that they need more girls to their group for the sake of equalizing the number of girls and guys in the group, and of course having a little fun. We see two girls, who're to see a concert in a bad neighborhood. They want to have some 'grass', and ask someone in the street to have 'a cut'. He calls them to their house, and viola! They're trapped. It will be the next couple of violent hours where we see the girls being brutally harrassed, raped, and killed out in the woods.
What makes the story more interesting is that it all happens in the walking distance of Mari's - one of the killed girls - house. The group changes clothes and knock on the family's door. In fact, they will be welcomed very well. However, things will change as the parents discover what they've done.
The acting is not perfect; I must admit that. The soundtrack isn't either. In a lot of the violent moments, the music director chooses to put country folk music, which just doesn't make any sense. Had they put some real scary music, the effect would have been much more intensifying. However, 'Last House on the Left' is overall a successful production, which should be watched to see where we were before and where we are now in scary movies. In fact, I like the old movies.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars Realism Arrives In Horror Movies., June 11 2003
By 
Burak Kilic (Istanbul, TURKEY) - See all my reviews
This 1972 production is one of the first films to present violence in the context of American society, and not in castles or anything. Wes Craven, who is recognized with his 'Scream' triology by masses, does a fine job in his debut.
The movie's plot is as follows: A bunch of guys and a girl, think that they need more girls to their group for the sake of equalizing the number of girls and guys in the group, and of course having a little fun. We see two girls, who're to see a concert in a bad neighborhood. They want to have some 'grass', and ask someone in the street to have 'a cut'. He calls them to their house, and viola! They're trapped. It will be the next couple of violent hours where we see the girls being brutally harrassed, raped, and killed out in the woods.
What makes the story more interesting is that it all happens in the walking distance of Mari's - one of the killed girls - house. The group changes clothes and knock on the family's door. In fact, they will be welcomed very well. However, things will change as the parents discover what they've done.
The acting is not perfect; I must admit that. The soundtrack isn't either. In a lot of the violent moments, the music director chooses to put country folk music, which just doesn't make any sense. Had they put some real scary music, the effect would have been much more intensifying. However, 'Last House on the Left' is overall a successful production, which should be watched to see where we were before and where we are now in scary movies. In fact, I like the old movies.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


5.0 out of 5 stars To avoid fainting, keep repeating "It's only a movie...", Nov. 20 2002
By 
Perhaps one of the most unfortunate things about Wes Craven's LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is that the film has gained such notoriety over the years, that it's likely to disappoint countless viewers who go to it expecting the most disturbing film ever made. In terms of onscreen brutality, Craven's debut doesn't quite scale the heights of the similarly themed I SPIT ON YOUR GRAVE, but it's mean-spirited and sadistic enough to shock the unsuspecting viewer.
To appreciate a film like this, you have to take into account the time in which it was made. LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT was released in 1972 at a time when movie-going audiences hadn't yet been subjected to this sort of thing. The closest equivalent to this that people had seen up until then was probably exaggerated violence in the Herschell Gordon Lewis vein, and it would be another decade before mindless slasher films would overrun the horror genre. That's not to say that the film isn't shocking, even by today's standards. Watching two teenage girls get mercilessly tortured and humiliated by four psychopaths is hardly something that has become "acceptable" in terms of cinematic tolerance. In fact, the more disturbing elements of these scenes are not the violence or the blood, but rather the psychological torment that these two youths endure. The protagonists of this film are particularly vile characters, especially the character of Krug (played wonderfully by cult icon David Hess). You can almost feel the sense of hatred that these characters have, both for themselves and for others. In one scene where Krug is trying to have sex with his girlfriend, he says, "Why don't you lay back and enjoy being inferior?" The scenes where the two teenage girls undergo sadistic violence are almost unbearable due to Wes Craven's unflinching camerawork. Don't expect any last minute cutaways or convenient editing... Craven isn't afraid to let his camera linger on in the more disturbing scenes.
To say that LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is a well-made film technically would be silly. This was Wes Craven's directorial debut, and he was essentially still learning how to make a film. The movie also has some problems in the actual plot structure... There are some rather unnecessary scenes with a sheriff that are played for comic relief. The direction is pretty standard, and the film feels as if it was thrown together rather haphazardly, but these are all minor quibbles. LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT is, first and foremost, and exploitation film, and in that regard, it delivers the goods. Its main purpose is to shock the viewer, and to provoke an emotional response, and in that regard, it succeeded. If you take a look at the overwhelming majority of the responses for this film, you'll find that people either loved it or they hated it. There's something to be said about a film that causes such extreme opinions, and I would argue that a negative response to this film is much better than no response at all. It's a testament to the effectiveness of Craven to get a response out of the viewer.
Regardless of what your thoughts are on the movie, the new DVD release from MGM is truly a thing of beauty. First and foremost, the audio and video are more than acceptable... this is the best that this film has ever looked. The good news for fans of the film is that this new release is packed with some fantastic extras. There's an optional introduction by Wes Craven and a trailer for the film (which highlights the now-famous tagline of "It's only a movie, it's only a movie!"). There's also a fantastic thirty-minute documentary called "The Making of Last House on the Left" which includes some really informative interviews with the cast and crew. We're also treated with a good audio commentary from Craven and producer Sean Cunningham (FRIDAY THE 13TH), a "Forbidden Footage" featurette that discusses the film's most violent scenes, and an outtakes and dailies section (somewhere buried in these scenes is the infamous never-before-seen "disembowelment scene," which is a rather nice touch).
It's a shame that LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT has been labeled as being just another horror movie, which really doesn't do the film any justice. Hopefully, with this fantastic new release from MGM, this infamous revenge flick will finally find itself the wider audience that it deserves. Recommended for fans of cult cinema...
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


4.0 out of 5 stars Wes Craven's hard-to-stomach cult classic!, July 18 2002
It's hard to analyse a film like Wes Craven's 1972 horror classic 'Last House on the Left', due to different types of audiences that view movies from the genre. It is very much a 'cult' film in every sense of the word, and anyone other than horror enthusiasts and Craven fans will no doubt find little interest in this intelligent work.
'Last House on the Left' is a genuinely disturbing horror opus, which pulls no punches in it's representation of violence and rape, and the debasing affects of these acts. The violence is shown in a raw and dispassionate style, turning the stomach of the viewer, and is shockingly realistic. Although the violence is very much a key factor in the film, Craven's direction and morbid imagination is unforgettable, and the screenplay offers up some witty dialogue and a lot of shock value.
It's position in the annals of horror history is legendary, though some viewers may be turned off, due to the low-budget and crude nature of the film, and the overall feeling of dread carried throughout. It is a draining and ultimately harrowing exercise, which is distinctively hard to view. This is definitely not a movie for mainstream audiences, and is extremely different to the more popular horror ventures.
You'll either love this film, or absoloutely hate it.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


3.0 out of 5 stars Revolting.....But it does it's job., July 5 2002
By 
Bruno S. (Bronx, New York USA) - See all my reviews
This is a flick that ranks up there with "Requiem For A Dream" and "Kids". While the two movies I just mentioned were in completely different genres of film. And are two far superior flicks, they all do the same thing. They scare you. But they don't scare you with shocks and boogeymen, they scare you by showing the [messed] up things humans are capable of doing.
This film is scary because it looks too real. It's a warning to people, don't trust anyone. The 2 girls go to some guys house to buy some smoke. They get kidnapped, raped, tortured, and it's a mess from there.
In regards to the way the film looked, some say sloppy, amaturish, the filming looks just like "The Evil Dead." But the gore effects in this movie look real. The film is really violent. I think Wes Craven knew this when he was making the film, thats why hecut the violent scenes with stupid ones about two bumbling cops. The comedic interludes don't work because you are still reeling from the scenes of violence that preceded them.
I think you have to be disturbed to find this flick boring, stupid, or funny. It's not. It shows that there are people out there you a completely {messed] up.
Can this movie be viewed over and over? I really don't think so. This DVD is pretty much for the completest horror fans who need every "Good" horror DVD in their collection. But then again the... price tag won't break your bank. Buy it, watch it once and place it next to your copy of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre."
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews 
Was this review helpful to you? Yes No


‹ Previous | 1 2 3 | Next ›
Most Helpful First | Newest First

This product

Last House On Left [Blu-ray]
Last House On Left [Blu-ray] by Wes Craven (Blu-ray - 2011)
CDN$ 14.99 CDN$ 11.98
In Stock
Add to cart Add to wishlist
Only search this product's reviews