These ‘90s Slashers Were Unfairly Panned by Critics
Prior to the widespread availability of the Internet, the majority of film critics worked for magazines and newspapers, with many having a vocal disdain for the slasher genre. But as online journalists have begun to outnumber their print counterparts, there seems to have been a shift in the critical consensus. The Internet has given a platform to a new generation of critics. And that distinction has allowed the opportunity for slasher pictures to be evaluated by film scholars who connect with and understand the genre, rather than critiqued almost exclusively by those that don’t have an appreciation for the macabre.
Modern horror was really taking shape in the ‘90s. That decade saw the genre becoming smarter and often more self-referential. But save for Scream, almost every slasher picture released during that decade was panned by critics. And that’s a damn shame because some truly exceptional films that bowed during the ‘90s weren’t given a fair chance by the powers that be. With that in mind, I am looking back on 4 noteworthy ‘90s slasher pictures that were unfairly maligned by critics.
Urban Legend: 27% on Rotten Tomatoes
I am a diehard fan of Urban Legend. It’s a smart slasher picture that nods to the horror genre’s history in folklore and manages to serve up some supremely terrifying scenarios. However, the majority of critics didn’t seem to connect with the film upon release. That’s painfully obvious when referencing the flick’s abysmally low Rotten Tomatoes rating. Urban Legend boasts a great cast, dry wit, some truly intense chase sequences, and a number of memorable kills. The idea of a killer weaponizing urban legends translates to effective nightmare fuel.
I get the impression that Scream became the benchmark for a lot of critics and films like Urban Legend were discounted for not being inventive enough. The problem with that line of thinking is that not every film has to reinvent the wheel. Sometimes effectively executing on a proven formula hits the spot. And Urban Legend is a case of exactly that.
I Know What You Did Last Summer: 45% on Rotten Tomatoes
I think the argument I am making here may be best illustrated by I Know What You Did Last Summer. This slasher film comes from screenwriter Kevin Williamson, who also wrote the script for Scream. Both films benefit from a killer screenplay. But Scream got all the love from critics and I Know What You Did Last Summer was written off as a by-the-numbers slasher. It seems film journalists overlooked the fact that I Know What You Did Last Summer wasn’t trying to be disruptive or different. The picture sets out to thrill and terrify in equal measure and does an exceptional job at exactly that.
I Know What You Did Last Summer succeeds thanks to a killer cast that we’re given good reason to invest in and serves up one of the most iconic chase sequences in recent memory.
The flick doesn’t get as self-referential as Scream. But to compare the two is a fool’s errand. Scream is a horror comedy. I Know What You Did Last Summer isn’t. The tone of I Know What You Did Last Summer is bleak and harrowing and attempts at comedy would have detracted from that. I would argue that while it isn’t a better film than Scream, I Know What You Did Last Summer actually delivers a higher level of intensity and more scares. So, to see critics write the film off as formulaic, rather than evaluate the picture on its own merits, is a true shame.
Popcorn: 38% on Rotten Tomatoes
Critics must have completely misunderstood Popcorn. The film is a love letter to the cheesy excess of the monster movies of the ‘50s and ‘60s; sending up the kind of gimmicks for which William Castle was well-known. But it’s so much more than that. Popcorn melds retro monster movie tropes with slasher conventions established in the ‘70s and ‘80s and serves up a unique and intriguing final femme that carries the picture through the more dialogue-heavy sequences. The picture delivers an antagonist that could have been lifted directly from a schlocky ‘60s monster movie but the character is modernized to adhere to contemporary slasher tropes.
Popcorn serves as a brilliant melding of the horror films of the past and present (circa 1990). And I think a lot of critics failed to see how effectively the film pulls that conceit off.
Child’s Play 2: 40% on Rotten Tomatoes
This 1990 sequel had big shoes to fill. But it did so remarkably. I’m not sure how critics didn’t see that at the time. Don Mancini’s script for Child’s Play 2 brings back a legacy character in Andy (Alex Vincent) and introduces viewers to Kyle (Christine Elise), who has since gone on to become a fan-favorite. That’s just what a sequel should do. A good follow-up ought to pay tribute to its predecessor while ultimately carving out its own path, therefore justifying its existence. Child’s Play 2 nods to the original but goes in a decidedly different direction. More importantly, it hits the ground running. The flick isn’t bogged down by establishing characters or delivering cumbersome exposition. Director John Lafia is able to get straight into the action and seems to be having a blast in the process.
The onscreen relationship between Kyle and Andy is surprisingly touching. Kyle is the older sister I always wanted but never had. She makes berets and smoking look so cool. And the way she looks out for Andy is sweet without being overly sentimental. Their bond reads as authentic. And the finale in the warehouse is an intense showdown that gets my blood pumping every time I revisit the flick.
My best guess is that critics went into the film with sequel fatigue and didn’t give the picture a fair chance. But that didn’t stop Child’s Play 2 from becoming a fan favorite and paving the way for a series of follow-up efforts of varying quality.
Categorized:Editorials Lists
