MovieChat Forums > Sunburst (1982) Discussion > Ugh, yuck, blecth and ugh again!

Ugh, yuck, blecth and ugh again!

posted 18 years ago by apocolypsejunkie
6 replies | jump to latest

I just saw this movie this past weekend. It's in the Chiller Classics set. To call it an implausible, incoherent mess would be kind.

First of all, I believe I would've boogied right on out of those woods the *first* time the loony creeps confronted me.
Second of all, if I *was* stupid enough to stay, I believe I would've boogied on down to the local police/forest ranger to report a brutal assault/rape that had just been perpetrated upon myself and my chick.
And third of all, where did Robert Englund's navel gazing speech-i-fying help anything? *He* wasn't the one who'd just gotten gang raped the night before. (Come to think, that might have made a much more interesting flick)
And lastly, when the boyfriend finally quit his own navel gazing and went for some payback,why didn't he slit the throat of the fat cretin that was already incapacitated instead of performing 'Dog Patch West Side Story', dancing around with a hatchet?

Horrible, just horrible. I did an IMDB search on all of the actors who participated in this crap-fest, with exception of Robert Englund, not many did much more after the 70's. With that turd wrapped in burnt hair of a flick on their resumes', I can see why.

I will give *some* coolness points for the movie's score, it had a kind of Valley of the Dolls, vibe to it.

If my answers frighten you then you should cease asking scary questions.

[–] lvis 17 years ago

It's a shame when people under 40 review films that were made before they were out of grade school. They miss out on how things were in times past. While this film certainly doesn't hold up well compared to today's "great" films, one should remember that every film should be measured by the time it was made in and the message it intends to get across. I think this film was about innocence lost. Just as America lost it's innocence, originally with JFK's assasination, and then later with Watergate, it shows a happy couple who's friendship is everything (which shows the naivete and innocence of the two, they remind me of children in their innocence)...love precedes sex, not the other way around. However, one cannot FULLY enter into adulthood (or understanding)without experiencing the ugly side of life, along with it's inherent pain. And it is through pain that we are able to fully 'grow' as individuals. So, for the current "Crank" generation who like their action non-stop it is hard to follow a story that was made for people of a different time.

[–] apocolypsejunkie 17 years ago

First of all, you're making some mighty-big-assumptions about my age. I'm hardly the from the "crank" generation. I remember Vietnam, Watergate and even what I had for lunch yesterday quite well, thank you.

Second of all, you can wrap that turd of a movie in all of the gossamer, misty water colored memories that you want. It's *still* a turd.

If my answers frighten you then you should cease asking scary questions.

[–] spooner-11 17 years ago

I just wanted to say, that liking this (kind of) movie isn't a matter of age, it's much more a matter of getting things.. I'm 18, and I gotta admit, I liked the movie for what it was, even if it wasn't very spectacular, but it has some good acting in it, and an atmosphere that i somehow enjoyed. I get if many people are disappointed, because they expect some sleazy horrorflick, but so did I in the first place..

[–] apocolypsejunkie 17 years ago

Do any of you ever try to, oh I don't know, actually *comprehend* what you've read before posting a reaction? Where in my original post did I ever say anything about being disappointed that the movie wasn't a slasher flick?

At least the petrified mummy was just as obtuse as the fetus, I suppose.

If my answers frighten you then you should cease asking scary questions.

[–] jinx_malone 16 years ago

it's a shame when people defend *beep* movies for no reason, too. but it happens all the time.

[–] tingeyh-1 16 years ago

I was also baffled when the two rapists take off and the girl and Robert Englund pull the boyfriend out of the mud and all three start laughing. I think the film was going for some sort of message about resorting to violence, but today it just looks odd.