MovieChat Forums > The New York RipperĀ (1982) Discussion > One of my favourite horror/thriller film...

One of my favourite horror/thriller films


I really liked this film, even though some of the script and dubbing was bad I thought the acting was pretty good, especially most of the men (not to be sexist) and the women were just ok. As for the story I thought it was great and very original, I know alot of people find the duck voice annoying but when you find out its to do with the killers motive it really did work well. As for the gore I thing its one of the most realistic I have seen from the 80's.

Dubbing: 4/10
Acting: 7/10
Script: 5/10
Plot: 9/10
Gore: 10/10

Overall rating: 9.5/10

I bet no one else aggrees with me! :(

reply

I disagree with the gore, but I can see where you're coming from on all the other rankings.



For indepth horror reviews, check out my youtube page: Horrorreviews123

reply

I agree, I think it is definitely one of Fulci's strongest movies. This one, Zombie and The Beyond are probably his best films.

reply

You forgot to rate the nudity! I thought this was one of the better Fulci flicks that I've seen.

reply

[deleted]

What was wrong with the gore? I think it was as gory as a movie could've gotten without crossing over into "cartooony" ness. But the actual violence commited in the movie greatly outweighs the gore.
---
Haben Sie ein Erste-Hilfe-Kasten griffbereit?

reply

I found this film to be a pleasingly scuzzy piece of in-your-face raw and nasty trash. The infamous "footsy" scene in particular was a definite sleazy highlight.

"We're all part Shatner/And part James Dean/Part Warren Oates/And Steven McQueen"

reply

Nope. I think your ratings are pretty spot on. I agree with you!

reply

Love this movie!

reply

I thought that this movie is excellent 10/10!!!

reply

[deleted]

What baffles me is the fact the US released a R rated version that cut out the nudity but left the violence intact. So women getting butchered is ok but a bit of nudity is bad? Talk about screwed up priorities.

As for the movie itself I have an uncut version and I agree it is very brutal in the depiction of the killings. The only problem I have with it is the fact that the killer quacks like Donald Duck during the kills. I wonder what Fulci was thinking. It takes the seriousness out of the murders and makes them a little goofy (no pun).

I did like this movie despite the quacking. Also the fact that Fulci doesn't shy away from showing the women being brutally killed. You don't see movies like that anymore. No, I'm not a misogynist. In fact this is one of the extremely few movies I've seen where it shows women being graphically murdered. Also the only one of 2 movies that actually shows vaginal mutilation. (The other being Giallo a Venezia http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0079207/)

I mention that last point because I've seen many horror movies involving the mutilation of male genitals (castration, being bitten off etc.) but, oddly, I can't recall any movies that shows vaginal mutilations. I find that rather disturbing to be honest. Why are there so many movies depicting male genitalia mutilation but not female?

That's what makes this movie and Giallo a Venezia stand out in the crowd.

reply