Despite scoring a major
hit on the drive-in circuit with his first movie, the Bigfoot-themed
mockumentary The Legend of Boggy Creek
(1972), low-budget auteur Charles B. Pierce dabbled in stories about Indians
and moonshiners before returning to his comfort zone of Southern-fried horror.
Once again flimflamming viewers by claiming that a highly fictionalized story
was based on true events, Pierce’s The
Town That Dreaded Sundown dramatizes the reign of terror that a real-life
serial killer inflicted on a small Arkansas town during the 1940s. To give the
story momentum, Pierce and his frequent screenwriter, Earl E. Smith, focus on a
hard-driving Texas Ranger (Ben Johnson) who tries to capture the murderer. So far,
we’re off to a good start—and, indeed, many aspects of The Town That Dreaded Sundown seem promising at first glance. The
title is great, the poster is spooky, and the trope of a psycho appearing from
darkness wearing a sack over his head while he wields a pitchfork is memorably
disturbing. (A long sequence in which the so-called “Phantom Killer” stalks a
woman played by Gilligan’s Island
star Dawn Wells almost fulfills this gimmick’s promise.) Unfortunately,
Pierce’s usual problems with maintaining a consistent tone and sustaining
dramatic interest derail the film. Recalling the faux-newsreel style he used
for Boggy Creek, Pierce presents most
of the movie like a documentary, complete with narration and re-enactments, but
he occasionally abandons the style to showcase long stretches of straight
narrative. This doesn’t work. Furthermore, a comedy subplot about an inept
policeman (played by Pierce) is beyond tiresome, and the murder scenes are so
sadistic they feel out of character with the rest of the picture. In other
words, enjoy the poster and skip the movie, otherwise you’ll say goodbye to 86
minutes that could have been spent more constructively.
The Town That Dreaded Sundown: LAME
I wished I had read your advice before watching this garbage
ReplyDeleteThe drive-in experience of DREADED SUNDOWN in 1976 was a very different thing than watching the movie on a TV screen of today. For us, it delivered the goods, and we actually expected the murders to be as sadistic as they were depicted. The impression one got was not that the movie relished showing us the ugliness, but rather that we needed to know how much more grim an actual murder can be than the way it is depicted for example in a newspaper . What didnt work then at all was the ludicrous "comic" shenanigans of the deputy. I think the character's name was Slingshot or Buckshot or some such thing. At the time we figured he must have been a brother in law of the director or something. (Had no idea it was the director himself. Sheesh.) It was no classic then either - but it was what we wanted from our weekly Friday-night trips to the Fairview Drive-in.
ReplyDeleteYeah it's a pretty influential movie, despite it's shortcomings, it was just a typical aspect of pre 80's horror to incorporate goofy humor. It's got a good mysterious vibe to it
ReplyDelete