What do you think?
Rate this book
The Official Splatter Movie Guide
This new book is a dream come true for splatter aficionados: a film-by-film guide to more than four hundred masterworks of blood and gore, arranged in a handy alphabetical format. 16 pages of photos.
145 pages, Paperback
First published February 1, 1992
11 people are currently reading
83 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews
June 15, 2020
Cinema-themed non-fiction from the 80's and 90's are some of my favorite pick-up-and-read books on my shelves, especially when they have to do with horror, exploitation, or just plain terrible movies. Now it's time to focus my attention on a new addition to my collection: John McCarty's The Official Splatter Movie Guide which, as the tagline explains, is filled with reviews of "more than 400 of the goriest, grossest, most outrageous movies ever made". It's a slim volume, clocking in at only 145 pages, but much of the celluloidal cancer McCarty covers isn't worth more than a couple paragraphs explaining where it all went wrong. Since four hundred reviews is a lot, even for a splatter connoisseur such as McCarty (who, several years earlier, coined the term "Splatter Movie" to describe a film which invests more heavily in corn syrup and red food dye than it does on the acting talent), he called in three friends for backup: John Brent, a former theater manager and gore hound; Ken Hanke, a guy who utterly adores Ken Russell's movies and who, in fact, wrote the book on Russell's oeuvre; and Dan Krogh, a man so entrenched in the field that he worked alongside Herschell Gordon Lewis on several of his movies, then wrote a book about the man's prodigious and violent output.
Together, these four Musketeers of Mayhem saddled up and rode forth into the valley of darkness (aka the local video rental palaces), where they did indeed rent, watch, and critique a ridiculous amount of movies in order to compile this guide to the greats and not-so-greats of the Splatter genre. That they got paid to do this only makes me more jealous. Then again, I was all of 11 years old when they were couch-potatoing their way into Splatter history, so I can see why they didn't invite me. Que sera sera.
* * * * *
Entries in The Official Splatter Movie Guide are arranged alphabetically by title, from Alien to Zombie Nightmare, with each entry including the company responsible for distributing it on video, the date of its release, running time, and a run-down of the director(s), writer(s), producer(s), and actors responsible for its creation. This information is followed by a short review, usually only a paragraph or two, which isn't meant to explain the story so much as it is to explain what on-screen atrocities the viewer can look forward to enjoying(?) should they pop in the tape. Films with multiple titles are given a main entry under the one it's best known by, with other alternate title entries pointing the reader to that entry. If the movie in question produced any sequels or tie-ins, these will be noted, along with the alternate titles. It's a very simple, very easy-to-navigate format which lends itself well to both cover-to-cover and pick-up-and-put-down reading styles.
McCarty doesn't mince words, and doesn't try to convince you to watch garbage, although those who can't get enough of terrible movies will find themselves drawn to these bottom-of-the-latrine concoctions like druggies to the local crack house. (Guilty as charged, your honor...). As an example, I provide his review for Amityville 3-D:
All of the reviewers write with considerable wit, turning phrases the way only die-hard word churners can, and make an effort to connect the dots for those less in the know -- stuff like "Director A was also Producer B on Movie X, and later wrote Movie Y for Director C". Valuable information back then, and even today to a certain extent, but redundant in a world where everyone on the planet can access IMDB on his or her smart phone.
One thing it's important to remember when taking in a book like this is that the writers are offering up their opinions, and those are tied to not just plot and acting, but also how much viscera gets dredged up for the unblinking lens of the camera. The reviewers all have their own feelings on directors, actors, sub-classes, and sub-sub-classes of Splatter, and I guarantee you'll find yourself disagreeing with all of them at one point or another. McCarty seems especially non-enamored with Lucio Fulci, Mario Bava, Dario Argento, Italy's most well-known and prolific gorehound directors, for instance, giving less-than-favorable reviews to films like The Beyond, Deep Red, and Suspiria. Surprisingly though, he doesn't seem to have issues with the likes of Deodato's Cannibal Holocaust or Umberto Lenzi's Make Them Die Slowly, which are obviously violent enough to satisfy any Splatter maniac regardless of dubbing issues or sub-par acting. But despite his personal feelings on the rest of his output, he praises Fulci in his review of Zombie, saying he (Fulci) "really knows what the genre is all about" and "can always be relied on to dish out the gore with eye-popping virtuosity".
On the other hand, McCarty and Co. all pen their share of mis-fires which have not held up at all: calling The Terminator an Alien clone (what?), castigating Aliens for being yawn-inducing (beg pardon?), and describing An American Werewolf in London as "hollow, pointless, and sleazy" (HUH?!) may have you questioning the writers' pedigrees. Again, remember these are ultimately opinions, and thirty-year-old ones at that. While it's easy to find fault with any critical review, it's important to realize that more often than not, these guys nail their targets like Jason with a speargun, and they aren't afraid to geek out over some especially well-produced scenes of bodily violence, nor revel in the bargain-basement, willing-to-do-anything-for-a-paycheck antics of folks like Cameron Mitchell, Linda Blair, and John Carradine. In other words: they like what they like, and if they skewer one of your sacred cows, don't worry because you probably hate something they loved, and will have added a hundred titles to your Letterboxd queue by the time you finished reading it.
The book isn't all text, either. McCarty gathered up three separate sections for pictures which, while only in black and white, consist of everything from movie poster artwork to the kind of "hell if I know what's going on" images you'd expect to see pulled from the pages of Fangoria.
Finally, a word about spoilers: None of the reviewers cares about spoiling the entire movie in his reviews without any warning. Normally I find this behavior atrocious, but the times they do it, the movies in question both A) absolutely deserve it, and B) usually gain from having their plots laid bare. We aren't talking about simple recitations of the story, so McCarty and his band of cinematic savages typically reserve their spoilers for special effects shots to watch for. And honestly, explaining who does what to whom only made me want to see some of these flicks even more, if only to enjoy the insanity of knowing what's coming. They don't give away the plot of every movie (I'd say maybe only 5% of the entries spoil anything even remotely important, like the identity of the killer before the big reveal, or who survives to the end), but it does happen often enough to warrant mention.
All told, The Official Splatter Movie Guide belongs on the shelf of anyone even remotely interested in that period of cinema stretching from about 1973 - 1989 when Splatter movies were at their peak, drawing audiences in droves with their controversial effects, each subsequent one attempting to up the ante and outdo previous efforts. It was so successful, in fact, that McCarty followed it up with a bigger, longer, bloodier sequel three years later, which was oh-so-smartly titled The Official Splatter Movie Guide Vol. II, which looked at several hundred more films (from the shockumentary Africa: Blood & Guts to the comically inept Jesus Franco-helmed Zombie Lake) made since the publication of the first book or simply left out due to time constraints, and which I'll probably write about later. You've been warned. Otherwise, I have no problem recommending this guide to horror hounds and blood beasts everywhere.
Five hacked-off limbs out of five!
Together, these four Musketeers of Mayhem saddled up and rode forth into the valley of darkness (aka the local video rental palaces), where they did indeed rent, watch, and critique a ridiculous amount of movies in order to compile this guide to the greats and not-so-greats of the Splatter genre. That they got paid to do this only makes me more jealous. Then again, I was all of 11 years old when they were couch-potatoing their way into Splatter history, so I can see why they didn't invite me. Que sera sera.
* * * * *
Entries in The Official Splatter Movie Guide are arranged alphabetically by title, from Alien to Zombie Nightmare, with each entry including the company responsible for distributing it on video, the date of its release, running time, and a run-down of the director(s), writer(s), producer(s), and actors responsible for its creation. This information is followed by a short review, usually only a paragraph or two, which isn't meant to explain the story so much as it is to explain what on-screen atrocities the viewer can look forward to enjoying(?) should they pop in the tape. Films with multiple titles are given a main entry under the one it's best known by, with other alternate title entries pointing the reader to that entry. If the movie in question produced any sequels or tie-ins, these will be noted, along with the alternate titles. It's a very simple, very easy-to-navigate format which lends itself well to both cover-to-cover and pick-up-and-put-down reading styles.
McCarty doesn't mince words, and doesn't try to convince you to watch garbage, although those who can't get enough of terrible movies will find themselves drawn to these bottom-of-the-latrine concoctions like druggies to the local crack house. (Guilty as charged, your honor...). As an example, I provide his review for Amityville 3-D:
Investigative reporter [Tony] Roberts moves into Long Island's most famous haunted house (the purchase price by now must be practically nil judging by the speed with which Roberts closes the deal) to debunk the place's reputation for paranormal goings-on. [Candy] Clark is his photographer's assistant, who signs on to capture snapshots of whatever is or is not present in the house. Not as gory as the second film, or as slimy as the first, but full of effects nonetheless -- mostly of hideous demons leaping out of the screen, courtesy of 3-D. Without the 3-D, however, this last entry in the Amityville saga (thus far anyway) is a must-miss.
All of the reviewers write with considerable wit, turning phrases the way only die-hard word churners can, and make an effort to connect the dots for those less in the know -- stuff like "Director A was also Producer B on Movie X, and later wrote Movie Y for Director C". Valuable information back then, and even today to a certain extent, but redundant in a world where everyone on the planet can access IMDB on his or her smart phone.
One thing it's important to remember when taking in a book like this is that the writers are offering up their opinions, and those are tied to not just plot and acting, but also how much viscera gets dredged up for the unblinking lens of the camera. The reviewers all have their own feelings on directors, actors, sub-classes, and sub-sub-classes of Splatter, and I guarantee you'll find yourself disagreeing with all of them at one point or another. McCarty seems especially non-enamored with Lucio Fulci, Mario Bava, Dario Argento, Italy's most well-known and prolific gorehound directors, for instance, giving less-than-favorable reviews to films like The Beyond, Deep Red, and Suspiria. Surprisingly though, he doesn't seem to have issues with the likes of Deodato's Cannibal Holocaust or Umberto Lenzi's Make Them Die Slowly, which are obviously violent enough to satisfy any Splatter maniac regardless of dubbing issues or sub-par acting. But despite his personal feelings on the rest of his output, he praises Fulci in his review of Zombie, saying he (Fulci) "really knows what the genre is all about" and "can always be relied on to dish out the gore with eye-popping virtuosity".
On the other hand, McCarty and Co. all pen their share of mis-fires which have not held up at all: calling The Terminator an Alien clone (what?), castigating Aliens for being yawn-inducing (beg pardon?), and describing An American Werewolf in London as "hollow, pointless, and sleazy" (HUH?!) may have you questioning the writers' pedigrees. Again, remember these are ultimately opinions, and thirty-year-old ones at that. While it's easy to find fault with any critical review, it's important to realize that more often than not, these guys nail their targets like Jason with a speargun, and they aren't afraid to geek out over some especially well-produced scenes of bodily violence, nor revel in the bargain-basement, willing-to-do-anything-for-a-paycheck antics of folks like Cameron Mitchell, Linda Blair, and John Carradine. In other words: they like what they like, and if they skewer one of your sacred cows, don't worry because you probably hate something they loved, and will have added a hundred titles to your Letterboxd queue by the time you finished reading it.
The book isn't all text, either. McCarty gathered up three separate sections for pictures which, while only in black and white, consist of everything from movie poster artwork to the kind of "hell if I know what's going on" images you'd expect to see pulled from the pages of Fangoria.
Finally, a word about spoilers: None of the reviewers cares about spoiling the entire movie in his reviews without any warning. Normally I find this behavior atrocious, but the times they do it, the movies in question both A) absolutely deserve it, and B) usually gain from having their plots laid bare. We aren't talking about simple recitations of the story, so McCarty and his band of cinematic savages typically reserve their spoilers for special effects shots to watch for. And honestly, explaining who does what to whom only made me want to see some of these flicks even more, if only to enjoy the insanity of knowing what's coming. They don't give away the plot of every movie (I'd say maybe only 5% of the entries spoil anything even remotely important, like the identity of the killer before the big reveal, or who survives to the end), but it does happen often enough to warrant mention.
All told, The Official Splatter Movie Guide belongs on the shelf of anyone even remotely interested in that period of cinema stretching from about 1973 - 1989 when Splatter movies were at their peak, drawing audiences in droves with their controversial effects, each subsequent one attempting to up the ante and outdo previous efforts. It was so successful, in fact, that McCarty followed it up with a bigger, longer, bloodier sequel three years later, which was oh-so-smartly titled The Official Splatter Movie Guide Vol. II, which looked at several hundred more films (from the shockumentary Africa: Blood & Guts to the comically inept Jesus Franco-helmed Zombie Lake) made since the publication of the first book or simply left out due to time constraints, and which I'll probably write about later. You've been warned. Otherwise, I have no problem recommending this guide to horror hounds and blood beasts everywhere.
Five hacked-off limbs out of five!
September 1, 2013
Not sure what makes this official but i guess it sounds good! This consists of short capsule type reviews of gore movies. While it is obviously well out of date, it ticks most of the boxes on movies up to the late 80's. Obviously there will always be disagreements on what is a good gore movie as one mans poison is another's blood soaked extravaganza. Here's a couple of my bugbears: Fulci's The Beyond is reviewed but there is no mention of the excellent gore FX. Evil Dead 2 rated as superior to Numero uno - technically yes but for splatter the original wins hands down, jeez, the second is a comedy not a horror film!! And finally The Thing is pretty much dismissed apart from the FX (which in fairness are highly praised).
Back in '89 the internet was not an option to check out how good or otherwise a film was so getting a book with so many reviews crammed in was a godsend for splatter fans. So even though i do not agree with all the reviews, this is still a worthwhile addition to any gore fans library.
Back in '89 the internet was not an option to check out how good or otherwise a film was so getting a book with so many reviews crammed in was a godsend for splatter fans. So even though i do not agree with all the reviews, this is still a worthwhile addition to any gore fans library.
December 11, 2007
For fans of horror movies
July 11, 2011
simply awesome. a comprehensive guide to splatter movies! a+
Displaying 1 - 4 of 4 reviews