 |
 |
| Q1. How much of an overall impact do you think that "Last House on the Left" has had on the horror genre, especially during the early 1970's, when it was first released? I think that "Last House on the Left" had both an immediate as well as an after effect on the horror genre. While the film was disturbing in the extreme during it's initial release, it was the word of mouth, coupled with the budding careers of Wes Craven and Sean Cunningham, that drew people to the film in later years. That such a film was produced by the two men who would go on to produce a pair of the most famous (or infamous) horror movie franchises on the planet, is something that film buffs and scholars will mull over for many more years to come. Q2. What are your feelings towards the heavy violence and adult content that made the film so controversial in 1972? Do you agree with it? Do I agree with the violent and adult content? Well, to each his own they say, I neither agree with it nor do I disagree with it. It's simply there. I know there are cut versions of the movie, versions that take large cuts out of the scene where Krug carves his name into one woman's chest, and such things I don't necessarily need to see to be scared. Part of the allure of films such as "Poltergeist" and "Alien" were the things you didn't see. Suffice to say, "Last House on the Left" wouldn't benefit from such thrills (and I think the filmmakers knew that too), so they went for the extreme. The fact that the film received so much condemnation from critics, social organizations, and the like, would say to me that the film, at least in the eyes of the filmmakers, was a success. Q3. Many critics, and Wes Craven himself, state that "Last House" was based upon Ingrid Bergman's "The Virgin Spring". What are your feelings on this? Do you think that it's perfectly fine to take the formula of a drama and turn it into a horror movie? I think the story is what holds a movie together. Everything else, actors included, are set decoration. If you don't have a good story, you don't have a good movie. We've all seen good actors in shitty flicks. So it is okay to take an existing film's story and alter it? Well, if the genre fits... Q4. Do you class "Last House on the Left" as a pure exploitation movie, or as a conventional horror film? "Last House" is certainly an exploitation flick, whether it should be classified as such or not isn't really for me to say. It's a personal preference (though my copy does happen to sit on the shelf next to "I Spit on Your Grave"). ** ** "I Spit On Your Grave" was a controversial movie, that took it's inspiration from "Last House". Q5. Do you think that there is a chance that "Last House" will ever get a full British release? It has, after all, been banned in the country ever since 1972. No, I don't think "Last House" will ever get a full British release. The film, while garnering wide-spread cult success, would probably fail to draw a large enough audience to support a wide-spread re-release. And it's not the kind of film that lots of people would go and see. But that is what makes it a cult favourite. Q6. Finally, do you think that a film of it's nature should be released at all, in any format? Lots of films challenge the status quo. Whether or not we see them...that's a question for the MPAA, I guess. I was never censored as a child, myself. My father believed that if I didn't like something, I wouldn't watch it. And I'm happy to say that despite being raised on horror films (among other genres), I am a fully functional member of society. So to speak... The 'Last House on the Left UK Resource' thanks Ian Rogers for this exclusive interview. Contact Ian at: ian@plastic-iguana.com Or see his own 'Last House' shrine at: www.plastic-iguana.com |
| This interview was conducted with 'Last House' fan Ian Rogers. He is also a critic of film, most notably horror, with several web pages. |
 |
 |