Shock Treatment

Reviewed By K-Dog
Posted 02/26/01 19:46:03

"This is one of those films you will only love if you loved as a kid"
5 stars (Awesome)

Many a year ago a bald skinny weirdo freak of a man, lets call him 'Richie' wrote a musical which became a complete phenomenon. Now whether you love or loathe the 'Rocky Horror Show', you have to admit that it is freakishly popular for many generations. As is the film adaption of that show. But fast forward 6 years on from the film to 1981. A time when big hair and big jumpers were cool, where looking like a plastic dildo meant something. In this mystical time of shameless tack, the little skinny baldy Richie released another musical onto us, but a sequel to the Rocky Horror Picture Show. It sunk fast. Faster than a whore on a rich man. But what was it like?

Well, for once a sequel that is completely different to the original. You know the way the Police Academy films tried to inject new life into the sequels by changing the settings? Well in the end they were still Police Academy movies. Here instead of a rocky horror 2, the skinny baldy man has taken a few characters from the original film and moved them into new surroundings, with a new style, and a new flavour.

But as most fans of the 'Rocky Horror Show' are obsessive compulsive sexually non denominational freaks, they hated it. It had none of the sleaze of the first film. Maybe that's why it flopped everywhere. Richie blamed the failure on the director Jim Sharman. But is this fair? Can it really chug that muck cock as people say? Well I stick by my opening statement. I love this film to death, but if I saw it for the first time today it would suck. Not 'Unbreakable' suck. But at least 'Charlies Angels' suck. Heres why readers;

You see Richie kept the things in this sequal that nobody cared for. Brad and Janet were basically the expendable plot characters that were not interesting in the original. No one gave two salty squirts about them. It was the inhabitants of the castle that were loved. So not following the tranny vampy aliens would automatically lose a lot of the audience. And the genius of having a real narrator is gone, again some audience would be lost. But here the skinny baldy man obviously wanted to see what would happen to Brad and Janet after the castle flew away. Good enough idea, but one thing changed that people hated. He moved the time they were in, 1950's to 1980's. So instead of a parody of 1950's sci-fi it turns to a parody of 1980's television. Which as we know is the most embarrassing time in television history. This made a lot of the original fans nervous, and the rest of them shit with rage.

Also Richie changed the actors of Brad and Janet. Instead of Susan Sarandon and Barry Bostwick, there is Cliff De Young and Jessica Harper in the roles. But the good thing is they are better singers and actors than their predecessors. Also a few familiar faces from the original return as new characters - Little Nell from Columbia to a nurse, Charles Grey from Narrator to Judge Oliver North, Richard O Brien and Patricia Quinn from the incestuous Riff-Raff and Magenta to the incestuous Dr Nation & Cosmo McKinley. (Jesus Cock! Richie you have one hell of a sister complex!) So with the inclusion of old faces some fans were hoping all was not lost. The general cast of this is a lot bigger as well, Add new characters from Rik Mayall, Barry Humphries, Ruby Wax etc.. and you would think that a new audience could be won, and the old audience won over. But everyone hated it. Hated it like rug burns.

The story behind the sequel is basically this, Brad and Janets hometown of Denton is a town obsessed by the local TV station, and spend all there time there, so in effect their lives is the station. Brad and Janets relationship meanwhile is failing, so through circumstance they get put on a gameshow, and Brad gets taken to a mental home (makes more sense when you see it), and Janet gets touted as the next best thing, while the stations new sponsor schemes. Now this story is very original and unlike anything I have seen. Like the Rocky Horror Show, Richie delivered something that is completely innovative plotwise. The script is like the original - wooden but passable as being a camp piss take. The songs are solid enough but lack any sparkle of the original, this is probably because they sound too 80's. (which is a bad thing) Whereas the original's songs were retro singalong rock and roll. (which will always please an audience). Here the songs are less singable and less sure of themselves. The acting also is something that lacks much sparkle. Tim Curry in the original was wonderful as was the rest of the cast. Here the actors are OK but are not as cool. It's not anyones fault except Richie, he didn't include enough extravagance.

One thing that people really hate about the film is it's look. It is SO early '80's. I mean bright orange/red is the main colour and everything has the feel of cheese. Not the cheddar sturdy kind. But the rocquefort smelly slimy kind. And as most people despise '80s this is baaaaaad.

As a whole the film is so strange it loses most viewers early on. Most people I have shown it to ask if they can see something else. Anything else. One person even started chewing off their arm cos they were so bored. But that's another story.

As a sequal to the Rocky Horror Picture Show, it loses the fans because it is so unlike the first, and as a film in the year 2001, it is just a strange little thing that can only be called cult 80's nostalgia.

Now although this is one of my favourite films, it is only because I grew up on it. I remember being 7 and seeing it in the cinema in '82. Ever since then I have loved it.

So I would not recommend this to anyone as people hate it. But fuck you all, I love it!! so top marks all around!! (This comes from a reviewer who knows all the words to MMM Bop)

© Copyright HBS Entertainment, Inc.