Customer Reviews

The Official Splatter Movie Guide

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(3)

 

 

Of the few sample pages I read, it seems there are many faults within this book. First of all, the reviews are short and the writing lacks descriptive quality. He spends too much time on obscure films from the 60's and 70's with little or no gore and doesn't spend enough time on the ground breaking films of the genre. He called "An American Werewolf in London" "hollow, pointless and sleazy" that in my opinion is a horrible review of a great film, and very misleading. He didn't write much on why he felt that way about the movie, and I'm sure potential viewers will be lost because of that review. What a shame. This guy's opinion isn't more important than anyone else's, and I think the book should be renamed as "A bunch of unofficial opinions, not a guide at all". Then his review of the Beyond was pretty bad too. He said Fulci was "far from original"... please! Fulci was brilliant, and the Beyond is a gore masterpiece. Who is John McCarty trying to fool? To tell you the truth, this book is a joke. Another major complaint is that there is no ratings given for the movies. Not even a 4 or 5 star rating. His comments aren't enough to go on in most cases to know what movies are worth seeing. Gorehounds beware! I recommend Chas Balun's "Gore Score 2001: The Splatter Years" if you want to hear some real reviews by someone who truly appreciates horror/splatter movies and knows all the good flicks, even foreign films I'm sure McCarty hasn't even heard of. Plus he actually uses a rating system (imagine that!) 1-5 skulls for the overall movie and 1-10 on the splatter meter for people who want to know how much blood is spilled. Chas gives it to you straight, he covers all the good stuff! Chas Balun is a fan and a critic, where McCarty seems to be just a critic, and a snob at that. The Official Splatter Movie Guide is extremely outdated (1989) leaves out monumental films, disrespects classics, and is written amateurishly. Take my advice and get
"Gore Score 2001" you'll be much better off, trust me.

I liked this book more than 'blitzkreig', but not much more. On the plus side it has some, admittedly very short, reviews on some 400 horror films, and is therefore useful as a basic reference work, but, having also read McCarty's earlier book on Splatter Movies, I cannot say I really agree with his opinions about alot of the films in question. At the risk of alienating US horror films fans, McCarty shows a clear bias towards American horror films at the expense of European horror film directors. Almost every Argento film ever made is noted as being 'incoherent', yet McCarty quite happily sings the praises of Tobe Hooper (who only made one fairly decent film, and that was overrated!) and lists the merits of such films as the Nightmare on Elm Street/Friday the 13th franchise movies. Whatever you think of the likes of Argento, Fulci et al, their films are often nastier, bloodier and considerably more stylish than the majority of lame American 'slasher' films. Indeed, where would the likes of Friday the 13th have been without Mario Bava's 'Bay of Blood' for example. McCarty has strong views on what constitutes a good horror film and who the 'giants' of the genre are. So do I, but my opinions differ considerably from those of McCarty.

Of the few sample pages I read, it seems there are many faults within this book. First of all, the reviews are short and the writing lacks descriptive quality. He spends too much time on obscure films from the 60's and 70's with little or no gore and doesn't spend enough time on the ground breaking films of the genre. He called "An American Werewolf in London" "hollow, pointless and sleazy" that in my opinion is a horrible review of a great film, and very misleading. He didn't write much on why he felt that way about the movie, and I'm sure potential viewers will be lost because of that review. What a shame. This guy's opinion isn't more important than anyone else's, and I think the book should be renamed as "A bunch of unofficial opinions, not a guide at all". Then his review of the Beyond was pretty bad too. He said Fulci was "far from original"... please! Fulci was brilliant, and the Beyond is a gore masterpiece. Who is John McCarty trying to fool? To tell you the truth, this book is a joke. Another major complaint is that there is no ratings given for the movies. Not even a 4 or 5 star rating. His comments aren't enough to go on in most cases to know what movies are worth seeing. Gorehounds beware! I recommend Chas Balun's "Gore Score 2001: The Splatter Years" if you want to hear some real reviews by someone who truly appreciates horror/splatter movies and knows all the good flicks, even foreign films I'm sure McCarty hasn't even heard of. Plus he actually uses a rating system (imagine that!) 1-5 skulls for the overall movie and 1-10 on the splatter meter for people who want to know how much blood is spilled. Chas gives it to you straight, he covers all the good stuff! Lucio Fulci even called Chas Balun "the King of splatter films!" Chas is a fan and a critic, where McCarty seems to be just a critic, and a snob at that (huge difference). The Official Splatter Movie Guide is extremely outdated (1989) leaves out monumental films, dis-respects classics, and is written amateurishly. Take my advice and get
"Gore Score 2001" you'll be much better off, trust me.

Okay, people seem to be giving less than fair reviews of this book. I have this one as well as the second one and they are both VERY GOOD review guides to have. I find both volumes to be very informative and a nice "slice" (yes, pun intended) of horror cinema.

I enjoyed both books in the Official Splatter Movie Guide series - I urge any fan of this type of film to purchase both of them. I have one argument, however, as to whether McCarty truly coined the term "Splatter" or helped it become more genre-fied. In all fairness to him, he did say George Romero had mentioned the term on one occasion - but claims he is the coiner... I own a poster from 1982 - of a 1981 film called Mardi Gras Massacre. On this poster, it reads in red print - American Splatter Movie (and "Splatter Movie" is dripping blood). This is a couple of years before his first book, Splatter Movies: Breaking the Last Taboo of the Screen. This single shred of historical evidence is pretty powerful against a statement like that. Please advise.

>John McCarty Kindly Replied:

The 1984 edition of my book SPLATTER MOVIES to which the reviewer refers was actually an expanded and updated reprint (by St. Martin's Press) of the first edition of that book, published by FantaCo Enterprises in 1980 that was heavily promoted in Fangoria magazine. The film "Mardi Gras Massacre" to which the reviewer refers came out afterward. The FantaCo edition in turn was was spawned by a cover article titled "Splatter Movies" that I wrote for a local alternatrive newspaper upon the release of the first "Friday the 13th" film, in 1980. Judge for yourself how much or how little I had to do with "coining" the term.

This book, essentially, is like expensive toilet paper. John McCarty is not an expert, and this book merely steals information directly off the boxes of old 80's video releases of each movie "reviewed" between the covers.

For anyone else who was genuinely involved in the 1980's home video boom, and who lurched about the aisles of every video store in your part of the country while salivating for horror films, you will know exactly what I mean. All of the so-called informative reviews and descriptions are lifted word for word off the original video release boxes, wrong information and everything. Incorrect summaries, wrong actor lists, wrong release dates, fudged run times, phony director names, you name it; Mr McCarty pulls all of that and splatters this erroneous and useless information on the pages of his book for the unwitting to flourish upon.

On the rare occasion when he decides to step bravely out of this protective state of copy-right infringement and reveal his personal opinion of a movie, it simply displays his sheep's brain. Another reviewer touched upon that fact, and to elaborate, McCarty seems to feel that all the movies which genuinely qualify as "splatter flicks" are boring and unoriginal, and in return he gives credit to directors who have achieved the most fame in the US for films that aren't even gory. Duh. Where on earth did he find the courage to use the name "splatter movie guide" for this misleading collection of ignorant declarations? For an even a more obscure reference towards his foolishness, I want to bring up the movie BLUE MONKEY which he declares is boring, apart from the title having no bearing on the movie itself. If he had actually watched the movie, he would have caught a main character describing the beastly star of the film as a "blue monkey," and hence the name was given genesis. Could Mr. McCarty simply be a poseur, parading about the scene like a wart on the tip of a witch's nose?? I believe this to be the proper assessment.

The people giving this book good reviews are simply giving evidence to their youth, and lack of knowledge on the subject matter. This is not their fault, they simply don't know any better, at least not yet. Censorship in the 80's is a thing they will never fully understand thanks to the internet and uncut dvd releases of this bizarre world we currently live in, but this censorship was the reason for directors using aliases and phony actor names to make a product appear other than what it was, thus selling it to a given market. John McCarty should know this, and he should have provided proper information on the movies reviewed in his book, but this is not the case. The whole entire book is a wretched heap of misinformation, probably collected on a notebook and scrap papers during his miserable dateless existence. This book is a waste of time and deserves no glory.

Being a huge gore fan i found this book great! I even discovered some gory movies that I didn't even know existed! The photos aren't that great, but they do help illustrate the book. Definetely worth the price!