Return to Horror High (1987) from Tuna and Johnny Web (Uncle Scoopy; Greg Wroblewski)

Tuna's comments in white: 

Return to Horror High (1987) is probably intended as a comedy parody of teen slasher films, but is too bad to work on even that level. As the film opens, we are led to believe that a movie crew has been slaughtered filming the story of a massacre that occurred in the same High School years before.

Then we spend a confusing  95 minutes switching between flashbacks of the original crime, making of the film, the film being filmed, and the present investigation. Most of what we learn ends up not being true. I see my share of films, and have some skill in following them, and this one had me  wondering which time period we were seeing about half of the time. 


There was some nudity, including a couple of unknowns, and Breasts from Darcy De Moss and Joy Heston. 
Scoopy's comments in yellow:

I agree completely. It goes off on tangents which may be part of the film they are making, or the present, or the past. The tangents are not only confusing,  but very long - long enough to make you forget the rest of the story. Amazingly garbled movie. Tries to be funny, tries to be scary. Fails miserably at whatever it attempts.

The film-within-this-film is about a series of unsolved murders, and it is being filmed in the same place where the murders occurred. Remember, the killer was never found. Tell you anything? I know it sounds a lot like the Scream films, but it just isn't worth your time.

DVD info from Amazon.

  • no widescreen

  • dark and blurry

  • no features

I enjoyed seeing a very young George Clooney (above) as the first victim in the "present", and I enjoyed the first five minutes, in which Alex Rocco was pretty much the only main character - a sleazy, insincere, penny-pinching producer. After those first five minutes, it was as bad as a movie can be. Look for many washed-up TV actors in various parts. My favorite was Vince Edwards. I suppose this marked the only film in which famous TV doctors Clooney and Edwards worked together, given that Clooney ruled the virtual hospitals in the late 90's, and Edwards in the early 60's. 

The Critics Vote

  • no major reviews

The People Vote ...

  • With their votes ... IMDB summary: IMDb voters score it 3.1 
IMDb guideline: 7.5 usually indicates a level of excellence, about like three and a half stars from the critics. 6.0 usually indicates lukewarm watchability, about like two and a half stars from the critics. The fives are generally not worthwhile unless they are really your kind of material, about like two stars from the critics. Films under five are generally awful even if you like that kind of film, equivalent to about one and a half stars from the critics or less, depending on just how far below five the rating is.

My own guideline: A means the movie is so good it will appeal to you even if you hate the genre. B means the movie is not good enough to win you over if you hate the genre, but is good enough to do so if you have an open mind about this type of film. C means it will only appeal to genre addicts, and has no crossover appeal. D means you'll hate it even if you like the genre. E means that you'll hate it even if you love the genre. F means that the film is not only unappealing across-the-board, but technically inept as well.

Based on this description, this film is a well-deserved F. (Scoopy adds: I echo that. Completely incomprehensible after a fairly good first five minutes.)

Return to the Movie House home page