User reviews

Wes Cravens' "Shocker" is often one of the more derided in the directors' career, but in this own reviewers' humble opinion, it still manages to be pretty entertaining, even as it gets awfully silly and keeps wavering between a serious, sombre tone and an insane, over the top one. It doesn't help that it's too obvious that Craven was trying to create another Freddy Krueger in the form of raving maniac Horace Pinker, a savage psychopath played to foaming-at-the-mouth perfection by Mitch Pileggi, eventually to become better known for playing Skinner on 'The X-Files'.

Pinker's on the loose, slaughtering whole families, but opposing him is college football star Jonathan Parker (a remarkably sincere Peter Berg), a nice guy who was raised by a police lieutenant (Michael Murphy). Jonathan and Horace, who are connected in a way that the younger man doesn't anticipate, are also psychically linked, and Jonathan is able to give the cops his name and place of business and before too long the killer is caught and executed.

But the story doesn't end there, as Pinker, in league with Satan, "survives" the electric chair and lives on to overtake various unlucky people and control their bodies, including, in the movies' most memorable sequence, a little girl. How can one hold in their laughter watching this blonde haired moppet curse like a sailor, and try to operate a bulldozer?

Ultimately, the movie is a little too absurd for its own good, but damn if it doesn't have some good atmosphere, show off some amusing ideas, and go overboard on the bloodshed. One particular murder scene is just drenched in the red stuff. One of the methods used to combat Horace is pure corn, involving Jonathans' love for girlfriend Alison (Camille Cooper) and an all-important locket. The best stuff is the wonderfully ridiculous climax in which a rampaging Horace and Jonathan run amok through TV programming (they end up in an episode of 'Leave it to Beaver' where Jonathan pleads for the Beavers' help). This does show some invention, and the special effects are effectively cheesy. (One has to love the "You got it, baby!" moment.)

The cast is extremely game throughout this thing; also popping up are Ted Raimi as an assistant coach, Vincent Guastaferro ("Jason Lives: Friday the 13th Part VI") as a victimized cop, Heather Langenkamp in a tiny, non-speaking cameo as a murder victim, Richard Brooks ('Law and Order') as football player Rhino, Ernie Lively as the warden, rock guitarist Kane Roberts also doing the cameo thing as a road worker, and Cravens' kids Jessica and Jonathan in bits. The heavy metal soundtrack adds to the fun.

Overall, this may not be something this reviewer would necessarily consider "good", but it's still something of a hoot, and may keep some people watching out of sheer disbelief.

Six out of 10.

A young man (Peter Berg) dreams of a killer (Mitch Pileggi)... and the dream is all too real, with his mother and sister left dead in the morning. But that is just the beginning. Once captured and executed, the story is not over but only starts anew!

We start with a shape-shifting story inspired by "The Thing" and Jack Sholder's "The Hidden". Craven even borrowed a shot from "Midnight Run" of all places. Then add in executive producer Shep Gordon (Alice Cooper's agent), which caused the use of Cooper's "No More Mr. Nice Guy", a song that became the film's tagline. Even Cooper's guitarist has a cameo as a construction worker.

Peter Berg makes a strong lead, acting as the poor man's Christian Slater. This was one of his earliest roles, having started in the business as a production assistant. Today (2015), he has become a wildly successful actor, director and producer, most notably on "Friday Night Lights". Mitch Pileggi is also excellent, though a bit campy, and it is nice to see him in a tougher, darker role than FBI Director Skinner.

Mike Mayo says, "Wes Craven creates a fierce satire on television and the way the medium distorts our view of reality." Not sure I agree. If this is a "fierce satire" of anything, it is hidden well. I did not see a critique of television or the media in here at all, and Craven does not make a point of saying this was intended.

Mayo continues, saying, "the film is just another derivative exercise in obvious special effects, borrowing liberally from Craven's own work", including the fact Pinker "becomes a channel-surfing Freddy Krueger who returns to attack his enemies." This is absolutely true... Craven himself, in his audio commentary, notes just how similar "Shocker" and "Elm Street" are in theme.

Both Timothy Leary and Ted Raimi show up, so that's a plus. Even Wes Craven's daughter has a slight cameo. Worth singling out is stuntman Dane Farwell (who worked with Craven since "Serpent and the Rainbow"), who takes a few beatings, including running head first into a pole at full speed. Farwell doubled for Bill Paxton in "Rainbow", and had previously doubled him in "Spaceballs". Indeed, Peter Berg and Bill Paxton are physically similar in some ways.

The special effects had to be done in the last two weeks of post-production, which ate up much of the profits, after the original effects plan fell through. This last minute rush may explain any shortcomings. Craven himself says he can still see outlines that should not be visible. We also have an MPAA-required 13 cuts, which cut down on some of the darker moments (including the electrocution itself.)

If you happen to be one of those who contemplate movies too deeply, you can look for the intentional use of water in the film as a Freudian symbol, saying (among other things) that there is more hidden beyond the surface. Or the "father issues" Craven tried to present in regards to the poor relationship he had with his own father. Or, on the lighter side, you can ponder the legacy of John Tesh -- only a local TV reporter at the time (1989), but quickly catapulted to national stardom... was it this film?

Wes Craven fans will need to see this one, but may want to keep their expectations a little lower. Some parts, such as the possessed girl, are entertaining. But budget issues, special effect limitations, and a cheesy sense of humor make this much more a cult film than one of Craven's best. (For those who like a little horror cheese with their beer, this may actually be a great pick.)

Now this was a weird idea; a serial killer (Mitch Pileggi, The X-Files) that feeds off electricity.

His nemesis was a high school boy (Peter Berg, Collateral, Cop Land) who hit a goalpost and had dreams about his kills - including his own family and girlfriend (Camille Cooper). Wow!

The body count rose as the killer had to move from body to body. Then comes the final battle, which I imagine would not ever be seen again as they chased through TV show after TV show. It was something to see.

This was more action flick than horror, although it did have it's share of blood and gore.

The stage curtains open ...

I was 21 years old when this movie was released in 1989, which is the perfect age to watch it at for the first time. I was naive enough to suspend disbelief and old enough for its gory and violent scenes. Perfect age. "Shocker", directed by Wes Craven, is simply put, a chaotic, full-throttle, horror/action movie - filmed with reckless abandon, heavy metal music, and with the heart of an adolescent. This is one crazy, busy film - and I loved every second of it!

The opening frames has Wes Craven written all over them. The similarities between this movie's opening frames and the original Elm Street's opening frames are remarkable. In fact, the dream sequences and the vibes from Wes Craven's earlier works, scream his presence in this movie. We follow the harrowing events of Jonathan Parker as he tracks down a serial killer named Horace Pinker, with whom he seems to share some sort of telepathic bond to. With everyone around him affected and impacted, Jonathan must be willing to put aside everything he knows is real and enter into Pinker's electrifying, nightmarish world.

This movie is so OUT there, and is so absurd, that one can really only love it for two reasons: sheer entertainment, or sentimental value. For me, it's both. Our villain, Pinker, has a bad knee, therefore, he half-limps and half-drags his left leg wherever he goes. As he jumps from body to body, apparently they inherit his physical properties too, because they all have that same limp. We also witness Pinker making a deal with what looks to be a pagan electricity god, I guess, just before his date with the electric chair - enabling him to jump in and out of electrical appliances as well. See what I mean? Complete chaos.

My favorite scene, and the one that really made it for me, was in the park when Pinker is jumping from body to body and he controls the body of a little girl, and she just turns nasty mean. I loved it. I give this movie a recommend at 7 stars out of 10. It isn't Craven's best work, nowhere near it actually, but what a fun ride! If you haven't seen it yet, then you are in for a shocking experience. (Sorry, I couldn't resist).

I first saw this in the early 90s on a vhs n somehow found it to be entertaining but aft revisiting recently I am truly shocked. The film starts well with a serial killer dozing off everyone who comes in his way but then it became very tedious. The worst is the television trapped scene. The scene where our lead actor jumps into a lake to search for a chain n pendant n voila, without any effort he finds it. As viewers we ain't shown the underwater scene. The soul jumping from one person to another is done creepily n very well in Denzel Washington's Fallen. Generous with 4 cos of the lip biting or sortuva lip pulling scene. Found it funny n not at all scary.

If you're going to release a film called 'Shocker', you're taking a big risk as saying that its rubbish becomes easy, and for Wes Craven; it's a risk that didn't pay off. Craven has had a number of deserving successes before he made this shocker, with films like The Last House on the Left and A Nightmare on Elm Street, but this film represents a huge hole in the man's list of directorial credits. Personally, I don't rate Craven too highly anyway; and that's mostly because of films like this. The director has certainly made a lot more rubbish than he has stuff worth seeing, and it's unfortunate that a career which started off so promisingly ended up making bottom of the barrel stuff. Anyway, the plot is actually rather promising and it follows a similar idea to the one that made A Nightmare on Elm Street such a success. The film features a homicidal repairman who enjoys killing people right up to when he is caught by police. Naturally, he sentenced to death by electric chair; but the authorities didn't count on him making a bargain with Satan, and after a silly sequence involving a TV - our killer is back!

Perhaps the most annoying thing about this film is the running time. For a film with a retarded plot like this, it's unnecessarily long and while Craven does have a few good ideas; there's not nearly enough to fill nigh on two hours. After the stupid scene where the killer electrocutes himself, I honestly didn't think I'd make it all the way to the end; but the film does pick up a little after that with a body swapping sequence that, while derivative of several other films, actually works quite well. That part of the film lasts for about twenty minutes, and once it's over we're back to tedium. The final sequence, which is fitting, is also ridiculous as our two major characters find themselves in a TV. This part of the film features movies such as James Whale's classic Frankenstein, but it's a bit too silly and while the film is tongue in cheek all the way through; it just doesn't work. All this nonsense is topped off by a silly script that neither manages to build characters or provide entertaining dialogue and side-plots such as the one revolving around the ghost of the lead character's girlfriend provide nothing in the way of interest. Overall, I highly recommend skipping this film.

I loved this very different slasher, i also loved the fact the movie could have ended early if he just grabbed the television remote, straight 80's cheese and i'm all for it!

Shocker (1989) is a master of horror Wes Craven's underrated excellent horror flick, that I do believe is a classic and I love it to death! It is my third favorite Wes Craven's horror flick. This movie is a memories on my childhood, I grew up watching this movie as a kid. The same thing that was with the Chinese director John Woo by me, I had no idea who was Wes Craven or that it was directed by him. The only movie I memorized by Wes was Scream, which become my favorite film when I was 15 years old, I watched Scream with my mom and even my mom liked Scream. I found out a year later about this film Shocker, but version I had on VHS was extremely horrible lousy picture quality and awful audio. The subtitles were extreme lousy dubbed so I couldn't watch this film. Now recently I got this film on Blu-ray and I really had a blast watching this horror film!

A Nightmare on Elm Street and New Nightmare are my favorite Wes Craven's horror films that I love to death and Shocker is my third favorite horror film is my number 3 Wes Craven's slasher horror flick, that I love to death! This amazing stylish horror film from the late 80's is about a diabolical mass murderer who harness electricity for unimaginable killing powers. Why I love this film? because Horace Pinker is a bad ass, kick-ass villain! The film simply reminds me on A Nightmare on Elm Street the original flick. Btw I hate horror idiotic icon Michael Myers from Halloween franchise, I hate him and I hate Jason Voorhees the same as Myers, but Horace Pinker could kick both of their assess! I love this film because in any horror film that I remember the main hero of the whole film is a kick ass guy who is likable decent male hero character trough whole film! In every horror film that I remember the main hero is always some stupid girl, but Wes tried something else which it worked.

You have a great horror, likable characters, a lot's of action, a lot of fantasy in it and a lot of fun. This is Peter Berg's best film in his whole career which is an awesome classic! Nancy Thompson (Heather Langenkamp) from A Nightmare on Elm Street is my favorite number 1 horror icon heroine but Jonathan Parker is my favorite number 1 horror icon which I love him to death.

I love the music scores from Megadeth and The Dudes of Wrath, I love soundtracks No More Mr. Nice Guy and shocker to death.

My favorite scene is when Horace Pinker (Mitch Pileggi) posses the body of 9 year old girl and drives an excavator and try's to kill Jonathan which that scene was incredible awesome! Horace posses the body of Lt. Don Parker (Michael Murphy) and hunts down Jonathan (Peter Berg) and shots with a gun on him, missing him and they both fight face off on a tower when they both climbing up and Don Parker kick's him away.

Ghost Alison Clemens (Camille Cooper) kick's Horace's spirit away from Jonathan.

Jonathan face's off Horace him self and fight's him off and finally beat's him in his own game, like Nancy did and he survives.

The cast is very solid in here: Mitch Pileggi gave a solid performance, Peter Berg's best underrated role, Camille Cooper is very underrated and excellent actress in here.

You also have Ted Raimi in here and Heather Langenkamp in a cameo scene as Horace's Victim.

Wes Craven did amazing job as script writer and director you have a solid script and awesome dialogue in the film.

R.I.P. - Wes Craven (1939 - 2015) I really miss you and thank you for all the Freddy movies, thank you for all horror franchise and movies like are: A Nightmare on Elm Street, New Nightmare, Scream, The Serpent and the Rainbow, Shocker and The People Under the Stairs. I love you so much I wish you could done more horror movies I really love them.

Overall: I love Shocker to death and it is my third favorite Wes Craven's horror film! The rating is a 10/10 for me.

Shocker (also known as Wes Craven's Shocker) is a 1989 American horror film written and directed by Wes Craven. It stars Michael Murphy, Peter Berg, and Mitch Pileggi as the evil antagonist Horace Pinker

10/10 Grade: Bad Ass Seal Of Approval Studio: Universal Pictures, Alive Films Starring: Michael Murphy, Peter Berg, Cami Cooper, Mitch Pileggi, Sam Scarber, Richard Brooks, Ted Raimi, Heather Langenkamp, Lindsay Parker, Janne Peters Director: Wes Craven Producers: Warren Chadwick, Wes Craven, Bob Engelman, Peter Foster, Shep Gordon, Barin Kumar, Marianne Maddalena Screenplay: Wes Craven Rated: R Running Time: 1 Hr. 50 Mins. Budget: $5.000.000 Box Office: $16,554,699

Wes Craven made an outstanding career on those exploitation horror movies, Shocker I never saw until now, surprising me in plenty way, creative plot indeed, interesting and original, fresh concept, an electrifying parody of the science fiction, although totally absurd and inconceivable the movie flow easy, a young football player Jonathan (Peter Berg) hit his heat on a steel bar, since then he got some psychic powers, as seeing his family be slaughtered at his house, he knows how the killer looks like, his step father is a Lt Don Parker (Michael Murphy) try avoid Jonathan a t crime scene, nevertheless Jonathan explains that he watch the massacre, actually the killer Horace Pinker (Mitch Pileggi) is his real father, he wants to proves that Jonathan is like him, will kill soon or later, even arrested and sent to be executed on electric chair his spirit survives using other bodies to make his revenge, the massive electricity on his body gets him more strong, including entering on television network, unusual and bizarre movie, that baffle us on so unique new approach, forget it the inconsistence and watch it how it was conceived!!

Resume:

First watch: 2020 / How many: 1 / DVD / Rating: 7.25

"Shocker" is mostly a mixed bag. The story has almost no development beyond the initial ideas, turning the film into an endless series of repetitive chases, and gets increasingly silly as it moves along. There are also too many action scenes which lack credibility to a point where that can't be forgiven (is Berg protected from bullets fired at him by an invisible shield?). However, there is also a particularly memorable sequence with the villain and the hero entering another dimension and fighting each other while jumping in and out of various TV shows. And Wes Craven's direction has enough energy to keep the film generally painless. (**)

Shocker (1989)

** (out of 4)

Disappointing Wes Craven shocker about college football player Jonathan Parker (Peter Berg) who after a bump on the head witnesses a murder as it is happening. He tells his cop father (Michael Murphy) and before long they're able to capture the serial killer Horace Pinker (Mitch Pileggi). After dying in the electric chair the killer manages to force his spirit into the bodies of others via electricity.

SHOCKER was meant for the horror legend as an attempt to start up a new series since the Freddy Krueger character had gone into directions that he didn't really like. Sadly for Craven and the viewer the end result is somewhat of a mess. SHOCKER starts off decent enough but it quickly falls apart during it's second half and there are just way too many problems for the film to work.

I think the majority of the blame has to go towards Craven's screenplay. The film starts off as some sort of weird thriller with elements of A NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET. The entire thing dealing with Jonathan seeing the killer just didn't work. To make matters worse is that the second half with the spirit jumping is just downright stupid and it never becomes believable to the point where you can get caught up in what's going on. Another problem is that the film clocks in at 109 minutes, which is about twenty minutes to long. There are so many stretches of boring stuff that you can't help but wish Craven had cut it down.

Both Berg and Murphy deliver good performances and their relationship is certainly the best thing about the story and it helps keep you somewhat entertained. Pileggi easily steals the picture as the foul serial killer and it's really too bad the entire film wasn't based around him. Once the spirit jumping happens it takes the actor out of the material and the film flat-lines. SHOCKER features a nice score and some interesting ideas but they just never come together.

Shocker sees horror director Wes Craven attempting (but failing) to replicate the success he enjoyed with A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984), bringing to the screen another supernatural psycho in the form of serial killer Horace Pinker (Mitch Pileggi), who uses black magic to free his spirit as he is being zapped in the electric chair. Transferring from body to body, Pinker is able to continue his grisly murder spree, AND have a little fun with Jonathan Parker (Peter Berg), the high school football star who was instrumental in Pinker's arrest.

Craven not only rips off his own ideas, using dreams as a major plot device, but also mimics the horrible tongue-in-cheek style of the later Elm Street movies, his killer a wisecracking figure unable to be destroyed by normal means. The result is a real stinker of a movie, boasting a lousy central performance from Berg (whose whiny nasal delivery is unbearable), lots of dreadful visual effects, and a plot that makes very little sense, all capped off with a sequence that is easily one of the worst things Craven has ever committed to film (and that's saying something): a battle that takes place inside a television set, with Pinker and Jonathan travelling through several TV shows, the plucky high-schooler eventually using the TV remote to control his enemy. I'm not entirely sure what Craven was aiming for, but the result is embarrassing in the extreme—even worse than BB the robot in Deadly Friend.

N.B. I just remembered the moment where Pinker disguises himself as a massage chair, which is as bad as, if not worse than, the TV channel hopping scene.

This Wes Craven vehicle is heavy on the cheese, has some truly awful effects-Craven admitted as much and unintentional comedy (a magical ritual where the Daemon sounds like a Burger King advert?). On the plus side the story is quite good and the X files Mitch Pileggi really commits to the role of deranged serial killer- hamming it up beautifully. Worth a watch, especially if B movies are your cup of tea.

This was a childhood favorite of mine and all the pals in the early years. Shocker is quiet an enigma. I'm not real sure as to what Craven was trying to pull off. Not only was Shocker a strange film, The People Under The Stairs that came out a year or two after was also a strange film.

As for 'Shocker' - I can only go as far as to say that there were nays and yays. First and foremost, all the supernatural elements of 'Shocker' may turn a few heads and leave some wanting to turn it off. Some people like the supernatural element going on with this film. Personally, I lean towards the former. If this flick was made into a balls out slasher/serial killer film which only used the main character's psychic ability instead of going to the extremes of allowing the main characters (killer/Hero) to jump inside televisions, using electricity as a source of supernatural power, it would have fared better, and been one of the great ones.

Even aside from all this nonsense, 'Shocker' still has it's moments. It has a very dreary and bleak atmosphere that somehow sucks you in. It's almost the same atmosphere emitted from his 1984 venture, 'A Nightmare on Elm Street'. There's this surrealistic feeling throughout the entire film, and you're not quiet sure what's gonna happen next.

There's a few comedic touches in the film that come from nowhere, but they are quiet welcomed in what otherwise is a very depressing feature.

In all honesty, 'Shocker' is a laughable attempt by Wes Craven. As I mentioned, the film has its moments, but the sheer absurdity of the circumstances lures one away from giving it a chance. Understandable.

Good acting, tho. A good performance by our male lead. Also, a great performance from our deranged psychopath - Who uses television and electricity as a catalyst to possess other people to do his dirty work. There's a slight hint of some occultisms when the killer (right before he's to be executed) has hooked boosting cables to his hands and attached them to a live television set. I guess he was recharging or something. Plus, I have no idea how he obtained boosting cables in jail. Maybe he put them in his lower body cavity? Anyway, if you're in the mood that allows you to throw all sense out the window, it might be an OK time waster. I'd almost go as far as to say that only horror fans would even watch 'Shocker' more than once. Good things, but mostly stupid things...not necessarily bad things, but things that should have been used for another ANOES sequel.

The movie starts with a promising note where a good amount of suspense is tried to be built but after some time, the movie starts losing the track. The story was good for it's time but it's not entertaining for today's time. It was quite boring. The direction felt little bit weak as the director fails to keep your attention to the movie till the end. At one time, you will be thinking when will the movie end? The performances by the cast members were also okay, you can't connect with them.

Overall, it was an okay movie for me which failed to impress me even if I take into consideration that it was a silly slasher movie.

I loved this as a teenager. But present day it doesn't hold up. Still though, check it out. The tunes are brilliant flashback hits.

Wes Craven certainly had an interesting career in the 80s. A Nightmare on Elm Street solidified the man as a master of horror. But the series went in directions he didn't want it to, so he left it. Sadly his other 80s films were usually pretty messy, and were often subjected to studio meddling. With Shocker, not only was Craven given full control, but he had the chance to outdo the now legendary Freddy Kruger...

...whoops!

The plot of Shocker is fairly similar to Renny Harlin's Prison and Jim Isaacs' House 3. A killer is put to the chair, thanks to a teenager with a psychic connection to him. A deal with the devil and over 1000 volts later, the killer is back in the form of pure electricity. Now he is after the kid responsible for his execution. No more Mr Niceguy!

Its a fun idea for sure, and it is present with its tongue firmly in its cheek. The characters and their relationships are pretty good. The actors all do what they need to to make the material work. Peter Berg makes for a very likable hero. Mitch Pileggi steals the show as the delightfully vile killer Horace Pinker, one who genuinely 'might' have rivalled Freddy if given the chance. And the soundtrack to this rocks!

Unfortunately what let's this film down is how disjointed it is. It feels like 3 films in one. The first half of it is pretty solid, classic Craven through and through. The horror and humour are perfectly balanced and the atmosphere is great. Once Pinker is killed and comes back, we go even sillier. This quarter of the film isn't as good, but is great for a laugh. Not really what you want from a horror film, but fun is fun.

It is the films ending, it's final quarter, that flushes it down the toilet. Reality and atmosphere are completely abandoned. The film becomes an unfunny cartoon (Pileggis performance not included). This is not helped by the truly terrible special effects. I don't know why, even as a concept, Craven thought that this was a good way to end the film.

In the end I do like Shocker, though it was a close call. The first half, and even the little time after it, are too good and fun for me to write it off. The same goes for the acting, music and overall directing of the film. It's such a shame about that ending. So, Elm Street it is not (don't make me laugh, though it is better than some if the sequels). But a bit of fun, Shocker is.