User reviews

Two very disturbed brothers kidnap women, take them to their secluded farmhouse and lock them in the basement. They seemingly do it for their mother (a la PSYCHO), who is only seen from behind, sits on a rocking chair and says, "Ah, it's good to have two fine boys!"

Johnny (John Stoglin) is the mentally adolescent one in overalls who bounces up and down, likes to be pushed around in a wheel barrow and, more importantly, likes to play "games." The sick games include doctor (where women are stripped naked, fondled and get a syringe stuck in their ass) and topless leap-frog (?!) John is also a voyeur who watches a young couple have sex, then kidnaps the girl.

The other brother is Frank (Gary Kent), who is depressed, impotent and sulks around a lot in deep thought. He seems fairly normal except during scenes where he rants about his mother, kills and tries to rape a captive. In one scene he relates an outrageous flashback to how his mom drove his fiancée away by telling her that "We make love! We make love like two lovers!".

The sickly chained up women in the basement have rats crawling on them while they sleep, are beat, sometimes killed and constantly humiliated and subjected to the sick games of brother Johnny. They're referred to as "pets", "toys" and "playmates" by their captors. Yes, this film (the video I picked up was titled LET'S PLAY DEAD) is very trashy, offensive and misogynistic, but cult/sleaze movie fans will love the depravity at work in this entertaining and mostly forgotten gem of the 1970s exploitation circuit.

This bizarre slice of "Drive-In" cinema takes obvious influence from films such as Psycho, and handles the graphic and unsettling themes of incest, rape, torture and necrophilia. The film wallows in its sadistic nature, and it's rather unsurprising that Schoolgirls in Chains has suffered banning in several countries, including the UK (although it's not an official Video Nasty). It has to be said, however, that it really isn't all that good; as while the themes comes across in a way that is as sick and as sleazy as possible; the whole piece is actually rather boring on the whole. If you go into this film expecting something along the lines of The Texas Chain Saw Massacre or The Last House on the Left, you will no doubt come out disappointed; as Donald M. Jones' film is as good as neither notorious film. The plot follows the antics of two deranged brothers who take delight in holding schoolgirls captive by chaining them up in their basement. However, they're not content with merely holding the girls; as the brothers' sick and sadistic nature means that they have to subject the girls to a number of humiliating games.

As you would expect from a film with a title like "Schoolgirls in Chains", the atmosphere is very sleazy; and shots that see the young, innocent girls wearing a collar pretty much sum the film up. Director Donald M. Jones (probably a pseudonym) stays away from making the film overly erotic, however, and it's probably a good thing that Schoolgirls in Chains doesn't depict the actions of its lead characters in a favourable light. Jones' direction is solid, but since this film was made for the drive-in, you can't expect any directorial brilliance - and this film doesn't have any. The acting is similar in that it's nothing to write home about, although both Gary Kent and John Stoglin get to have fun in their absurd roles. Stoglin plays the retarded side of the pair of brothers, but it's Gary Kent who wins most of the plaudits where the acting is concerned for his portrayal of the more subdued side of the pair. The locations are well used, and the house in which most of the film takes place is suitably rural and isolated. Overall, this film isn't bad and will no doubt appeal to exploitation fans; but it's not as great as similar seventies genre efforts such as The Last House on the Left and House on Straw Hill.

Charming little thrust of misogyny concerning two psychotic brothers(one, a drooling, feeble-minded idiot, the other a more literate and functional idiot) who abduct random pretty girls off the interstate and imprison them in a filthy storm-cellar. The purpose for this is that the girls are regularly utilized as props for the brothers' sick, perverse "games". The reclusive mother of the boys, a strict, punctilious old broad, oversees these sadistic activities with loving but cautious approval.

A gleaming example of "only in the 70s" cinema, this lovably tactless little mud-wallow is a treasure-trove of trash-a-plenty. Incest, torture, nekkid gals, rape, and murder...all the requisite bases are covered, and there's even some almost-artful production qualities. Sure, the conceptual nuts-and-bolts of SCHOOLGIRLS IN CHAINS might be hackneyed and unoriginal, but this flick injects some pretty edgy nastiness into those worn-out ideas and shoves them straight up your nose.

Recommended to most, and mandatory for vintage trash-film zealots...7/10

A good entertaining movie with interesting characters It's not a masterpiece but it's worth watching. The thing that spoils it for me is the abysmal soundtrack!

Synopsis: Frank and his mentally underdeveloped brother live with their mother. They kidnap and hold girls that catch their fancy in a cellar for use in their sick games. Their controlling and incestuous mother has twisted them and now no woman in the is safe.

Thoughts: 'Girls in Chains' (original title: Schoolgirls in Chains) is actually above-average Grindhouse fare from the period. The script is relatively solid and although it borrows from Hitchcock's far superior 'Psycho' manages to build its characters with some pathos and detail. The crew did a pretty good job with limited means to give 'Girls' an interesting look with camera movement and shots not usually afforded to these type of films. The acting was above par as the women weren't your average horror movie bubble-heads and the brothers managed to generate some sympathy. As suggestive as the title may be 'Girls' does have the usual nudity and violent sexual debauchery but it is actual somewhat restrained and doesn't go too overboard. If you're a fan of Grindhouse features and/or 'Mother's Day' than 'Girls in Chains' may be for you.

"Schoolgirls in Chains" is a "Psycho" inspired low-budget slice of sleaze that chronicles the events of several young girls kidnapped by two maladjusted brothers named Frankie and Johnny who store them in a fruit cellar and routinely subject them to harassment.The films underlying theme of misogyny is primarily filtered through verbal intent rather than visual shocks.The film features Gary Kent as a brooding,incestuous bruiser,John Stoglin as his creepy retard brother and Leah Tate and Suzanne Lund.There is a decent amount of smut and perversity and plenty of nudity,so I wasn't disappointed.Unfortunetely there is not enough violence for my liking and the action is rather slow,but if you like grindhouse exploitation flicks you may give this one a try.7 out of 10.

The term 'grindhouse' gets bandied about a little too much these days (thanks, QT), but Schoolgirls in Chains is the real deal, a sleazy, low-budget shocker aimed specifically at drawing in a crowd keen to see pure exploitation—in this case, beautiful women abducted and abused by a pair of demented brothers, who have been raised by their sick mother to believe that ALL pretty young females are evil (when, in fact, it's only about 90% of them).

Trapped in the grungy basement of a remote house, the captured women are kept as playthings for man-child John (John Stoglin), whose over-enthusiastic approach to his depraved games often results in his 'toys' being broken (and consequently buried in the family's vegetable patch). Meanwhile, big brother Frank (Gary Kent) is on hand to keep the ladies in control, under the ever watchful gaze of domineering, woman-hating Mother (Greta Gayland).

When John's game of hide and seek with his latest toy Sue (Merrie Lynn Ross) ends up with the gal receiving both barrels from Frank's shotgun, Mother agrees to the abduction of Bonnie, an attractive student who John has been spying on. After Bonnie goes missing, however, her lover—a professor at her college—sets out to find what has become of her...

With a dab of psychological drama (ala Psycho), a soupçon of incest (mother loves her lads a little too much), a smidgen of rape (Frank forces himself on pretty prisoner Ginger, played by lovely Suzanne Lund), a touch of torture (I want to play doctor!), and a whole lot of grubby, low-rent photography accompanied by a suitably discordant soundtrack (complete with an effectively unsettling nursery rhyme theme), Schoolgirls in Chains achieves exactly what it sets out to do—entertain its audience through a series of sensational and sordid scenes in which girls in peril are subjected to all manner of horrors.

It's not exactly art, but it sure is fun (but don't tell mama I said so: she doesn't approve of me watching filthy girls). 7.5 out of 10, rounded up to 8 for IMDb.

"Schoolgirls in Chains" is a "Psycho" inspired - make that VERY "Psycho" inspired - sordid melodrama about two brothers, Frank (Gary Kent), a brooding creep, and John (John Parker), a simple minded man-child. They're dominated by their overbearing mother (Greta Gaylord), and this woman is a true twisted piece of work. Frank and John kidnap various unlucky, lovely young women to serve as "playthings" to keep John amused. The trouble starts when they snatch Bonnie (Cheryl Waters), a woman who is going to be missed, at least by her boyfriend Robert (Stafford Morgan), a psychology professor. This is enjoyably sleazy stuff, although, truth be told, it might not be quite depraved enough for some exploitation fans. Also, the movie does suffer from sluggish pacing; it would have benefited from more of a sense of "Hurry up and go". Still, they should be entertained by not one but two scenes of playing "doctor" and an impromptu game of topless leap frog. The movie also proves to be worth watching for mom's priceless revelation just past the halfway point, which drove away a young woman who'd wanted to marry Frank. If the old lady is telling the truth, then one can hardly blame Frank and John for being so messed up. Doses of female skin help to raise the sleaze factor, while the acting from all concerned gets the job done, especially from exploitation veteran Kent, whose performance is mostly nicely understated, and the very believable Parker. In fact, these guys are so good one can easily feel sorry for them by the time the movie wraps up; their characters are far from being truly malicious. Also worth watching are the lovely Suzanne Lund as Ginger, T.R. Blackburn as the sickly Stevie, and Merrie Lynn Ross (in her film debut) as the feisty Sue, who learns the lesson of running away. Writer / producer / director Donald M. Jones comes up with some good ways of staging scenes, and the camera-work is reasonably impressive. The original music by Josef Powell is often hilarious, especially when it's far from suspenseful, and the cinematography is courtesy of Ronald Victor Garcia, who started out in exploitation and eventually gravitated towards TV, also shooting the "Twin Peaks" feature film. All in all, this is a decent diversion & bag of trash that can be recommended to fans of the genre. Seven out of 10.

Schoolgirls in Chains (1973)

** (out of 4)

Two brothers, one a good-looking, seemingly normal man (Gary Kent) and the other a retarded, child-like man (John Stoglin) are sent by their mother to kidnap women and keep them chained up in their basement. Mommy does all of this so that her retarded son will have someone to "play" with. This film certainly fits into the exploitation genre but it isn't as wild or as sexual as the title would make you believe. During an interview on the DVD the director lets it be known that this title was just thrown on by the producer so that it would draw people in. Overall the film isn't too bad but it contains a "twist" in the story, which is so obvious that it really slows the film down because we have to wait eighty-minutes for the characters in the film to pick up on it. If I named the movie or director that this is ripping off then it would be a dead giveaway but I'd be shocked if anyone didn't have it figured out by at least the thirty-minute mark. I picked up on it right when the first clue happens and I'm sure many others will as well. Other than that the film actually delivers some decent performances and direction. The most interesting scene is one that seems to have been copied later in HALLOWEEN. There's a scene where the retarded brother is stalking a future victim and he walks from the front of the house to a side window to look in on a couple making out on a couch. This whole sequence is very close to what we see at the start of HALLOWEEN so it was interesting to see it being done here five years before the Carpenter movie. The low budget actually helps the film because it creates a nice atmosphere and really makes the movie seem all the more realistic. Kent gives the best performance in the film and Stoglin is good too even though his performance is more off the wall during certain times. The nudity in the film is rather low, although the retarded brother does like to play "doctor" with his female victims. There's really nothing too special here but there is enough where fans of drive-in exploitation will want to check it out.

The pointless death in the first minutes of the movie ended my interest in. The senseless killing was just used as a tool to excite the audience, that pretty much sets the ambient for the story - the random acts of senselessness action of some sort, because it is hard to call it abduction(?).

Some of the girls feature nice pre-Farrah Fawcet haircut, and putting on a good face for a bad movie, in which they were abducted, all right, but not by the brothers, rather by the producers, who presumably lured the girls to the basement with the 'you will star in my movie' crap.

And for that and for wasting my time the producers deserve the place in the basement themselves.

Sadly this great often haunting B has all but disappeared and it is all the more unfortunate because it has the components of a immortal cult classic. Schoolgirls In Chains is the truly bizarre story of two brothers who kidnap and keep women locked in the cellar for the retarded brothers childishly sexual games. This very unusual film does beg comparision to Texas Chainsaw Massacre (with themes of cannibalism replaced with incest and necrophilia) and if for no other reason is significant for being one (among DeathDream, Blood and Lace and the later films of Hershell Gordon Lewis) of the darkest drive in films of the early 70s

Although this Grindhouse-era sleazer is the genuine article, and features enough griminess and mysogeny to merit its title, the film's relative tameness and tediousness made for a fatiguing watch. As such, this trash is recommended only to genre completists. The women are mixed, from very hot to rather plain, and they seem to be dispatched in order of their overall sexiness. That said, however, there isn't a lot of violence here, with the majority of the encounters relegated to generic harassment and lame-o psychological domineering. The story involves a pair of backwoods brothers, whose mentally ill, incestuous mother has twisted them into dementia. After years of abuse, the brothers eventually find solace in kidnapping young women and keeping them captive in a makeshift cellar, visiting them periodically for faux-childish "playtime," which involves anything from kiddie-style doctor scenarios, unwholesome "hide-and-seek" stuff, with the brother's shooting one girl as she runs away; and miscellaneous intimidation and humiliation. There is a decent amount of nudity, but no more so than your average grindhouse flick. The dialog and scene structures are repetitive, and the story is basically a joke. In the end, this one looks fugly and sounds fugly, and you'll spend the majority of the time just admiring the 70's skin. Been there, done that, friends, and I've seen it done a whole lot better than "Schoolgirls in Chains." Unless you just have to see every entry from the sleazier end of the Grindhouse front, you can pass on this one. ---|--- Was this review helpful?