Girls in their underwear chased through a mall by killer robots. Welcome to another year of Flip Flop Slap Fight’s 31 Days of Horror!
I wonder when humor started becoming a regular feature of horror movies. Using moments of levity to contrast and accentuate the scares has been a tool probably as long as horror movies have been made, but I’m talking about comedy taking a front seat ahead of things like suspense or atmosphere. By the mid-80’s, it seems that nearly half of the “scary” movies were spending as much time winking at the audience as they were spooking them. Over the previous decade, fans had become so familiar with the slasher formula that filmmakers felt beholden to follow it to a tee, but also free to poke fun at it as well. Chopping Mall certainly accomplishes both.
From the opening scene, involving a big 80’s corporation demonstrating their state-of-the-art security system in a mall, the intentions of the filmmakers are pretty transparent. The bad guys are introduced, in the form of guaranteed-to-malfunction robotic security guards with an arsenal of deadly weapons (including a laser for “clearing debris”… you remember how unsafe your local mall was with all that debris lying around, don’t you?) Sarcastic mall tenants snark at how ridiculous the whole thing is, then promptly disappear from the film. It’s an interesting signal to receive as a horror fan. On one hand, hey, these guys get it, they aren’t taking things so seriously, this ought to be fun. On the other hand, you are immediately let off the hook in terms of tension. There will clearly be nothing that has the potential to terrify you, so you can sit back and enjoy the show, except aren’t you ostensibly watching a movie like this because of the promise of terror?
Soon we are introduced to the cadre of horny teens who will be victimized by the killbots after they get locked in the mall overnight. Honestly, do I need to describe the plot of this movie to you? If you’re reading a blog that’s doing a Halloween horror movie countdown, I think you can fill in the blanks. One subverted trope Chopping Mall does have up its sleeve is that the kids don’t wait around until act three to fight back. They leverage the arsenal of firearms and propane tanks available to them in their well-stocked confines to go on the offensive pretty much as soon as they have assessed the situation (you remember that military surplus depot in between the Sam Goody and Spencer’s Gifts at your local mall, don’t you?) I found that to be a refreshing reversal of the formula, and once the obnoxious couple whose deaths you are very obviously intended to root for is dispatched, the rest of the cast is likeable enough to easily rally behind. Of course not all of them can make it, and we’re left wondering who will survive the night. Well, not really, because obviously the one couple who opts for chaste necking in favor of actual sex earlier in the film is rewarded with their safety. Funny that a genre that so blatantly touts T&A as one of its chief selling points remains so consistently and steadfastly puritanical when doling out punishment to its characters.
I found myself ultimately a little disappointed in Chopping Mall. Don’t get me wrong, it delivers exactly what a movie like this promises. There’s a respectable amount of nudity and death, including a rock solid exploding head, hallmark of the finest 80’s trash cinema. There are some funny moments sprinkled in, like when the killbots drone “Thank you. Have a nice day.” after each electrocution or immolation. I had high expectations for the movie, however, driven by its sterling reputation online. I’ve always heard that it was some sort of subversive classic of the genre, skewering consumerism and mall culture as deftly as it skewers its young protagonists. Add to that hype the fact that it was so hard to come by for years, and my anticipation shot well past reasonable levels. It was fine. It breezed by, and it certainly ranks above mountains of crappy slasher movies just by way of competence and panache. Best to take it at face value, though, because it doesn’t actually have anything subversive to say (at least not to a modern audience), and it’s not exactly a lost classic of the form.
Comments