Movie Review - THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT

This might turn out to be a bit lengthy, so please bear with me. I've decided not so much to review the films, but to compare them as well.

Quick spoiler-less recap: A family living out in the middle of nowhere has a daughter, Mari. Mari and her girlfriend decide to have a little fun, and meet up with a strange boy who promises he has some maryjane to share.

The girls go with him to his motel room where they meet the boy's father/uncle/guardians. At that point, the girls' lives become expendable at the playful delight of the strangers.

Inevitably, after disposing of the girls' bodies in the nearby woods, the strangers end up going to the nearest house to beg for food, and maybe to see what nastiness they can get away with. That house is where Mari lived with her parents.

At some point during their stay, the parents find out these people are responsible for their daughter's disappearance. That's when they take the law into their own hands, and the strangers suffer a fate worse than the one they gave Mari and her friend.

The original LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT, written and directed by Wes Craven, is a sick film. Sick. Depraved. Disgusting. Horrifying. Nauseating. What's worse, the main protagonists are unforgiveable.

These people laugh and taunt the girls as they continue to torture and rape their victims. They're soulless.

But the way the parents turn on the killers in the WC version is worse than it is depicted in the 2009 version.

The mother's way of getting her revenge is far more disgusting, in my opinion. I far liked the mother's revenge in the remake.

Although both films are essentially the same (no "re-imagining" here, folks, since Craven helped to produce the new version!), there are significant differences between the two. In trying to be spoiler-less, some of my explanations following

may seem strange, so please forgive me.

* The house's "purpose" is different in the 2009 film. This change is crutial in a plot point at the end of the movie.

* The "lake" in version 1 is really a pond, whereas in version 2, it's actually a full-sized lake. Also a crutial plot point.

* Mari and her friend have different plans between the two films.

* The young boy who led Mari and her friend to the motel has a different outcome.

* Mari's necklace in the remake is more believable as a clue. In the Craven version, I kept thinking, "But what if the kid had one like it?" No mistaking that in the 2009 film.

* Mari's final outcome.

* The deaths are different, especially the strangers'

While I openly admit that I didn't originally like the first version of the film, upon a second and third viewing, I still don't like it. Not because of the way it was filmed, but that the actors were so damned good, their actions made me sick.

I truly enjoyed the 2009 version. The performances were top-notched and more subtle, and effective. But the subject matter and exposition were better handled (for lack of a better explanation). I also liked the ending to version 2 a lot better.


My recommendation?

Get both versions and do your own comparison.

(It would terrific if the two came in a boxed set!)