Henry - Portrait of a Serial Killer (20th Anniversary)

Well I will start with that this movie really opens ones eyes to who is right next to you. And is it not amazing how one can have some much hatred and then turn around and be so nice to another. People who are crazy are just like us its just thier brains work differently. This movie is a great eye opener and it is a must see when it comes to not knowing whats around you and things can happen to you.

Since millions of words have already been written about this film I've decided to take another approach, ammie permitting. I intend to compare it to another film about a murderer who is an Evil Genius, a film which the masses have seen fit to honor while living in blissful ignorance of the existence of John McNaughton's classic portrayal of two dull normal rednecks engaged in roughly the same line of work. I may have to be tricky about this since ammie doesn't like it when you say things that aren't nice about other films. You may have to guess the title and a few other things about the film.

My first objection is to the use of the Evil Genius concept in the film we shall call SOTL. The Evil Genius is an extremely trite concept and probably fairly far removed from reality, but its does seem to be one that the public embraces. Is it because it makes them feel more secure in their day to day lives to believe that it would take such a Genius to off them? Possibly. But the truth of the matter is that most serial killers are probably more like the ones portrayed in HENRY--two fairly normal, everyday guys of the variety you see and dismiss lightly all the time. And that is exactly what makes them so adept at what they do, they can pass by you unobserved. Single you out at the gas station, check your power meter, spray your house for roaches. No Evil Geniuses here--just two vicious killers who are much better at what they do than you are at staying alive.

The cast of SOTL has also been singled out for all kinds of r ecognition and awards while the cast of HENRY has had to content itself with playing second fiddle even within the realm of Horror where the awards also went to SOTL. Was the other truly the better film with the superior cast? No, but it was the film with the more famous, internationally recognized cast and that always seems to impress folks when it comes time to hand out the awards. The Main Star of SOTL played his role to the hilt with so much hammy verve that Orthodox Jews were unable to see the film because of his performance. Perhaps it was the type of role that called for such a performance. Compare it however, to Michael Rooker's interpretation of Henry in PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER and you will clearly see that it IS possible to be just as threatening and unnerving by playing it the other way. Rooker is so quiet, so polite---"Henry was always such a quiet boy"--that it makes what is inside him seem all the more ugly and (more importantly) all the more REAL. Reality is what scares me, not some comic book caricature of reality. And the horrible beauty of HENRY PORTRAIT OF A SERIAL KILLER is that every single moment of it rings true, especially Rooker's performance.

This "review" presupposes that you have seen this film. What follows contains a massive spoiler that will totally ruin the film for you if you have not seen it!*****

SOTL never once surprised me. It was a by the book film, but HENRY--whoa! That was a shocker! The film a was more or less true account of Henry Lee Lucas and Otis Toole, two famous serial killers who have since gone to their just rewards. So the questions arises, how do you surprise and shock a jaded audience that already knows exactly what your film is about and how it must end? (At the time Lucas was in jail in Texas awaiting execution and Toole was locked up in Florida doing the same.) The answer turned out to be simple, McNaughton led us down the primrose path! In short he allowed us to believe that's what we were seeing, but he never once mentioned the names LUCAS and TOOLE, just Henry and Otis and Becky. We assumed the rest since most of the film did fit in with the facts we knew about them, which meant that when the film reached its real climax with Henry's murder of Otis--we were all out of our seats screaming "NO, THAT CAN'T HAPPEN!" or just sitting there frozen in stunned silence. Absolutely brilliant!******END OF SPOILER*****

Lastly I'd just like to mention the one scene in this film that did manage to scare me, and as I've said only 3 films have ever managed to scare me; this one, THE THING (the original when I was 4 and 1/2), and NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. It comes near the end of the film right after Becky has been coming on to Henry and to avoid her he decides to "go out for some cigarettes" which usually means that someone is about to die a horrible death. We follow him nervously as he walks to the store where he encounters a rude clerk and a couple of other people who give him lip, but he just ignores them. Then as he's going back to the apartment he runs into an old woman walking her yappy little dog. He stops to talk to her and of course she's rude too, and then SHE TURNS HER BACK ON HIM AND WALKS DOWN A DARK ALLEY! What on earth possessed this woman? Henry looks around to see if anyone is watching and then starts to follow her--we know its going to happen soon---and then he just changes his mind and goes back to the apartment. Just like that. Murder Interruptus.

Now I know a lot of you are going "What's so scary about that?" Well maybe its a female thing. I think at sometime or another every female has suspected that somebody really weird has been following her and its been bad enough to really spook her, but then she felt relieved because he turned off. Oh good, she thinks,I was wrong he was never following me at all. Well, after this movie you can't help but think, if only for a moment, maybe that freak really was following me after all. And if you're not thinking that, maybe you should be. (Cue scary music)

Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer is a rare film, it's a horror film filled with gore that's actually scary. Micheal Rooker plays Henry with intensity often copied but never as equal. The things that Henry does in the movie are very shocking and the film isn't for those who have a weak heart. I give this film **** out of ****.

Henry is former convict who served in prison for killing his mother when he was just 14. A mother that abused and neglected him for years by forcing him to wear dresses and making him watch her have sex with strangers. We don't see this, it's merely implied by Henry when talking with the sister of his friend and roomate Otis, Becky who stops by live with the two for a while. This explains Henry's hatred for women and why most of his victims are such. He shows a genuine revulsion to any physical contact with women when he is seen killing a hooker in the backseat of Otis' car and when Becky kisses him during a home video session where he looks uncomfortable and wipes his mouth off.

Otis stands more as composite degenerate type with almost every type of sexual perversion that one can muster. He makes advances on young boys he sells drugs to, attempts necrophilia on a dead woman he just killed and is constantly making incestuous advances on his sister Becky only to be stopped by Henry who again shows revulsion to any kind of sex. However at first, he is not a killer until Henry shows him the way and enlightens him to the "rush" of the kill.

Under the "teachings" of Henry, the two go on a spree of killing random victims in different ways so not to leave a modis operande. A good samaritan is shot when fooled into thinking the two have car trouble. An illegal appliance salesman is stabbed with a soldering iron and having a TV smashed over his head. And in the most disturbing scene in the film, we see an entire family slaughtered in their own home as photographed from a video camcorder they stole from the murdered salesman. We then see them sitting on the sofa watching this video and drinking beer like they were watching the Super Bowl!

Sound powerful and disturbing? You bet! Writer/director John McNaughton holds nothing back in this realistic portrayal of diseased minds. Forget Jason, Michael and Freddy who are just fantasy killers with supernatural qualities that seemed to have just come out of adult comic books. This is loosly based on the exploits of real life serial killer Henry Lee Lucas (who claimed to have killed over 300 people).

The film is made in a sort of quasi-documentary style reminiscent of William Freidken's style in The Exorcist, using hand-held cameras and minimal lighting to give it grit and realism. The opening shot is that of a naked woman lying somewhere in a field with blood on her. Then we switch over to Henry doing his day-to-day activities and as he does this, we see brief shots of other various mutilated female corpses juxaposed while hearing the sounds of the murders that took place earlier. I consider this to be the best sequence in the whole film.

McNaughton made this film in 1985 for a mere $100,000 in his hometown Chicago but was not released until four years later. The MPAA refused to give it an R rating due to it's disturbing content so the film was shelved. Like George A. Romero's 1977 classic Dawn of the Dead, it eventually got released as unrated with no one under 17 admitted. It was this film along with Peter Greenaway's The Cook, The Thief, His Wife and Her Lover that sparked the debate on a new rating that eventually brought in the NC-17 rating.

The acting is top notch, the then unknown Michael Rooker gives a real chilling performance as the title character along with Tom Towles as the goofy but sick Otis. Rooker went on to do several acclaimed films like Mississippi Burning and JFK. Towles moved on to mostly TV most notably with his recurring role as the internal affairs investigator in NYPD Blue.

Critical reaction was mixed when released, some critics like Ebert praised it for it's unflinching look into a killer's head. Others savaged it as exploitation gone way over the top. You be the judge. Scary? Not really, but very disturbing and it won't leave your head anytime soon after watching it.

Im an avid Horror movie enthusiast and I was interested in this movie, but unfortunatly I was very disapointed. It's just a poorly put together film, with poor acting and I wouldnt recomend this to anyone. DONT WASTE YOUR MONEY.

-Casey