User reviews

You won't see big stars or great acting performances in this production. It's not a masterpiece but it's cool because it parodies some famous movies. And, although silly, there are many funny scenes. The scene with the two twin girls and the puppy eating the cake, the scene when Schlock coming out of the cinema disgusted by the big crap with Steve McQueen called "The Blob", the scene when Schlock dismembers the red car, the scene with the boy who asks Schlock to take him to pee and, very funny, the scene when Schlock plays the piano with the blind man. Unfortunately, the ending is sad, beauty kills Schlock.

The reviews for this movie here are mainly positive. And it's no surprise. This is a very, Very strong first movie. In fact, it looks almost exactly like the more famous Landis movies down to the lighting and editing. It does have some silly stuff in it, and there are scenes to make the picture longer. But the movie never feels constricted by its low budget, it successfully pokes fun at it. Landis is great as the titular ape and Rick Baker's done a great job on the mask - it even allowed Landis to emote. Eric Roberts' wife plays a blind girl who befriends Schlock thinking he's a dog, but soon she regains her sight and then!... Schlock's really funny, it looks like it's someone's first movie only for the first 15 minutes, and then it becomes big and quite enjoyable.

Low budget comedy that helped launch the careers of director John Landis and makeup artist Rick Baker. It parodies everything from King Kong to Dragnet to 2001: A Space Odyssey and more. Funny stuff but it does lose steam the longer it goes on. Still worth a watch especially for Landis fans. I would also recommend the many would-be filmmakers whose crappy iPhone-shot home movies dominate the internet today take a look at how a proper low budget (really no budget) indie film can be done.

John Landis's first movie may be as good as anything he made. "Schlock" falls in neatly with other 'progressive' US comedy movies of the early 70s, which kicked around genre conventions and added a new frankness in language and toilet humour to US film comedy vocabulary. (Others like this were sketch comedy flicks like Landis's "Kentucky Fried Movie"; plus the Mel Brooks and Woody Allen movies of around the same time).

What sets this one apart is its sustained comic atmosphere, which is goofy, laconic and giddy. Set-pieces - like the 2001 parody, the bar scene where the monster 'Schlock' observes a Jose Feliciano-like blind musician playing a piano boogie and ends up joining in, and a very funny scene where the allegedly fearful Schlock goes into a cinema to see a horror movie, and is terrified - all come off perfectly.

Some beautiful bits of background business too - the hippie in the background of the 2001 scene, just ignoring the portentous foreground action while eating his frozen custard is worth a look. This is just a really, really funny film.

This is a pretty simple review to write, if you like Monty python stuff, you'll like this movie. It's very surreal, but in the best way possible. I thought it was pretty funny, while not all of the jokes stuck, but you could easily say the same thing about Monty python. Give this gorilla film a chance if you like bizarre comedies!

I did not know what to expect and got a pleasant surprise. As others have said here, a bit uneven but jokes hit more than not. Great movie for insomniacs. Worth your time.

This is the work of a big time film fan who has...not a lot of cinematic talent. He's the goofy guy people said was funny, pushing his low-brow sense of humor as hard as possible across a quick 77-minute long thing that resembles a movie. It's interesting to see this kind of desperate attempt for a laugh after finishing the work of Preston Sturges which always felt so effortless (well, until the end), but that kind of screwball mentality is what gives John Landis the little appeal the film has. It's not really a story. He can't build anything across a scene or the film at all. All that's really there is the weird guffaws at odd behavior and base comedy that come along with regularity. It's enough to get me through the movie, at least.

The banana killer is attacking a small California town, killing hundreds at a time, and Detective Sergeant Wino (Saul Kahan) would rather stay safe in his house than investigate, but he must because it's his job. Interviewed by television anchorman Joe Putzman (Eric Allison), who interrupts his reports to describe the movie of the week (always the fake See You Next Wednesday, a 2001 reference) or update the audience on the "guess how many bodies are in the bags" contest the station is running, Wino is at a complete loss and does not know what to do. Four teenagers accidentally come across the lair of Schlock (Landis in Rick Baker makeup), a pre-history man-like creature that has been frozen for millions of years and is now terrorizing the countryside, as explained by Professor Shlibovitz (Emile Hamaty).

It's easy to see Landis' love of 50s scifi movies pop through all of this. Much like Joe Dante and Piranha, it's the kind of influence that reeks of children sitting around the TV in the middle of the night watching scientists explain nonsense that thrilled the generation of genre filmmakers who came up in the 70s. There's no real satire of it, though. It's more like base parody, kind of like Mel Brooks at his least imaginative (usually without Gene Wilder) with people acting the roles in lightly comedic manner. It's mostly deadpan delivery of silly dialogue (I wonder if there's a Monty Python influence here). But the dialogue is only intermittently amusing, mostly the proto-version of "lolwut...so random" type of joking.

For instance, there's a scene where a blind girl, Mindy (Eliza Garrett) has her bandages taken off from her eyes. First, the bandages end up much more than expecting, coming to a large pile on the floor. That's a kind of funny image. It doesn't come from anything or feed into anything else, though. There's no build up. The other thing in this scene is the doctor walking into a closet with a sliding door, very obviously a closet mind you, to leave the scene. It's meant as a joke, gets a guffaw, and quickly moves on. That is both the film's appeal and limitations in terms of its comedy. It's constantly trying for laughs (it's easy to see why the Zucker brothers and Jim Abrahams would hire him to make The Kentucky Fried Movie), but the laughs are all isolated, thin, and never really all that funny.

So, what it amounts to is a long series of individual attempts at comedy that never connect, relying almost entirely on the strength of the comedy within those individual moments to provide the entertainment. It's essentially a skit show centered around Schlock wandering around and being a fish out of water. There's an extended sequence in a movie theater (apparently added after the main production to add length for the distributor) where Schlock struggles with an ice cream machine, terrorizes the concession girl into giving him candy, gets scared at dinosaurs on screen, is fearful of a clip from The Blob (50s scifi, mind you), takes a kid to the bathroom, and has the poster outside the theater changed repeatedly (The Blob, See You Next Wednesday, King Kong vs. Godzilla). You see, it's just a random series of slightly amusing things that don't build to anything.

The irony is that Landis built this film on a well-worn structure, the 50s scifi monster movie, but he doesn't understand how they work narratively at all. He can poke fun at moments here and there, but they don't actually cut the material at all. In addition, the jokes don't piggyback off of the narrative to build to something bigger. All we get is Schlock climbing the gym roof with Mindy, throwing her off harmlessly in fear of some thrown flares, and then a King Kong reference. Some of this is funny (honestly, the last line of the film is probably the height of it because it's actually satirical in nature), but it's just all so disconnected from everything else except in the most basic, mechanical ways of plot.

I'm reminded, in contrast, of how Lubitsch built jokes on top of each other until the Super Joke that made audiences burst into laughter.

Oh well, I'm not that down on the film. It's not good. It's kind of bad. In taking nothing seriously, not even the comedy, nothing really lands or builds, but there are a surprising amount of chuckles along the way. That made the experience far better than it had any right to be.

I realize this film has quite a large base of loyal and devoted fans, but to be entirely honest, it undeniably remains a truly dumb and irredeemable amateur flick. In fact, the sole reason why I'm glad "Schlock" exists is because it meant the first venture into cult-movie world by John Landis; - and John Landis will always be the genius who gave us "American Werewolf in London". "Schlock" apparently did get noticed here and there, which ultimately led to Landis modestly building out his career further, first with the more crazed out comedies "Kentucky Fried Movie", "Animal House" and "Blues Brothers", but then he and Rick Baker (also debuting here) immortalized themselves with the still-fabulous transformation sequences in "AWiL".

"Schlock" is a type of slapstick and absurd parody about a prehistoric ape-monster, supposedly the Missing Link, going on extreme killing sprees in Los Angeles and leaving behind a trail of banana peels. I could still appreciate the first 10-15 minutes, since Landis exaggerates so tremendously with his numbers. During the opening sequences, the camera pans around a playground where literally dozens of dead bodies lay spread around. When "Schlock" attacks, he allegedly makes two-hundred victims at once and the local news reporter even organizes body-count contests on live television! It immediately goes downhill, however, with non-stop lame and infantile jokes, as well as reference to cinematic milestones ("Frankenstein", "2001: A Space Odyssey", "King Kong", ...) that don't really work. There's a frustratingly high number of gags in which the monster is treated or addressed to like he's an ordinary human being, and those eventually make the film dull and tedious. After the first half hour (which seemingly lasts twice that long) the lack of financial means and creativity also becomes too obvious, and John Landis hardly still manages to hold the viewer's attention.

I actually saw this in the theatre where they filmed the movie theatre sequence just a few months before. I think the movie was only out for about a week, but my buddies and I caught it twice! Even dragged our drama teacher to see it (he loved it).

This is the kind of high-school humor that was a carry over from the Three Stooges and is still going strong, but Landis was one of the first to bring it up to date.

I think they shot this in 16mm (it looks it) and the photography has all the depth of a Wilderness Family entry, but the laughs are very much there. And this had one of the most memorable ad campaign tag lines in history: "Due to the horrifying nature of this film, no one will be admitted."

It was also the only film I know of which had ads featuring a rave by Johnny Carson. It's low budget, but high yuks. I still remember it fondly (Hey, Landis, please return to your comic roots of the 70s and 80s; we don't need another Woody Allen).

No pun intended - but like the Exorcist, this was released in 1973 - 50 years ago! Completely different angles on the horror genre of course. This is over the top and as silly as you can imagine. You have to really dig the style and the humor this promotes. John Landis moved on to bigger and better things, but this kind of establishes his style and humor to a degree.

For a low budget movie this is quite fine - that said the movie does not have much of a story .. it is almost like many sketches put together. There is an attempt to make it coherent - but you can't take anything in here seriously. Be it the "monster" that can be nice or aggressive - depending on what the script or the next joke needs it to be ... everything for a laugh .. just give in or stop watching I reckon ... it is true to itself humor and mood wise from start to finish ...

'Schlock" is the often talked about, but rarely seen, first film from John Landis. The story concerns a prehistoric ape man, played by Landis, terrorizing a California community. 'Schlock' is of interest mainly because of what Landis went on to do later. Is it great filmmaking...not by a long shot. There are some good moments, but the comic timing Landis displayed in films like 'The Blues Brothers' and 'Animal House' just isn't there yet. I am a huge fan of Landis' work, but it's his first film...one shouldn't expect greatness. The best thing about 'Schlock' is the ape suit made by Rick Baker. It's very expressive, and seems somewhat out of place in this low budget environment.

This is a truly bad film in almost every conceivable way: Poorly scripted, amateurishly acted, badly directed, and incompetently edited, but is saved by director Landis himself: His largely improvised performance in Rick Baker's excellent "monkey suit" for most of the second half of the film is laugh-out-loud funny in places, truly saving an otherwise forgettable film.

Sadly, despite Mr. Landis's encyclopedic knowledge of early cinema, many opportunities to parody or pay homage to other monster movies are missed. For example, the sequence where Schlock is feeding the ducks at the pond is just asking for a reference to the "flower" scene from James Whale's "Frankenstein". (Or is this reference enough? Hmm.) Other similar opportunities are missed throughout.

I suppose I was a little hard on this film. It entertains, indeed, but it's filled with holes and inconsistencies. I suppose if you ignore the aforementioned "holes and inconsistencies" you could get a kick out of this.

Childish, ridiculous, at times funny... Goofy, filled with rotten acting (and rotten bananas), bad camera-work, bad colours...

It's actually kind of nice to see a pretty well established director's first film and realize it's a total B flick.

I like the king kong reference. And the 2001. And the Beauty and the Beast (Cocteau would be proud... either that or roll over in his grave)

In a movie that very much lives up to its title, the missing link (played by John Landis, wearing a solid ape suit devised by Rick Baker) runs amok in a small town. Fortunately for Schlock, the cops are all Keystone types who literally trip over dead bodies. Eventually, Schlock falls in love with a girl (Eliza Roberts) who's just had her sight restored.

A very young Landis (20 going on 21 at the time) wrote and directed this minor cult favorite, his first attempt at film-making. While undeniably very crude, and amateurishly acted, the laughs *are* there. The pacing does lag at times, as if Landis was struggling to get this to feature length, but the good news is that he often comes up with some truly inspired sight gags and farcical moments. Landis is quite funny as the beast, and the supporting cast is sincere if not exactly polished. Saul Kahan (also the still photographer) is a hoot as the unlikely detective in charge of tracking down Schlock.

Given that Hollywood producer Jack H. Harris got involved, there are some funny moments where Schlock & others watch the Harris-produced "The Blob" and "Dinosaurus!" in a theater.

It's no surprise that Landis would hook up with the ZAZ comedy team for his next effort, "The Kentucky Fried Movie"; there's even a surely / Shirley joke in here! And Landis works in plenty of references to his classic phrase "See You Next Wednesday". He famously worked with Baker again a decade later for the landmark werewolf film "An American Werewolf in London". John Chambers, the man who designed that great ape makeup for the "Planet of the Apes" series, appears on screen here as the National Guard captain.

Seven out of 10.

I'm almost 35 minutes in and haven't seen one funny thing. Complete and total failure as a comedy.

Why do they ever try to parody horror films when horror is an inherently self-parodying genre?

Not funny. Get some real laughs off a real horror movie instead.

*WARNING: MORE THAN ANY OTHER MOVIE THAT COMES TO MIND, THIS IS A TRUE CULT MOVIE! WATCHING IT COULD CAUSE DANGEROUS NEW THOUGHTS IN YOUR HEAD* DO you understand the above warning? If you don't get that statement, or don't like what it implies, you will HATE this movie. I sat alone in a theatre in a rotten, crummy little one-horse town in the Midwest and saw this movie in 1973. I laughed harder that night than I have since.

The film violates every possible rule of good taste, all conceivable social norms, and is terrifically long on puns and non-sequiturs. It is a positive wealth of sight gags. this is not highbrow movie by any stretch of the imagination, but low comedy was one thing in the 70's and something less now: it is probably "too hip for the room" at the dawn of the 21st century.

Think of this movie as a knowing "wink" at the audience. It says, "we're going to play a game here--I'm going to pretend to be a movie, and you're going to pretend to be an audience...all you have to do as the audience is to get the joke." "Schlock" is a satire of a lost genre of horror films: the "caveman" movie (specifically it is a first rate send up of one of the classic bad movies of all time: "Trog").

If you watch bad movies for their unintentional comedy, if you think Mel Brook's first six movies are funny, then you're going to love this. On the other hand, if you think that the three funniest movies ever made were "Scary Movie I," "Scary Movie II," and "Not Another Teen Movie," then avoid this at all costs.

The Schlock really got its funny moments but there are parts that do not work very well or where the humor feels rather forced and some scenes are even rather boring. Also from a today's perspective I would add some real gore to spice things up. Therefore, I won't say that Schlock is a classic or cult (like other reviewers claim) or even a must-watch. But I am also not a great fan of director John Landis' biggest hit The Blues Brothers (good but not outstanding in my view). All in all, okay to kill some spare time - if you want to go on a nostalgic trip.

This is an early film from John Landis made when he was just 21 years old and funded by family and friends but not released until 1973. He shows a deft touch for writing and directing goofball comedy and this was far more entertaining than I had anticipated.

Landis also wears the monkey suit as Schlock, courtesy of make-up artist Rick Baker, who is the missing link between ape and man. Both Landis and Baker would go on to create the groundbreaking transformation make-up effects for An American Werewolf in London (1981) with Baker receiving an Academy award. Here though the Schlock suit is not quite as sophisticated but Landis delivers some good physical slapstick comedy dressed as the prehistoric creature in a nod to The Three Stooges. This also marks the beginning of the long running professional relationship Landis had with producer and editor George Folsey Jr.

There's not much plot involved about locals discovering an ape like creature in a well which then goes on the rampage but a noteworthy highlight is a lampoon of Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) and quotes from other movies such as Love Story (1970) and the original King Kong (1933). Essentially this is a 1950's B movie parody with a string of gags and quickfire lunacy that sweeps you along with it's silly but good natured humour in much the same vein as the early Woody Allen films.

Schlock also features the phrase 'See You Next Wednesday', a quote lifted from the aforementioned 2001 and is a running gag featured in every John Landis movie. Some of the on screen lunacy would be later refined by Landis for his more accomplished comedies like The Kentucky Fried Movie (1977) and The Blues Brothers (1980).

Don't let this minor cult classic be the missing link in your John Landis collection.

Funniest film ever, a real cult classic. Watched it first years ago and he tears were streaming from my eyes I was laughing so much. I have no idea how to categorise this, beauty and beast an be the closest analogy.