MovieChat Forums > Three on a Meathook (1975) Discussion > Deserves More 'Credit'

Deserves More 'Credit'

posted 18 years ago by mvance-1
10 replies | jump to latest

Whenever the "slasher" flick is discussed in print or on film, this feature never even rates a mention. Usually, the genre is dated from either HALLOWEEN or THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE (with occasional nods to Bava's Seventies' output, PSYCHO, and THE LAST HOUSE ON THE LEFT), but MEATHOOK contains all of the seminal elements, it seems to me, and preceded both of those first two movies. I suppose its extremely low budget and obscurity unite to keep it beneath the critical radar, but it certainly deserves more consideration when the roots of the explosively popular slasher field are examined.

On a recent (October, 2006) cable tribute to these bloody entertainments, a special effects master (it was probably Savini) stated that he was searching for something unprecedented to highlight in one flick when he came up with an on-screen decapitation . . . excuse me, but MEATHOOK had already pioneered that one, too. Anyone else remember the scene in which the terrified girl was trying to escape the madman by barricading herself inside the shack, only to have her head severed by a single hatchet blow while her body fell from beneath the blade on-camera? I haven't seen this film since a drive-in viewing sometime in the mid-Seventies, but that graphic shock has remained fresh in my memory since.

Not a great movie but certainly an underrated one within the boundaries of its genre. Steve V.

[–] torpedoboy4 17 years ago

True!! That decapitation took me by surprise, too. I thought Savini started that trend as well. Guess he didn't do his research.

[–] nakedcitizens1 14 years ago

Although I love Savini, he is awfully full of himself.

[–] [deleted] 7 years ago

[deleted]

[–] InjunNose 12 years ago

It was a very memorable effect, and the credit goes to J.G. "Pat" Patterson :) Apart from handling the gore effects in "Three on a Meathook", Patterson had worked with Herschell Gordon Lewis and directed a couple of films of his own--the most famous of which is "The Body Shop", released on videocassette in the '80s (as "Doctor Gore") with an introduction by Lewis. It's an excruciatingly awful movie, but anyone who enjoyed the gore scenes in "Meathook" should see it. In Patterson's own film the effects are much more graphic, and it's obvious that he was a considerable talent in his field (if not a talented actor or director). Sadly, he has received almost no recognition. Those who knew him remember Patterson as a nice guy, and he suffered the nice guy's traditional fate: he was shortchanged, ripped off and died without accolades. (See Patricia Breen's excellent William Girdler site for a review of "Doctor Gore" as well as a photo of Patterson working on the set of "Three on a Meathook": http://www.williamgirdler.com/drgore.html)
My knowledge of Tom Savini and the other effects artists who rose to prominence in the '70s and early '80s is not encyclopedic, but I've read lots of interviews and I've never heard them acknowledge their debt to people like Herschell Gordon Lewis (let alone Pat Patterson). Not once. There seems to be an implicit consensus among these guys and their fanbase that they invented gore effects. But the fact is that a few pioneers--Lewis, Patterson, Jack Curtis ("The Flesh Eaters")--were shocking audiences with graphic effects long before "Dawn of the Dead" and "Friday the 13th".

[–] nakedcitizens1 12 years ago

I think the reason why Tom Savini and other makeup artist recieved more credit is because the films they worked on were more mainstreme low budget films. Lewis' films and 3 on a Meathook were films show in grindhouse and drive in theaters. They recieved almost no coverage in the media or anything. Plus, although they are gorey, the effects weren't that groundbreaking in any of Lewis's films. You also have to recognize that maybe they never saw those films or cared too much for them. They may have paved the road for more extreme gore in films but they were not big films until after the gore craze came about.

[–] InjunNose 12 years ago

"...the effects weren't that groundbreaking in any of Lewis's films."

The gore effects in Herschell Gordon Lewis's films were groundbreaking in the most literal sense: dismemberment and disembowelment had never been shown onscreen before. Ever. If you mean that the effects were technically crude, then yes, they were--and Lewis would be the last person to argue with that. But that wasn't the point. They were graphic, and the major studios weren't doing them. (And they were profitable: "Blood Feast", made for $24,500, grossed four million dollars.)

"They received almost no coverage in the media or anything."

Sorry, but that's not at all accurate. "Blood Feast" was reviewed in "Variety", and developed such a notorious reputation that it was referenced (along with its followup, "Two Thousand Maniacs!") in an issue of Forrest J Ackerman's "Monster World" as the leading example of the type of horror film that pro-censorship groups sought to ban. Lewis's films were very much on the cultural radar during the 1960s, even to the extent that he began toning down the gore (because, as he said in a 1981 "Fangoria" interview, "these censor boards were just laying for us").

"You also have to recognize that maybe they never saw those films..."

I can't say with any certainty whether or not Tom Savini has ever seen a Herschell Gordon Lewis film. I *can* say with near-absolute certainty--and so can anyone else who regularly read "Fangoria" in the '80s--that Savini is aware of Lewis, and understands his significance.

"...or cared too much for them."

Fortunately or unfortunately (depending on one's perspective), personal taste has no bearing on historical fact.

[–] AceRoccola 12 years ago

I'm not sure this film really pioneered much of anything. It may be a notable early genre flick, but merely in an underground enthusiast-only kind of way.

I don't think it's unjust for it to be considered well below films like Peeping Tom, Psycho, Black Christmas, and Halloween in terms of influence and overall historical/artistic importance. It predates some of those classics, but it wasn't really an important link in the chain. Psycho, TCM, Halloween etc. all brought something to the table. And it doesn't hurt that they were all fine horror films, whereas this is...just an obscure no-budget dip in already explored waters.

[–] Mathias001 11 years ago

God I remember seeing this at the drive in back in the day. I actually liked it. (The only one of the three of us who went that night)

Heh, I remember that the actual scene that the title mentioned doesn't appear until towards the end and it's one of those "blink and you miss it" scenes.

The actor who played the father was good in his role. Very creepy guy. I enjoyed the effects as well. Pretty good for that time. The decapitation you mentioned as well as the girl getting impaled with the pitchfork in bed was quite a shocker then.

[–] ElectricWarlock 10 years ago

I love the decapitation scene. It was very well done and quite surprising therefore it was one of the most memorable moments of the film. The movie isn't quite up to par with similar movies like "The Texas Chain Saw Massacre" but it is still worth watching by all fans of '70s horror and worth some recognition.

[–] Indig0Mist (84) 4 years ago

And that decapitation scene was so memorable that it inspired one of the most memorable and creative kills in a horror movie: Carly's death in Wrong Turn (2003), her head being split in 2 by an axe up in a tree and her body falling and hitting the tree branches.