The Worst Movie Ever Made! Maniac

Don't believe the hype. For all the fame (infamy) and notoriety that Ed Wood's Plan 9 From Outer Space has received over the last thirty years, it's not the worst movie ever made. Whatever the inimitable Mr. Wood may have lacked in technical skill, he made up for with determination. There really isn't anything in Plan 9 that's any worse, when you objectively look at it, than the excruciatingly extended dinosaur attack sequence in Peter Jackson's remake of King Kong. Honestly, can you really justify that the computer effects in that scene were any more believable than Wood's pie-tins on a string flying saucers?

Generally speaking, I don't really like it when the term worst movie is applied to an obviously bad movie. Whenever I think of really rotten films, I tend to bestow the honor upon movies that really should have been good: movies with budgets, good actors, good directors, etc. It's very easy to slam a low-budget quickie with actors never seen again, but if you want to talk about bad movies, you should really go after the big fish. At the top of my worst movie list would be, in no particular order: Conan the Barbarian, Face/Off, "10", The Fellowship of the Ring. Recent additions would include the almost universally bad The Brothers Grimm (read my article devoted to why it's so awful), and The Sixth Sense.

But I'm willing to make an exception for a movie I recently watched that is included in the 50 Horror Classics boxed set of DVDs. The film was made in 1934 and in no way resembles anything that should have been a good movie. This movie is not just bad, it's bad in every conceivable way, but one. I must say that on a level equivalent to watching a horrific NASCAR crash, it is far more entertaining than of the scenes in Peter Jackson's remake that doesn't include King Kong himself.

The movie is called Maniac. You may wonder how you can go wrong with a title like that. (The fact that at least four movies made with the title Maniac are all eligible for competing for worst movie ever should give you a clue). Well, I'll give it this, the movie is maniacal. Simply put, even if this article turns out to the single greatest thing I'll ever write, words cannot describe this film. You have to see it to believe it.

There's really no point in describing the plot, although technically you could call it an adaptation of E. A. Poe's The Black Cat. Technically. Oh, there are cats (more about that later) and there is a person buried behind a wall, but that's really about the end of the similarity to Poe's very chilling story right there. Like I said, describing the plot is rather pointless, and to fully appreciate the ineptitude of this movie requires a review that, as best I can manage, approximates its style.

To begin with, interspersed throughout are title cards that describe various stages of psychosis. Supposedly these states correspond to the main character's mental instability. Again, any similarity is PURELY UNINTENTIONAL.

Did I mention a guy a pops out a cat's eye?

It would appear as if this was meant in some way to be a semidocumentary about the connection between mental illness and sexual deviance. It almost aches at times

…..and then he eats the eyeball…

to be a serious movie. But how serious can you be when your actors make TV evangelists look downright subtle in comparison? Should I mention the names of the actors? Not much point. Except that Phyllis Diller co-stars.

(not that phyllis diller)

Naked women in a 1934 move. Well ,topless.

The really funny part about the whole cat's eye business is the actual poking out. The guy sticks his finger into cat's eye and pops out a little black thing and then you immediately see the cat's real eye before they cut. It's the little things like that that make a movie truly great in its badness.

And there's more. For instance, after our maniacal hero kills his maniacal mentor, he puts on a beard and wig so as to impersonate him (There's a scene where the guy is running through the streets only it's lit by, well, I guess a lighter, so you can hardly see him) and when he reaches down to grab his glasses the corpse flinches. And then when he reaches down to close his eyelids, you can see his eyes moving behind the closed lids. But guess what? That's not even the greatest example of incompetence involving the mentor!

It's all perfectly gratuitous, this nudity. And I'm not sure, but it looked as though the actress who first appeared as the topless rape victim was replaced by another actress when they come back to the scene. Unless the guy picked up another woman to assault after he had already assaulted the first woman. And if that wasn't enough, wait till you hear about the underwear scene.

Did I mention he eats the cat's eye? Did I mention there's a scene of catfight between two cats and then, at the end, a catfight between two women going at each other with hypodermic needles and a baseball bat? Did I mention there's a third catfight between two dogs?

Okay, now get this. If you're familiar with Poe's story, then you know his maniac kills his wife and hides her behind the drywall. Only this black cat that's been demonizing him somehow gets trapped there too and the police hear it and he's discovered. There's a similar scene in which the cops hear the cat and start breaking through the bricks to discover the mentor. Now the mentor was the mad scientist when the story began, only he's been killed and the guy who impersonates him has become mad. You have to remember that the mentor is dead or this won't be funny. As they are breaking down the brick wall, well, I guess it wasn't coming down quickly enough for the director. At any rate, you can see the actor playing the dead mentor-HE'S A CORPSE-pushing the bricks away and then quickly trying to get his arm back down by his side.

Only he's too late.

Did I mention that after he pokes out the cat's eye, there's a cut and then back to the cat showing him with only one eye? Did I mention that this cat looks nothing like the cat whose eye he poked out?

Another scene that shouldn't be missed is the one where the impersonator gives Phyllis Diller's (not that phyllis diller) husband an injection of pure adrenaline. He's the guy who either rapes a character played by two different actresses or rapes two different women. After getting the injection, he goes completely mental. I mean if you think you've seen hysterical overacting before, be prepared to be educated. You haven't seen hysterical overacting until you've seen this guy go on a rampage.

"Darts of fire in my brain...agony...I can't stand it...I won't...eeyaagghhh...nnnnnn...rrrrrnngggg...ooorerewyerrrgghh!!"

You've scrolled down looking for more information on the underwear scene haven't you? Sticking out like a sore bum is a scene involving a Betty Boop sound-a-like, a Mae West lookalike, a woman dancing in bra and panties and a woman in the tub. No, there's no point to the scene. Although it might have been an earlier example of product placement. Except that the product being placed doesn't come off too well. It's one of those old-fashioned "exercise" machines in which you wrapped a wide strap around your posterior and it shook it for you. Only this gal wraps it around both front and back and then tops it off by singing La Cucaracha AND La Cockaroacha. I'm trying to describe it adequately...but, I find I don't possess the necessary literary tools to paint in words the truly disturbing images that scene creates...I wish I could.

But I can't. I just can't. It's too awful. Too awful to think about.

Try instead to think of the movie with the worst acting you've ever seen. IIf you need a little help might I suggest Battlefield Earth, or Broken Arrow, Perfect, or Face/Off. Oh heck, just imagine any John Travolta movie besides Grease or Pulp Fiction and then multiply it by say, oh, a million. The heights to which these performances soar in the pantheon of overacting is not to be believed. Then add in the murkiest cinematography on record. Then toss in editing that was apparently done by a blender. Then add in a guy eating a cat's eye.

This was a rather amazing week for me. Within the space of three days I saw not only the worst movie ever made but I also realized that my statement in a previous article published here - WORST DECADE EVER by TIMOTHY SEXTON - that this decade had yet to produce a truly great movie was wrong. Two days before witnessing the spectacle that is Maniac, I finally saw Donnie Darko. Why it took me so long to see a movie that from all I'd heard about it was right up my allley is too complicated to get into here. Why am I bringing this up? Because this article is meant to reflect the structure of Maniac. There is a sequence in which the maniac is apparently examining a female patient and he has a fantasy in which he is kissing her minus his beard, wig and glasses while standing in the same position. It has no point. Just as this digression has no point except to give me an opportunity to admit my mistake.

Donnie Darko is a freaking masterpiece. Except I still can't quite figure out what Frank gains by doing what he does. Why did he wake Donnie up the night of the plane crash in the first place? Little help here?

Oh, and the cat whose eye gets eaten is named Satan.