Psychological Slasher: Maniac (2012) vs Maniac (1980)
This series begins with the desire to study the classics, gain more knowledge, have both a deeper understanding of, and maybe develop respect for, the Horror films of our past. The reviews I find cover thoughts on both films, with the reviewer watching the original film FIRST. Not me. Not this series. Having virgin eyes to many ‘vintage’ films, I come with unbiased viewership.
Both films do follow similar storylines, a man struggling with the inner war of giving in to the desire to scalp beautiful women. But here’s where the similarities end. I’m trying my hardest to keep this series spoiler free, so you can easily decide whether both, one, or neither sound good to you. Or you can argue me in the comments below! Be prepared for me to argue back. 😉
We’ll follow this order:
- Explore thoughts on the 2012 remake starring Elijah Wood and directed by Franck Khalfoun
- Dig deep into thoughts on the 1980 original starring Joe Spinell and directed by William Lustig
- Does the remake measure up to the original?
- Recommendations
Maniac (2012)
My initial thoughts after viewing the opening scene of the 2012 remake are mixed. I mean, it is a hell of an opener, way to set the scene! The story can’t possibly be going anywhere GOOD. But there’s a lot of telling, and not enough showing me information I need. I feel like I’m meant to be shocked, but that’s it, nothing more complex than that. But that can be okay in some instances. Let’s truck on.
I’m loving the depiction of paranoia, but I want more. I want to see our main character, played by Elijah Wood, drenched in suspicion at every turn, in every scene. I want him pulled down, stuck in the loop of paranoia, not just shown this part of him so little. Give me more!
Watching from Wood’s POV for the majority of the film is fun, a little touch of individuality we don’t see everyday. The obsessive interest and behavior we get to see as if we, too, are a part of Wood. As if we, too, have similar interests and behaviors. Neat!
I wish the auditory cues were a little more…specific…and I didn’t have to work as hard to ‘get’ what’s happening. But thankfully this did not take away from the terrifying notes and rhythms of being a woman afraid, being surrounded by the evidence of humans, yet no help comes. How deep this can run. Fantastic job getting me worked up!
In addition, we’re shown the tragic results of giving into our instincts and transgressive thoughts. Medicating the symptoms, while the tumor grows. The horrifying pieces of this remake aren’t throughout, but are strong enough to give nightmares and inspire thought.
Neither Wood’s character or any of the women convince me to like them. Don’t get me wrong, I enjoy an unlikeable character, I find them the most fun, the most…REAL. Nobody is really all that likeable, are they? But I feel like I would be dreading the inevitable more if I was given the opportunity to find redeeming, surface level human qualities in our main male and female characters.
Wood’s acting is fine. There are points of genius, but that ending scene….I can’t. I just can’t. Don’t.Make.Me.Start.Laughing.Again.
But the nods to other horror greats! I caught a little wink to American Psycho, 28 Days Later, and Silence of the Lambs. Did I miss any? Nice little kisses to HORROR. Cool, this film is shouting fanboy, which is fine. Errr… but I thought it’s supposed to be a remake?
Maniac (1980)
The opener immediately has me hooked, the grunting and vocals, like our main character is ravished and starving. Gorgeous. I’ve always found older horny gentlemen to be the most creepy. They have to know this, right? The director William Lustig had clear vision, and this is evident from the get go.
Talk about REAL scenes! The special effects are surprising in their success of getting me to believe in the horrifying scenes throughout. For 1980, phenomenal! There’s such a brilliant mix of violence and everyday mundane life actions.
In addition, the inner dialogue I find brilliant, and wish it’s more popular. Not that I think stories should solely be told in thoughts of our main characters, but it could be nice for tough spots in explaining complex human emotions. Forceful storytelling doesn’t work, but in the original Maniac psychological slasher, everything’s connected perfectly and makes sense. We watch our main character, played by Joe Spinell , exercise and validate his feelings. And what feelings those are!
BLOOD! There’s blood! I thought the remake was bloody….oy! And the scenes involving violence aren’t drawn out, like some…others I’ve seen. Perfect length, each scene having specific purpose to bigger picture. The dread and intensity created is unbelievable. Lustig understands that the shock factor is necessary but isn’t excessive. Superior Horror here, guys!
The characters are, for the most part, layered, human, and likeable. Us, the audience, are constantly kept in mind, which is clear in both the overall chilling atmosphere and in the ending. I haven’t felt this way after viewing a film since the first time I watched Wes Craven’s Scream, back when I was….well, a long time ago.
Is Maniac (1980) better than Maniac (2012)?
No. Although they’re both considered Psychological Slasher films, they both speak to very different audiences. Both gory and original, but because they’re so different, I cannot say which is superior. I can say, however, that each should be viewed separately, as their own pieces of art and storytelling.
Comparing the two films against each other would be an injustice to film in general. The original is masterful, intense, and a perfect use of film as this story’s mode. Now, the remake. If you’ve seen the original, watching the remake could make you…angry. Or maybe you’ll love the twisted, poisonous apple, this film gives.
The side by side comparison shows little from each being the same. Aside from the main story, these are two very different films, both with cool aspects. Okay, okay. They’re both pretty gory and intense. But calling the most recent release a remake of the 1980 original should probably not happen.
Horror Movie Recommendations
- If you liked Maniac (2012), to get a similar feel, the best horror movies to watch Drag Me to Hell (2009), You’re Next (2011), The Strangers (2008), Mama (2013), American Psycho (2000)
- If you liked Maniac (1980), watch some of the finest Horror films, like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974), Hereditary (2018), Midsommar (2019), High Tension (2003) P2 (2007)
I’m extremely interested in your thoughts! If I watched them in their release date order, I wonder how my thoughts would differ. Argue me, make me take your side. Whichever that side may be.
If you’d like to see my thoughts on other remakes of horror originals, I’ll be sure to watch the remake first and compile my thoughts! Just leave both titles in the comments below.
Email me at parzz1val@yahoo.com
Find me on Twitter @Parzz1V
Click on my name above, by the title, to see my other articles.
All photographs pulled from Google Images.
Movies n TV
Anna (2013) To Some, Mindscape to Others, a Thriller Film
Anna (2013), also known as Mindscape, is a psychological thriller of a struggling memory detective named John.
Anna (2013), also known as Mindscape, is a psychological thriller directed by Jorge Dorado. This R-rated directorial debut stars Mark Strong, Taissa Farmiga, Brian Cox, Saskia Reeves, Richard Dillane, and Indira Varma. As of this review, interested viewers can watch this film on VUDU, Hoopla, Plex Channel, Pluto TV, Roku Channel, Tubi TV, Amazon Prime, and more. Anna originally released in 2013, but it released in the US in 2014.
Struggling to return to his work as a memory detective, John (Mark Strong) pursues a new assignment. Anna (Taissa Farmiga) views John as her last chance to prove her innocence before she’s condemned to an asylum. As John searches through her memories, a tale of abuse and manipulation unravels.
What I Like about Anna (2013)
Anna earned three nominations but no award recognition. From the Sitges–Catalonian International Film Festival, it earned a nomination for Best Motion Picture. The Goya Awards recognized Jorge Dorado with the 2014 nomination for Best New Director. Finally, Anna received a nomination from the Gaudí Awards for Best Art Direction.
Taissa Farmiga’s performance balances the line between suspicious and innocent, which is necessary for this unraveling mystery. It’s a delicate role, but Taissa Farmiga brings to life the material given.
No products found.
Anna‘s plot rotates around a new fringe science that’s slowly gaining traction. It’s less a dissection of this science and more a norm that Anna expects viewers to believe. It’s an interesting concept, though not unique. Still, it’s a nice additional dynamic to the mystery.
While not a horrifying film, it does deliver a mystery that keeps viewers engaged with enough hooks to add an extra layer before something gets stale. That mystery does linger in the mind in some respects but doesn’t haunt the viewer.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
Despite Anna not depicting these moments, sexual assault remains a recurring element of the film. Little remains conclusive, with some suggestions that these are false allegations. Furthering this point, the film depicts Anna as a manipulator and flirt when some incidents suggest she’s a survivor of assault.
Derogatory language might upset some, but these remain brief moments. The use indicates a particular character’s immaturity, but I’ll raise the point regardless. Furthering this line of analysis is a moment where a bullied character is implied to be gay, but it’s likely just an insult.
While not inherently a trigger, this new field of science earns the claim of being somewhere between forensic science and lie detector tests, a massive gap that anything can fit in. It makes everything subjective when the film wants to claim absolute evidence. I can’t help but wonder what exploring that unreliability might look like, but that’s not this film.
What I Dislike about Anna (2013)
The biggest deal breaker for some is this concept of a teen mastermind. I won’t go into details about the mystery, but I am often fatigued with this idea of a teen femme fatale. While Anna gives enough mystery, it’s an overused trope.
Mark Strong’s performance delivers on the material, but John seems so easily manipulated for someone who does this as a profession. While out of practice, I don’t understand why he believes or doesn’t believe information. If Anna depicts John as overly critical or gullible, the film will have a more consistent character.
I assume there remains an understandable reason for the name change, but Anna appears as a common title for a film, spinning a series of some recognition. Mindscape also earns some recognition and competition, but it’s a more memorable title than a single noun name.
Final Thoughts
Anna provides an interesting concept and mystery, but many shortcomings hinder the execution. Viewers eager for a psychological mystery with a drop of sci-fi, Anna delivers an engaging story. However, the market does provide competition, making it a tough film to recommend. 
(3 / 5)
Movies n TV
Tips on Raising Evil from “The Demon of Parenthood”
The assessors investigate cursed toys in an attack against commerce, but Ben has a finger on the issue in “The Demon of Parenthood.”
“The Demon of Parenthood” is the eighth episode of season 3 of Evil, created by Michelle King and Robert King. The central cast includes Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi, Michael Emerson, Christine Lahti, and Andrea Martin. As of this review, it’s available through Netflix and Paramount+ and its add-ons.
The assessors investigate cursed toys in a terrible attack against commerce, but Ben (Aasif Mandvi) has a finger on the potential issue. David (Mike Colter) receives another task from the Entity. Kristen (Katja Herbers) learns more about her missing egg. Leland (Michael Emerson) invites Dr Boggs (Kurt Fuller) to the darker side of spirituality. Sheryl (Christine Lahti) takes her granddaughter to work.
What I Like about “The Demon of Parenthood”
I enjoy the espionage aspect of the Entity, pushing David to questionable grounds as he navigates what’s right against what’s demanded of him. While this plotline doesn’t reach its full potential, this episode highlights one of the more interesting opportunities of this idea. The Entity consistently interferes with the procedural case, possibly covering up abuse to support its objectives. This episode highlights this dynamic to perfection.
Kristen gets pulled in multiple directions, forced to question her trust in David, and faces a unique horror after learning about her missing egg. While I won’t dive deeper into this issue for this review, it’s safe to say this episode belongs to Kristen, and Katja Herbers delivers.
Her unsettling night terrors suggest an intuitive understanding of some of the manipulations around her, highlighting these moments to the viewer by proxy. Beyond these meta moments, the execution of these night terrors remains pleasantly unsettling.
![Evil: Season Three [DVD]](https://hauntedmtl.com/wp-content/plugins/aawp/public/image.php?url=YUhSMGNITTZMeTl0TG0xbFpHbGhMV0Z0WVhwdmJpNWpiMjB2YVcxaFoyVnpMMGt2TlRGYWJYaGtVVFpFYlV3dVgxTk1NVFl3WHk1cWNHYz18MTc0MDQxODgxMg=)
- Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi (Actors)
- Robert King (Director)
- Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated)
![Evil: Season Three [Blu-Ray]](https://hauntedmtl.com/wp-content/plugins/aawp/public/image.php?url=YUhSMGNITTZMeTl0TG0xbFpHbGhMV0Z0WVhwdmJpNWpiMjB2YVcxaFoyVnpMMGt2TlRFdGJuQndVRmhtU1V3dVgxTk1NVFl3WHk1cWNHYz18MTc0MDQxODgxMg=)
- Katja Herbers, Mike Colter, Aasif Mandvi (Actors)
- Robert King (Director)
- Audience Rating: NR (Not Rated)
Last update on 2025-01-31 / Affiliate links / Images from Amazon Product Advertising API
Among a constant trail of failures, Leland lingers in the background as he puts pieces together for his master plan. We don’t see the full scope of his vision yet, but the suspense it builds for future episodes earns its place. I’m interested to see how these plots will evolve, even if Leland’s luck seems to turn sour. Perhaps it’s because of this dynamic that the tension works so effectively.
With a shocking moment tied into this episode, “The Demon of Parenthood” creates one of the more haunting episodes. However, the greatest accomplishment in the episode is what it establishes for the future of the series. While not all these points follow through by the end of Evil, it’s still an episode that ripples across the show’s progression.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
Without diving into too many details, spousal abuse and murder occur in the episode. This abuse might indicate a demonic influence, but such points remain speculation.
A severed body part and some gore stand out in this episode. It hardly earns enough attention from fans of gory horror, but the squeamish should tread carefully toward the end.
What I Dislike about “The Demon of Parenthood”
Many dropped ideas seem genuinely interesting, building to some potential development that receives little payoff. Missing these opportunities will never feel satisfying. While some changes are understandable, it creates holes in the narrative. For example, Dr. Boggs’ dark seduction slows in pace, becoming implied or withheld from the audience soon after “The Demon of Parenthood.” These experiences often adapt the concept of evil that the show seeks to bring to life.
Sheryl’s compliance with Leland’s plan still seems underdeveloped as a concept, especially with how far she takes it in this episode. While later episodes add a different perspective, I can’t help but feel these are retcons or concepts not thoroughly thought out.
Final Thoughts
“The Demon of Parenthood” progresses the plot and delivers some genuinely haunting moments. While a retrospective assessment does note many missed opportunities, the episode stands up beyond these missed opportunities. 
(4.5 / 5)
Movies n TV
You’ll Have a Bloody Good Time with this Eternal (2004) Health Tip
When Raymond Pope’s wife disappears, he follows the trail. But each lead points him to the Eternal beauty of Elizabeth Kane.
Eternal (2004) is a horror thriller written and directed by Wilhelm Liebenberg and Federico Sanchez. This R-rated film stars Caroline Néron, Victoria Sanchez, Conrad Pla, and Ilona Elkin. As of this review, it is available for Amazon Prime members with renting options from Spectrum on Demand.
When Raymond Pope’s (Conrad Pla) wife disappears, he’s swept into the mystery of Elizabeth Kane (Caroline Néron). As his investigation becomes increasingly bizarre, bodies pile up and point to Raymond Pope. Will he clear his name, or will this bloody rampage drown him?
What I Like about Eternal
While all of the performances add to the film, Eternal thrives on the charisma and mystique of Caroline Néron’s Elizabeth. She enchants her targets, lowering their defenses until that final moment.
Conrad Pla’s Raymond Pope also requires a delicate approach to succeed. The sleazy and hypocritical detective seems genuinely concerned for his wife (at least initially) and sells that concern. While far from an easy character to root for, the audience understands him and the danger he faces.
There’s a heavy erotic thriller angle that Eternal delivers on. I’ll linger on this point in later sections, but it certainly knows how to build tension within a single scene or between characters. These moments don’t feel forced, and while they often target a male audience, interesting dynamics rise above general exploitative content, if only slightly.
This seems to be a passion project between the creators, Wilhelm Liebenberg and Federico Sanchez. This passion lingers in the moments to deliver something unique, if not without its flaws. The film doesn’t hold back, a point that fluctuates between negative and positive depending on the situation. Regardless, it holds a charm in that commitment that’s hard to replicate without passion behind the scenes.
Tired Tropes and Triggers
The film labels itself as “Inspired by True Events,” which only relates to the general discussion of Elizabeth Báthory. It’s also worth mentioning that, much like Vlad Dracula, her story remains heavily dominated by modern interpretations. I won’t pretend to hold exclusive knowledge of these historical figures, but cultural interpretation reduces realism. The claim means little to nothing.
The predatory queer trope applies to Eternal, with little complexity to challenge the point as the violence often targets women. It’s important to note that Elizabeth acts as a femme fatale in general, but the targets remain clear. However, this film did earn a moment of recognition from the Glitter Awards (a clip was used in 2006), which might suggest the standout performance of Caroline Néron’s Elizabeth earns back some goodwill.
What I Dislike about Eternal
The erotic thriller holds a stigma that Eternal doesn’t challenge. Elizabeth remains a clear femme fatale with a slightly supernatural twist. While the performance executes this character perfectly, viewers likely know if this remains an interest or a tired cliche for themselves.
While most of Raymond’s acts make sense for the character, I hold issue with the end. Without going into too many details, he is asked to do one thing to protect himself and does the opposite for no reason. Perhaps this indicates supernatural influence, but such a claim lingers in headcanon.
The film ends ambiguously, which hardly seems fitting given the evidence and weakens the overall film. A definitive ending, or something moderately more definitive, would strengthen Eternal.
Final Thoughts
Eternal’s major obstacle in executing its erotic thriller is that of tired tropes in the modern era. If one looks past these dated points, there’s a haunting thriller that can meet moments of excellence. The plot falls short in many areas towards the end of the film. Ultimately, if a vampire-esque thriller interests you, Eternal certainly adds its perception to the niche but in a familiar form.
(3.5 / 5)
Pingback: Supernatural Horror: Suspiria (2018) vs Suspiria (1977) - Haunted MTL