New Year's Countdown...of Horror: 1 - Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer

1
Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer
 1986, d. John McNaughton - amazonprime

The Story (in 2 paragraphs or less)

Henry is a serial killer.  He lives in an apartment with an ex-con he was in prison with, Otis.  Otis' sister Becky has left her husband after years of abuse and comes to stay in Chicago with Otis for a break.  Otis is a horny man with no boundaries, men, women, boys, his sister... we learn from Becky that he probably got this from his father, who used to abuse her.  Becky learns that Henry killed his mother, and falls in love with him. Poor Becky.

While out with prostitutes, Henry's compulsions overtakes him, and he kills both the one he's with and the one Otis is with.  Otis is scared, but intrigued, and Henry starts to teach him the tricks of the serial killer trade, as it were...until Otis takes it too far and Henry has to clean house.

Why this?
I started the countdown with Rooker, so I guess it made sense to end with Rooker.

What's Good?
Honestly, I don't know what's good about this.  It was effective in its unpleasantness, but it wasn't a good movie. I guess it was good that the film didn't present Henry as any sort of sympathetic anti-hero ala Taxi Driver. He's just a fucked up dude who murders and even when we learn more about him, it certainly doesn't make us like him at all...not like poor Becky who has had a rotten life, and can't help but make bad decisions because she doesn't know what a good one looks like.

Visually it's pretty tame by today's standards...hell, Hannibal was a network tv show that's gorier than this is.  But somehow it's more disturbing in its crudeness.  It caused a pretty big stir at the time, with its X-rating and sensationalized reviews, and while it's not nearly as upsetting today (again production values to blame) it's still effective at being disturbing.

Not so good...
There's an uncomfortable correlation between sex and violence, and documentaries about serial killers do acknowledge that sexual abuse or trauma in childhood is often the gestation of their violent urges.  This film captures some of that, but it also has a grotesque fixation on tracking it.  One of the first images of the film is a slow, lurid pan up of a dead (presumably) prostitute in lingerie with a breast exposed and a bottle sticking out of her head.  There's no necessity to be as lurid as it was which speaks more to the director's interest in mild titillation (as usually happens in conventional horror movies) coupled with violence.  As I said, it's effectively uncomfortable, but it's also gratuitous.

With the exception of Rooker, who carries a very calm demeanor (and his trademark simmering rage just under the surface), the acting is pretty awful.  The role of Becky should be the focal figure here, the one the audience is really trying to understand, but Tracy Arnold doesn't get across any of the emotion she's supposed to (whether it's lingering fear of her husband, or irrational attraction to Henry).  She's so wooden and her line delivery is like she's being reminded of her prompts off screen.  Tom Towles as Otis certainly looks the part of a dirtbag, and he's eminently unlikeable, but, again, his delivery is so stilted and unconvincing. 

It's an ugly movie (visually as well as in theme and story) with a soundtrack to match.  It's heavy into 80's droning synths and tries to mimic Psycho's stabbing strings with jarring, unnatural screeches when someone gets stabbed.  It's pretty corny actually. 

The bad thing:
Well, it's almost all the bad thing.  I think in some ways this film is trying to make a statement that someone like Henry, who has a compulsion to kill, is in some way better than Otis, who just derives pleasure from killing.  They're both awful in their own godawful, special way. 

Franchise Potential:
There is a sequel to this in 1996. There probably shouldn't be.
But like kind of serious exploitation movies which are at least trying to examine something but then become dumb franchises (think, like, First Blood, or Death Wish for example), I'm surprised Henry didn't just continue on Michael Myers style.  I certainly see the seeds of Dexter in this.

Did I like watching this?
No, no I did not.  I don't think you're supposed to.  I think were it better made I might appreciate it a little more (but then I actually do kind of  appreciate what it did accomplish for $110K)