Bad Movie Review: Ratman (1988)
Starring:
David Warbeck
Janet Agren
Eva Grimaldi
Nelson de la Rosa (aka Mahow)
Dir: Giuliano Carnimeo (aka Anthony Ascot)
As exploitation films go, “Ratman” seemed to have it all: Gore, flesh-eating, a shower scene and needless nudity, an Italian production team, and a midget. Despite meeting that criteria, the film fell flat.
In the opening scene, our not-so-mad scientist explains that by mixing the sperm of a rat with the egg of a monkey, he created Ratman. A tiny little thing with a venomous bite and scratch that kills instantly. Because you know, both rats and monkeys carry a recessive gene that makes them venomous. We’ve been lucky in nature so far that we’ve not seen rats rearing up like King Cobras to spit in our eyes thanks to the haphazardly random nature of natural selection. We breath a sigh of relief until reckless scientists like the one in this movie come along (and force us to suspend our disbelief to ridiculous levels).
I have to admit it, “Ratman” was hard work to watch. Bad movies, and exploitation movies are fun to watch because they either exaggerate or subvert (or in the case of exploitation films, obviously exploit) cinema conventions and audience expectations. This film does none of that. It has the signature screenplay of an exploitation film – that is a stop-start series of set pieces. But they’re such bad set pieces that it’s hard to even name them as such. They’re too subtle for the genre. The only set-piece that stands out is Eva Grimaldi’s shower scene. That may be the only good bit of the film because it has nothing to do with the plot, and there’s no dialogue. You’re pleased to see her naked not because she has a great body, but because she gives respite from the tediousness that is “Ratman”.
It’s not that this movie is in the category of “so bad it’s good”. Watching bad movies a lot can be like that – they’re bad movies for a reason! But it’s the ridiculous set pieces, or golden nuggets of dialogue that keep your interest throughout the truly dire moments of a bad movie. The problem with “Ratman” is that it doesn’t have anything like that to keep you interested. The runtime comes just shy of 80 minutes, even that felt too long as I was watching it. I kept checking my watch in the hope that it would end soon. It was more of an endurance test than a bad movie.
This movie was so bad that it’s affected my writing style. Look at this review – long, boring paragraphs of prose with not even a good joke to keep you going here and there. I hope this homage of a review is boring your pants off. Because if I had to watch that bucket of excrement and waste my time, the least you could do is read this bucket of excrement and waste your time. In a display of solidarity. Right on.
“Ratman” was also released under the following titles:
- Quella villa in fondo al parco
- Terror House
- El Hombre Rato
