Massacre at Central High

My wife hates doing the "what was the artist thinking when they made this" analysis of media. Unless it is painfully obvious (say, an "issue" movie like Platoon or Schindler's List) or the allegory is unmistakable (X), she's not much for delving into the psychology behind a movie. She would never be the one to look at something like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre and believe it's about anything other than what it says on the tin. I don't share her point of view -- I find it fascinating to try and unravel what a movie or an album or a book says about its creator -- but I get why she thinks as she does. She just wants to enjoy the damned thing, not turn it into a college thesis. Massacre At Central High poses an interesting conundrum, then, for those willing to dig deeper than what the movie shows you, because it is so bafflingly constructed and executed, it might be impossible to know what the director was going for here. To properly explain, I have to explain the story: David is a new kid at Central High. He encounters, and falls in love with, Theresa, who is the girlfriend of Mark, an old buddy from childhood. Mark introduces him to his friends, a trio of sociopaths who rule the school with an iron fist. David doesn't approve of Mark being in the group, or how they ruthlessly torment others. After a series of ever-escalating confrontations, David finally decides to go vigilante and kills them one by one ... but in the vacuum left behind, the formerly oppressed kids start to become bullies as well, and all the factions want David to be their messiah. There is the most literal view of this movie, which is a sort-of Death Wish-goes-to-high school, proto-slasher, exploitation movie. The violence is definitely more in line with the early slashers of the era like Black Christmas and Halloween, where there isn't really much in the way of graphic violence ... but it is definitely more inventive in its kills than those movies are, especially in the first half. And David cutting a path of vengeance certainly does bring to mind the vigilante movies of the era, in a number of ways; David himself is unstoppable, cunning, and always a step ahead. The antagonists aren't just bad guys, they're hyper-realized uber-bad guys; seriously, the first time it gets violent between David and the group is when he stops them from gang-raping Theresa's best friends, and they retaliate by dropping a car off a jack onto his leg, crushing it with the brake rotor. These aren't bullies, they aren't even Stephen King-style bullies; they are malevolent, amoral monsters wearing human skin. And where there's exploitation and slasher tropes, there's objectification of women. There's all of three women with speaking roles; one gets topless, and two do full-frontal. The acting is perfunctory, the dialogue is basic, and none of the characters act like anybody would in real life; Theresa and Mark know David is killing people, and they never go to the police or a teacher. Taken at face value, and I can't blame anybody who does, this is a movie designed to appeal to the lizard section of a man's brain. It has explosions, violence, bad guys getting their just desserts, and beautiful women frequently naked. But if you look past the surface level and actually examine the movie, you begin to see something else. A very weird, very off-kilter, potential satire of fascism, the corrupting ability of power, and the consequences of violence. It's not handled with any sense of delicacy whatsoever, that's for sure. Massacre is as subtle as a tack hammer to the face. But there is an argument to be made that its story is a political satire. Take the bullies, whose power seems unchecked by any authority figure whatsoever (there aren't even adults seen until the last ten minutes). Their rule is so complete, in the dining area, their table is adorned with a fruit platter in the middle and other students perform table service. When the two girls are nearly raped, there is no discussion of going to the police, or even acknowledgment that it was, in fact, a sexual assault. Their rule over the school is tyrannical and unchecked, to an almost comic degree. When they begin to get picked off in highly suspicious accidents, only one person wonders if there is something more to it; everybody else shrugs it off. There is no rumination on mortality, no astonishment at one of their classmates being dead. There is only either apathy or shrugging "eh, no loss" attitude about it. And once they realize their tormentors are gone and the reign is over, everybody swarms in to try and take their place, becoming just as terrible as the the gang was. Massacre is so surreal in its presentation, both hyper-serious and nonchalant to the point of wondering if the movie has sustained brain function. The premise of all these kids having latent sociopathy and the power vacuum driving them all mad when the bullies get taken out is so ludicrous, just as much as David's vengeance becomes a reckoning when the school's political dynamic undergoes its seismic shift. Massacre's surprises aren't of the Sixth Sense-style plot twist, but of the kind that make you question if the director was alright in the head. It is a movie committed to doing things the weirdest way possible, with all the wrong musical cues and acting choices piling onto the surreal nature of it all. So, which is it? Avant-garde deconstruction of fascism disguised as an unrestrained parade of cartoonish violence? Or a basic, trashy, straight-forward exploitation B-movie whose only design is a thrill-ride? I honestly don't know, and I don't know that it can definitively be said one way or the other. The vibe of the film is ultra-serious, except when the corny 70's soundtrack cues up, or the acting betrays little familiarity with how humans talk, think, and behave. The plot is bombastic to the point of disbelief, but the movie never once tries to act like this is a parody. Nobody acts like a human being would in any given situation, but there is a clear line that can be drawn between the dynamics playing out and real-life situations. Everybody has seen a movie where there seems to be two tones or styles clashing with one another in the movie, and it almost never works. I don't know if I can say it works in the strictest sense with Massacre At Central High, but I can say that it makes for a compelling, if confounding, watch.