Freaky Farley (2007)
Review by Fatally Yours
This is not a horror movie.
Just to clarify, just so you’re not as confused as I was when I sat through this 83-minute time-waster. I knew the filmmakers were trying to make a bad horror movie when the proclaimed on the DVD cover that Freaky Farley was in the vein of “classics” like Silent Night Deadly Night 2 and Slumber Party Massacre 3 but I had no idea it would take the “bad movie” idea so damn seriously! Movies shouldn’t be this painful!
The film opens on Farley Wilder (Matt Farley) spying on a bunch of underwear-wearing girls through a window. Cut to Farley waking up in a jail cell and meeting yet another psychologist who wants to hear his side of the story about why he is in jail. And Farley talks…and talks, starting with the death of his mother when he was just a wee lad and how his father became strict and overbearing afterwards. Farley was punished numerous times for the slightest offenses and wasn’t allowed to attend college or pursue his own career. So, stuck in the small town of Morgansville, Farley spent his days spying on people (especially young women), which led to his nickname, “Freaky Farley.” Farley continued his miserable existence until one October when he met a girl just as weird as he was named Scarlett. Together, they explored the town and the supposedly haunted woods where many people have disappeared and, which according to the local hobo, contained dangerous monsters named Trogs. After hanging out with Scarlett, Farley becomes defiant towards his father and sticks up for himself. One day, he disobeys his father and travels deep into the haunted woods to find the cabin his family used to visit in its happier days. Once there, he learns the truth about his mother’s death and snaps, going on a killing rampage. The psychologist coaxes what really happened that day out of Farley, and he is granted one day out of jail to travel into the haunted woods and do a service for the town…
Believe me, that long-winded synopsis sounds much more interesting than the film actually is. Though I will say that if the filmmaker’s main aspiration was to make a horrendously bad movie, congrats! They’ve achieved their less-than-lofty goal. Freaky Farley is not tongue-in-cheek, though it tries desperately to be and make fun bad horror movies. It fails miserably, dragging the poor viewer along with it. For the entire first hour nothing happens. We see Farley in interactions with his father, Scarlett and the annoying girl-next-door Katie and even a ninja (!) but nothing that would make this film even remotely close to a horror movie. When Farley finally goes on his killing “spree,” it’s a laughable affair. He kills several people with a knife, but whenever the knife is shown plunging in and out of someone, there is no blood to be seen! Even if this supposed to be poking fun at all the bad horror flicks that feature bad continuity, the tone is all wrong and it just looks like a major mistake on the filmmaker’s part. That, or they couldn’t afford fake blood!
Another thing the low-budget film is seriously lacking is competent acting. Now, I usually hate to rag on low-budget films that can’t get professional actors, but the acting in Freaky Farley was so bad that it would be a disservice to the readers not to mention it. First and foremost was Matt Farley as the lead…his acting was so over-the-top and annoying that it reminded me watching an actor in an elementary school play. His lines were delivered so unevenly and woodenly that it sounded like he was reading directly from the script. And, seriously, what was the deal with the Katie character, played by Katie Reidy? She dressed, acted and talked like a little girl, not the 20-something that she was. Come to think of it, most of the characters acted like immature little kids. The film’s only saving grace, as far as acting was concerned, was Sharon Scalzo as Scarlett, who brought a much-needed spark to the otherwise dull proceedings.
Of course, the actors aren’t entirely to blame for the poor movie. The script, written by director Charles Roxburgh and actor Matt Farley, is where most of the fault lies. There is a certain charm some bad horror movies have, a charm that keeps viewers entertained and watching the film. It was precisely this charm that the film lacked. In the first hour, there is nothing to keep the viewer engaged. This is supposed to be a horror movie, guys!! C’mon, make it fun! Throw a little blood around, a little nudity would have even been okay…anything to perk up an otherwise painfully boring movie. Unfortunately, we don’t get much. About the most fun I had was watching the guys in big furry suits play the Trog monsters. The rest was just as dull as actually living in a podunk town like Morgansville where the story is set.
I will say that writer/director Charles Roxburgh did a competent job of directing. Shots were always well-lighted and the characters were always framed properly. Mr. Roxburgh, sir, I hope you stick to directing as opposed to writing…
If the filmmakers wanted to make a bad movie, they have succeeded. If they wanted to make a bad movie that people would enjoy, they’ve failed. This is the kind of film that will piss you off and make you wish you could get the 1.5 hours of your life back that you just squandered. I guess it could be worse…at least I didn’t put my blood, sweat and tears into creating this pathetic piece of trash!
Freaky Farley on Myspace
Popularity: 3% [?]
[ ‹‹ Book Review: Meat by Joseph D’Lacey Rue Morgue Cinema Night – Valentine Villainy ›› ]
