This is "Troll", an American movie from 1986, so I was one year old when this got released and despite having its 35th anniversary this year, this film is far from forgotten. Let me start with the basics: There are horror components here for sure, but I would call this mostly a fantasy film. With an ounce of comedy too, the imdb genre descriptions gets it right this time. The director is John Carl Buechler and he is also one of the two writers apparently, even if he is not officially credited in that department. Sadly, Buchler died not too long ago and looking at his entire career now, it can be said that he was really a man of many professions. Dabatable if "many talents" is accurate as well. At least, he tried a lot. That much is safe. His most prolific area of expertise was the special effects department, even in the very final years of his life and career. He was in his early 30s when he worked on this movie here and not a complete rookie, but still relatively inexperienced. Had only worked on a segment from another feature film before apparently. If we are looking at him as the man in charge. Today, it's probably not an exaggeration to say that this one here is one of those releases for which he is most remembered today. His co-writer here was Ed Naha, two years older actually, but still with us and he turned 70 not too long ago. He focused mostly on writing and just like with Buchler, this is also an early career effort for him. Unfortunately, a lot of the stuff he worked on afterwards was not exactly well-received gently speaking and this includes a great deal of animation as well. It is certainly also true for him that this movie is easily among his most famous, also such a long time after it came out.
If we look at the cast, there are certainly some interesting names here. For me personally, it was interesting to see L&O's Michael Moriarty here, who is also pretty old now, but as I like the show I just mentioned (although Waterston more than him), it was a welcome addition. Sadly, his character felt pretty insignificant and had almost nothing to work with. I mean he is second credit. Clearly disappointing. Also in it is Sonny Bono, yep the one from Sonny & Cher. He is not featured constantly throughout the film, but he is there nonetheless. Most remember him as a singer though I guess and honestly his performance was not great or anything, so I can see why. The one closest to being the lead here is probably Noah Hathaway, at least on the male side. He is mostly known for "Die unendliche Geschichte" from two years earlier. Well, what can I say? He was alright here, nothing more, nothing less. His female co-lead is Jenny Beck, the one who plays his character's sister. Nothing to really remember here either. Her career started approximately five years earlier and ended roughly half a decade later as well. Probably also her career-defining credit this movie. The actress who plays her mother here has a name that sounds poretty similar this time. Phil Fondacaro is maybe a contender for most memorable performance and that is not only because he plays two characters, but because he has great recognition value with the human character he plays (long before the likes of Dinklage) and also because he plays the title character. Glad to see he is still alive with how things went for other miniscule actors like Troyer or Villechaize. I hope he is alright. And finally, I totally must mention Julia Louis-Dreyfus. Yep, the one from Seinfeld, Veep and many other pretty popular shows. She was in her early/mid 20s when this came out and it is apparently her first film, so quite an entrance, even if she showed up in a Woody Allen film the same year. But yeah, I am not sure I would agree with the girl here that she is so pretty and she is really my type, but enough of that.
This is a pretty short film. It barely makes it past the 80-minute mark and that already includes a solid set of closing credits. Without those, it is even shorter than 80 minutes. But it's a good thing honestly. The story and everything here already felt stretched despite the short duration and there were a handful scenes that certainly could have been left out. This is also the real problem. The quality simply isn't there. It felt very random at times. Little made sense here and I know it's a fantasy film, but still they have to do better in terms of storytelling in my opinion. The introduction with the troll basically taking over the girl's body needed better explanation, like why is he who he is and where does he come from. Also pretty strange that he could randomly turn into his troll physicals anytime again and what happened then with the girl. Strangely enough, the girl was totally unharmed in the end. Definitely way too much craving for an unrealistic happy ending. Then I also had an issue with the idea that the troll must turn all apartments into well troll world looks, let's call it that. And if he succeeds, then the world belongs to him. Very simply idea, but made virtually no sense. Why this house in particular? They totally needed more and better explanations altogether. Same is true for the idea that he will at all costs defend and save a blonde innocent girl and that is of course the one he turned into, so he basically sacrifices all his plans to protect a human? The only valid explanation there is linked to the film itself, not the story. The troll had to have a vulnerable side, so the film is never too serious. I mean he also did not kill anybody, just transform them when conquering their apartments. They simply wanted younger audiences to be allowed to watch this film too. Away from the troll, there are more ridiculously unauthentic inclusions. I am for example talking about how the young male protagonist correctly guessed that the old lady is a witch. Said old lady was played by the way by mother and daughter Lockhart and the former is still alive now at the age of 95. There the film struggled again too, no acceptable explanation why she suddenly has to look young again.
On a more positive note, I did like the way the title character looked. Solid work with the make-up and effects there I suppose. He was extremely scary in an awkward way to me and I can kinda see why everybody was all of a sudden screaming from fear when they watched his true self. I certainly preferred his looks over the looks of the apartments after he had taken care of them. I mean the mini trolls were nice, but other than that it did look a bit cheap here and there. And it also sounded cheap sometimes. With that, I am mostly referring to when the girl (troll) speaks with the troll's voice. Or altered creepy, much deeper girl's voice I could also say. Not sure what was up with that. A touch of Exorcist perhaps, but the revelation element was certainly not enough of an explanation to make this work. One of not too many good moments from the movie for me was probably a very human one, namely when the girl is ready to have her friend over and daddy (Moriarty) opens the door and sees the man. Imagine what you would feel like if your young daughter (or even old daughter) had a fella like that over (even if there is no romantic stuff indicated here, all kids-friendly) and did not tell you as a parent who exactly would be coming and you would see it at the doorstep. Would you be happy he is a professor? Anyway, the girl thinking he was an elf when they first me was somehow funny too. Aside from that, I was surprised to see an MGM sign (with the lion) at the very start because I thought that this would have been produced by some small underground company, but nope. Then again, the fairly famous cast makes it obvious that this was not a low-budget movie, even if, unfortunately here and there, it sometimes looks like one. Oh and their characters are so weird that you are not angry at the troll.
I read that the sequel to this one here is considered by some the worst horror movie ever made, maybe even the worst movie, some will say, but this first film is also not exactly a revelation. It is all over the place story-wise and almost nothing makes sense. Then there are also individually bad moments and not just a few. You will recognize those when they happen. One example would be when the old witch with dramatic music turns into the young witch, also also when the old witch talks to the boy on some occasion and is very determined. Or also the wind instrument she was using on one occasion I am undecided what to think there about the noise hurting all the creatures of darkness. I guess June Lockhart here really did not have the character of a lifetime, even if there was so much alleged depth to said character with her long fantastic history and how she once even was in love with the title character. Extremely bizarre. Just like the boy (Hathaway) getting closer to the absurd truth and knowing almost exactly what is going on. His alien assumption being the only wrong thing makes him a great investigator I suppose. Come on, her furniure is why he assumes she is a witch? Oh and finally, I must mention that we have not just one, but two Harry Potters in this movie. I kid you not. What a coincidence. Or at least I think it is. I doubt Rowling named her protagonist after this movie here. Ah yes, the cops at the end clearly underestimating the situation and all that happened were decent too. Film ends on a comedic note, light note. Okay, that is pretty much it. For me, it is an easy thumbs-down and I never reall thought I could give it a positive recommendation. Still I must also say that all in all this movie is not a failure in its entirety. On some occasions certainly and a lot could have been better here, but it's not an abomination. I think the average rating here on imdb is relatively accurate, maybe slightly too high overall. If there is any reason to check this one out, then it is just from the guilty pleasure perspective. I am glad it was this short and I say go skip it.
If we look at the cast, there are certainly some interesting names here. For me personally, it was interesting to see L&O's Michael Moriarty here, who is also pretty old now, but as I like the show I just mentioned (although Waterston more than him), it was a welcome addition. Sadly, his character felt pretty insignificant and had almost nothing to work with. I mean he is second credit. Clearly disappointing. Also in it is Sonny Bono, yep the one from Sonny & Cher. He is not featured constantly throughout the film, but he is there nonetheless. Most remember him as a singer though I guess and honestly his performance was not great or anything, so I can see why. The one closest to being the lead here is probably Noah Hathaway, at least on the male side. He is mostly known for "Die unendliche Geschichte" from two years earlier. Well, what can I say? He was alright here, nothing more, nothing less. His female co-lead is Jenny Beck, the one who plays his character's sister. Nothing to really remember here either. Her career started approximately five years earlier and ended roughly half a decade later as well. Probably also her career-defining credit this movie. The actress who plays her mother here has a name that sounds poretty similar this time. Phil Fondacaro is maybe a contender for most memorable performance and that is not only because he plays two characters, but because he has great recognition value with the human character he plays (long before the likes of Dinklage) and also because he plays the title character. Glad to see he is still alive with how things went for other miniscule actors like Troyer or Villechaize. I hope he is alright. And finally, I totally must mention Julia Louis-Dreyfus. Yep, the one from Seinfeld, Veep and many other pretty popular shows. She was in her early/mid 20s when this came out and it is apparently her first film, so quite an entrance, even if she showed up in a Woody Allen film the same year. But yeah, I am not sure I would agree with the girl here that she is so pretty and she is really my type, but enough of that.
This is a pretty short film. It barely makes it past the 80-minute mark and that already includes a solid set of closing credits. Without those, it is even shorter than 80 minutes. But it's a good thing honestly. The story and everything here already felt stretched despite the short duration and there were a handful scenes that certainly could have been left out. This is also the real problem. The quality simply isn't there. It felt very random at times. Little made sense here and I know it's a fantasy film, but still they have to do better in terms of storytelling in my opinion. The introduction with the troll basically taking over the girl's body needed better explanation, like why is he who he is and where does he come from. Also pretty strange that he could randomly turn into his troll physicals anytime again and what happened then with the girl. Strangely enough, the girl was totally unharmed in the end. Definitely way too much craving for an unrealistic happy ending. Then I also had an issue with the idea that the troll must turn all apartments into well troll world looks, let's call it that. And if he succeeds, then the world belongs to him. Very simply idea, but made virtually no sense. Why this house in particular? They totally needed more and better explanations altogether. Same is true for the idea that he will at all costs defend and save a blonde innocent girl and that is of course the one he turned into, so he basically sacrifices all his plans to protect a human? The only valid explanation there is linked to the film itself, not the story. The troll had to have a vulnerable side, so the film is never too serious. I mean he also did not kill anybody, just transform them when conquering their apartments. They simply wanted younger audiences to be allowed to watch this film too. Away from the troll, there are more ridiculously unauthentic inclusions. I am for example talking about how the young male protagonist correctly guessed that the old lady is a witch. Said old lady was played by the way by mother and daughter Lockhart and the former is still alive now at the age of 95. There the film struggled again too, no acceptable explanation why she suddenly has to look young again.
On a more positive note, I did like the way the title character looked. Solid work with the make-up and effects there I suppose. He was extremely scary in an awkward way to me and I can kinda see why everybody was all of a sudden screaming from fear when they watched his true self. I certainly preferred his looks over the looks of the apartments after he had taken care of them. I mean the mini trolls were nice, but other than that it did look a bit cheap here and there. And it also sounded cheap sometimes. With that, I am mostly referring to when the girl (troll) speaks with the troll's voice. Or altered creepy, much deeper girl's voice I could also say. Not sure what was up with that. A touch of Exorcist perhaps, but the revelation element was certainly not enough of an explanation to make this work. One of not too many good moments from the movie for me was probably a very human one, namely when the girl is ready to have her friend over and daddy (Moriarty) opens the door and sees the man. Imagine what you would feel like if your young daughter (or even old daughter) had a fella like that over (even if there is no romantic stuff indicated here, all kids-friendly) and did not tell you as a parent who exactly would be coming and you would see it at the doorstep. Would you be happy he is a professor? Anyway, the girl thinking he was an elf when they first me was somehow funny too. Aside from that, I was surprised to see an MGM sign (with the lion) at the very start because I thought that this would have been produced by some small underground company, but nope. Then again, the fairly famous cast makes it obvious that this was not a low-budget movie, even if, unfortunately here and there, it sometimes looks like one. Oh and their characters are so weird that you are not angry at the troll.
I read that the sequel to this one here is considered by some the worst horror movie ever made, maybe even the worst movie, some will say, but this first film is also not exactly a revelation. It is all over the place story-wise and almost nothing makes sense. Then there are also individually bad moments and not just a few. You will recognize those when they happen. One example would be when the old witch with dramatic music turns into the young witch, also also when the old witch talks to the boy on some occasion and is very determined. Or also the wind instrument she was using on one occasion I am undecided what to think there about the noise hurting all the creatures of darkness. I guess June Lockhart here really did not have the character of a lifetime, even if there was so much alleged depth to said character with her long fantastic history and how she once even was in love with the title character. Extremely bizarre. Just like the boy (Hathaway) getting closer to the absurd truth and knowing almost exactly what is going on. His alien assumption being the only wrong thing makes him a great investigator I suppose. Come on, her furniure is why he assumes she is a witch? Oh and finally, I must mention that we have not just one, but two Harry Potters in this movie. I kid you not. What a coincidence. Or at least I think it is. I doubt Rowling named her protagonist after this movie here. Ah yes, the cops at the end clearly underestimating the situation and all that happened were decent too. Film ends on a comedic note, light note. Okay, that is pretty much it. For me, it is an easy thumbs-down and I never reall thought I could give it a positive recommendation. Still I must also say that all in all this movie is not a failure in its entirety. On some occasions certainly and a lot could have been better here, but it's not an abomination. I think the average rating here on imdb is relatively accurate, maybe slightly too high overall. If there is any reason to check this one out, then it is just from the guilty pleasure perspective. I am glad it was this short and I say go skip it.