User Reviews

To everyone who's been writing about how awful this movie was - did you think everyone was terrible? What about me? I played Raymond (the projectionist). I hadn't realized this film was released, until I found it on the IMDB. When they were shooting it, it was known as "Phantom of the Bijoux."

I remember this movie vaguely. I saw it on "Elvira's Macabre Dark Mistress Theater"(or something like that). I have been reading a few of the above reviews and it is safe to assume that this flick has been rendered unanimously a Z-Grade howler of the very first order. And rightfully so. However, there is something to celebrate in this trash. And that would be the nostalgia of low-budget(to the say the least in this case) 70's garbage that can only be represented in the spirit of movies like this. "THE MEATEATER" was probably filmed by a wayward crew trying to cash in on the drive-in craze that saturated inner-city lots across the Midwest and California at that time. When I saw this flick it was appropriately mocked by Elvira. Now,it would be lucky enough to be even relegated to collecting dust on a shelf at some Mom and Pop video rental(If those still exist). Aside from that, the filmmakers obviously intended to entice "THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE" crowd. Hence,the title. But it's plot similarity to that film is tenuous. For those of you who actually went to the trouble to seek out a review of this very obscure picture, I admire your frivolousness for the genre. And I do owe you a bottom line opinion. "THE MEATEATER" is an abysmal movie. If you have sought it out,then it is worth renting because of the reasons stated above. Other than that,the movie will forever descend gracelessly to the bowels of oblivion and beyond.

I watched this obscure, bizarre movie as a child and had months of nightmares after watching. I think my older brother had rented it with friends and I picked it up and put in the VCR and hit play after seeing the blood covered fork on the cover. The old man in the movie really freaked me out as a kid. I think what made it scarier to me at the time was the dated set and imagery. The styles of the seventies were scary enough, plus you throw in all of the loose ends and voilà, you have a traumatized child... I also recall the story leaving me confused, which compounded the whole effect.

I haven't seen this film in about twenty five years, but I am not surprised this many people have commented on it. I recall that it was truly bizarre and decided to look it up today.

I love this movie because it is so bad! The reason meat is mentioned or shown so often, is because Derek ran out of money and found money to finish the movie available from the California Pork Board! Oh, I wish I was an Oscar Meyer Weiner! Watch closely during the family sing along, notice that the family car is on the street but it is not actually going anywhere?! And is it just me or was Dianne Davis, Mother trying to make out with a rather young Gary Dean, Son. And how many ladies let a dirty old man stare at them all the time? It is hard to believe, but three of these actors went on to bigger things! The actor who played Mr. Knuckle Real Estate Agent,starred in Ghostbusters! Remember the elevator? Irving Wassermann "Pa" starred in Roseanne! And Scott McGinnis "Necking Boy" Starred as Mr. Adventure in Star Trek III: The Search For Spock! But he was at his very best in Joysticks a.k.a. Video Madness! Why can't we get classics like this on DVD?!

James L. McIntyre

This is a variation on The Phantom of the Opera which has a shoe salesman who is tired of his profession buying and renovating a disused cinema. The problem is that a murderous fiend is lurking on the premises. The actor who plays the cinema manager looks like a z grade version of comedian Paul Lynde. He also has a distinctive way of pronouncing theatre. Another memorable character is a slob of a detective who decides to "investigate" mysterious deaths - that is when he is not stuffing his face with food. This low budget junk has its moments. I saw the name of Steve Neill in the closing credits. He later helped with the special makeup on Mutant (aka Forbidden World).

yeah...rain city video in Seattle has a dollar bin and this was there. was, as its in my cabinet now. but could be in yours if you are looking for something to take your mind off something terrible like a root canal. it is best screened (really its more tolerated: not watched, viewed, shown, screened, uh displayed, no its tolerated and barely at that) with a large pizza, bag of chips and a case of PBR. I can say with full disclosure this is really one of the best bad movies to watch when you feel that need... but please, don't spare the beer, i suggest cans as they will be flung at the TV...the way the lead says "theatre" (thee-8-urrrr) will really drive you mad... all in all, bad. break out the armored Plexiglas TV protector for this one... it feels way longer than it is, be certain to keep the laptop charged up for some anything during the boring parts but there are a few moments, lines, shots etc that do remind us, justify us, make it all worth while...this little obsession of ours to find THE baddest movie out there. bad. but in a great way and well worth the dollar, well, not as much as murdercycle, future kill or time walker ("nothing can stop him. not even time") but worth it...

MONROVIA, California is where this theater was, right next to Trader Joes, and at that time KFC, on Foothill Blvd. The reason it was so bad was that it was a cover for what was really happening in the basement. XXX, thats right, they were filming Porno and using this movie as a cover. So just remember, things are not always what they look like. Does anyone know where I can get a copy? I remember it was on TV back in the 80's. I have done several searches and have yet to find a copy for sale. It reminded me of the type of movies we used to make at Monrovia High. Like Attack of the Killer Chairs, has anyone seen that one around?

Not one of the five pictures on the box of this movie are actual shots from the movie; they all seem to be photographs taken on set by a guy with a far better aesthetic sense than the cameramen. That should set the stage.

First off, the title is fallacious. The "villain" eats a rat in the beginning, and nothing else for the rest of the movie. Most of the meat-eating is done by the protagonists, including some disgusting closeups of hotdogs and campy endorsements for them scripted in for no apparent reason, the singing of the Oscar Meyer wiener song for no apparent reason, a big closeup of some roast beef for no apparent...okay, you get the idea. In fact, most of this movie happens for no apparent reason. The thought that the director even wanted to get out of bed after the first day of filming this abomination bewilders me.

The father of the family shows no facial emotion during the duration of the film. His children make you *want* them to die, they're so obnoxious and irritating (not to mention just as flat as the rest of the characters, if not more so), and his wife...don't even get me started.

The cops are so pathetic that it made me laugh hysterically; the police chief has some of the worst lines out of anyone, and the one other cop they show looks like a misplaced 30s gangster about to hop into his getaway car.

Gore? No. Despite the bloody fork on the cover (it's beyond me to guess how that wormed its way on there), there is so little gore that I'm surprised this got an R rating. Not that I'm one to complain about an un-gory movie, but such a movie would need something like plot, acting, scripting, etc. to hold my attention and stand a chance at keeping me entertained. Instead, my only entertainment came from ripping this movie apart and laughing hysterically at each new display of ineptitude.

Did I mention that the movie theater plays nature films to be family-oriented, yet draws a large teenage crowd on the weekends? That this film has the ugliest kid I've ever seen toting a skateboard around inside the theater, even though he was dropped off by his parents and they're picking him up at the end of the movie?

I was amazed by one thing, though. I felt *sure* that if anyone else had heard of this movie, it would be in the IMDB bottom 100. I can't believe that it's not in the bottom ten, much less the bottom 100.

How is it possible that THE MEATEATERS isn't in the IMDb 'Bottom 100?!?!?!?!? This movie is worse than bad. Bad would suggest an emotional response on behalf of the viewer - anger, revulsion, nausea, etc. Meateater can't even provide that. I can say with absolute confidence that I would rather stare at my blank TV screen for an 1 1/2 hours than watch this movie again.

I actually found a video rental store that carried this movie, and I would note that they ended up going out of business - I'm convinced Meateater had something to do with it.

Be forewarned; the cool image (a cartoon) on the cover of the VHS has nothing to do with the film. The only scene that holds a place in my memory (for which I hope the director suffers in the afterlife for) is the family driving around in a station wagon singing "I wish I was an Oscar Meyer Wiener..." If that sounds like entertainment to you, maybe you should rent this flick. Otherwise stay far away from it.

Derek Savage isn't my real name. Do you honestly think I would put my real name on this? It was a total giggle. Caldwell (who stupidly used his real name) and I knew exactly what we were doing. We set out to make an incredibly bad film, one I can't believe people have actually and recently seen and are even seriously writing about it. Some have even loved it!? Amazing! I don't even own a copy, but after reading some of the comments I now wish I did. Yes, the acting is bad. We tried to find the worst actors imaginable who would work for fifty bucks a day. The actor who played Mitford (I don't know where I came up with that name) was so nervous his knees literally shaked when he acted. We had to start plying him with Valium to calm him down. I find it hard to believe that some of these actors actually got another job.

A brief history on me. Went to UCLA film school in the mid 70s. Made my first feature at 24 for my thesis. Got discovered. Got married. 26 film festivals. Thought I had it made. Then nothing. This came up. The producer owned a theater in Monrovia, Ca. and wanted to set a movie there. I thought, why not? It was job, writing and directing. Think I made 300 bucks for both. A few years later I made one of my real films under my real name. Won the Grand Prize at Sundance. Had two more of my films shown at the festival in later years.

I'm still writing and directing. Currently as I write this in Aug '08 I start directing a TV movie the day after Labor Day. I came up with the name Derek Savage because I thought it sounded French, but the crew called me Derek Sausage.

If anybody has a copy of the new art work with the fork, let me know at my e mail address.

I gave myself a ten but I don't really deserve that.

Derek Savage

P.S. Reading some other comments I feel the need to say that this film was not a cover for porno being shot in the basement. I wish, it would have made the environment even more of a goof than it already was. Again, I'm just blown over that people have actually seen this. Somebody is making $ but it ain't me, babe. Not that I would want to use my real name to go and try to collect. I hope that the hapless producer who threw his money into this got something back. But, knowing this business, I doubt it. And I can promise the writer who hoped there wouldn't be a sequel that there definitely won't be one - unless I'm offered a truck load of money. Then I might do it under my real name. I am now worried that some sick mind I messed up is going to track me down. Hopefully they will show up with a pen for an autograph and not a knife to slit my throat and then gut me.

Ok-let's cut to the chase. This is one of the most inane pieces of film-making that I've ever seen. In fact, the director and two of the stars apparently have never done anything since...which doesn't surprise me one bit. But, if you like kitsch, and go into this with the right frame of mind, you could spend the duration of the film alternating between gaping at your screen in utter disbelief that this piece of drivel actually got made, and giggling uncontrollably at....the utter disbelief that this piece of drivel actually got made. I actually watched it twice, which I reccommend, trying to figure out what in the blazes the title had to do with anything at ALL!!! And that, my friends, is the best part of this sad excuse for cinema. Keep score of references to meat throughout the film...our final count was 14. Trust me...it's worth it.

The Meateater is one of those rare underground flicks that is actually INTERESTING. Think Ed Wood meets Stephen King. Bad technical stuff, but great characters.

The characters are unexpectedly and instantly likeable. Mitford, Raymond and the sheriff are the sort of mid-western anti-heroes that make one laugh out loud more than once. Mitford, the dad/main character, is dumbfoundedly fascinating - he's whiney, hokey, freaky and very funny. We want to hate him but CAN'T, because we can identify with his dissatisfaction in life and desire to live out a dream. And viewers will relate to how Raymond tries B.S.'ing his Projectionist experience (NONE) to Mitford in an interview. The son, Ricky - looks cool, exactly like a kid in the late 70's stoner-era wanted to look. Kind of like a teenage Mini-Me to Edgar Winter. The wife's subtle but obvious interest in meat products is highly amusing. Savage should have worked that nugget further into the plot somehow. It could have worked, considering the title of the movie.

Plot: It's there, albeit loose at times. Due to Mitford's drive to break out of shoe sales and live out a dream, the family buys the Crest theater (Mitford pronounces it "thee-ATE-er"). Unbeknownst to Mitford & The Gang, there's an old psychotic guy living there who used to have a thing with Jean Harlow. After being badly scarred by a fire, the geriatric looney toon starts killing people at the thee-ATE-er. And here's the cornstarch to thicken it all up: Mitford's daughter is a blonde bombshell named - you guessed it - Jeanie. Like Harlow. Good idea, but the Jean Harlow connection is so thin that it's almost non-existent.

There is a great deal of humor in this baby. Most of it is in the dialogue, but it's elsewhere as well. Innuendos are everywhere, from the Grizzy Safari movie to the numerous references to hot dogs. Freud would have a ball with this flick.

The actors are VERY seventies and Savage was an OK director.

If you have interest in cheesy 70's horror, then you'll know what to expect. This isn't the Exorcist, people, nor does it try to be. But in the category of Clever, Low-Budget Velveeta-Caked Horrors, this is a gem.

An All-American suburban family man purchases an old, ramshackle movie theater with high hopes of restoring it as a family-run business. Unfortunately, he is unaware that the theater is home to a creeping madman obsessed with 1930s movie legend Jean Harlow. Not surprisingly, bodies begin piling up the minute the theater reopens, and the new owner's daughter finds herself in mortal danger due to her uncanny resemblance to Harlow(in truth, she looks about as much like Jean Harlow as Jack Klugman does).

This is a textbook example of trash-film-as-comedy...with its barnyard production of manifold deficiencies, it's hard not to feel a chivalrous, understanding sort of love for THE MEATEATER, similar to the way that you'd love your own two-headed, pigeon-toed offspring. If, however, your personal funnybone is not jabbed by the face-down peculiarities of supremely bad cinema, then you'd be best advised to forestall this one .

4/10

Perhaps one needs to experience the "Elvira's Movie Macabre" version to truly appreciate this very bad film, but what I enjoyed the most is the earnestness with which it was made. The creators didn't seem to realize that they were making an awful "Z movie" and didn't have fun with it. My favorite line was (paraphrased, perhaps) the new owner of the theatre asserting that it would be a family establishment, and that they would show "nothing stronger than a G."

A family that has just bought an old theater discovers that a crazy, murderous old man is lurking inside and killing the patrons. Talk about awful. Awful acting, direction, script, editing. This movie has no rewarding features what-so-ever. Do not waste your money on this and lets prey they never ever make a sequel to this. Makes Plan 9 from Outer Space look like Citizen Kane. One question though, why isn't this in in the IMDB bottom 100? Rating 1 out of 10.

I rented "The Meateater" after much hesitation, and I realized...I was better off hesitant!

The movie looked like some all-American family made it. The main characters are of this one family that start running an old movie theater. And, because this movie is so freakin' family-oriented, the movie theater shows nature films!! And the theater is packed every night!

Alright, the story goes like this....Some old guy who lives at this theater has an obsession with the old movie star Jean Harlow. But that fades fast until the end, when he kidnaps and "terrorizes" the daughter of the theater's owner, who holds a striking resemblance to Harlow herself, and what a coincidence, her name is Jeannie, who, for the most of her screen time, whines about wanting to go on her date with some baseball player from school. But this girl looks nothing like a high schooler! (Obviously. Why would there be anything close to good in this film?)

For some reason, I paid much attention while watching this film, and tried to get any scares from it. In the end, there was nothing. A slightly interesting climax, but not when the antagonist (or antagonists, I couldn't figure it out) is an old man!! Oh, real thrilling! He'll kill you, but first he needs to get his walker!

Also note, there are about three deaths in this movie. An electrocution, something I didn't understand, and, in the end, this one disgusting death that was pretty much the only thing confirming a nice family didn't make this. (That, and when the camera was slowly looking over the daughter.)

My question is: what did this have to do with eating meat? The only eating scenes are one in the beginning, when the guy eats a rat, and disgusting closeups of people eating while watching the movie, which really kills your appetite. I thought the killer was cannibalistic or something. But no. Just some stodgy old man with an obsession with an old movie star. Though, that was somewhat interesting, and I'd have to say, the ending was somewhat appealing. Don't know why or how. This movie isn't much of a horror flick, but rent it if you're babysitting. The kids might enjoy it.

Also note the many plug-ins. "Jimmy Dean," "Oscar Meyer," and so on. I think that's where the money for this ultra low-budget flick came from.

A family buys an old theater with a bad rep. It appears an old, homcidial maniac has been living in the place for quite some time now and is willing to kill anybody that messes with his turf. Candiate for worst motion picture of all time is dull, plotless, unexciting, and features awful special effects. Unrated; One Scene of Brief Graphic Violence and Drug Use.

I seen the cover to this movie when I was a tyke. Ever since it stuck in my head and had to find it. I don't know how many people ever heard of this movie but it's bad, but not awful. This movie could have had a lot more potential. Horrible direction and acting. Although, I have seen a lot worse ones by far. By the way, this movie was one of the most hardest movies that I found.