Simply A Masterpiece

It is a performances centric movie

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

The story, direction, characters, and writing/dialogue is akin to taking a tranquilizer shot to the neck, but everything else was so well done.

1982 slasher Deadly Games (not to be confused with the similarly titled '84 slasher Fatal Games) begins promisingly enough, getting its first scene of gratuitous female nudity in well before the opening credits have finished—that's got to be some kind of record. The topless beauty is then chased through her very dark house by a killer dressed in black (including regulation ski mask and gloves), before the woman falls through a window to her death on some rocks. So far so good.Sadly, after this encouraging start, it's all downhill. The victim's sister, Keegan (Jo Ann Harris), turns up at the scene of the crime, and a more irritating character it would be hard to imagine: within minutes you'll be wishing it was her who took the face plant onto the rocks, the woman's goofy mannerisms and constant, supposedly amusing quips proving irritating in the extreme. And she is the main character for the next eighty minutes or so. Not so great.The remainder of the film primarily consists of Keegan developing a relationship with married cop Roger Lane (Sam Groom) and a friendship with Roger's best buddy, oddball theatre owner Billy Owens (Steve Railsback), one of whom is obviously the killer. This leads to such exciting scenes as the threesome going to the park for a football game, watching an old movie at the theatre, and playing a board game (part of a montage that is accompanied by a lousy song), all of which has sod all to do with the plot.After lots of pointless waffle, interspersed by a couple of random jump scares, a spot more nudity (during the obligatory sex scene), and a couple of bloodless murders, the film ends with a predictable chase through the darkened theatre, after which Keegan conveniently finds a gun and shoots the killer dead. Normally this would signal the end credits, but writer Scott Mansfield has another surprise up his sleeve, one that'll leave you wondering what the heck you just watched.

The film starts off as any proper slasher film should - with an opening scene murder. The quality of the VHS I have is poor, so I couldn't see everything that happened during it, but it was a good attempt at creating intensity. After the first kill, we get introduced to the police investigating the crime as well as the victim's sister Keegan (a reporter) who had left the town years prior. A lot of the middle portion of the film is Keegan seeing some old friends who still live in town and reconnecting with them. There are some scenes with a creepy theatre manager named Billy mixed in as well to create suspicion. The town's main police officer is also a suspect, and some of the movie is spent showing the female lead (Keegan) falling for him despite the fact that he is married. A few of the other women in the town are killed off leading to Keegan facing off against the murderer.Deadly Games could have been so much better. It has some great things going for it; a killer wearing a black ski mask, cool movie title, decent plot... but the makers of "Deadly Games" add so much unnecessary filler that it becomes quite a bore. We get scenes of the character's playing sports and having a party, which are really pointless by the end of it all. There is also one strange choice by the director of "Deadly Games", for some reason he has Keegan act as if she doesn't even care that her sister died. She just comes back to town and is all cheery with her friends and mother. Oh, there is this strange two minute musical montage of Keegan and the two suspects playing a board game, pretty much the only connection the film has to it's title next to the fact that we see the killer playing around with the board game on one or two occasions. They could have done so much more with it, but they didn't.Acting wasn't that bad, I like that the Keegan character is different from your regular/ordinary slasher film heroine. The ending was ridiculous and insulting in a way. You spend the whole hour and a half watching it for.. that? Anyways, I'd recommend this strictly to horror completests. It drags on way too much, and because of that you lose focus and lose interest.4/10

This is a pretty messy movie. I saw it on cable when I was young and new slashers appeared every week on cable. It appealed to me at the time because the character who played "Keegan" was spunky and interesting, and the premise was, if I understand it correctly (somehow hinging on a gay subtext...?) unique for its time. There was also little else to watch back then.The story, such that it is, involves the murders of young women in a town, and the solving of those murders by the spirited Keegan, who has just moved there, and at least starts OUT as a character that isn't an empty-headed cliché.But who can tell what's going on? This movie just flaps along, presenting one disjointed scene after another, and characters you're never encouraged to care about in scenes that fall flat and look drab and ugly. The presence of the dynamic and almost always insanely fun Steve Railsback (soon to appear in "The Devil's Rejects") is barely noticed. It all becomes dull as a white color crayon very quickly with no gore, no tension, no logic and no story to speak of. This is why God invented the fast forward button. Or better yet, the "Stop" button. Put in another movie--any other movie--and enjoy a good evening's entertainment.I have a feeling this was cobbled together from the remains of several other movies somehow, like how Roger Corman's "Hollywood Blvd," which this resembles in a weird way, was assembled. I hadn't seen this for years, saw it for a buck on VHS and promptly recorded Scooby-Doo cartoons over it so it would have SOME value anyway...

I somehow thought this movie would turn out to be an undiscovered treasure, but no such luck! Visually murky and poorly plotted, this is basically an oh-so-familiar retread of "Halloween", though the director shows some talent and tries to surpass the limitations of the script. The lousy ending does not help. (*1/2)