Berserker (1987)

Boasting an insane, bear-mask wearing, cannibalistic Viking for a killer, Berserker promises to be a cut above its mid-80s slasher contemporaries. Unfortunately, director Jefferson Richard does nothing to capitalise on this cool concept, instead preferring to travel down a path already well-worn by countless other stereotypical horrors.Dumb, horny, pot-smoking teens vacationing at a remote cabin in the woods; a country cop with no patience for city kids; a creepy campfire tale to set the scene; alfresco sex followed by death: this one packs in the clichés whilst neglecting to make the most of the one thing that could possibly have saved it from mediocrity—its bad-ass-sounding Norwegian nut-job.For most of the film, all that is shown of the titular berserker are fleeting shots of a clawed paw; frequent shots of a grizzly bear wandering in the woods even go to mislead viewers into thinking that the killer has somehow taken on ursine form (although a fight between the berserker and the meandering grizzly eventually clears up this confusion). In the film's closing moments, we finally get to see the killer, and it soon becomes patently obvious why Richard decided to keep him hidden for so long: he looks crap!Also serving to make the production look super cheap and unconvincing are the terrible lighting and smoke effects designed to create a creepy atmosphere, but which just look plain daft, and the crap gore effects which consist of a few naff claw scratches and a smattering of fake blood.Thanks heavens for the fact that the film has a half decent cast (including a turn from prolific genre legend George 'Buck' Flower) and that gratuitous outdoor shagging scene—otherwise it would be a complete waste of time.

A group of teenagers head out for an adventure into the woods,trying to spook each other with stories of fabled Viking warriors who used to wear the skins and snouts of bears and go berserk in order to frighten their enemies.Soon,the teens are disappearing,being dragged away to gory deaths by a hairy,half-seen being."Berserker" by Jefferson Richard is an average slasher flick.It offers some bloody deaths and lots of boring bumbling in the woods.The funniest thing is that whenever there's a kill scene,we see the bear.The pace is slow,the editing is bad and the final fifteen minutes are completely laughable.There is a pretty steamy sex scene in the woods but it is inter-cut with a death scene to make both scenes look tacky.There is very little gore,so I was slightly disappointed.Overall,"Berserker" is one to avoid unless you want to see every 80s slasher film.4 out of 10 and that's being kind.

BERSERKER is not the worst backwoods slasher ever made. Films like DON'T GO IN THE WOODS make BERSERKER look like a work of genius. The script is really terrible though and whatever they tried to do was, in the end, completely nullified by the badly written story. The idea of having a Viking mythical being behind the killings is original BUT when the killer wrestles with a bear during the end of the film, and the bear wins, well, how scary does the Viking monster look like? (the Viking killer looks like a WWE wrestler, btw).The folks behind BERSERKER tried to do something slightly different and that part is commendable. For example, the ending happens in daytime, which is different than the 99.9% of slashers made up to now. And the best part of the movie happens when the killing starts, which is intercut with sex scenes. That whole moment, until the two girls are found dead, is pretty good and creepy. It's the film's best moment. But like I've said before, all attempts by the filmmakers of trying to do something different were rendered useless because the conclusion of the story is a howler, the acting is sometimes poor (even if the cast is game), and some scenes just don't make any sense, like when the girl leaves the cabin (it's night time) to take a pee and she seemingly walks miles away from the cabin to do this and can't find her way back. How stupid! As a fan of slashers, I had to see BERSERKER. But those who aren't die-hard fans of slashers should stay away from it.

(* out of *****) Here's a bad idea for a slasher movie: Get the audience all stoked and build their expectations by setting up a terrifying, Viking warrior killer called a `berserker' who tears apart and cannibalizes his victims, but then don't even reveal him until the last fifteen minutes. Instead, have half the cast (and the best-looking half on top of that) get killed off by a stupid, boring bear. Seriously, this frustrating movie doesn't know whether it wants to be "Friday the 13th" or "Grizzly 2," and the bear attacks are drawn out and laughably fake looking. Even though it clocks in well under an hour and a half, much of this turkey is still padded with long, tedious scenes of old men playing chess and making fun of each other's hearing and frightened doofuses walking through the woods or limping and falling through creek beds. When the berserker is killed, his mask disappears off of his face for some reason, as if he's a werewolf. Curiously, of the six main characters, only two of them are killed (and the violence is minimal), so I'm wondering just to whom the heck this supposed `slasher' film is targeted. B-movie veteran George `Buck' Flower is the only actor of note in this mess, but I'm sure even he would like to forget it. The Blockbuster Video Guide gave this movie three stars -- I seriously want to meet the person who sat down, watched this entire movie, and said to him/herself, `Now that's three-star entertainment!'Lowlight: The `climactic' fight between the berserker and the bear. Most of the time, it looks like they're just hugging each other.