The film begins with fairytale imagery, reminiscent of Pan’s Labyrinth (Guillermo Del Toro Spain 2006). The cinematography and colour exploration in the beginning scenes through the woods describe the ‘other worldliness’ that envelopes a young girl lost in an enchanted snowy place. Alas, the child is wrenched from her idyll as she and the rest of her family are attacked by an angry mob intent on killing them. Their wooden lodge is set ablaze and the little girl is the only survivor. As she runs through the forest her eyes change and this is the first indicator that she is different.

These opening scenes are visually beautiful and reveal what the rest of this film is really about: great art direction and fantastically ambient locations which emboss a story that asks questions about alienation, secret societies, forbidden love and guilt (albeit in a slightly stilted manner). What this film is not is a horror werewolf picture. Once that is acknowledged and the expectation for full on monster mayhem is quashed, this film actually has moments of tension and anticipation, which move the story at an adequate pace.

When the action is transferred to the present, the backdrop of Bucharest suggests a time and place that is steeped in the unconventional. The leading lady, Vivian is the little girl all grown up, nineteen to be precise and she is still running. She lives in a secret world that embraces the mysterious periphery of a city at night. The underground club she effortlessly enters, whilst ‘others’ struggle, is frequented by young adults that appear reckless and uninhibited, which is a sharp contrast to the morose yet smart loner. This is also where we are introduced to her cousin Rafe, a cocky, aggressive, self-confessed romantic. Vivian keeps him and his ‘pack’ in line, but she seeks solace in an abandoned church when her privacy is invaded too many times. Also inside the church, sketching, she meets a graphic novelist called Aiden who is researching the Loup-Garoux (human to wolf shape shifters). Unbeknown to him this is exactly what Vivian and her family are. Desperate to meet her again, he pursues her through the back alleys of Bucharest. She has amazing climbing and running skills so he quickly loses her. However, upon discovering that she works in a chocolate shop, he pursues her. As the title suggests, the contrast of two opposing food sources is a beautiful metaphor for Vivian’s duel personality: blood-her ancestry and her identity, chocolate-comfort, a desire/need. This also helps to describe the contrast of the two men that want her.

Every seven years the leader of the pack, Gabriel takes a new wife, and this year it is Vivian’s turn. Astrid, Vivian’s aunt, was once Gabriel’s wife, and father to Rafe. This causes conflict between her family and within herself. Vivian’s nature means she is continually fighting against who she is and all that it entails, and once Aiden stirs her more human feelings she becomes withdrawn and confused. Because of Aiden’s impact on Vivian, the rest of the pack has to asses how this situation will ultimately affect the lineage of the Loup-Garoux. She is almost repelled by an absinthe swigging Gabriel (Oliver Martinez) who represents all that she despises in her ancestry, so she begins to fight against the traditions which have always prevailed.

At first it appears that the werewolves pose no real threat to humans as their exposure would almost threaten to exterminate their existence. However in one scene a known drug dealer is used as prey for the Loup Garoux as they chase him to his death through the forest. This chase is where for the first time we get to see the transformation. They leap into the air (in slow motion) and with minimum special effects a bright, mystical golden glow poetically transmutes the human into an actual wolf. This hybrid was certainly a surprise as there was tension and a big build up to what exactly Vivian was suppressing.

Although initially a little disappointed when revealed, this has to do with the psyche of what a werewolf looks like; it actually starts to clarify the reasoning behind the behavior of some of the characters as well as questioning how they can control who they kill as wolves. There are big differences to other representations of werewolves, which includes their lack of transformation when there is a full moon and their bite is not infectious (they are however still at risk from silver). Vivian’s growing attraction for Aiden inflames a spiteful and jealous suspicion in Rafe; spying on the couple, Rafe’s pack sneak around and prowl, regarding humans as ‘meat’ and nothing more. Rafe tells Gabriel what Vivian is up to and is told to drive Aiden out of town. I really liked the idea of the Loup Garoux’s view of humans; they are merely play things and a good meal and I would have liked to have seen more development of the cat and mouse chase, it would have provided more of an insight into what kind of lives they lead, as well as contributed to suspenseful and tension filled scenes.

There really is only one significant stalker scene and it revolves around a woman in a red dress (again playing on the Little Red Riding Hood tale), who rejects the supremely confident Rafe. Rejection and jealousy induces the destructive side of him, which sees him intent on destroying Vivian’s relationship in frustrated retaliation. Essentially this is the catalyst which enables Vivian to confront her lineage, which ultimately cements her future.

Lack of identity is this film’s biggest obstacle when trying to connect with the main characters and their circumstances. Vivian is the heroine of the piece, as she is the one who ultimately changes the history of the Loup Garoux- given this, perhaps Vivian should have a persona that radiates this strength and determination. Sadly, Katja Von Garnier neglects Vivian’s stance as the character that holds the power, even though every scene that Vivian appears in she is responsible for the cause and effects of many of the male characters.

Unfortunately, Agnes Bruckner (The Woods-Lucky McKee; 2006) who plays the permanently nonplussed lead looks so despondent and indifferent throughout that she is very difficult to care about, which is a problem as the film revolves around this character. Aiden played by Hugh Dancy (Shooting Dogs-Michael Caton-Jones; 2006) does however possess a charm that is easily translatable and believable. His charm works well against Bryan Dick’s annoyingly self important Rafe, who seems to really enjoy his dual personality and pushes others around him to their limits. Oliver Martinez (Unfaithful-Paul Martel; 2002) as Gabriel, is simply not strong enough. As the pack leader he seems to suffer from the same disease as Vivian- he is completely uninspiring.

Overall the film contains questions and dilemmas which are very interesting but never really addressed; it is easy to see how this may have alienated many of the young fans of the book who perhaps engaged with the turmoil of self identification. The whole look and feel of the film is well shot and realised, but regrettably the lack of horror leaves the film confused as to what it wants to be. It does give the impression that it has dark qualities, yet, like most aspects of this film it is never really explored in detail. The direction is sensitive to its atmosphere and the visual depiction of a crumbling society is beautifully translated. It is worth watching for its imagery, and at 98 minutes running time it is reasonable to suggest that if disappointed by lack of horror content, its fragmented gothic inspired milieu provides an alternative to current hormone driven teen horror/angst pictures.

There is of course an uncomplicated story that is nothing out of the ordinary for such films, but its simplicity makes it all the more intriguing. Essentially the narrative begins with an escaped killer-Ross Thorn; he is on the loose and begins to stalk a group of teenage girls. One of the girls, Trish, her family goes away so she decides to have a slumber party with a few choice friends, excluding the boys (who are hiding there anyway) and the new girl who has just moved in next door. As darkness falls the killer sees his chance and decides to dispatch as many young bodies that are available. This of course is with the use of a slasher favourite, the power tool, in this case a large drill. With the help of the next-door neighbours, Trish survives and they band together and slay the madman, pretty simple, but what the plot does is add an adequate amount of suspense and just enough gory moments that appeases the horror appetite and creates plenty of tension.

Because such classic slasher films as The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (USA 1974; Tobe Hooper), Halloween ( USA 1978; John Carpenter) and Friday the 13^th (1980; Sean S. Cunningham) preceded The Slumber Party Massacre it is easy to relegate this film to a lowlier place on the slasher chain. Indeed, the above films are exceptional in the fact they spearheaded the genre but most have all the same ingredients and allude to the same outcome. This brings me to the only outstanding differences, which are its female writer and director. It is perhaps acceptable to state that is where the differences end. From the outset nudity is high on the agenda, more specifically female nudity, voyeuristic in its execution as we see groups of teenage girls in communal school showers, getting dressed in locker rooms, changing into their pyjamas etc. Perhaps Holden Jones was creating female bonding scenarios and nudity, and expression of that does not necessarily have to be seen as sexual? But the contradiction regarding this premise is that these films are designed for young males, whom I’d imagine would watch this film for the nudity. There are no major feminist undertones or messages in this film, but there is a substantial amount subtext which alludes to young female apprehension regarding sex and more specifically men’s sexual organs.

There are however quite a few humorous and witty moments and as Rita Mae Brown had originally written the screenplay as a parody of the mass teenage sex slasher films that were in abundance around this time, the jokes are certainly aimed at the consumers of these films as they really play on the genres conventions which fans will easily get. However, the film was made straight. Despite this there are genuine comical scenes that reflect some of Brown’s intentions, most notably a superb scene which comes towards the end of the film. Trapped in a cellar, Valerie the next-door neighbour sees a medley of DIY tools, which would suffice, as possible weapons to eradicate the crazed killer. After perusing the tools she finally settles on an electric drill. Charging up the stairs weapon in hand she gets yanked back down the cellar by the electrical cord that is still plugged in. This is a fantastic piece of parody, mocking the yet to be established ‘Final Girl’ theory. This scene is also parodied in Eli Roth’s Hostel Part 2 (2007), another nod to his obvious fandom and influences.

Although the film is littered with funny moments it is well balanced with skilfully placed tension. The second half of the film, which essentially takes place in and around Trish and Valerie’s houses, is where the horror element of this slasher really kicks in. The stalking of the oblivious teenagers switches to all out panic as they discover, courtesy of a dead pizza delivery guy, they are at the mercy of a lunatic.

The performances of the cast are credible. The only weak areas are the buffoon-like boys, who really are weak willed when it comes to women and the prospect of death. This I’m sure is an intentional character trait as similar films of this era Friday the 13^th , The Burning (USA 1981; Tony Maylam) and The Funhouse (USA 1981; Tobe Hooper) all show teenage boys on the verge of their first sexual conquest yet still very much little boys when faced with danger. Robin Stille, who played Valerie, is a really interesting character. She is pitched against Trish played by Michele Michaels who surprisingly is a sweet natured teenager. Val unlike Trish is an outcast, and has an interesting demeanour that is imperturbable yet vulnerable. Trish is popular yet compassionate; these are the qualities that make an audience root for their survival. Their relationship is based upon mutual intelligence and a strong sense of self which seems to attract them to each other. The killer, played with frenzied enthusiasm by Michael Villella does not hide behind masks or have any background information that helps understand his psyche; this is slightly unusual for this genre yet helps take the emphasis off him as human being; creating more of an inhuman quality about him. He is a plain and simple psychopath wielding an extra long drill (bit) who just couldn’t resist killing a gaggle of nubile female teenagers.

The drill does get employed as a phallic symbol in quite a few of the killing scenes, in particular one scene where he stands in front of a young girl who is on the floor backed up and helpless. The camera is low, and is shot behind his open legs as the drill falls in between his stance; we see the young girl scream as the drill comes to life. This use of metaphorical rape is well contrasted with the metaphorical castration that helps destroy the killer, as his drill gets chopped off leaving him powerless and open for ridicule in death.

The Slumber Party Massacre does not offer anything different in the sub genre of the slasher, but because it was written and directed by women it does beg the question why and how would it differ? What this film does provide is a thoroughly good ride through a well paced suspenseful, slightly gory slasher film. Whilst there is a substantial amount of bloodshed, and pointless female nudity it actually is a surprisingly exciting horror film. At 77 minutes long the ride is swift, there really is no time to question the usual mistakes characters make in these films ie don’t go into the dark garage alone etc, so it travels along with enough surprises and wit that complies with convention yet does not offend nor bore.