Today, we are back to our old friend the Leprechaun. After last week's entry with his cousin Jeff, we are now seeing the title character himself. Join me as I express my thoughts on Leprechaun 1 and 2.
Leprechaun was released in 1993. It was written and directed by Mark Jones and released by Trimark Pictures. This was the first film that was made in-house for a theatrical release from Trimark Pictures.
The film's story is an interesting one. It follows a Leprechaun as he searches for the love of his life. He is very broken about it. And he does not know what he shall do without the love of his life - his pot o' gold. It's a very touching story...almost a romantic comedy in a sense. But tis a story as old as time.
Well, that's the way the Leprechaun sees it. In truth, he's a cold, vile, evil, sadistic creature that will go on a rampage to find his gold. Unfortunately this rampage has him terrorizing the new resident of a house, Tory (Jennifer Aniston) and the three guys helping fix the house. Well, it's more like two and a half - Nathan (Ken Olandt), Ozzie (Mark Holton) and Alex (Robert Hy Gorman). Now, they must find a way to last the night against the Leprechaun.
The cast in this film do a great job. It's very interesting considering that this is Jennifer Aniston's film debut. She doesn't have a problem showing the valley girl/spoiled brat persona in her performance. It's a bit of a layered performance in a way. And towards the end of the film, she doesn't necessarily play a girl in distress. Ken Olandt delivers a solid performance as the straight man to Mark Holton and Robert Hy Gorman's characters. He's the serious of the three that's taken a bit of a liking to Aniston's Tory. There's also some chemistry between them. Mark Hilton's Ozzie is phenomenal. He is a very straightforward character with a huge heart of gold. He is the film's heart in a way. He's the one that we want to protect and not see any harm come to. There is a genuine sincerity to his performance. And it's what elevates the character of Ozzie to a memorable one. And then there's Robert Hy Gorman's Alex. He's the youngest of the three. At times, however, he displays a maturity to where it feels like he's taking care of Nathan and Ozzie instead of the other way around. The friendship between Alex and Ozzie is also so well done. It could have easily been done where it was vast amounts of cheese. However, it's a genuine care between the characters that is displayed so well.
And then, we have Warwick Davis as the Leprechaun. It's easy to see why his performance is held up so high. It's the amount of fun that is on display. At this point in his career, Davis hadn't had a lot of meaty roles. I mean there was Willow. But what I mean is a performance that is so layered by the amount of fun Davis has in the role. It's like a huge spark to the film. It's honestly one of the reasons why there had been so many sequels in this series. Seeing what Davis does with each turn as a Leprechaun is awesome. He is always finding something new to showcase about the character. Plus, he gets to have fun playing a rotten character.
Originally this film was meant to be a very straight horror film. However as filming continued, it began to become apparent that it was dipping it's toes into the horror comedy genre. Plus if it had been so straightforward as a horror only film, it would have lost some of its charm. It's the way the Leprechaun moves about the screen that makes it so fun. It's a very welcome addition to horror comedy. There is some gore in the film. It was to the point where it's been said that there were reshoots to add more gore to the film. It was a way of reaching a more adult audience.
It's very clear to see why Leprechaun has lasted. It's fun. It doesn't take itself too seriously. And it's Warwick Davis wonderful performance that has people coming back for more.
Rating: 5 out of 5.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Leprechaun 2 was released on April 8, 1994. This was a very fast tracked sequel as the original had released in October of 1993. It was written by Turi Meyer and Al Septien and directed by Rodman Flender.
While this is a sequel to the first film, it's unclear if this is the same Leprechaun as that first one. None of the characters that survived from the first film return. This is a very stand apart film. Honestly, this helped set the tone for the Leprechaun films being more anthologic in it's approach. Wait, is that a word? Screw it, it is now.
On his 1000th birthday, a mean Leprechaun gets to choose a bride by making her sneeze three times, then she's his...only the bride he chooses is the daughter of his slave (who fouls up the wedding). So the Leprechaun must wait until his 2000th birthday to claim the woman of his nightmares. The descendant of the woman he wanted to marry already has a boyfriend: a brave young boy named Cody, who lives with his swindler uncle Morty and together they run a tour company called Darkside Tours.
Leprechaun soon wakes up, kills a bunch of people and kidnaps his bride to be. It's soon up to Cody to save her, and only wrought iron can destroy a Leprechaun. Morty has an idea, but it soon goes horribly wrong when he gets too greedy. Cody ventures into Leprechaun's home to save Bridget, but little does he know that a leprechaun's home has many surprises.
It's amazing at how quickly this film was put together. They kinda don't make these much like they used to. When I revisited this film, the thing that struck me was how similar it felt like Part 3 to me. Whenever I think about the sequels, my brain tended to mash Part 2 with Part 3.
When compared to the first film, the Leprechaun is given more to work with. More chances for him to be diabolical. I mean come on, there's one death involving the lawnmower. That's a pretty brutal way to go. There's a bit more definition to the Leprechaun. They knew what was working and just dialed it to 11.
I honestly wish I could say more for the rest of the cast. Besides Davis, who delivers another outstanding performance. The rest of the cast feels there for the body count and more generic. It's a bit bad as I can't recall now exactly who was in the film.
I know this is a short take on the first sequel, but there's not much more to work with. It feels like this was rushed to capitalize on the success of the first film. And it shows a little.
Rating: 3 out of 5.
No comments:
Post a Comment