Shriek of the Mutilated (1974)    American Films Ltd./Horror    RT: 86 minutes    Rated R (violence, some bloody images)    Director: Michael Findlay    Screenplay: Ed Adlum and Ed Kelleher    Music: N/A    Cinematography: Roberta Findlay    Release date: July 18, 1974 (US)    Cast: Alan Brock, Jennifer Stock, Tawm Ellis, Michael Harris, Darcy Brown, Jack Neubeck, Ivan Agar, Tom Grail, Luci Brandt, Marina Stefan, Harriet McFaul, Dwight Marfield, Jimmy Silva, Warren D’Oyly-Rhind, Ed Adlum.    Box Office: N/A

Rating: ***

 Michael Findlay definitely made a name for himself in the exploitation film industry, but it wasn’t for his killer Yeti picture Shriek of the Mutilated. It was for a 1971 piece called The Slaughter, a rather dull movie centered on the exploits of a Manson-like cult in South America (“where life is CHEAP!”). You might not think you’re familiar with it, but you probably are. After five years on the shelf, producer Allan Shackleton used it to make the infamous Snuff. That’s the one that purports to show an actual murder being committed on camera. Of course, nobody actually died during the making of Snuff, but like P.T. Barnum said, “there’s a sucker born every minute”. The controversy it stirred up is still one of the greatest marketing stunts ever pulled. That’s the one the late Findlay is remembered for.

 Findlay’s next picture was Shriek of the Mutilated, a silly horror flick about a group of college students being terrorized by a Yeti on a remote island in upstate New York. For those not in the known, a yeti is an ape-like creature more commonly known as the Abominable Snowman. Like Bigfoot (aka Sasquatch), his existence has never been proven. Much of the evidence produced by so-called witnesses is just that, produced, a hoax. However, there are some that still believe. They’re the ones with the phone numbers for tabloid publications on speed dial.

 I first heard of Shriek of the Mutilated in the 1983 book For One Week Only: The World of Exploitation Films by Ric Meyers, a jack of all trades (author, screenwriter, editor, consultant. etc.) best known for being “one of the men most responsible for the acceptance of Asian action movies and stars in America”. I first saw it in 1994 when I bought a used VHS copy at my local West Coast Video. I didn’t much like it at the time, mainly because it wasn’t the bloodbath I was hoping for. I decided to give it a second chance when I saw it was showing on Tubi. I didn’t find out until later that what I just watched was an edited version with the bloody stuff cut out. Thankfully, I came across an uncut version on YouTube and rewatched the pertinent scenes.

 One of the scenes missing from Shriek of the Mutilated on Tubi is the opening where a woman is decapitated by a swimming pool. It’s only eight seconds long and has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with anything that happens in the movie. It’s never even mentioned. What gives? If I had to make an educated guess, I’d say that Findlay threw it in there at the last minute in order to ensure an R rating. He had to do something. There’s no sex or nudity, the violence isn’t all that extreme and the swearing is mild at best (not a single f-bomb). Again, this is just a theory. I really have no idea what it’s doing in the movie.

 After an opening title sequence featuring B&W footage of a Yeti in the woods (I think, it’s hard to see what’s going on), we get down to business with anthropology professor Dr. Prell (Brock) preparing four of his grad students for a field trip to Boot Island where a Yeti has been spotted by friend and colleague Dr. Karl Werner (Ellis). Three of the four students, Karen (Stock, God’s Bloody Acre), Tom (Neubeck, Invasion of the Blood Farmers) and Lynn (Brown), spend the night before partying with friends while Keith (Harris) joins Prell for an exotic dinner at a fancy restaurant that caters to an exclusive clientele.

 At the party, one of the guests, a disturbed dude named Spencer (Grail), tells the others about his experiences with Prell on a similar excursion several years earlier. Apparently, some f***ed up stuff happened. It’s why he’s disturbed. Moments later, he returns home where he drunkenly slashes his wife’s (Brandt) throat. She reciprocates by dropping a toaster in the bathtub while he’s washing her blood off his clothes (without taking them off first). ZAP! Bye-bye, Spence!

 By way of letting the audience know how screwed the group really is, an elderly gas station attendant (not quite Crazy Ralph crazy) says, “I make it a practice never to interfere with folks when they’re bound and determined to get someplace because no matter what I say, they’re bound to get there and they’re bound to get what they’re there for.” in response to questions about their final destination. Even a grade school kid knows that spells D-O-O-M.

And doomed they are! They’re barely settled in when the Yeti shows up and starts thinning the herd. Prell, more concerned with gathering proof of the Yeti’s existence than the safety of his students, proposes using the bodies of the deceased to trap the beast. That goes over with the surviving students as well as you’d expect.

 Now you may think you know where Shriek of the Mutilated is going, but you’re probably wrong. It takes an unexpected turn into weirdness with the revelation of what’s really going on. I wouldn’t dream of spoiling it, so I won’t. I’ll only say that it involves another popular motif of early 70s horror.

 Shriek of the Mutilated was written by Ed Adlum and Ed Kelleher, the twisted minds behind the exploitation classic Invasion of the Blood Farmers (directed by Adlum). While it’s not as all-out bonkers as Invasion, it’s still pretty insane. The ending is especially gross and demented. It’s like something out of those old illustrated horror magazines we used to read as preteens. But is Shriek of the Mutilated a good movie? Is it scary? Is it suspenseful? No, no and no! It’s actually quite bad. The Yeti costume is a joke. It’s almost as convincing as the gorilla-alien in Robot Monster. It’s one of the things that make this dopey horror flick so doggone entertaining.

 Do I really have to get into the acting? It’s all bad. For most of the cast, Shriek of the Mutilated is their sole acting credit. The one performance that stands out is Ivan Agar (Behind Locked Doors) as the mute Native American house servant Laughing Crow. His crazy-eyed overacting is hilarious. Lacking the voice to say “how” or “ugh”, LC wears a headband to make his heritage known. All that’s missing is a feather and some war paint. I can see why the others didn’t go on to stardom. What you have to keep in mind, however, is that bad acting is part of the exploitation movie experience.

 There isn’t a whole lot of gore in Shriek of the Mutilated. The goriest scene is when Spencer slashes his wife’s throat with a carving knife. There’s a great deal of splatter, BUT you can tell right away it’s red paint. I guess stage blood wasn’t in the movie’s low budget. Okay, whatever. It actually adds to the film’s questionable charm.

 For all its faults, Shriek of the Mutilated does boast great cinematography by Roberta Findlay, the wife of the late director who was killed in a horrific helicopter accident in 1977. It happened on the roof of the Pan Am Building in NYC. He and 20 others were boarding for a ride to JFK Airport when the aircraft tipped on its side with the rotors still going. Findlay and two others were “literally cut to pieces” by the blades. It sounds like a scene from a horror movie. ANYWAY, Mrs. Findlay makes the cheap movie look good. She would go on to direct XXX movies as well as the 1985 street gang actioner Tenement.

 I don’t have any info on the score, but I’m pretty sure it all comes from other sources. I don’t think anybody bothered to compose one for Shriek of the Mutilated. The sole musical point of interest is the use of the Hot Butter novelty hit “Popcorn” to segue into the party scene. It’s weird to hear it in a movie about a bloodthirsty beast, but okay.

 I’m not going to try to convince you or myself that Shriek of the Mutilated is a good movie. It’s NOT! It’s really bad which is what makes it so much fun. It’s bad to the point of being laughable. It’s actually funnier than most so-called comedies of the past 20 years. This is one to watch with friends over pizza and beer or, for the more daring of you, a plate of “gin sung”. If you know, you know.