1989’s Psycho Cop from Wallace Potts seems to be a B-movie based on a B-movie. Said original B-movie being Maniac Cop from the previous year. Did the world need more psychopathic, supernatural, maniacal, slaughter-obsessed cops on our screens? Apparently it did in the late 80s and so here we are with Psycho Cop in 1989 and the sequel that someone was clearly pining for in 1993 (Psycho Cop Returns).
So what sets this endeavour apart from the B-movie classic that is Maniac Cop? Not much really. For Maniac Cop we have the tag line “You have the right to remain silent. Forever.”, but for Psycho Cop we have “You have the right to remain… dead.”. Technically both achieve the same desired outcome I guess! Nonetheless I really enjoyed the original Psycho Cop outing. I still have no idea if our protagonist is a devil worshipper, escaped lunatic, escaped prisoner, actual cop, or all of the above, but who cares. What I do know is that he has terrible witticisms, a strange ability to seemingly teleport when he feels like it, and a killer laugh to die for. Robert Shafer in the lead role also clearly enjoys his work as he dispatches a variety of teenagers throughout the film.
Whilst we’re on the subject of the victims, this is where the film really shines for me. These people are idiots of the highest order. How are these people even friends? What is with the constant brushing of hair from one of the females? Why does one of the characters absolutely refuse to accept anything untoward is happening whilst all his friends are gradually disappearing from the scene? And this is before we’ve even mentioned the caretaker. The caretaker impacts this film more than many have done in the 100+ years of cinema history. It is more remarkable given that he has a couple of early scenes before being killed off. Despite his lack of physical presence our idiots are constantly wanting to visit him in his caravan (despite being told he is at hospital… which he isn’t of course). They knock on his door, they call out his name, they incessantly ask themselves what the caretaker would do in this situation. His presence casts a shadow over the entire film and one which the characters struggle to remove themselves from.
Overall this is a fun movie. The kills aren’t particularly memorable and there certainly isn’t anything new to see here, but we have a cheesy, slightly incomprehensible lead protagonist, a joyful collection of idiots as victims, and the imposing presence of The Caretaker. It lingered long in my memory.
As for 1993’s Psycho Cop Returns, I can’t say I enjoyed this one quite as much. I viewed it on a wonderful technical presentation from Vinegar Syndrome, but the film itself didn’t grab me as much as the first. Popular opinion seems to be that folk enjoy the sequel more though, so I may simply be out of step with this one. The kills are certainly more extravagant. There is also more gratuitous nudity, which is remarkably absent from the first film despite it feeling like it is just the kind of film that would have gratuitous nudity. We also still have the same killer with his “witty” wisecracks. Given all these things, what is it that turns me off this sequel a little? I miss my idiots from the first film. I’m sorry, but I miss listening to their inane conversations and wondering how they came to be. I miss people getting upset about not having their hairbrush. There is no caretaker in this sequel! I’m sure many of you will have just as much fun with this sequel as with the original, but for me it will be 1989’s Psycho Cop that I will be returning to again if I need to scratch this particular itch.
