The greatest movie ever!

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

The thing I enjoyed most about the film is the fact that it doesn't shy away from being a super-sized-cliche;

A film of deceptively outspoken contemporary relevance, this is cinema at its most alert, alarming and alive.

First things first I as a horror fan am not a real fan of the small but small non the less prevalent sub-genre of horror and art films focusing on the subject of necrophilia. Personally it just does not do anything for me....just not my cup of tea and that may or may not make this review sound biased so i will try to be as objective as possible. I found out about this film around seven or eight years ago give or take and from what i had initially read this sounded like a seriously depraved piece of film. The review made the films come of as something comparable to nekromantik or aftermath but it floated in obscurity until 2009 when the good people at synapse films put out a very, very nice print of an otherwise worthless film.I sat through most of the films in this sub-genre, nekromantik 1 and 2,aftermath, parts of kissed, still yet have to see love me dealy. However unlike the first previous mentioned three films everything that made these films compelling , disturbing, or even remotely entertaining was just not there with this film. THe story line revolves around a depraved killer who wakes up from a coma only to continue his spree witch automatically made me question the idea that director had ripped off Halloween. THe character is like stone, he wanders for the majority of the film ( that is when he is not killing and humping...in that order) he is wandering like some mindless zombie, not even speaking till the end. Even then he starts ranting that he had some type of relationship with the protagonist again i cant help but think of Halloween.The dialog is atrocious even for a c grade exploitation film. The violence is moderate no more blood than any other slasher films. what got me was how many people said how disgusting the scene with the prostitute was. I was leary of this scene when i first slipped in the DVD because personally this type of thing really does get under my skin. However i have to say that the scene was so fake unrealistic that i got rather board with it and ended up fast forwarding through it entirely all in all this film is not worth it. If you are interested check it out just don't let someone rob you for this film it is not worth it in the slightest.

Though I have reviewed this before, a new edition with some improvements in color and some directorial changes has necessitated a fresh review. The new DVD is mastered from a surviving 1" tape; the original negs and positives no longer exist. The picture has more color and less crud than the dupe of a cruddy VHS I was familiar with. Unfortunately, the technical improvements, courtesy of Synapse, do not change my opinion of the film -- it is still a torturous bore. The writing is of the blatantly obvious kind. There is no subtlety at all. Characters state exactly what they are thinking. In this case, the killer/rapist/necrophile John Lucker expresses his hatred of women in the most direct, uninteresting way. Like everybody else in the cast, the actor portraying Lucker overacts. There is no style, no vision, and no suspense. The director made the movie out of a desire to shock a government film body, not a desire to tell a disturbing story. The infamous scene in which Lucker paws a decaying corpse and licks his fingers is a bit gross, but there's nothing clever or interesting about this scene or anything else in the film. Parts of the film have a "Maniac" feel; other parts resemble Shaun Costello's "Forced Entry". When all is said and undone, "Lucker" is inept rubbish with as much aesthetic value as a gonzo porn flick. Come to think of it, I'd prefer gonzo porn any day.

John Lucker awakes in a hospital bed,from a failed suicide attempt a few years ago and he proceeds to escape only trying to dodge numerous hospital employees until he kills a man that discovers him.Somehow he puts on pants,sneakers, sunglasses and(haha well look at you!) a leather jacket and he kills the dead man's girlfriend. Johan Vandewoestijne's Lucker works as a portrait of a quiet serial killing necrophiliac who stalks women and kills them,made in 1986 just the year before Jorge Buttgereit's excellent Nekromantik.Nick Van Suyt's performance as the creepy,menacing John Lucker makes the film have a gritty feeling and the music builds the tense atmosphere.Lucker learns one of his last victims is still alive,he becomes angry and starts killing his way towards her,he kills a prostitute and leaves her body for a few days until the sex starts,the sex scene with the corpse is gritty,doesn't look the same from Jorge Buttgereit's Nekromantik,a film that I dearly loved and admired for its work in the life of necrophiliacs.Since Jorge Buttgereit made necrophilia look like a good thing, Johan Vandewoestijne makes it look too good from that finger icky scene,there is plenty of misogyny around.Lucker is a well crafted horror thriller with Nick Van Suyt's menacing,somewhat quiet performance as John Lucker,the ominous night stalking atmosphere that Johan Vandewoestijne had made.The film and music has a feeling of stark isolation of John Lucker being the only person dead to the world.Although I cant recommend it from not really getting to know John Lucker much,he seems like a guy you become friends with in a bar but doesn't say you're friends since he's too quiet to tell you why he's hanging with you.I would've liked to know why John Lucker became this way or why he's mentally sick and I don't wanna bring up Jorge Buttgereit' film again as an example.oh and one more thing:what's with those series of psychotic attacks?

Lucker the Necrophagous is a testament to the type of film that you either love it or hate it; there is no in between. The general consensus is that it's a terrible, disgusting movie with absolutely no redeeming values. That's right, it is. Frankly, it's downright appalling. It's another rare movie that exists only to be as atrocious as it can be, without any sort of justification. I'm a part of the minority, however, who found it worth their while. Undoubtedly, there are several boring scenes, and of course, the dubbing and acting are terrible, but there are some completely unexpected moments of sheer dread that I couldn't help but to enjoy myself. Naturally, Lucker remains as a complete surprise to me. It stays as one of the most depraved, misogynist, and disturbing movies ever conceived, but along with this grotesque content are some tense and fear-inspiring scenes. I think I found Lucker so effective is because I didn't have any expectations for it, but I was still exhilarated to see not just a famous obscurity, but one of the most shocking and appalling movies ever made. It was really a charged experience.John Lucker has attempted suicide during a mental institution transfer, and now lies heavily sedated in a private clinic. Of course, he wakes up. He lurks around the hospital and eventually kills one of his doctors (this is one scene that has a few minutes of walking, but pays off with a brutally gory scene). He then kills the doctor's girlfriend in her car, drives off, and has sex with her fresh corpse. The next morning, he walks his way (again, for a few minutes) to town where he finds that a victim of his crimes from eight years ago, Cathy Jordan, has survived. Outraged, he continues to fulfill his sick lust by stalking and brutally murdering women, yet he becomes so overcome with rage and shame for not killing Cathy off that it develops into a physical psychosis. He decides it can wait a week, however, as one of the women he's killed since escaping (a prostitute) has turned into a nice, pus-filled corpse, presenting the infamous necrophilia scene that remains as one of the very few movie scenes that made me want to gag. He then finally arrives at Cathy Jordan's apartment building with yet another victim, and plays a sick game of simply watching her psychological torment and listening to her scream. Lucker eventually gets bored and kills Cathy's husband and goes after her. He leaves her with his other still-living victim, but she gets loose, stabs Lucker, and escapes. Lucker's mad as hell and must bring this to an end, once and for all.This is not a perfect film by any means. Some parts indeed are rather slow, and the acting and dialogue were some of the most humorous (and then turned incredibly annoying). It was easy enough to do, as some of the content is so appalling that the dialogue faded into the background as I watched these overwhelming displays. Though Lucker tries to be the most insanely putrid movie imaginable with necrophilia and misogyny, it also has the simple structure and execution of the standard slasher movie. These elements, though cliché and watered down, are very creepy in the film's rough atmosphere, even though there's essentially no reason to fear for the victims. All characters present are simply meant to pad the body count and to make excuses for putrid scenes of overly-dramatic blood and guts. Why I think it's effective is because there's such an insane fear of the villain, not for the victims. Each time Lucker began to kill someone was a moment for me to wonder with dread what he was going to do this time (this all works because Nick Van Suyt plays such a good psychopath). Because of this natural tension being spewed by a most vile killer, I didn't mind the longer periods of walking and stalking, which seem to be the biggest complaint of this film. In fact, it was almost a relief from some of the stress produced by the mere presence of John Lucker. His uncaring and unforgiving attitude in how he kills people creates some truly unrelenting terror. This is also amplified by the music, which had a very creepy electronic tone that reminded me of the music from The Shining. There's a eerie feeling to the whole movie.Though some horror elements here are standard, Lucker is still one of the most disgusting and unapologizing movies I've ever seen. The sheer brutality of not only the murders, but of the necrophilia angle is stomach churning. There are no limits set to how Vandewoestijne tries to shock and horrify his audience, most notably by the famous finger-licking scene. Other than just the incredibly sick necrophilia angle, the misogyny expressed in this film is outrageous and even maddening sometimes. Scenes of Lucker pulling up a chair to watch his victim scream in pain, agony, and terror are unbelievably barbaric, and his efforts at humiliation and degradation are terrifying and enraging. Those who have seen I Spit on Your Grave will see much of the same disgust and disrespect for women that this shows, maybe even more, so be sure to hold onto your hats. I can easily imagine showing this to someone who will have to leave the room to vomit. It's that type of exploitation, and it should never be taken lightly. Like I said, the slow points and humorously annoying acting are almost saving relief from what atrocities are committed in unflinching, in-your-face detail. As exploitation goes, Lucker's on the extreme!