I had great expectations for THE MAJORETTES when I found out that JOHN RUSSO (co-author of NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD) had based it on his novel. Sadly I had no idea of the disappointment that awaited me inside the cover of this hugely mediocre effort.

A masked killer - disguised in army surplus garb - is stalking and murdering the young female members of a majorette team one by one. The brutal slayings leave authorities baffled as there seems to be no apparent motive for the vicious and ruthless attacks. It's left up to the surviving members of the group to watch their backs before they become the assassin's next victims.

This is easily one of the 'cheapest' of the period slashers and is best avoided by fans of the genre. Atrocious acting, muggy cinematography and a theme tune that sounds like it was knocked up on a $25 keyboard (honestly!) add up to make an extremely unpleasent viewing experience. The only redeeming feature is that the killings - that were heavily edited in the BBFC's print that I watched - are surprisingly well executed and look like they might be pretty gory in an uncut print. If only director Hinzman had showed the flare for the rest of the film that was evident in the murders, he could have made this a half decent thriller. But the problems really begin when the maniac's identity is revealed far too soon leaving the closing half of the film filled with a poor and unconvincing action-revenge plot that looks like it owes more to Gary Busey's EYE OF THE TIGER or RAMBO than it does any slasher flick.

Sadly MAJORETTES ended up being a major-let down...

A killer is going around in an army camouflage jumpsuit slicing up the desirable high school majorettes with their trusty knife and leaving their bodies immerse in water. Lt. Roland Martell is put onto the case with the help of the local sheriff, but the body count is rising. There are some punk bikers and their leader is a prime suspect, but could it be the perverted school janitor or maybe his deceiving mother who plans to take over the inheritances of the old lady she's looking after.

What in the name?! This is one extremely patchwork film that has so much going on in its heavily plotted premise that it feels like everything has been chucked into a blender. Yummy camp that's frightening for all the wrong reasons. I was rubbing my eyes in disbelief in how ridiculously stupid it gets! What starts off as your conventional copy and paste high school slasher turns into an embarrassing revenge action story. Huh? Where did that come from? We watch one of the characters go "Rambo" on us. It's raining down gunfire and unnecessary explosions. Pure anarchy! These sudden incomprehensible shifts in the fitful story truly made it one unpredictable smörgåsbord of gratuitous 80s cheese. The slasher element is poorly done, but sticks to the main gruel. Vixens who get their clothes off when they can. A POV shot with heavy breathing to inform us it's the killer. Bloody murders (although they are mostly the same old repetitive kills; knife to the throat routine) on "unexpected" victims. And red herrings around each corner. The banal nature of this segment suddenly turned moronic in falling by the wayside. The a-wire action is plain bizarre, and rather guilty entertainment. A lot people bite the dust and there are unexpected surprises in who does too. Sounds complicated… well no, just messy and padded out.

Some of the key players in Romero's "Night of the Living Dead" are who to thank for this shamble. The premise is taken from writer John Russo's own novel and the script he dragged off it is completely insipid and dank across the board. Is the novel that bad? The amateurishly leaden acting makes matters even worse and there's no real central figure rounding it off. The ladies in the picture look nice, but do little else. Bill Hinzman (zombie in the graveyard in the opening scene of "Night of the Living Dead") is in the director's chair, but you wouldn't know it. One or two decent stalk scenes are there, but there wasn't much control and direction seemed quite non-existent. Being plastered with a low budget immensely brings it down and leaves a lot to be desired. The off-kilter story just didn't make too much sense or did the other pointlessly out-of-left-field sub-plots to the bigger picture. It feels fairly longer than it actually is and this erratic mood swings enhanced it even more. A tacky one-note music score is especially jerky and the stale camera-work only hurts your eyes. Mindlessly idiotic and mundane accurately sums up the hack-eyed presentation and feeble production.

This z-grade stinker entertains in its unintentional wackiness, but you can find yourself doing it tough in a glut of unbearable shoddiness. Be afraid… be very afraid.

Spoilers herein.

Yeah all the usual production values are horrible. And the setup is along the lines of Jess Franco, but with adolescent body types.

All is pretty dreary until two thirds of the way through when the slasher is discovered and blackmailed. The thing quickly disintegrates into a battle among evil groups. It is an incompetent film, but a pretty interesting collection of events in that latter third, of a scope worthy of Tarantino.

Ted's Evaluation -- 1 of 3: You can find something better to do with this part of your life.

It's not even a good movie. To many standards, this would be considered a bad movie, bordering on awful. But it's intention was B-horror, so what can you really say? To be fair, my review is a tad biased, since I've been reading a book called "Making Movies" by John Russo, the writer of the screenplay and the novel. He discusses the making of this movie in several chapters, and hence I became hugely interested in checking out this obscure horror flick. So I bought a copy of the video on Amazon.com for a cheap price, eager to add it to my collection. I always enjoy (being an avid video/DVD collector) having movies in my collection that virtually no one has heard about. Hell, there are people out there who aren't avid video/DVD collectors who have movies like "Gladiator" and "Independence Day" in their collections. So I don't want to jump on the bandwagon. Besides, I'm always curious (outside the collection circle) about obscure independent and low-budget films. So the minute I received "The Majorettes" in the mail, I was more than psyched to watched it right away.

Needless to say, this is a truly amateurish work. The dialogue is horrible and the acting is even worse. The film itself isn't very well made, but the atrocious acting was so bad that it distracted me from the cheesy aesthetics. But at least I got some laughs out the deal, though unintentional. The death scenes were poorly edited. They were edited somewhat like a R-rated movie edited for television, cutting mostly to close-ups and medium shots of the killer, until we finally cut to the knife being slashed across the victim's neck. Then we see a little blood. That's the only gore we see, and I'm sure that's due to poor production values. We basically just see the victims drenched in blood, to let it be self-explanatory that the victims got stabbed in other places. But the only effect the director was able to pull off was the neck-slashing.

The plot is flimsy, full of way-too-obvious red herrings (the evil nurse, the creepy janitor, the fanatical priest--just to name a few), and when we finally discover who the killer is, we don't have a clue as to what his/her motive was. It's basically just thrown in there to have the audience go, "Wow! I had no clue he/she was the killer!" I was definitely surprised to find out who the real killer was. I just didn't think it made much sense. And towards the third act, the plot meanders, totally abandoning the majorette-killer premise and seguing into another subplot.

So I have a lot of bad things to say, regarding to how this movie was made. Who wouldn't? I think a better approach would've been camp horror, rather than serious horror. But I got enough laughs from the bad acting (the actors literally never change expression and sound more like they're running through a first read-through) and didn't really need the actors to wink at me and confirm that they're in on the joke. Nevertheless, it has a certain so-bad-it's-good quality. It's like a train wreck. It's really bad, but you just want to see what happens and who gets out alive. I ain't gonna lie, this movie really interested me, in the way that monster movies used to interest audiences back in the 50's. So if you're looking for fun, B-movie entertainment--then I would recommend checking it out. But there's one other minor criticism I have to let out: the lack of gratuitous nudity. There is nudity in the film, but it's not exploitative. If this were a first-rate, or even second-rate, film that would be a good thing. Basically, you see the sides of the girls' breasts, but rarely do we see frontal nudity. Call me a perv, but if you're gonna make a bad B-movie, you may as well thrown in a ton of nudity. It's not like feminists are gonna be watching this!

My score: 5 (out of 10)

The Majorettes starts out as a below average, badly acted, boring slasher film. A killer in camouflage is murdering the majorettes at a local high school. Big deal. But suddenly at the half way mark, the narrative shifts and it becomes a vigilante flick as one of the slain girl's boyfriends runs around shirtless, dishing out vigilante justice against a group of dope dealers with an M-16. You've gotta see it to believe it.

Needless to say, this bizarre twist boosts the entertainment value slightly and saves this movie from the doldrums of crummyville. No talent in front of or behind the camera, but worth a look for bad movie fanatics.

No wonder, nobody bothered to comment on this piece of s...! What starts out to be a slasher (and a extremely bad one, that is) then suddenly change direction and becomes an action movie, with a lot of gunfight and explosions!? I can only hope that the book is better (which it doubt).

So don't bother watching this. There's not enough blood to make it a good stalker/slasher flick, and there's not enough action to make it a good action movie. The plot(?) is non-existing, the acting is worse than bad, the "effects" are really dull (all victims get their throat cut, how inventive) and even the editing is bad.

You're better off renting the old classics like Friday the 13th, the prowler, helloween and if you liked the action part of this movie you're better off with all Craig R. Baxley's movies.

I actually know someone who liked this movie, but I'm with the other users who didn't care for it. To my mind, it would only be somewhat worthwhile to watch it if you'd first read John Russo's Making Movies: The Inside Guide to Independent Movie Production, where he goes into some detail about some of the aspects of making The Majorettes. Incidentally, in that book he states that the budget was about $200,000. That seems about right. It certainly didn't look like it was made for any more than that!

In the movie, someone dressed in camouflage and wearing a camouflage hood is killing (primarily) high school majorettes with a knife. He leaves their bodies in whatever water is nearby: a lake, a pool. There are plenty of red herrings. There's a dope dealer and his gang, a peeping-tom retarded janitor, the janitor's sinister nursemaid mother. The killer is revealed about an hour into the movie, and it largely turns into an action film from that point on.

The general opinion is that this slasher flick by the "Night of the Living Dead" co-creators John Russo and Bill Hinzman really sucks. And in this case I'm afraid the general opinion is right on the money. What you basically have here is a bunch of barely legal Hollywood bimbos/Motley Crue groupies playing barely illegal high school majorettes who, when they're not prancing around in butt-hugging leotards or skimpy bikinis, are taking long, hot showers and getting butchered by a maniac in military fatigues. I guess I'm not entirely complaining, but these ingredients do not necessarily a good horror movie make.

The problem is this movie is derivative to the nth degree. At one point the movie lifts a scene (in a swimming pool) almost verbatim from "The Prowler". And I think this film sets a new record for stupid characters saying, "So and so, is that you?" I'd almost think this was meant to be a pre-"Sceam" parody/homage of the slasher films, but it is neither particularly funny nor clever, just tediously unoriginal. The only thing that sets it apart from other bottom-of-the-barrel slasher dreck is a really stupid action/revenge sub-plot where the studly quarterback takes on a particularly unconvincing motorcycle gang (and if there was one genre that hit bottom more consistently than the 80's slasher films it was the 80's action/revenge films). Amazingly, this empty-headed film was actually based on a novel by John Russo. I would read that instead--it can't possibly be any worse.

Hey … what's with all the harsh and negative reviews on "The Majorettes"? I watched this movie before checking out what people thought or even taking a glimpse at the rating and thought it was a surprisingly enjoyable film! I was convinced it would have some loyal fans among the reviewers, but strangely enough practically all comments are discouraging others to see it. Well then allow me to be one of the only souls on the Internet promoting this eighties action/horror oddity!

Avid and knowledgeable fans of the genre will immediately recognize two of the displayed names in the opening credits of "The Majorettes"; i.e. John Russo and Bill Hinzman. Both these gentlemen played fundamental roles in the establishment of one of the greatest milestones in cinema of all time; George A. Romero's "Night of the Living Dead". Russo was the co-writer and Hinzman played the legendary cemetery zombie with whom the invasion of the dead all begun. They went onwards with lesser successful careers in the 80's (Russo wrote and directed the obscure "Midnight" and Hinzman put together the dreadful "Flesheater"), but "The Majorettes" was their mini-reunion!

That being said, "The Majorettes" opens exactly like you expect an 80's horror movie with such a lurid title to start! With a posse of chicks in tight gym suits doing aerobics to the tunes of dreadful pop music and then collectively stripping nude to hit the showers. So far so good, I'd say… After that it's getting even more typically 80's with voyeuristic janitors, love-making couples getting slashed in the backwoods and harsh bullying all within a span of five minutes! "The Majorettes" can overall be filed in the slasher cabinet, but there's certainly more than meets the eye. The plot is reasonably ambitious and there are some clear attempts to generate tension and atmosphere in between all the gratuitous nudity and brutal gore. A vicious killer dressed in a military camouflage outfit goes around slitting the throats of high school majorettes. The local drug dealer and boyfriend of the first victim is the main suspect, but it seems that the real killer has much more religious motivations for his killing spree.

I spent quite a number of years looking for "The Majorettes" before finding it on a DVD-compilation along with "Hell High" and "Hitcher in the Dark". I have no idea why it's so relatively obscure, as it really isn't any worse than the vast majority of 80's stalk & slash movies. Quite the contrary, at least this movie tries to insert some significant twists and additional story lines. It's a mishmash of obvious red herrings and genuinely inventive plot twists. The whodunit factor is reasonably well-structured and effectively keeps you guessing along. The teen characters are also surprisingly likable and not at all the stereotypical bimbo-dimwits you anticipate to encounter in this sort of films. The acting is adequate (the copper with the mustache not included), there's plenty of excitement and the special effects are pretty cool. As far as yours truly is concerned, "The Majorettes" is one of the slasher-sleepers of the decade and urgently needs a fan base!

PS: Keep an eye open for the sequences with the grandmother! She looks as she had no idea she was on a film set!

A big, camouflage wearing psycho killer is going around offing the girls in a high school cheerleading squad. It's up to the local Sheriff (Mark V. Jevicky) and a big shot detective (Carl Hetrick) to weed through the possible suspects. One recurring clue: this killer seems to have a thing for the purifying qualities of water.

At first glance, this would seem to be a VERY typical slasher, albeit one directed by the legendary Cemetery Zombie of "Night of the Living Dead", S. William Hinzman, and scripted by John A. Russo, based on his novel. There's zero suspense and zero scares, but Hinzman goes through the motions adequately, serving up lots of nudity and violence. Some of the actors are reasonably amiable, but the performances are, by and large, amateurish and dull. (Russ Streiner, a.k.a. Johnny in NotLD, appears here as a pontificating priest.) The trying-to-ape- John-Carpenter electronic score is good for some chuckles, to be sure.

Where this actually gets interesting is at the two thirds mark. Here, the killer gets revealed, and even if you've guessed their identity correctly, it's a hoot that the way that the plot thickens. Then the killer, due to their compromising position, is obliged to help a character from a subplot take care of their problem. (Reminding this viewer of the 1975 Giallo "The Killer Must Kill Again".) Things go bad for almost everybody, and eventually the story turns into a tried-and- true revenge saga! This finale comes complete with some nifty explosions and bloody squib action.

The final third of the picture may be a turn-off for some die hard slasher fans, but just speaking personally, it's what helped to make "The Majorettes" more than just run-of-the-mill for this viewer.

Seven out of 10.

In my years of trawling through cheap movies, I've discovered that there are two varieties of bad films. The first is the 'enjoyably bad' movie, which is poorly made and doesn't work, yet is still fun to watch mainly for all the wrong reasons. You can have a good time watching these kind of movies. The second variety is the 'just plain bad' type of film, the kind that rests at the bottom of the pile. I know I always pick on it, but the first film I bought for review was the Filipino atrocity THE THIRSTY DEAD. That's just a plain, boring, totally worthless bad movie.

ONE BY ONE is a film which falls into the former camp of bad movies. Sure, it's very poorly directed (by Bill Hinzman, the guy who played the famous cemetery zombie in the original NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD), the special effects are cheap and tacky and the acting is an atrocity in its own. Yet, I found myself glued to the screen, frequently laughing and incredulous at the antics playing out during the movie. You can't really get any more '80s than the beginning of this movie which shows a group of cheerleaders dancing to rubbishy music while a geeky photographer zooms in for a closer look. Creepy janitor Harry is also lurking around, pretending to mop the floor but instead getting an eyeful of the girls. He's the type of character who enjoys watching the girls undress in their locker room - and, coincidentally, the viewer also gets to partake in this activity. There's a lot of nudity which gives the movie a sleazy, slimy kind of edge.

It doesn't take long before the murders begin, with the beautiful young girls getting their throats messily slashed by a killer in an army costume. The splattery special effects in this film reminded me of the ones in Friday the 13th, so at least they have something going for them, although the majority of the good stuff has been hacked out by the censor's knives here in the UK. Now, scriptwriter John Russo wasn't content to have his film that straightforward. Thus begins a complex subplot involving a wicked nurse (who also happens to be the mother of Harry, the janitor), who cares for an elderly woman. The woman's granddaughter is one of the cheerleaders and is due to inherit millions on her 18th birthday, which is only a week away. When Harry snaps a photo of the killer, his mother blackmails the villain with the evidence and asks him to commit one last crime; namely, murder the granddaughter on her 18th birthday so that her inheritance will pass on to her grandmother, who can then also be bumped off to make way for the nurse to claim the money for herself.

Confused? Well, it explains itself pretty well on screen, although you have to admit that this premise is pretty unrealistic. These activities take up the first hour of the film, and while what's happening up on screen is pretty bad, at least it moves quickly and doesn't become boring. The acting, as I mentioned above, is dreadful from the cast of unknowns (overage actors pretending to be teens again), with the only familiar face being that of Russell Steiner, a.k.a. the unfortunate Johnny from NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. It goes without saying that cronies Bill Hinzman and John Russo also find cameo roles for themselves to appear in.

Now, "what of the last half an hour?" you may ask, and "why is this labelled an action film?". This is where the film gets really crazy. It's like at the hour mark, Russo suddenly got tired of his slasher plot and switched track into making an urban thriller. Two young innocents, Jeff and Vicky, are captured by a biker gang headed by a drug-dealer who has been turned in by Jeff earlier on in the film. They are taken to a warehouse, where they are beaten until Harry the janitor intervenes. You see, Vicky is THE granddaughter, and if she dies before her 18th, there won't be any money for his mother. Meanwhile one of the gang members rebels against his leader and violence suddenly erupts, with the rebel, Harry, Jeff and Vicky all getting shot dead. The biker gang flee back to their trailer to hide.

Except that Jeff isn't dead. He goes to his house, grabs his dad's assault rifle and goes back to the trailer home of the gang...Yep, incredibly this film has now turned into a REVENGE thriller with the wounded Jeff turned vigilante! I really couldn't believe my eyes as I was watching this film, and the twists and turns the plot was taking. What follows is a highly cheesy shoot-out in the woods, with loads of stuff exploding and people getting shot. Things culminate in a one-on-one with the gang leader in which Jeff shows no mercy. Yes, ONE BY ONE is a bad movie. Yes, it's also an enjoyable bad movie, worth watching alone for the bizarre plot and unpredictable storyline. It's amazing the kind of films they make these days...

This lame attempt at a film was based on Russo's book by the same name and as with all of Russo's movies one wonders how Night of the Living Dead could be so good. Cheerleaders get knocked off in very boring, predictable, and basically uninteresting ways for the first hour and then it becomes a shoot-'em-out, for no real reason, so long that when they get back to the cheerleader killer plot line you forgot what you were watching. Acting is bad, but dialogue is worse, and only one man can take the blame for that.

The last scene (don't worry I won't spoil it) is surprisingly well done though and I like the last plot twist. The action were well shot, but in the wrong movie. Ultimately you can't be mad at the movie because it's just as confused as you are, but Mr. Russo has no excuses.

I must be weird, when everyone else talks of John Russo they think of "Night Of The Living Dead", when I talk of John Russo I think of mind-numbing crap like "Satan Claws", "Midnight", and this cinematic turd. For an hour it's a horrid "horror" movie about a slasher picking off Majorettes (the girls that are not hot enough to be cheerleaders), then it turns into a gawd-awful action movie. Hey, John, pick a genre and stick with it. Don't show the world that you suck at every kind of movie equally.

My Grade: F

DVD Extras: "one by one" Featurette; Yearbook; "One by one" trailer; Soundtrack; Trailers for "Flesh for the Beast", "Flesh Eater", "Slaughter Hotel" & "Faceless"

*No spoilers that I know of. Well, maybe just one.*

I did so, partly out of curiosity/partly out of prurient desire. In most low-budget slasher films, back then (mid-to late 1980's), half the female victims were always cheerleaders. This one featured baton twirlers as the targets!

"Something different, for once," I thought to myself, at the time.

Well, I quickly found out the only difference was the clothing. Skintight, semi-sequined leotards. Not bad! But, not good enough to compensate for the acting (or, lack thereof). Definitely, a B-MINUS movie!

The only reason I can think of for the sheriff being the slasher? He probably got lured into some humiliating trap by a majorette, on behalf of some overindulged jocks, back when he was in high school. Russo and Hinzman, however, obviously couldn't afford to film such an explanatory flashback.

And, the only reason I give this 1.9 stars? IT'S STILL WAY BETTER THAN "CABIN FEVER!"

Weak adaption of a not so great horror book both done by John Russo. A hooded killer is out on the loose killing off high school girls. A local gang is a prime suspect. Full of red herrings, dumb plot twists, an an unexplicable change of tone halfway through the film and then again towards the end of the film. This film is a real stinker in all respects. Rated R; Sexual Situations, Violence, and Profanity.

Just when you think there's nothing new out there, you see The Majorettes. A semi-slasher film that owes a lot to The Prowler, although certainly not the gore scenes. Bill Hinzman helmed this picture and only one other, Flesh Eater. Reportedly based on a novel, this isn't totally bottom of the barrel but it certainly tries.

A killer in camouflage is stalking the Majorettes at a high school. You will find out this is because he believes they are filthy and in need of killing. After seeing them dance and twirl batons, you, too, will seek to dismember them. They are truly awful. The acting is atrocious, as is the dialogue, and many scenes end awkwardly focusing on a character after they just finished their lines then the camera lingers a bit too long on their faces. There are some throat slashings, but most of the deaths by blade involve shots of the knife descending rather than hitting its mark.

And, just as I was getting supremely bored with this film, a stupid subplot comes out of nowhere and actually improves things. The film actually has a few subplots: besides the killer not-so-subtley stalking the girls, there is also a German nurse who wants to kill an old lady and her granddaughter(also a Majorette) to get an inheritance and a biker gang that looks like rejected roadies for Motorhead who want to get revenge on a jock for squealing on a dope dealer. These all crash into each other about an hour into the film and the murders actually take a back seat to the jock's showdown with the bikers. All of the budget effects went into this scene, which is a shame since it could have better been used during the killer's work.

The musical score is, well, interesting. Often derivative of other 80's thrillers, and this isn't a bad thing, we are also treated to a variety of guttural moans over the soundtrack. And it's not a woman moaning, so it gets very annoying.

This is for slasher completists or for bad movie night.

A psychopath wearing camouflage with a hunting knife as his weapon, commences in slaying female majorettes across the throat while bathing their bodies in water "purifying their sins". A reluctant county detective is placed on the case with a sheriff who doesn't want his company. A nurse, whose son is the high school janitor and resident idiot with a vent opened up in his supply closet so he can spy on the majorettes removing their clothes in preparation for the showers(..while also taking snapshots of them, for his private collection), hopes to gain a great sum of money from her employer's will..the employer is an invalid, pretty much a vegetable unable to speak due to a stroke that has left her practically a zombie in a wheelchair. The nurse informs the poor woman of her diabolical plans while injecting her with heavy doses of insulin. Meanwhile, a gang of drug-dealing hoodlums selling their dope to underage teens cause problems towards a high school quarterback and his friend(..she's the granddaughter of the invalid the nurse plans to kill, and also a victim-to-be set up for execution due to what she'd receive in the will at the age of 18)which culminates in two tragic shoot-outs leaving quite a many dead. The nurse, thanks to her voyeur son's taking photos of a victim as she's being mutilated by the killer, blackmails the serial killer, wanting him/her to execute her employer's granddaughter to keep their silence.

While I give a lot of love to the "Russo camp" for keeping it real by investing the film with local folks, this film is burdened by the cast's inabilities to adjust to acting in front of the camera. The screenplay is uneasy as the film moves from one scenario to another, with nearly everyone winding up dead. Though, everything ties together somehow, the glue is running and so is the audience for the eject button. I did think the twist regarding the identity of the killer was nifty and the final scene I thought worked really well. The slasher portion of the film I felt was rather clumsily staged and dragged out a bit too long removing the power these are supposed to bring when we are being led through a building murder sequence where the killer is about to strike his prey. The attacks are rather uninspired and typical of the genre. I feel the convoluted uneven story will leave many slasher fans frustrated and the killer's identity is revealed a bit too soon. The shootout belongs in another film(..although, I did enjoy both shootouts I must admit)and feels tacked on..although, the first shootout spoils the nurse's initial plans and shockingly some important characters wind up dead a lot sooner than one would expect. There's some nudity, particularly in the majorettes' locker room. As far as the attacks, most of the violence, except a few throat slicings, is off-screen. Kevin Kindlin, the quarterback who wages war with the nasty bikers, would later return as the lead "vampire" in Russo's flick, "Dark Craving."

If you're an avid fan of George Romero's 'living dead' series then you might recognise the name Bill Hinzman: he played the graveyard zombie who attacked Barbara at the beginning of Night of the Living Dead. After several negligible roles in other Romero movies and assorted jobs behind the scenes, Hinzman decided to have a bash at directing, his first effort being this tawdry slasher/revenge flick based on a novel by John Russo (who also provided the screenplay).

Opening with a gloriously tacky opening credits scene showing a group of sexy, lycra wearing babes (most of whom look a bit too old to still be in high school) busting some moves, closely followed by a shower scene during which we see the pervy school janitor taking snapshots of the girls through a ventilation grille, the film certainly starts promisingly—heavy on the 80s cheeze and sleaze, it looks set to be a blast. Sadly, even though the gratuitous nudity continues throughout, and is accompanied by plenty of violence (but not much in the way of decent gore), the sense of fun soon wears off thanks to the truly awful performances (the girls certainly weren't hired for their acting ability), Russo's woeful script, and Hinzman's uninspired direction which only goes to prove that lurching around like a drooling ghoul in front of the camera is a darn sight easier than calling the shots behind it.

4.5 out of 10, generously rounded up to 5 for the silly-but-bloody OTT Peckinpah-style shootout at the end.

This film begins as your average run-of-the-mill slasher flick, with titular cheerleaders getting killed by a man in full camouflage dress. Is it the perverted/peeping tom janitor, the jealous football star, the European nurse or the zealot preacher? Well, the filmmakers lead us astray from the majorettes and seem to center on a group of thugs and their violent escapades - as the viewers knows that this group isn't responsible for the cheerleader slayings.

The initial plot is abandoned as we are fed this side story about the thugs and the star quarterback seeking revenge on them for killing his friend. So we have a slasher film in the Cheerleader Camp mold initially and then have some Ramboesque revenge flick near the end.

VIOLENCE: $$$$ (Plenty of it, seeing as how this combines the slasher with the revenge saga. However, if you're a fan of variety, then this will not appeal to you. All the majorettes get their throats slashed and the thugs blow people away. I found it quite strange that the high school quarterback had an M-16 in his gun cabinet. I supposed all future Peyton Mannings need semi-automatic rifles).

NUDITY: $$$$ (Plenty of it as well - although that big '80's hair gets in the way at times. The peeping tom takes photos of the majorettes in the locker room and Sueanne Seamans has a shower scene that doesn't end well for the buxom beauty).

STORY: $$ (There are plot twists, and then there are plot journeys. The screenplay wasn't quite terrible as it should have stuck with one genre rather then trying to mesh two. Also, writing in an Army arsenal for the high school quarterback was foolish).

ACTING: $ (There is a reason we have never seen these faces before or since. Kevin Kindlin does the best job as the revenge seeking football star while Jacqueline Bowman - as the only majorette that doesn't employ an entire can of hairspray in one sitting - give the best efforts here. Sueanne Seamans and Terrie Godfrey looked a little too old to be portraying high school students, but without Sueanne, the filmmakers wouldn't have reached the slasher film breast-baring quota).

Contains nudity, a lil' blood. A bunch of high school delinquents start getting knocked off in several hammy ways before one brave (or somethin')boy decides to take justice, and gratuity, into his own hands. - - - I've certainly had enough of Bill Hinzman for one lifetime and that was before I saw the Majorettes. John Russo wrote the script that, most horrifyingly, is based off his novel... allegedly. Fans of bad cinema may find the overall ineptness entertaining- as I did for a short while- but it gets bogged down by too much of a "so bad its good" thing. Eventually, there ends up being very little value in watching the next series of inanities go by. Worthless, skip it.

* out of 4