Love Object

Year: 2003

Director: Robert Parigi

Written by: Robert Parigi

Threat: Psychopath

Weapon of Choice: Power Saw

Based upon: none

Color/B&W/3D: Color

Language: English

Country of Origin: U.S.A.

IMDb page: IMDb link

Love Object  Love Object

Other movies in this series:
None

Rish's Reviews
I thrive on deadlines. Being an extraordinarily lazy person, I'm one of those sad folks who waits until the last possible moment to do something, and then usually manages to salvage fair to passable work for the time it's due. Back a couple of years, when tyranist was much more into this website than I was, he would send me an email, letting me know that he was updating the site, and I would try to quickly get something ready for him to post from me. Back in those days, he always had five to fifteen more reviews online than I did, and I never had any hope of catching up.
But those days are behind us now, and I am free to be extraordinarily lazy for as long as I want. Case in point: my review for Love Object. I rented this movie for the site so long ago, Pierce Brosnan was still James Bond. And it would never have seen the light of day, had I not been stumped as to its title this morning ("What was that flick," I asked, "Where there was the doll of Melissa Sagemiller?"). So here you are: one SERIOUSLY overdue review.
Kenneth is your average nerdy office worker, unhappy and alone, with a backbreaking stack of tech writing to do. When the attractive Lisa is hired and assists him, we get a glimpse of just how lonely Kenneth is. Luckily, he gets himself a fabulous and realistic sex doll, named Nikki, which he alters to look like Lisa, and it appears that happiness might come his way. That is, until he starts getting close to the real, flesh and blood Lisa. Nikki doesn't like that. Not at all.
Love Object's cast included Desmond Harrington, the lovely Melissa Sagemiller, Udo Kier (who was weird as all get out) and Rip Torn (who was also weird; every character he plays seems like an inside joke).
It was a most interesting little film. Made for very little money, it sort of feels like a student film on steroids. It had a nice little score, though. Tyranist would've enjoyed this one. It's a bit reminiscent of Vertigo (it's got a character named Novak in it, but that's reaching), but not much else. That's saying something, I suppose. And it takes a substantially dark turn in the third act--much more unpleasant than I expected.
I think I know a little something about obsession. Of course I would be remiss in not mentioning how much like me (and very probably you) Kenneth was. It went a long way in making his situation sympathetic instead of just really, really creepy. Individual results may vary.
FETISHES.
I'm not sure why I wrote the above line (or why it was in creepy all-caps and underlined thrice) in my notes, but I thought I'd better include it here.
I don't talk a lot about fetishes, even among friends. I guess it's a sensitive subject. But just like private fears, they're often irrational, and I'll bet that nearly everybody has one. Not that my dad is going to tell me, "You know, son, I really like it when women dress up in camouflage. Camouflage colours, makeup, military fatigues, even camouflage paint, you know? Oh, and bloody sheets work too." I think most people have some kind of fetish just because we as a species are so variant and different. Who really knows what drives our desires and motivations, both conscious and unconscious? I'm not going to even try, since I can't even tell you why I like the title Children Shouldn't Play with Dead Things even though I hate the movie, much less explain why Brenda's strange obession was for certain vegetables and fruits.
Some fetishes are sicker than others, though. I'd read about the so-called Real Dolls that cost a truckload of money and creep out all but the most degenerate among us. This takes it a step further, and yes, the doll is quite frightening.
The film is low budget--but would it have been better if it cost ten million dollars? Not really, no. The movie had a languid pace and for long stretches seemed not to be a horror movie at all. A very nice, unexpected ending redeemed any less successful scenes, however.
Best Scare: Dolls are scary.
I recommend the film, though it's much more cerebral and slow than the average horror film. Thriller? Not me.
Posted: January 13, 2007

Total Skulls: Unrecorded

Sequel
Sequel setup
Rips off earlier film
Horror film showing on TV/in theater in movie
Future celebrity appears
Former celebrity appears
Bad title
Bad premise
Bad acting
Bad dialogue
Bad execution
MTV Editing
OTS
Girl unnecessarily gets naked
Wanton sex
Death associated with sex
Unfulfilled promise of nudity
Characters forget about threat
Secluded location
Power is cut
Phone lines are cut
Someone investigates a strange noise
Someone runs up stairs instead of going out front door
Camera is the killer
Victims cower in front of a window/door
Victim locks self in with killer
Victim running from killer inexplicably falls
Toilet stall scene
Shower/bath scene
Car stalls or won't start
Cat jumps out
Fake scare
Laughable scare
Stupid discovery of corpse
Dream sequence
Hallucination/Vision
No one believes only witness
Crazy, drunk, old man knows the truth
Warning goes unheeded
Music detracts from scene
Death in first five minutes
x years before/later
Flashback sequence
Dark and stormy night
Killer doesn't stay dead
Killer wears a mask
Killer is in closet
Killer is in car with victim
Villain is more sympathetic than heroes
Unscary villain/monster
Beheading
Blood fountain
Blood spatters - camera, wall, etc.
Poor death effect
Excessive gore
No one dies at all
Virgin survives
Geek/Nerd survives
Little kid lamely survives
Dog/Pet miraculously survives
Unresolved subplots
"It was all a dream" ending
Unbelievably happy ending
Unbelievably crappy ending
What the hell?