Frogs (1972)

Director:

George McCowan

Writers:

Robert Hutchison (story)
Robert Hutchison (screenplay) ...

Release Date:

10 March 1972 (USA)

Genre:

Horror | Mystery | Sci-Fi

Tagline:

Cold green skin against soft warm flesh...a croak...a scream.

Plot:

Malevolent frogs proliferate at a country residence. The family who lives there is engrossed in their own problems, however...

Plot Keywords:

Frog | Island | Pollution | Mansion | Croak

Cast

Ray Milland	...	Jason Crockett
Sam Elliott	...	Pickett Smith
Joan Van Ark	...	Karen Crockett
Adam Roarke	...	Clint Crockett
Judy Pace	...	Bella Garrington
Lynn Borden	...	Jenny Crockett
Mae Mercer	...	Maybelle
David Gilliam	...	Michael Martindale
Nicholas Cortland	...	Kenneth Martindale
George Skaff	...	Stuart Martindale
Lance Taylor Sr.	...	Charles
Holly Irving	...	Iris Martindale
Dale Willingham	...	Tina Crockett
Hal Hodges	...	Jay Crockett
Carolyn Fitzsimmons	...	Lady in Car

Runtime:

91 min

Country:

USA

Language:

English

Color:

Color

Aspect Ratio:

1.33 : 1

Sound Mix:

Mono

Certification:

UK:15 (re-rating) (2005) | Germany:16 | Iceland:16 | Ireland:15 | Netherlands:16 | Canada:G | Finland:K-16 | Norway:15 | Sweden:15 | UK:X | USA:PG

Filming Locations:

Eden Gardens State Park - County Road 395, Point Washington, Florida, USA

Company:

American International Pictures (AIP)

Trivia:

This was the first of many "eco-horror" films of the 70's, inspired by the surprise box office success of 1971's Willard (1971).

Goofs:

Continuity: When Smith and Karen are walking through the willows, it's completely clear. Then, when the camera changes angles, there's suddenly dense fog. In the next immediate shot, it's clear again.

Quotes:

Jason Crockett: I still believe man is master of the world.
Pickett Smith: Does that mean he can't live in harmony with the rest of it?

Movie Connections:

Featured in Dusk to Dawn Drive-In Trash-o-Rama Show Vol. 3 (1996) (V)

Death by Turtle!

As anyone who used to frequent video rental shops in the early eighties can tell you, the one cardinal rule of renting videos is that you don't go near any case that has a painting on its cover and no photographs. As I recall, Frogs had a bad painting of a fat, somewhat dopey-looking frog with a human hand hanging out of its mouth. I remember it quite well because nobody ever rented the film and the case was always somewhere on the shelves.

I finally got around to watching it (as I knew I someday would) because it showed up late one night on the Horror Channel. Well, the film isn't quite as bad as I'd expected. It's still bad – just not mind-numbingly, irredeemably bad. Early on it sets itself up as an eco-horror but, other than showing us a few shots of rubbish and sewage in the rivers, the film neglects to give any kind of explanation as to why the pond life on grumpy old Ray Milland's private island have suddenly become a co-ordinated unit of assassins led by a bunch of frogs who seem to have acquired telepathic powers. We can only wonder what kind of private hell Milland, an Oscar-winner in The Lost Weekend, must have been going through when he accepted the role. Perhaps that's why he's so convincing here as a cantankerous rich old man; he certainly gives the best performance by far.

The film's other strong point is its location photography, but this fails by some way to make up for all the other deficiencies. Chief amongst these is the fact that the film just isn't horrific – even by the standards of its day. The deaths – when they finally arrive – range from comical to dull: one woman is somehow murdered by a turtle (although we don't actually see that murder) while another excitable old girl is chased around a forest by snakes for what seems like half-an-hour. In between these killings we are subjected to interminable shots of frogs doing nothing (apart from when someone just off-screen has thrown them onto a patch of grass the camera happens to be looking at; when this happens the frogs squirm a little bit before doing nothing). And as others have noted, frogs just don't look scary. They look stupid.

Actually, I was wrong about the film's chief deficiency: it isn't the lack of scares, it is the complete lack of attention paid to continuity. Killings that begin in darkness somehow continue into daylight before being completed after night has fallen once more. And shouldn't that 'surprise' freeze frame in the car conclude the film instead of being the penultimate scene?

At the end of the day nobody is going to watch this film hoping it will be a good movie. We all know it's bad, and so we can't really justify ripping it apart when it fails to entertain. But, when there's precious little good to write about something what other option do we have?