Cindy Collins Smith's review (see above) explains the context of this film very well. I strongly recommend reading it before you read any of the other reviews (including my own - below).
'Epically awful' 'full of misinformation' 'a propaganda film which was so ineptly made that it had the opposite of its intended effect.' Much has been written about Reefer Madness and its importance in the history of film-making, so I won't bother to reiterate any of these opinions. Instead, I would like to look at Reefer Madness as a film.
How does it rate as a film?
Poorly.
It has a predictable, uninteresting plot, cardboard cut-out characters, racial stereotypes presented as obvious facts, a stiff script, an unrelentingly plodding pace, and it is very poorly shot. The dramatic points in the plot are so badly acted, scripted and filmed that the film fails to produce any real drama, and the only likable characters in the film are, sadly, the ultimate villains. The editing isn't too bad.
IMO, the fact that it was shot with very little budget over a very brief period and was not intended to be taken very seriously does not really help matters much. The low budget shows. Some competent acting talent was squandered. And the film really isn't funny unless you're high!
The plot is simple - a clean cut American Boy is given a joint in place of a cigarette and is, from that point forward, spun out of control down the path to lunacy, addiction, and violence. Saying any more would lead to a spoiler, and, just in case any of you are seriously considering watching this film, I wouldn't want to ruin what little entertainment value there is in it. Having stopped experimenting with drugs twenty years ago, I can not imagine anybody even being amused by this film unless they themselves were on drugs. It's simply poor. And poor does not necessarily = funny.
Unless a film is particularly artful, I will rate it according to its entertainment value, not necessarily its technique, theory or method. This, for me, is one of those films which does more harm than good - it is neither an effective propaganda piece nor a parody of one, and therefore deserves a single star.
'Epically awful' 'full of misinformation' 'a propaganda film which was so ineptly made that it had the opposite of its intended effect.' Much has been written about Reefer Madness and its importance in the history of film-making, so I won't bother to reiterate any of these opinions. Instead, I would like to look at Reefer Madness as a film.
How does it rate as a film?
Poorly.
It has a predictable, uninteresting plot, cardboard cut-out characters, racial stereotypes presented as obvious facts, a stiff script, an unrelentingly plodding pace, and it is very poorly shot. The dramatic points in the plot are so badly acted, scripted and filmed that the film fails to produce any real drama, and the only likable characters in the film are, sadly, the ultimate villains. The editing isn't too bad.
IMO, the fact that it was shot with very little budget over a very brief period and was not intended to be taken very seriously does not really help matters much. The low budget shows. Some competent acting talent was squandered. And the film really isn't funny unless you're high!
The plot is simple - a clean cut American Boy is given a joint in place of a cigarette and is, from that point forward, spun out of control down the path to lunacy, addiction, and violence. Saying any more would lead to a spoiler, and, just in case any of you are seriously considering watching this film, I wouldn't want to ruin what little entertainment value there is in it. Having stopped experimenting with drugs twenty years ago, I can not imagine anybody even being amused by this film unless they themselves were on drugs. It's simply poor. And poor does not necessarily = funny.
Unless a film is particularly artful, I will rate it according to its entertainment value, not necessarily its technique, theory or method. This, for me, is one of those films which does more harm than good - it is neither an effective propaganda piece nor a parody of one, and therefore deserves a single star.