Director: Richard Friedman
Starring: Derek Rydall, Jonathan Goldsmith, Rob Estes, Pauly Shore
A man loses his home and suffers life-threatening burns from a fire deliberately set by commercial real estate developers vying for his property. One year later, a shopping mall opens on the land, and a series of murders begins.
Developers of a new shopping mall wants Eric’s property. I was waiting for events to unfold which would lead to Eric’s reason for revenge, but unfortunately I waited in vain. His story was merely told in back flashes. Being such an important aspect of the film – and the very reason for Eric’s revenge – why was this not shown in the beginning? (like in the 1981 movie ‘The Burning’, for instance.) Also, if this is a vengeance story, the culprits should have been shown so we could have an idea who were to be avenged.
Instead, after a short intro establishing the characters, the film jumps ahead one year to the opening of the Mall. Eric now hides and lives in the Mall, and starts killing people. But if its about revenge, then why is Eric killing innocent people – like the piano player for instance? Did he have to die simply because he is employed by the Mall? And what about the security guard? Also simply because he works at the Mall? And the Mall owner’s son? Just because he was being a dick? If Eric is killing innocent people, why should I root for him? If he was a maniacal killer like Jason Voorhees, then it would have made sense. But this is supposed to be about vengeance.
I’m about to do spoilers, so stop reading if you intend watching the movie still. Melody was Eric’s girlfriend, and believing he is dead she is trying to move on. So, when she meets reporter Peter there is a spark between them, and this causes Eric to become jealous. But what did he expect? Why did he never try to contact Melody, since we learn he never died in the fire? To a certain extent I suppose I can understand he didn’t want her to see him all scarred and looking like a monster, but then why not allow her to move on? Instead – after a year!!! – he suddenly wants her with him and wants to keep her locked up like a prisoner! Oh, pfff!!
From the shallow characters to the very bad script and the equally bad execution, ‘Phantom of the Mall: Eric’s Revenge’ is not worth it, and forgettable, actually. When all was revealed I had more questions than answers. ‘Chopping Mall’ from 1986 – also set in a shopping mall – is by far a better option. Rather give ‘Phantom of the Mall’ a skip.
Would I watch it again? Enough said…
Paul's Movie Reviews 