Review for Dear God No!

Is it even possible for a film to be substantially less than the sum of its parts? ‘Dear God No!’ sounds, on paper, like an exploitation film-fan’s dream. Filmed on Super 16mm, the movie features an outlaw biker gang taking to the open roads on their choppers, wreaking havoc at every twist and turn. There are naked Nun’s, topless chicks with Richard Nixon masks and machine guns, red-neck policemen, a Nazi loving professor with a secret in his cellar and much more besides from the exploitation film-maker’s checklist. 


The trouble is it turns out to be a fairly unimaginative, spiteful little movie full of misogyny and faux violence that is just feels wrong. Just the sort of film that a mis-guided fan might make if they don’t quite ‘get it’. There’s no post-modern Tarrantino-esque irony or homage here, or even a grudging wink at the fact that its political incorrectness is attributable to its era. It’s just plain stupid, mean and spiteful from the get go.



Unfortunately, by grabbing a few choice frames by way of illustration, this may make it look somewhat better than it is. You should be aware that what the screen-shots don’t show is bad dialogue badly recorded, a pace and narrative that will have insomniacs sleeping like babies and a sick humour that more properly befits an inadequate teenage boy than folk who are all growed up.


The film starts with the gang waking up in a dis-used drive-in cinema, surrounded by the bloodies bodies of their female victims. Just in case the audience has any doubt about how mean these guys are, one sets his back wheel atop a semi-naked nun and revs his engine sending blood (and her bloody carcass) flying into the air.


They set off on the road an see a mother and her child standing by their car. So they savage the mother and we see the small boy wet his pants. Mean huh? (And if you are in any doubt about the kind of numb-skulls who think this stuff is cool listen to the Director’s commentary where there is much discussion and Beavis and Butthead style laughter about how to get the boy to pee). 


They make their way to a bar where the leader of the Angel’s is residing. He tells them to cool the carnage so they kill him and half the bar, but not before we've seen an eyeful of crazed topless dancing. Then it’s off to the woods, with a stop off at a drug store to kill the clerk and a couple of policemen and harass a pregnant lady and her husband.


Following the couple, who are visiting a professor and his slightly backward daughter who live in the woods, the remainder of the film is focussed on the corruption of the daughter and the raping of a pregnant lady, spitefully cutting her open and pulling out her unborn child as part of the party. Cool, huh? 

The film culminates with one of the bikers chasing the semi-naked daughter through woodland, whilst a yeti (which has been hiding in the Nazi-loving professor’s basement) chases them both, killing the biker and ripping off the girl’s head.


The whole thing just falls horribly short of the real-deal . There are more than enough sub-standard drive-in films now available to last a anyone a lifetime which are fun and historical curios without the creation of this mean-spirited trash. Unlike Robert Rodriguez and Quentin Tarantino’s Grindhouse movies, this falls short on every count. I should have watched the grade and ‘aged’ Grindhouse version on disc 2 as at least this may have helped the thing look like the real-deal. Why two versions are available is anyone’s guess. Probably because the whole sorry mess looks like it’s the result of far too many cooks, independently financed and with a dozen ‘Producer’ credits.

The commentaries come on like this is a major but soon merely convince you (as if you’d need it) that the film has been pulled together by a bunch of chancers. I wanted to like this film. But I really didn’t. After all, independent creative work should be encouraged, right?

I also genuinely wonder how this film will find an audience. After all, who thinks the relentless misogyny and humourless violence is cool? All I do know is - If you love exploitation films from the sixties and seventies then this is not for you.