"Multiple Maniacs" follows Lady Divine's Cavalcade of Perversion, a wayward traveling group of sideshow freaks who have a penchant for the perverse, which includes murdering their audience members. I've always considered John Waters something of a less pretentious Andy Warhol, and this film-his second directorial feature-reiterates the sentiment in my mind. "Multiple Maniacs" is patent garbage, and I mean that in the most loving way possible. While watching it, it is obvious that Waters and his crew were fumbling their way through learning to make a movie. This is especially clear in the cinematography and performances; actors continually flub their lines, look into the camera, and chew the scenes apart-there is better acting in high school plays. At the center of it all is Divine, who has rightly attained a cult following of his own, playing his signature character, and his performance, though by no means stellar, is what will inevitably draw the audience in.For all the rough edges present, there are themes and ideas circulating throughout the film that are by turns bizarre and unique, and it has rightly earned a reputation for containing a particularly blasphemous montage. The last fifteen minutes ostensibly contain the film's most well-orchestrated moments, with Divine alone descending into madness and chasing civilians through the streets. I don't think anyone could classify "Multiple Maniacs" as a masterwork of filmmaking by any stretch of the imagination-but it does stand as a celluloid capsule of Waters quite literally learning how to make a film, and there is enough wackiness, debauchery, and utter madness to please the most jaded of trash cinema fans. Good or bad, there is really nothing else quite like it. 7/10.

If a movie in which an obese drag queen gets comically raped by an obviously fake giant lobster does not sound as if it would be your cup of tea, chances are you will not enjoy "Multiple Maniacs". Fans of John Waters, on the other hand, will find plenty to love in this weird and wild glimpse into a world of filth.Perverted, silly, shocking, and blasphemous, "Multiple Maniacs" is one of film history's least conventional masterpieces. With the atmosphere of a sleazy grindhouse flick directed by Pier Paolo Pasolini with a dash of tongue in cheek satire, "Multiple Maniacs" is a mind blowingly nasty, but also highly entertaining cinematic freakshow. Beneath its over the top story, it is almost a documentary. The line between fiction and fact blurs as imperfections stick out like sore thumbs. Due to the tongue in cheek, raw nature of the film, the slight technical flaws scattered throughout only help the film, as it reminds the audience that it is an independent work created on a shoestring budget by a now-iconic and tasteless group of friends. The early cinema of John Waters almost feels like a parody of the cinema of Andy Warhol. Warhol's (more plotted) films often consisted of raw, sleazy, and occasionally hilarious footage of his superstars. Waters' films consist of raw, sleazy and constantly hilarious footage of HIS superstars, the biggest difference being the artist's intent and the levels of vulgarity. Warhol may have had his borderline pornographic moments, but Waters' films are jam packed with constant, almost unbelievable perversions. There are scenes in this movie that actually made my jaw drop, especially a certain sequence taking place in a church that I cannot even describe without both laughing and wanting to vomit.

I'm not some nut who will throw himself off a building for Waters or lick shoe polish from the Master's boots. I have rather fixed opinion on the different stages of the director's career. The early Super-8's (the few I've seen) are short, crude and original; the first features, including "Multiple Maniacs", "Mondo Trasho", "Pink Flamingos", "Female Trouble" and "Desperate Living" are all very interesting, though not all classics; the films that followed from "Polyester" are Waters Lite, strange birds documenting Waters' struggle to please the mainstream financiers and broaden his own creative output. Naturally, I like the middle period.When I think of "Multiple Maniacs", I think of David Lochary inviting conservative punters to come and seeing the most disgusting show of their lives. "See Puke Eater!" he screams with pride, and in that solitary invitation, he sums up why we loved the 70's and early 80's John Waters. Waters showed us filth without the sermon, without the hypocrisy. He acknowledge our love of sleaze, our passion for the putrid, and our lust for freaks. He came across as honest, as a misfit himself, an artist determined to rub our noses in the dirt we secretly craved.Well, some of us did.I prefaced this review with my declaration that I'm not a Waters brown-noser. Far from it. Despite its admirable desire to shock and sicken, "Multiple Maniacs" is also very boring at times and in dire need of a ruthless edit. The Lobster scene goes on forever and the trek to Calvary is almost as long as Gibson's "Passion of the Christ".The beauty of "Multiple Maniacs" is its pus-filled heart, not its aesthetics. The aesthetics would come later with "Female Trouble" and "Desperate Living" and seem counterfeit with truly awful trash such as "Cecil B. Demented", a film I want to murder.

I've been an IMDB lurker for years, never contributing a comment or questioning the reviews of others. But I just have to step up to the plate on this one.On the one hand, I see that relatively modest but effective films like "Eight-Legged Freaks," "Bug Buster", and "Darkness Falls" are getting ripped on all sides for failing to properly develop the plot, poor CGI effects, lousy acting, short running time, and whatever else is a personal gripe of the reviewer.Then I see that this film is rated much, much higher and I just have to speak out. This film is garbage. Not only that, it is boring garbage. The lobster attack is not amusing, original, or impressive. There is absolutely no actual discernible acting in this film. The story is boring and the nudity is not even up to the standards of "Orgy of the Dead." I actually purchased a sealed VHS copy of this movie based on the reviews at this site. I expected that there would be SOME minimum interest in this film, but I was sadly mistaken.I won't tell you not to rent or view this movie. In fact, there is actually some benefit in watching this movie. You may get a more realistic idea of the reliability of the reviews that are posted to this site.