Ever wonder what the American Dream was really all about? You know, the Post-War Dream? I lived through it, and it wasn't all backyard barbecues and family vacations. This work of art stands as the perfect metaphor for those times which seem so long ago for many people alive today, but those of us 50 years or older know how things really were behind the smiles and friendly nods--not so peaceful, as the Beat, Civil Rights, and Hippie movements showed us. Movie about people eating other people? Sure, if you must. But what is actually on display is something far more sinister, and real. Life devoid of love and forgiveness does a real number on people. Now, all the theology set aside, if you love black humor, this is the film for you. Forget that stupid movie Pleasantville and dive right into this nasty little slice of Horror. You won't be sorry you did. I've seen it multiple times since its release in 1989, and I'm still watching it.

Many critics seem eager to find some moral metaphor in the movie Parents to serve some political pet cause of theirs. Some films do have an obviously moral point to make, but Parents is not one of them. Other critics who attempt psychoanalysis of the movie's child protagonist Michael do have some rather fascinating hypotheses and alternate interpretations of events that occur in this movie, but I contend that the movie works quite well enough when taken at face value: it's just a story about a fairly ordinary (if rather shy and withdrawn) little boy whose suspicions about where his parents are getting their meat prove to be well founded, and how he deals with this rather disturbing situation.Most who attempt to categorize this film place it firmly in the horror comedy genre, claiming that it uses the parents' cannibalism to "satirize" family life in the suburbs in the 1950s. While the conclusion is valid enough, I contend that this premise is faulty: at no point does the movie Parents ever make fun of the 1950s, the nuclear family, or suburbia. (In fact, the beauty of the setting actually makes it look like growing up in a nuclear family in the suburbs in the 1950s would actually be pretty swell, as long as you didn't happen to have cannibals or domestic abusers for parents.) Actually, there are really only two real jokes in this movie. One of these is rather a meta-joke, since it's the title. In the tradition of a great many "animal attack" horror flicks, the title of Parents manages to name the central threat of the movie in just one word; and just to take the absurdity a little more over the top, it's scribbled across the cover in clichéd dripping red lettering. Thus does whoever titled this movie manage to lampoon this tradition by pointing out that nearly any noun scrawled across a cover in dripping red is a convincing title for a horror movie. The other joke, at the end of the movie, is basically the punchline to the whole story: yeah, if your parents' mystery meat turned out to be human flesh, you'd never trust another meat sandwich anyone handed you either, would you?If this movie really does have any purpose other than to play upon our common childhood fears for fun and profit, I'd say it's to point out the difference between an imagined horror and the real thing. One way Parents keeps us guessing about Michael's suspicions is by repeatedly showing us that his imagination tends to exaggerate traumatic memories. In flashbacks to a mildly traumatic incident in which he caught his (still mostly clothed) parents engaging in sexual foreplay, for instance, his imagination turns the lipstick they both had smeared on their mouths into a great splatter of blood dripping from their chins as if they'd just been messily devouring a raw corpse. While one can easily understand how his imagination could mix up two taboo subjects that are otherwise unrelated, this does call the accuracy of all his other perceptions into question.This difference, in fact, is at the heart of the entire conflict on which the story turns. Splattering characters and scenery with blood makes sense in war stories, since the chaos of war typically doesn't allow anybody on the job much time to take care of personal hygiene. For stories in more orderly settings, such as a relatively prosperous 1950s suburban neighborhood, having everyone splattered with blood makes no sense whatsoever. As historians and sociologists can testify, anyone who actually butchers humans on a regular basis typically sanitizes this practice as much as possible through ceremony and ritual and orderly disposal of the remains. In keeping with this reality, what actual cannibalism Michael encounters in this movie is all very sanitary: evidently, his parents are very careful to drain off any excess blood before processing their "long pork" for dinner. The only bloody messes we ever see until the final act are in Michael's overactive imagination.To Parents' credit, once it's revealed that yes, Michael's parents really are cannibals, the focus shifts immediately not to his disgust and horror at the cannibalism itself, but to the moral dilemma of what to do now that he knows. As his father points out, Michael doesn't really get along with society and its mores any better than they do, his only friend being a similarly quirky young girl who's a bit of an outcast herself. Also, try as he might to deny it, he and his parents really do love each other, and if he exposes their crimes to the world, he'll lose them. His parents haven't personally wronged him, and there's been nothing to indicate they'd ever killed anybody before now. Yet they demand at the very least that he stay silent about a murder they've just committed, and are pressing him to join them in eating the victim.The way out of this dilemma this movie ultimately provides Michael, I think, proves just a little too morally convenient for the audience, though no less viscerally disturbing. Still, as in another masterpiece of horror, V.C. Andrews' infamous novel Flowers In The Attic, this movie does demonstrate the truly horrifying reality that under enough stress even true love can go cold and even genuinely loving relationships be destroyed. For all his strictness and vaguely creepy behavior, I like to think that originally, Michael's father really did love his son; as for his mother, the movie leaves no doubt that she loved her son right to the bitter end, even as she still loved his father.In the end, the greatest horror this horror movie provokes in its viewers is the moral horror of Michael's being forced to choose between the loving thing to do and the right thing to do; which in the final analysis, is the most compelling kind of horror of all.

The opening sequences of "Parents" immediately catapult us back to the swinging 1950's. A family of three moves from the big city to the cozy suburbs. Michael is a bit of an introvert and terrified child, but that's not too hard to understand, because he's literally surrounded by weirdos. His parents are bonkers and even at school he only befriends girls that allegedly come from the moon. Mommy and daddy like to eat meat – and tons of it – but Michael righteously questions the origins of their family diners. For a good half hour or so, I had high hopes that "Parents" would be a refreshing and exciting horror comedy (like "Eating Raoul" or "Flesh Eating Mothers") , but it's actually quite dull and spiritless. This is a black comedy without the courage to offend or upset. There's hardly any gore and the lines and situations remain politically correct at all times. In fact, the only thing about "Parents" that genuinely works effectively is the apt recreation of the 1950's atmosphere. The Leamle family fits perfectly into the idea of a post-war American model family. They live in a cozy suburb, daddy (complete with thick Buddy Holly glasses) goes out working whilst mommy takes care of the household and everybody punctually gathers around the table for diner. The 50's ambiance gets particularly epitomized through the traditional cinematography and the cheerful soundtrack, including contemporary tunes from the Big Bopper and others. I really wanted to like "Parents" a lot more, but it honestly wasn't funny and/or horror enough for my liking. There's only one sequence I really appreciated as a horror fan, notably the ghastly nightmare Michael suffers from, in which his cannibalistic parents chase him around the house with bloodied mouths.

A cannibal movie with Randy Quaid? Count me the f@ck in! Parents is the story of a young, weirdo lil kid named Michael, who's been suffering nightmares lately. Strange blood-filmed dreams. He draws bizarre, blood-filled pictures at school. His appetite and his behavior is all screwy. The kid is a total lil mental case. But as you know, the parents are almost usually to blame when it comes down how their kids act. And that theory is really ringing true here. Pops is also mental, but much more than lil Michael or anyone thinks.Talking about a dark flick. I heard that this was a dark comedy of sorts, and you better believe that. I love a good dark comedy, but with this one, it's really not that funny. Sure, you've got Randy Quaid delivering some great stares and being nicely menacing, but besides that, the darkness just stays dark for horror's sake not for comedy's. Which isn't bad. The reason being is probably because of the young kid. His part is one of a very quiet and what seems disturbed young boy, but to me, he plays the part much too deadpan. Either that his acting skills were weak. Nevertheless he didn't take much away from the film, because Randy was usually pretty close by.Parents delivered a unique look at Cannibalism that should appeal to fans of dark comedy, and of the cannibal genre. Oh and especially Quaid fans. It's really short at only 81 minutes so it's a quick movie to watch, and with it being a one-of-a-kind type of horror flick, it's very recommendable. But make sure you know who you're recommending it to.