When I watch a slasher, I don't expect it to be particularly intellectual. I expect a lot of blood and guts. If the movie turns out to be more than that, then it's a pleasant surprise.Unfortunately, "The Surgeon" tries to be intellectual but fails. It could have just stuck to being a gorefest and I would have been satisfied. Instead, it fizzles out very early on. Not even the presence of Malcolm McDowell and Peter Boyle can save it.There's just no reason to see this movie. It's a total waste. Much like how the one "Twilight" movie that I saw tried too hard to be both a vampire flick and a teen romance, "The Surgeon" tries too many things at once and ends up making no sense.

In the 1950's, young Julian witnesses his brother being murdered by a surgeon (with the sounds of the Chordettes' "Lollipop" none the less). Now all grown up he turns to stalking patients, of the hospital where he got canned for carrying on unlicensed experiments on regeneration, and killing them for fluid he needs to carry on his aforementioned experimentation. It's up to his ex, Theresa and her new 'flavor of the week' Ben, to stop the carnage.Even with such heavyweight talents as Peter Boyle (as a hardened cop) and Malcolm McDowell (as an ape-experimenting doctor) in this film, it still can't overcome it's clichéd premise and story. Most of the acting is serviceable but somehow lacking, the killer is not all that memorable nor terrifying, and the tension was non-existent. I've seen a lot worse but this movie is still just too mundane to recommend to anyone. Screenplay writer Patrick Cirillo wound go on to pen the much better "Tears of the Sun" My Grade: D+ Eye Candy for the guys: Juliette Jeffers gets topless; Isabel Glasser shows everything Eye Candy for the girls: James Remar's penis & ass

I instantly got hooked on this film when I first saw it. It came on late-night TV and I watched it even though I wasn't really allowed. The combination of seeing a forbidden film and being impressed by everything that is bloody, I really liked it. Now, years and literally tons of movies later, I notice that it is obviously flawed and unoriginal but yet I still think it's an enjoyable thriller that can provide you with a few scares. The film opens with an eerie black and white sequence in which a young boy witnesses the death of his older brother while the song 'lollipop' is playing on the radio. Apparently due to this trauma, he grew out to become a mad scientist with Frankensteinian ideas and methods, using terminal hospital patients for his research. He takes revenge on the hospital staff that suspended him. The most efficient aspects about this film are unquestionably the ominous set pieces and locations. The horror highlights include a sequence in which a helpless patient gets a huge needle injected in her nose, or when our insane doctor operates on himself. First time actor Sean Haberle is decent as the 'villain', by the way. He's a spooky looking dude with vicious eyes and a violent charisma. The two leads – James Remar and Isabel Glasser – are okay as well but it's the supportive cast that is REALLY interesting. Peter Boyle (Young Frankenstein, Hardcore), Charles Dance (Alien³, Space Truckers) and especially Malcolm McDowell all make great appearances. Unfortunately, McDowell's icky character dies too soon and the film dies a little with him. Exquisite Tenderness is nowhere near original, the production takes itself way too serious and the last 5 minutes shouldn't have made the final cut. Yet, it's still a delightful film to kill some time with and the body count is enormous.

This was one of the most repulsive and disgusting movies I've ever tried to watch. So much gore and special effects splatter overwhelm whatever extremely minor narrative pull the movie has. The movie starts off stupidly as a would-be attempt at irony (e.g., horrible violence set to silly '50s pop song) lets you know how wrong this flick is gonna go. If not for the extremely lovely presence of leading lady Isabel Glasser I never would have spent as much time on this splatter-dog of a flick as I did. Didn't need to see James Remar's tackle, either. All in all, a waste. I will keep my eyes out for Glasser in the future, though.