Perhaps “The Cult Films of” is a bit of an exaggeration, as this book reports critical reaction to Pete Walker’s sexploitation and horror films have been mixed, perhaps unfairly against Walker but in Making Mischief: The Cult Films of Pete Walker author Steve Chibnall’s attempts to paint him as a national hero of the British cinema don’t really wash either. A University teacher, Chibnall’s profession explains the books scholar approach but can’t justify the little life, passion or excitement about the films or their era (compare this to the same publisher’s Come Play With Me tome). Seeing Walker’s movies back to back in book form their faults (indifferent pacing, moments of unsure humour) become unavoidabl,e hence Chibnall avoids more direct criticism, instead focusing on Walker’s metaphors, blunt politics and his both pro and anti establishment sub-texts, it will certainly make you think about Walker’s films in a different light but it wouldn’t make you want to see them again. With a bibliography that includes Films and Filming (the first to bring Walker to the public’s attention) to the most badly researched fanzines, Chibnall makes a good case for The House of the Long Shadows and Home Before Midnight two of the more despised Walker movies although not even he can make a case for the irredeemable Tiffany Jones. One thing is clear though Mischief Maker, Walker clearly wasn’t. Quotes like “I’m in favour of censorship providing its fair” “I believed in censorship for the reasons that Mary Whitehouse believes in it” don’t prove well for Chibnall’s attempts to paint the man as a boat rocker. In a funny scenario, Walker nearly meets the Sex Pistols but freaks and flees back to the safety of a Mayfair dinner. While a more inquisitive look at Walker’s polemic stance towards his films might have given this book an interesting centre, this is all taken at face value. Chapter headings like exploitation auteur, mischievous movies and villainous verdict seem out of context- A self confessed Conservative, Walker twenty years after the fact doesn’t seem to have made peace with the films he made about Swedish au pairs and driller killer grannies. The book fails most when comparing Walker to the most unlikely of people Russ Meyer, Malcolm McLaren or a latter day carnival showman. Walker was no Dave Friedman, for every carny quote like “I deliberately rub people up the wrong way, I want them to come into the cinema and be shocked” there are several complaints to a tabloid that he wouldn’t make those sort of film if the public didn’t like them. Most disappointingly we learn very little about Pete Walker other than what anyone purchasing a book on the man would already know. According to Chibnall, Walker’s childhood left him with elements of cynicism, detachment, distrust and pessimism” but never explains why. Making Mischief is best at dissecting the socio-politico musings at work in Walkers films with more complexity than have ever been attempted before. Other times the book just seems self-important, trying to prove examples of Walker’s genius when it’s simply not there “his mature movies are among the most intellectually sophisticated of all exploitation films. That most contemporary reviewers failed to notice this was largely a function of their own professional myopia”. While anyone who has enjoyed Walker’s movies may feel burned by what Chibnall generously refers to as the man’s “cynical regard for his audiences”. Ultimately for a book about a man with supposed roguish humour Making Mischief lacks the wit, believablabilty or the first hand account of the superior writings of Walker’s erst-while scriptwriter David McGillivray collected in Doing Rude Things and the three Shock Xpress books. For two takes on the same subject they tell a surprisingly different story.