Reviews (58)

An okay repersantation worth mentioning
dracula Prince of Darkness, the second hammer horror dracula in the series. starring christopher Lee in an unspeeking role(why?), and the worst actress, Barbra Shelly(I don't know about you but shelly reminds me of my seventh grade teacher). One of the few wide screen hammer films that I could find, its a must have for any hammer collecter. The story isn't bad, four travelers from england are taking a vacation in, of all places, the Carpathian, supposedly to broden there minds. They are abandoned by there coach driver so when a misterios cart comes rolling down the road they decide to take it. But the horses went in the wrong direrction, towards castle Dracula. The servent of the castle, kills one of the travlers and pours blood on the ashes of the count(he ran into the sun in Horror of Dracula). then Dracula stocks helen (the sventh grade teacher(Barbra Shelly). Two travelers get out alive after being confronted by Dracula. They seek the help of a preist who knows how to destroy vampires(a real Van Helsing). They Destroy the count with a bit of the old stake through the heart. a few bad points, no dialog from the Lee, the cute chick doesnt get naked, and Barbra Shelly. It's too bad.

Dracula-Prince of Darkness: A must see for all horror fans!!
This film was first released in 1965 and is certainly worth the 90 minates of running time. Filmed in Techniscope, Dracula-Prince of Darkness is about 4 tourists who stray off their destination of Carlsbad and end up within the walls of Castle Dracula. Christopher Lee and Barbara Shelley provide plenty of scares and keep you on the edge of your seats. Plenty of gore and a very tense scene involving B. Shelley towards the end of the film, make this (in my opinion) one of the scariest Dracula films ever. Although Christopher Lee was disappointed that he didn't have a speaking role, I think (in my opinion) it made him more frightning to watch. The only 2 faults I have with this film is the dialog a little weak at beginning and an extra scene or two could have been used at the end. Never the less, an enjoyable film to watch for all horror fans. Cast: Christopher Lee, Barbara Shelley, Francis Matthews, Andrew Keir, Susan Farmer, Charles Tingwell and Thorley Walters. Director: Terence Fisher

A Hammer classic
Dracula, Prince of Darkness tends to get short shrift from the critics, but it is hard to see why. Director Terence Fisher is on top form, delivering some of Hammer studios' most memorable and fascinating images: Klove's pseudo-Eucharistic ritual to bring Dracula back to life; the staking of a female vampire; the Count's destruction at the film's icy climax. Cast are second to none: Christopher Lee reprising his role as the Count; Barbara Shelley as a repressed Englishwoman-cum-vampire; Andrew Keir as Father Sandor, a rough-and-ready Van Helsing-type. Rest of the crew are top-notch: The atmospheric photography is by Michael Reed; the score is one of studio regular James Bernard's best; and Bernard Robinson's set designs are among his most memorable (the castle exterior was shared with the less impressive but still entertaining Rasputin the Mad Monk in the same year).

I found this film riveting as a child, and it still captivates me today. It certainly belongs in the essential Hammer canon, and is perhaps the finest of the Dracula sequels.

OK, but does not add up to the original
This one is OK for Halloween perhaps, but not the best of them all. Dracula does not even say anything in this film although the evil is quite effective. Only buy this one if you are a die hard fan of the Hammer "Dracula" films. Other than that, renting it at your local video store might be better.

This film may have also been better with the presence of Professor Van Helsing, and that's what also made the first film even better.

Dracula Returns
In 1895 two english couples on a trip in the Carpathians find themselves stranded at an eerie castle. They do not know it but they are at Castle Dracula. Count Dracula's manservent Klove has been waiting for this, it seems his master has been dead for 10 years. One of the guests becomes a victim and reconstitutes Dracula. The next day the other couple go in search of Alan & Helen Kent, Helen has become a vampire and Charles is no where to be found.

They seek the help of Father Sandor and he helps them combat the Count. The final is a thrill when Sandor shoots the ice around Dracula. The Count is consigned to the moat, destroyed by running water. Father Sandor replaces Dr. Van Helsing in this one.
Barbara Shelly gives the performance of a lifetime as Helen Kent. ... Read more

Reviews (235)

Classic Horror Film; Not So Classic DVD Release Here's Why
Repeated.

First, this movie from an entertainment value from 1 to 10 is a 10 plus.
Second, this movie from a technical visibility and technical audibility release value on DVD from 1 to 10 is a 4.

Reason for the first critique: The PROS
1. Director Lucio Fulci directs a fast paced nail biter from start to finish.
2. Excellent film scoring as the music really accentuates the drama.
3. Excellent casting, the actors are solid for this type of film - no phonies.
4. Excellent locations - from New York City to the exotic Carribean where the two main characters meet up with vacationers who agree to charter their boat and take the main two characters to the island of Matool where the horror begins - you'll know why there going there as you see the film.
5. Excellent makeup effects for zombies and the gruesome and great death scenes.
6. Excellent cinematography to heighten the tension during the film.

Reason for the second critique: The CONS
1. Anchor Bay Entertainment's DVD release of this movie is poor. This critique of poor DVD quality is rare when it comes to Anchor Bay Entertainment releases as their remastered-from-the-good-old-cellar-movie reputation normally puts out excellent quality DVDs with full frame-by-frame color correction, removal of original picture blurriness, and excellent audio track remastering, but this movie somehow slipped through the cracks as perhaps there was a rush to get this movie out on DVD due to its immense popularity among gore hounds and Fangoria Magazine fanatics. The rush job to DVD certainly shows. And below are the main points to look out for on this particular Anchor Bay Entertainment release.

2. Poor picture clarity. The picture from start to finish is viewable, but not at all crisp and without blur. This will be corrected see ALTERNATIVE DVD below.

3. Poor color management. The color from start to finish lacks vibrance and richness. The color frame-by-frame is as dead and bland as the zombies themselves. The opening scenes especially as the abandoned yacht( or so you think ) sails into New York Harbor as it is coralled by the New York police, you will see that the city buildings including the World Trade Center towers look more purple/grey in tone, the harbor looks dark brown-grey in color, the sky looks grey in color, and the facial tones of the characters look more fuscia-pinkinsh-beige. The color on this release is horrible and will be corrected. The most frustrating aspect of the poor color is when the movie shfts to the Carribean as two main characters meet up with two vactioners and the four somehow agree to sail for the Island of Matool, after some hesistancy, you will see that the color really suffers here. The exotic locations - the beautiful water, the green of the palm trees, and the like are painfully lacking the vibrant standout color correction needed to make every film frame standout with crisp clear picture quality and life like color. This will be corrected see ALTERNATIVE DVD below.

3. Muddled audio track. The sound is clear, but not at the level of a remastered audio track with either DTS or THX Sound treatments. The musical score periodically steps on the sound effects This will be corrected see ALTERNATIVE DVD below.

4. From the original uncut full-version, there are some scenes missing on this DVD. This will be corrected see ALTERNATIVE DVD below.

5. Periodic purple outlines on the edges of the widescreen black bars.
This will be corrected see ALTERNATIVE DVD below.

-----> ALTERNATIVE DVD <------

Coming from Media Blasters Entertainment, another respected DVD Production Studio in the same ilk as Anchor Bay Entertainment and Blue Underground Studios a two new releases of this film are on thier way.

The first will be a Special 2-Disc Fully Remastered ( Picture and Sound ) 25th Anniversary Edition Anamorphic Widescreen Transfer due out as Amazon.com states on the web page hosting this title as July 27, 2004.

--This DVD has 2 hours of Extras including Director commentary, Film Trailers, TV-Spots, Cast and Crew interviews and audio options. This version is the one to buy and as of this review is only less than two months away.

The second will be Single Disc Fully Remastered ( Picture and Sound ) Anamorphic Widescreen Transfer due out I would suspect around the same time as the 25th Anniversary 2-Disc Edition in late July 2004.

Final Thoughts:

1. Avoid buying the Anchor Bay Entertainment release if you can wait less than 2 months from todays date June 13th. The wait will definitely be worth it. If you own this version already as I do, then I would recommend donating this release to the local public library for a tax break when the new versions, especially the 2-Disc set, come in.

Expect from the newer versions as a recap.

1. Excellent Frame-to-Frame Picture Quality from start-to-finish and Full Elimination of Film Blur.
2. Excellent Frame-to-Frame Color correction bringing the movie to life.
3. Excellent Sound Treatment for fully enhanced dialog clarity, punchy sound effects, and a robust musical score getting more crisp.

If these do indeed happen as Media Blasters Enterainment Studios are indicating, then this film goes from a 4 to a 5 plus.

I have revised my opinion of this movie
The first few times I saw this film ,I hated it. I couldn't understand what all the fuss was about,but I really wanted to see this film as others saw it(only because so many people love it). So,it was a really hot,dark evening with a thunderstorm threatening to knock the power out,and I was really bored and regretting not buying Torso at the mall earlier, so I pulled out my copy of Zombie and set out to watch it. Lo and behold, I was very entertained and managed to scare myself silly(storms and Italian horror movies make a scary combination). The beginning is somewhat slow, but does a good job setting up the story. There's a zombie here, a zombie there,just enough to show you something's up. By the time they get to the island,though,things really start heating up. All of a sudden,there's zombies everywhere, and these aren't the shambling, blue-skinned ghouls of Dawn of the Dead. These are friggin nasty looking suckers. They have worms crawling through their eye sockets,and their flesh is all rotted and hanging from their bodies. Fulci got the throat-rippings right too, with pulsing blood spurting all over the place. The gore is absolutely superb,especially for 1979, and makes Dawn(another film I was never fond of) look like a sunday school picnic. That said, many people will be bound to hate this film. Some will be bored, some will be nauseated, and some will just laugh. But it's still worth checking out, and if you hate it, you can always scare your friends with it(I have a friend who is deathly afraid of zombies;I already showed her Dawn and Children Shouldn't Play With Dead Things,now this...hehe...fun...). I also love Italian horror now, I have no clue why I said before that I didn't (bad brain...bad! Lying is bad, you get a spanking now...hehe... :)).

THE VERY VERY BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 100.000.000 STARS!!!!!!!!!
THIS IS BY FAR THE BEST ZOMBIE FLICK EVER MADE IN MY OPINION!!!! I CAN'T WAIT FOR THIS 25TH ANNIVERSARY SPECIAL EDITION 2 DISC SET TO BE RELEASED ITS ABOUT TIME THIS FLICK GETS THE RESPECT IT DESERVES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! THERE IS NOT MUCH ELSE TO SAY EXCEPT THAT FULCI IS GOD!!!!!!!!! later on fellow horror fans!!!

ZOMBIE
EVERYTHING A ZOMBIE MOVIE SHOULD BE! VERY GORY AND SCARY. ONE OF THE BEST ZOMBIE FLICKS AROUND.NICE AND MOODY FEELING.DEFINITELY WORTH THE PURCHASE. GET IT!!!!!!!!!

AWESOME ZOMBIE FLICK!!!
When you think of the all time great zombie movies George A Romero's trilogy "Night of the Living Dead" , "Dawn of the Dead" and "Day of the Dead" most likely come to mind. Lucio Fulci's "Zombie", which has been called a sequel to the above mentioned "Dawn of the Dead", doesn't seem to be as popular and not as well known (at least around here) as Romero's trilogy. However, I believe Zombie is almost as good as the above mentioned

Plot is simple; Tisa Farrow plays Ann Bowles, when Ann discovers her father's boat to be abandoned in the New York Harbor her and reporter Peter West(Ian McCulloch) go searching for answers. Their search takes them to the small island of Matool where an unknown virus makes the dead stand up and walk, and of course they do much more than just walk. The plot is so simple yet extremely effective. The movie does move a bit slowly and the acting isn't very impressive but everything that makes a great horror movie is presented, creepy score, spooky elements, extreme gore and the most realistic, best looking zombies of any zombie movie I've ever seen.

This was only the second Fulci film I've seen but from seeing those two movies and reading other reviews it's easy to see a couple of Fulci's trademarks, bad dubbing and extreme gore. The killing scenes were awesome!! A big splinter through an eyeball, zombies feasting on dead woman's guts (that's pretty nasty!) and my favorite, a zombie tearing at the jugular of a woman as blood squirts out and shoots everywhere. If you haven't seen this movie yet and your a fan of horror movies add this one to your collection!! ... Read more

Amazon.com

"Naked girls and lots of blood, that's what Vampyres is about," says Joseph Larraz in the notes to the film. He rewrites the vampire myth to make his bloodsucking lovelies the restless ghosts of lesbian lovers murdered while making love in their shadowy castle. Reappearing nightly in the twilight forest, they lure men to their castle for blood feasts until the brunette vampire, Fran (Marianne Morris), falls for her latest victim (Murray Brown) and decides to keep him alive, a sex slave she slowly drains dry. "You're playing a dangerous game," warns blonde Miriam (Anulka), perhaps just a tad jealous. As the local cops watch a veritable wrecking yard of car crashes fill up the sleepy back roads (all with naked dead men behind the wheels), you have to wonder if anyone finds this a bit suspicious. It's a slim story filled with misty forests, candlelit castle interiors, and the above-mentioned blood and naked flesh. Larraz adds a few poetic flourishes--blood dripping down pale faces, clouds crawling past a castle--but, more important, gives the living dead girls a genuinely passionate relationship and a zest for nightlife. The DVD features commentary by Larraz and producer Brian Smedley-Ashton. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (32)

Kind of a mix of Hammer and Jean Rollin
A pair of bisexual women (Marianne Morris and Playboy playmate Anulka) living in a dark, decaying mansion have a craving for blood and sex. Hitchiking in long black cloaks, they lure men home and then take them to bed, slash them with knives, and dump the bodies, making it look like a car wreck. They like one guy so much they keep him around for days and he knows something bad is happening, but he's not sure what. Some people camping nearby also suspect that the women are up to strange things.... The violence is strong even though there's more blood than gore, plenty of sex and nudity, and some very lyrical, beautiful scenes. The ending throws a whole new, darker twist on the proceedings and ties it all together nicely. It has kind of a "Hammer Films" look to it, but the storyline is more along the lines of Jean Rollin. Even though the budget was small, this is a quality-looking film. The DVD looks great and contains a commentary track with producer Brian Smedley-Aston and director Joseph Larraz that's worth listening to - it's informative, and Larraz is hilarious and pulls no punches - ya gotta love the guy, even though he admits he's become a dirty old man (the comment during one of Anulka's nude scenes had me rolling on the floor). :) It's one of the most entertaining commentary tracks I've heard on a DVD, and a quality film besides.

Bosoms and bloodshed, a potent combination!
VAMPYRES (UK 1974): A motorist (Murray Brown) is lured to an isolated country house inhabited by two beautiful young women (Marianne Morris and Anulka) and becomes enmeshed in their free-spirited sexual lifestyle, but his hosts turn out to be vampires with a frenzied thirst for human blood...

Taking its cue from the lesbian vampire cycle initiated by maverick director Jean Rollin in France, and consolidated by the success of Hammer's 'Carmilla' series in the UK, Jose Ramon Larraz' daring shocker VAMPYRES pushed the concept of Adult Horror much further than British censors were prepared to tolerate in 1974, and his film was cut by almost three minutes on its original British release. It isn't difficult to see why! Using its Gothic theme as the pretext for as much nudity, sex and bloodshed as the film's short running time will allow, Larraz (who wrote the screenplay under the pseudonym 'D. Daubeney') uses these commercial elements as mere backdrop to a languid meditation on life, death and the impulses - sexual and otherwise - which affirm the human condition. Shot on location at a picturesque country house during the Autumn of 1973, Harry Waxman's haunting cinematography conjures an atmosphere of grim foreboding, in which the desolate countryside - bleak and beautiful in equal measure - seems to foreshadow a whirlwind of impending horror (Larraz pulled a similar trick earlier the same year with SYMPTOMS, a low-key thriller which is all mood and very little action, until it erupts into a frenzy of violence during the final reel). However, despite its pretensions, VAMPYRES' wafer-thin plot and rough-hewn production values don't really amount to very much, and while the two female protagonists are as charismatic and appealing as could be wished, the male lead (Brown, past his prime at the time of filming) is woefully miscast in a role that should have gone to some beautiful, twentysomething stud. A must-see item for cult movie fans, an amusing curio for everyone else, VAMPYRES is an acquired taste. Watch out for Bessie Love, star of the silent era, in a brief cameo at the end of the movie.

Originally released on DVD by Anchor Bay in incomplete form (29 seconds of carnage were accidentally omitted from one of the climactic sequences), Blue Underground's definitive disc - beautifully presented and packaged - restores all the missing footage to its rightful place. Picture quality is as good as the low-budget film stock will allow, though it's still a little grainy in places, and the mono sound is adequate. Extras include trailers, interviews with Morris and Anulka (both are older and wiser, yet still radiant), and a lively audio commentary with Larraz and producer Brian Smedley-Aston, along with an unexpurgated version of Tim Greaves' much-admired booklet 'Vampyres - A Tribute to the Ultimate in Erotic Horror Cinema', here presented in DVD-ROM format which this writer was unable to access.

NB. Blue Underground's DVD includes an insert which replicates vivid artwork for an Italian release print (OSSESSIONE CARNALE), featuring a prominent Techniscope credit. However, the movie wasn't photographed in any kind of scope format, and viewers are assured the disc's 1.85:1 ratio is correct.

87m 29s
1.85:1 / Anamorphically enhanced
Mono 2.0
Optical mono [theatrical]
No captions or subtitles
All regions

AESTHETIC, SATANIC, INDULGING
YES, THIS IS A FLIM THAT RISES ABOVE THE REST IN THE VOLATILE TIME OF EROTIC VAMPIRE FILMS IN THE EARLY 1970'S. TWO VOLUMPTOUS, BEAUTIFUL VAMPIRES USE THEIR FEMININE TALENTS AND THE AGE OLD ONE NIGHT STAND AS A FACADE TO LURE OVER-ANXIOUS MEN TO THEIR BREATHTAKING, DECREPIT OLD COUNTRY HOME. THE MEN FALL ALL TOO EASILY FOR WHAT THEY THINK WILL BE A SEXUAL RENDEZVOUS WITH TWO STRANGE, DARK WOMEN. AFTER THEY ARE ENTERTAINED, THEY FALL VICTIM TO SAVAGE DEATHS, BLOODLETTING, AND HUMILIATION. THE BRITISH COUNTRYSIDE AND THE BREATHTAKING OLD HOME CREATES A SUPERIOR AMBIENCE THAT IS CONDUCIVE FOR AN UNFORGETTABLE, EROTIC, LURID FILM. THIS FILM WILL LEAVE YOU WANTING NEVER TO RETURN TO REALITY. DARK, EVIL, BEAUTIFUL, IMPERATIVE.

Share Pleasures of the Flesh...and Horrors from the Grave!
Okay, 1974's VAMPYRES admittedly has numerous nude scenes--full frontal female nude scenes, in some cases--that was a prerequisite for the sexploitation horror pouring out of Europe in the 1970s. And yes, the two female players have hourglass figures, ample bosoms, and beautiful faces. However, this British indie film, directed by Spanish auteur José Ramón Larraz, has a cinematic aesthetic that makes it stand out above its contemporaries as a horror film of true quality. Larraz does a fantastic job of directing, working in close conjunction with cinematographer Harry Waxman to ensure that nearly every shot of every scene is a balanced, well-framed image. In keeping with the spooky atmosphere of the moldering English manor house and surrounding grounds used for location shooting, production designer Ken Bridgeman maintains the perfect ambiance throughout. And unlike many other buxom sexploitation actresses of the era, erotic stars Marianne Morris and Anulka (Dziubinska) can actually act, and they do a superb job in making the eponymous characters both scary and sympathetic.

In addition to the outstanding efforts of cast and crew, the tight, well-written script is refreshingly new--even from this vantage point of some thirty years hence. Avoiding the usual vampire clichés, these VAMPYRES are really more like ghosts who have some inexplicable but insatiable desire to feed on the blood of the living. They don't have fangs, they can tolerate moderate sunlight, and instead of resting in musty old caskets, they sleep in a wine cellar during the brightest of the daylight hours. They also can eat, drink liquids other than blood, and seem to genuinely enjoy sex. And they even sometimes have sympathy for their victims, a characteristic that may lead to their ultimate downfall.

The myth of the vampire has always been regarded as sexual in nature, especially the intimacy of the flesh-penetrating bite on the neck. VAMPYRES carries this metaphor to the extreme, with heterosexual vampiric coitus portrayed as an intensely passionate, rigorous event that includes feasting on the blood of the non-vampiric partner. And the eponymous characters in VAMPYRES don't gently suck from two pricks in the neck; in the midst of sexual passion, they tear open their victims and lap up the crimson liquid with ferocious, writhing pleasure.

In short, VAMPYRES is an excellent British erotic horror flick that is superior to most others from its era of origin, and it can even stand up against many straightforward, non-sexploitation horror films. It is well written, well acted, and has high production values throughout--and all this in spite of a low, low budget. Director Larraz and his co-scripters have take an idea that they could play for camp or sheer sexploitation and, instead, deliver a thought-provoking look at indiscriminate and promiscuous sex, physical obsession, and guilt. And on top of that, they still throw in lots of delicious T&A.

The DVD from Blue Underground is a great buy. Not only does it present a widescreen restored director's version of this excellent film--transferred primarily from the original negatives--but it also has lots of cool extras. It offers a feature-commentary track with director José Ramón Larraz and producer Brian Smedley-Aston that is both hilarious--due to Larraz's frank use of English colloquialisms--and informative. And there are also recent interviews with Marianne Morris and Anulka Dziubinska, the film's beautiful stars; a lost scene recreated via production stills; U.S. and European trailers; and more. This is a piece of erotic artistic cinematic history that any serious horror fans will want to add to their collections.

Too slow
Even allowing for the fact that this film is low budget, and from the 1970s, doesn't make up for its monotony. Its mix of sex and cheap blood effects may have seemed avant-garde to some back then, but it sure doesn't cut any edge now. Except for a few thrills at the end, this film is like a long walk to nowhere (in fact, there are too many scenes in this movie of just that - long walks).

It's too bad really, because in the right hands, the story of two vampire seductresses luring passersby to their castle could have been creepy fun.

Not enough story, and bad direction make this a "passerby". Current interviews with the lovely female stars prove to be the most interesting part of this package. ... Read more

Reviews (477)

A great modern adventure!
This is the last entry in the "Evil Dead" series, but folks, this is NOT a horror flick, it is a fantasy comedy adventure. This deals with "Ash" ( Bruce Campbell) who was sucked into another time, in the medieval times. Now he must get a unholy book called " The Necronomicon" so he can get back home but when his idiocy gets in the way, he unleashes a army of the dead and now Ash with the rest of King Arthur's men must fight back.

A brilliant, entertaining and hilarious final in the awesome Evil Dead series with wit, humor, skill, good special effects and great battle scenes. Sam Raimi is a genius of a filmmaker, Bruce Campbell is definitely a great actor portraying a lovable moronic hero. Like i said, this movie isn't a horror flick, it's really a Fantasy comedy adventure and doesn't have gore like the last two flicks but this movie is also enjoyable for the whole family. I own this movie on DVD in 2-versions such as the Cut U.S. version with happy ending and the Director's cut with alternate ending, this is a must see movie.

Also recommended: Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring, The Evil Dead, Evil Dead II, The Princess Bride, The Neverending Story, The Dark Crystal, Conan The Barbarian, The Crow, Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers, Harry Potter and The Sorcerer's Stone, In The Army Now ( Pauly Shore), The Flight of Dragons, Return of the King, The Last Unicorn, Gladiator, The Wizard of Oz, Excalibur and Mulan.

Great, Fun Film.
ARMY OF DARKNESS is the third film in the EVIL DEAD series. The first movie in the series, EVIL DEAD, was a strictly horror film containing a humorous moment every now and again. EVIL DEAD 2 was basically a dark comedy interlaced with a few moments of horror. ARMY OF DARKNESS is neither; it's an action/adventure flick filled with comedy and just a touch of gore.

The movie begins where EVIL DEAD 2 ended: Ash has been transported to the 13th century and is surrounded by the Army of King Arthur. He is assumed to be a member of a rival army and is taken prisoner. After defeating a couple of Deadites in the pit, he is declared to be the prophecized hero who will rid the kingdom of the evil that has befallen it. However, Ash, being the befuddled hero he is, makes things worse and almost destroys any chance he has of returning home.

ARMY OF DARKNESS is hilarious. It's filled with comedy and all sorts of literary and pop culture references from The Three Stooges to Gulliver's Travels to JASON AND THE ARGONAUTS to Frankenstein. I found myself laughing about every three minutes and some of the one-liners just rock: "Give me some sugar, baby" and "I'm going to cut your gizzard." Of course, this movie isn't for everyone. There are some people who would be offended and some who would see this movie as garbage. However, I see the movie as pure genius and great fun. Whatever.

A Bad and Tasteless Film
This by far is the worst film I have ever seen. Sure, I've had my fair share of bad films, but this one tops them off. The acting stunk in a very big way. I expected this film to scare the socks off of me, but, instead I was shaking my head in full on disgust at the Comedy Relief Film instead of being a true horror flick. Don't waste a second of your time on this film and don't waste your money on it either.

Great cheesy cult horror film - choose the edition wisely
I've seen the U.S. theatrical cut of this film a number of times, so I bought the Director's cut (ASIN B00005QW4K) when it first came out. I finally got around to watching it recently, and I've got to say, I'm pretty disappointed with this particular edition. If you want to see the director's cut, I'd recommend you go with the "Boomstick Edition", which also includes the U.S. theatrical release.

There were a number of flaws in this particular DVD. The first thing I noticed was really bad pixellation in many scenes. They did a great job in many cases of cleaning up any scratches or flaws in the source film, but then they did a really bad job of DVD compression. I'm sure the other editions aren't any worse on that score, and hope that they're better.

Also, this cut is actually missing some of my favorite scened and lines. The worst offense is that the line "Good, bad - I'm the guy with the gun" (which for me has always epitomized Ash) was replaced by "I'm not that good". In the commentary, Campbell and Raimi actually note that they prefer the "Good, bad" line... So why not include it in the "director's cut"?

They also deleted an early fight scene, just after Campbell's arrival, and went back to what was apparently the original ending. I really liked the ending in S-Mart, though. I also found the editing on the windmill scene in this edition less cohesive than the theatrical release.

The commentary by Campbell and Raimi was very good, since those two have a long history together, and really seem to have loved making this movie. Still, though, it was clear that they could see some of the same issues I mentioned above, leaving me baffled as to why they didn't work together to make this edition a true reflection of what they think the "best" version of "Army of Darkness" would be.

Good bad im the Ash with the gun.
Army of Darkness is such a fun movie to watch, What more could you want from a movie. I first became a fan of this movie because of Evil Dead 1&2, they where pretty good movies but when Army of Darkness came out it was five times better than the first two movies put together. The real reasson this movie did so well is because Bruce Campbell a.k.a Ash played his part damn well, and because of that we the fans of his movies where happy to see him come back to the big screen. If you don't like slap-stick comedy or horror movies you will not like this film, but if you do your in luck because Army of Darkness is the cult classic movie you've been waiting for. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Werner Herzog's remake of F.W. Murnau's original vampire classic is at once a generous tribute to the great German director and a distinctly unique vision by one of cinema's most idiosyncratic filmmakers. Though Murnau's Nosferatu was actually an unauthorized adaptation of BramStoker's Dracula, Herzog based his film largely on Murnau's conceptions--at times directly quoting Murnau's images--but manages to slip in a few references to Tod Browning's famous version (at one point the vampire comments on the howling wolves: "Listen, the children of the night make their music."). Longtime Herzog star Klaus Kinski is both hideous and melancholy as Nosferatu (renamed Count Dracula in the English language version). As in Murnau's film, he's a veritable gargoyle with his bald pate and sunken eyes, and his talon-like fingernails and two snaggly fangs give him a distinctly feral quality. But Kinski's haunting eyes also communicate a gloomy loneliness--the curse of his undead immortality--and his yearning for Lucy (Isabelle Adjani) becomes a melancholy desire for love. Bruno Ganz's sincere but foolish Jonathan is doomed to the vampire's will and his wife, Lucy, a holy innocent whose deathly pallor and nocturnal visions link her with the ghoulish Nosferatu, becomes the only hope against the monster's plague-like curse. Herzog's dreamy, delicate images and languid pacing create a stunningly beautiful film of otherworldly mood, a faithful reinterpretation that by the conclusion has been shaped into a quintessentially Herzog vision. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (82)

Werner Herzog creates the ultimate vampire.
Nosferatu was originally a German expressionist film, much in the style of "The Cabinet of Dr. Calgari. Moody, extremley gothic, and very scary, shot in Germany in 1922. Max Schreck played the part of Nosferatu, aka Count Orlok, the ugliest, scariest Dracula in cinematic history. Orlak is tall and skinny, shriveled, actually, with elongated limbs, and long, sharp claws for hands. He is ancient as well. We have no leading man type here, a la Christopher Lee, who was actually a sex symbol back in the late sixties, or handsome Bela, Frank Langella, or more recently, Gary Oldman. Orlak is the combination of an evil old man, mixed with a rodent. His ears are batlike, his eyes, wide and scary, a beak nose, and his full lips hide long, ratlike fangs. He is bald as well. Klaus Kinski captured Nosferatu to a tee, although Klaus is well, flat out not as ugly as Schrek. the story is virtually Dracula retold, including Harker's trip to Transylvania, the Count buying Real Estate, the Count lusting after Lucy, and Lucy's sacrifice. There is a hidden eroticism in the final scene with Lucy that must be seen to be believed. Lucy, by the way, is portrayed by the ever sexy Isabelle Adjani, and she portays a perfect damsel in distress, who knows what she must do. The contrast in Lucy's beauty, compared to Orlak's hideous repulsiveness, only adds to the erotic chemistry that is on the screen during their scenes together, especially when Lucy is first confronted by the lustful old vampire, and he demands her love. During the famous, final scene, we see Orlak consumate his vampiric love, in full detail. Lucy almost seems to be enjoying it. Orlak must have Lucy, even if it means that his very existance is the price to be paid, so he enjoys his night of bloodlust, and lovemaking to the fullest. The movie is atmospheric, and well acted throughout, although the Van Helsing character seems a bit powerless. Then again, aside from Lucy's sacrificial beauty, what can stop the evil Count Orlak.....Highly recommended.

Cerebral, dream-like horror
Nosferatu unfolds like a languorous, disturbing dream. The images have an hallucinogenic, archetypal quality: mummified human remains in an ancient tomb; the figure of a woman sitting on a beach studded with tombstones; a dead sea-captain lashed to the wheel of a deserted sailing ship.

Like Kubrick's The Shining, Nosferatu is less a standard genre film than a singular expression of a filmmaker's vision. Writer-director Werner Herzog began with F.W. Murnau's expressionist classic, mixed in elements from Bram Stoker's novel Dracula, then set about creating a meditation on the vampire myth. What would it really mean to live forever, and be compelled to feed on the blood of others? What of the unspeakable boredom? The longing for companionship? For normalcy? For death? As played by Klaus Kinski, Herzog's Dracula has spent hundreds, if not thousands of years alone with these thoughts. He is the ultimate poster boy for German angst. If not for the skill of his performance and Herzog's direction, he might have lapsed into self-parody.

There are shots that all but reproduce moments from the silent classic - right down to the overwrought body language. But Herzog, Kinski, and the rest of the cast (including Bruno Ganz as Jonathon Harker and Isabelle Adjani as his wife Lucy) keep it in check and keep it beautifully stylized, so it all works.

Probably due to the involvement of American studio 20th-Century Fox, Nosferatu was shot in both English and German versions. Both are on this double-sided DVD; comparing them is instructive, since there are non-trivial differences in the visual construction of both films. Most critics agree (and I concur) that the German one is superior.

Finally, to get an idea of whether you will like this - or any - Werner Herzog film, take the Armageddon-Matrix test: if you hated Armageddon because it was empty and overblown, but kind of liked The Matrix because of its ideas, then you may like Nosferatu. If, on the other hand, you thought Armageddon rocked, but only kind of liked The Matrix because it was slow in places, then don't even think about it.

Good remake!
Remakes don't get much better that this, lets give a round of applause to the drictor, it's hard to make a remake of a classic film. So the film follows the story of the orignal, some guy goes to see Dracula, who he later bits( the guy goes crazy). Dracula later takes a ship to England and starts a rampage of death. This film does not have as much action as the first but it's still fun to wach. Make-up for Dracula rocked. Worth every penny.

The Classic Art-House Version of Dracula
For our second outing between Kinski and Herzog we find that the director has chosen to remake, or rather retell, his favorite film of all time - 'Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens' by F.W. Murnau (1922), while at the same time adapting more of the original Stoker novel into the remake, using the original name of Count Dracula (Kinski) instead of Orlok and injecting his own take on the story of Dracula (in German), which for all intensive purposes is a story about 'tragedy' and Herzog has correctly identified this main theme that would help levitate this entry to one of the all time great art-house horror films with images of Kinski's vampire often filling many film magazine pages and posters. In fact, it is Herzog's most commercial and accessible film to date. It was this telling of the Dracula story that influenced Coppola to remake the Stoker novel entirely into a film. It was not the first time Coppola had been influenced by Herzog. Coppola learned from Kinski and Herzog in "Aguirre: Wraith of God" that guerilla film making while going up a jungle river would be just what he needed for his version of Conrad's "Hearts of Darkness" (Apocalypse Now).

The usual Kinski/Herzog display of frustration is more subtle in this film than all the others probably because the beautiful Isabelle Adjani keeps Kinski distracted long enough for him not get angry with Herzog's cruel daily shoots to 'get it right' and deliberately making the actors and actresses angry for their performances. Here everyone just looks deathly sick and move extremely slowly. Even Adjani looks paler than Kinski at times. For some reason this has given Herzog a more controlled approach to this film with certainly less improvisation and 'on the spot' acting than any of his other collaborations with Kinski. Here we see a mix of Herzog's favorite - Tarkovsky's slow shooting style while cutting in shots of water (Herzog uses a bat in slow motion) and some sort of strange cinematic art house presence that we would see in many of Andy Warhol's productions. Herzog also gets the lighting just right and the cinematography is sublime - watching Kinski materialize from the darkness is again some of the most memorable images in art house cinema ever. Herzog also brings coffins en masse for display. Black coffins play a major role in the design throughout the film. Later on during a plague thousands of rats covering a city become central to Herzog's eye for capturing horror (a formal dinner takes place among hundreds of rats because the diners have the plague and wish to make the best of it before they die) - again extremely visionary and talented. Adjani puts on an amazing performance while remaining stunning under all the white. In one classic scene where she is confronted by Kinski she looks and acts more scary than Kinski almost performing him off the screen. The ending is an erotic take on the original film with Kinski touching Adjani all over, but the acting is excellent. The final twist comes as a shocker and is a bit funny. The end scene is like something out of a great Western and looks spectacular. Also the strange atmosphere of holiness is found throughout this film more than in any other Herzog/Kinski collaboration. The use of Orchestral sounds makes it all the more eerie while at the same time retaining that spirited electric connection to the presentation of madness that Herzog and Kinski are so well noted for.

'Nosferatu the Vampyre' is probably one of the most original art house horror films ever made even though the subject matter has been beaten to death, however it still ranks up there as one of the best versions of Dracula you can see. The DVD transfer is good and crisp. The aspect ratio is 1.85:1 and there are a lot of extras including director's commentary. By the way you can get the Kinski/Herzog box set of 6 films for a few quid extra than this stand alone DVD. Go look for it.

Belief and Science Clash
Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht (1979)

Nosferatu: Phantom der Nacht directed by Werner Herzog, is really a color remake of the 1922 film Nosferatu, eine Symphonie des Grauens directed by F.W. Murnau. There are a couple of name changes: Count Orlok became Count Dracula; Jonathan's fiancée Nina became Jonathan's wife Lucy. The original film was silent and in black and white, where the 1979 version is in color and is in German with English subtitles.

However the plot is close to Bram Stoker's book on Count Dracula which has a very similar plot line and story. F.W. Murnau bought the movie rights to the film; however these rights were owned by Bram's widow Florence and she refused to allow the use of the name and storyline. Even though Murnau had changed the major names of the main characters (Count Dracula, Thomas and his wife Ellen) and location enough similarity remained that Florence took the case to court and in July of 1925 the German court ordered all the copies of the movie destroyed. However a few copies did manage to survive.

While the film starts off slow it shows spectacular scenes of an ocean voyage, and waterfalls experienced during Jonathan (Bruno Ganz) Harker's journey to Count (Klaus Kinski) Dracula's castle. The contrast with his return trip is startling, since he was healthy when he started, but on the return is very sickly and barely alive. The Count's journey is very stark, his companions' death and rats board another ship, which glides into port with no one left alive on board except the rats. As the rats depart the ship one reminded of the story of Ben, where the rats were everywhere and out of control.
An interesting dilemma in this film is the direct confrontation of belief in the existence of the supernatural and sacramental with belief in the rationale of science. Science was believed to able to explain away rationally anything that happened out of the ordinary. Yet here it could not produce an answer for Lucy (Isabelle Adjani) Harker. The way that this was shown was that after consulting with the town physician, Lucy broke and crumbed the Eucharist around Jonathan to keep him locked into a chair in a corner all night, while she became the sacrificed lamb to save him from the Count and death. While she did this out of her love for Jonathan, her sacrifice resulted in the final demise of Count Dracula and her own death. Yet Jonathan in essence lives on to carry the legacy of the living dead, alive yet not fully. The last that is seen of Jonathan is when he is released from his imposed prison, by the removal of the broken host around him, he declares that he has much work to accomplish he mounts a horse and rides off. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Ira Levin's scary novel about forced conformity in a small Connecticut town made for this compelling 1975 thriller. Katharine Ross stars as a city woman who moves with her husband to Stepford and is startled by how perpetually happy many of the local women seem to be. Her search for an answer reveals a plot to replace troublesome real wives with more accommodating fake ones (not unlike the alien takeover in Invasion of the Body Snatchers). The closer she gets to the truth, the more danger she faces--not to mention the likelihood that the men in town intend to replace her as well. Screenwriter William Goldman (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid) and director Bryan Forbes (King Rat) made this a taut, tense semiclassic with a healthy dose of satiric wit. --Tom Keogh ... Read more

Reviews (73)

You'll Just Die If You Don't See This Movie
Whether or not you've actually seen it, you'll probably have heard of "The Stepford Wives". Based on Ira Levin's novel, it was produced in the 1970s and has endured in the public consciousness ever since. Indeed the terms "Stepford" and "Stepford Wife" are now part of our vernacular. If you're in any doubt what these expressions mean, just imagine a woman who is the perfect male fantasy...a wife who cooks, cleans and keeps her husband's home to perfection whilst remaining an object of beauty, with well-preserved looks, sexy outfits and just the right-sized cleavage. A female who is there to service her man's every need - domestic, emotional, sexual - whilst never questioning her role as devoted housewife.The film tells the tale of New York housewife and photographer Joanna Eberhart, who moves with her lawyer husband Walter (sexy name - not!) and their two kids to the seemingly idyllic rural town of Stepford. Very soon Joanna becomes disenchanted with her surroundings, missing the liveliness of New York. Her feelings of isolation are compounded by the fact that the other women in the town appear content to stay at home for their husbands as loyal house fraus, with no outside interests whatsoever. Also, all new male arrivals in Stepford are invited to join "The Men's Association", an organisation from which the town's women are strictly excluded. Whatever goes on there remains a mystery; the women aren't told.

Fortunately Joanna meets the effervescent and rebellious Bobby Marco, another recent arrival in Stepford who shares her concerns about the strange behaviour of the women in the community. Together they decide to set up a consciousness-raising group and rally to get the local women involved...almost to no avail! At the first meeting of the wives, the other women prefer to agonise over the cleanliness of their kitchens and talk about the wonders of "Easy-On" starch spray and baking. One other recruit is found though; a feisty redhead called Charmaine who feels restricted by her husband Ed's demands. However after a weekend away with him, Charmaine returns strangely altered, allowing her hubby to bulldoze her much-loved tennis court and confessing that she all she wanted to do was "please Ed...and boy am I gonna please him". Weird.

Mystified, Joanna and Bobby seek an answer to the zombie-like behaviour of the local women, wondering if "something in the water" might be responsible. They enlist one of Joanna's ex boyfriends, who is a scientist, to help, but this fails to pay dividends. Joanna soon comes to the frightening realisation that the town's wives undergo a change in personality after they have been resident in Stepford for roughly three months... and her time is almost up...

I won't give any more away but this is a thought-provoking and intriguing movie!! Although low on action, the film builds its sense of momentum through a growing feeling of paranoia: are the women in the town somehow being "substituted" for drone-like replacements? Or are all of Joanna's anxieties inside her own head? If you're looking for a fast-moving film you might be disappointed, but the cleverness of the movie lies in its subtlety and the way in which the events take place in a seemingly normal domestic setting.

Another reason for this movie's success lies in the acting. Katherine Ross (also of "The Graduate") puts in an intelligent, sympathetic performance as a woman who feels increasingly hemmed in by the claustrophobia of Stepford, and you really root for her as she feels she might be next on the list for "conversion". Paula Prentiss is great as Bobby, a funny, bubbly and tomboyish character determined not to become "one of those pan-scrubbers" and the rapport between her and Joanna is believable and touching. Given her determination to escape Stepford, Bobby's last few scenes are all the more poignant; I won't say any more but they make for some of the film's best moments! The supporting cast do a good job: amongst these are Peter Masterson as Walter, becoming gradually less supportive of his wife's feelings and fears and more and more influenced by the demands of the "Men's Association"; and Nanette Newman as Carol Van Sant, one of the wives who starts behaving very oddly at a barbecue, continually proclaiming "I'll just die if I don't get that recipe" (!!) Newman's role as a wife is all the more ironic considering all those "Fairy Liquid" adverts she once did (remember?!)

The movie has also attained a kitsch/camp quality over time, mostly due to the fact that it was made in the 1970s! This doesn't spoil the subtler elements to the film, rather makes it all the more entertaining! A large part of the camp appeal is down to the wives themselves - their appearance, behaviour and dialogue. According to this movie, men would like nothing better than to see their wives dressed in frilly blouses (still showing off their assets), flowery dresses and big floppy hats - hilarious. The wives all say things like "I really shouldn't say it, but I just love my brownies" (that's cakes in case you were wondering) and constantly praise their husbands' performances in the bedroom department: "You're the King....you're the Master"!! No comment!

To summarise this is a very enjoyable movie, which, as I have already mentioned, shows the dangers of male fantasies coming true and the perils that women must face having to exist in a patriarchal society. Go buy it...but don't get any ideas about changing your girlfriend...okay?!

I'll simply die if I don't get this recipe!
THE STEPFORD WIVES was a unique film. It set out to make a horror film where clean spotless sunlit kitchens were just as scary as rainy spooky old mansions at midnight. Made in the mid 1970s during a wave of feminism and controversy over the ERA Ammendment - it never got the acclaim it deserved for it's building creepiness and Sci Fi twists. The remake is what it is, but here's where most people first glimpsed Stepford - a very real suburb where homemaking is a science.

Katharine Ross(in an EXCELLENT turn)plays Joanna Eberhard who moves from NYC to Stepford with her husband and two daughters. She's a photographer and homemaker who's dabbled in the women's movement but never really taken up the cause. She begins to realize the women of Stepford are all obsessed with housework, and worse ... subservient and servile to their husbands. She joins up with another woman who finds this all strange, Bobbie -- played oustandingly by Paula Prentiss. Together they find out a string of clues that maybe not all is well in Stepford, and the seemingly benign suburban bliss may be MANUFACTURED by the creepy Men's Society that every husband is a part of.

Bryan Forbes took over this project after speculations Brian De Palma should film it. He made a very effective treatment of the novel, but added his own touches. His wife Nannette Newman influenced the costumes by demanding rather than proposed Playboy bunny outfits the wives should look Victorian with hats and gloves and long dresses - creepy and sexy. Tina Louise (Ginger on Gilligan's Island) also makes a great cameo as Charmaine - one of Joanna and Bobbie's radical friends who transforms to a Stepford Wife by startingly ripping up her tennis court for a pool her husband wants.

You get the film in widescreen, and the transfer is passable for a movie of this age. Colors are 1970s soft and there is grain, but it looks fine. You get a 12 minute featurette with all the principle players, and they explain how the movie was made and what it was like. Some people say the pacing was slow, but this was the 1970s! I think its suppposed to develop slowly like the novel, and you get to know the characters. The last ten minutes are completely shocking, and no test audiences made them whimp out (cough cough - the remake's ending was reshot). This was a politically relevant well-crafted film with great acting! Superb in every way! Check out the source novel by Ira Levin as well.

A great, but very slow-moving picture.
After seeing the new version of The Stepford Wives (which, incidentally, I loved) I had to seek out the original, which I haven't seen since I was a kid. I was very impressed by most of the performances, most notably Paula Prentiss, who was absolutely magnetic. Although the story was absorbing, and the direction was good, the movie, not unlike Rosemary's Baby, seemed to go nowhere fast. Foot after foot of tape passed through my VCR, but the story unfolded so slowly, it was hard to remain interested........all in all, a must-see because of it's pop-culture influence.

THE STEPFORD WIVES DVD -KATHARINE ROSS
AN EXCELLENT MOVIE ALL AROUND!!! FROM THE STORYLINE TO THE ACTING. DEFINITELY SCARY AT TIMES AND AT TIMES FUNNY. KATHERINE ROSS IS OUTSTANDING IN HER ROLE AS WELL AS PAULA PRENTISS. YOU CAN ALSO CATCH TINA LOUISE(GINGER FROM GILLIGANS ISLAND)AND HER BIG HAIR. A GREAT MOVIE, A MUST SEE!!!

Terrific adaptation of the book
I watched this movie because of the excellent book by Ira Levin. I haven't seen the remake yet, but it will be hard to top this version. This movie is very faithful to the book. There are some changes made, but they remain true to the book and help make it a better movie.

The acting is pretty good. I really found myself caring about what happens to Joanna and Bobbie, her best friend. Having read the book, it was great to see these characters brought to life in a way that rang true. It was almost worse knowing what happens to these characters before you actually see it because you really do want things to turn out OK for them.

It was also very well-written. It starts out kind of slow, but once it digs its hooks in, it keeps you glued to the TV. I also like the way they dealt with the subject of women's desire to be an individual and not some cookie cutter housewife with no life at all. It was done very creatively and it was clever as well.

I highly recommend this movie. It is very creepy and there are some very intense moments. Just because it's rated PG does not mean it wimps out on the suspense. This is one of the most suspenseful movies I've seen in a whil and it's one of the best book to film adaptations I've ever seen. ... Read more

Amazon.com

Italian horror maestro Dario Argento made his name by turning homicide into modern art with a cinematic flourish, but with Phenomena he takes his stylish mayhem in new directions. The film opens with the dreamy grace of a fairy tale: a young girl wandering the green meadows of Switzerland and discovering a gingerbread house, wherein lives a monster more modern than mythic, a psychopathic maniac who plunges the picture into a lush nightmare. Jennifer (Jennifer Connelly in her first starring role), a gifted young girl at a Swiss school, has a psychic link to the insect world and develops a connection with the killer through midnight sleepwalks. With the help of a lonely, wheelchair-bound entomologist (genre stalwart Donald Pleasence, who inflects his sonorous tenor with a gentle Scottish burr) she turns telekinetic detective, which only draws her closer to the killer's lair. The densely plotted story becomes muddled at times (this is the busiest film in Argento's oeuvre) but the lyrical cinematography and gorgeous nocturnal imagery--dreamy sleepwalks, nightmarish murders, hideous horrors that emerge in the dark of night--take on a poetic elegance not seen in his previous work, providing the tale with a kind of dream logic. This is a slasher film reborn as an exquisitely grim fantasy: Jennifer in Argentoland. --Sean Axmaker ... Read more

Reviews (80)

A real jolter!
In Switzerland, an American girl named "Jennifer" ( Played by Jennifer Connelly) is attending a girl school there but unknown to her she has special telepathic powers that communicates with insects. An insane murderer is butchering young girls at night, only Jennifer with her insects, a crippled bug researcher ( played by Halloween's Donald Pleasance) and his Chimpanzee assistant must join together to put a stop to the raving mad killer or else it will find her.

An entertaining and very bloody horror mystery thriller that is completely original and interesting, it's from the mind of Italian horror master Dario Argento ( who did " Tenebre", "Demons" and "Suspiria"). This movie is the debut of Jennifer Connelly before she was a big star, she looks good as ever in this movie especially in the nightgown scene, oh man! Jennifer Connelly is a perfect woman.

This movie is quite smart, scary and gory at times but keeps you on the edge of your seat. Originally released here in the U.S. by New Line Cinema called " Creepers" then heavily cut to 82 minutes, Anchor Bay thankfully has re-issued this movie under it's true name " Phenomena" and with the original length 118 minutes of extra footage not seen in the U.S., if you love good suspensful and gore ridden thrillers then add this to your collection.

Also recommended: " Silence of the Lambs", "Suspiria", "Tenebre", "City of the Living Dead", "Cannibal Ferox", "Caligula", " Day of the Dead", " Re-Animator", "Scanners" ," Making Contact ( a.k.a. Joey)", " Inferno", "Sleepless", " The New York Ripper", " Maniac ( 1980)" " House of 1000 Corpses", " Carrie", " Demons", " Akira", "Firestarter", " The Fury", " The Toxic Avenger", " Battle Royale", " Riki-Oh The Story of Ricky", " Ichi The Killer" and "Audition".

Awesome Argento! Original and Creative!
It's hard to find horror movies that haven't taken some kind of thought or idea from a previous one but Dario Argeto's ("Tenebre", "Susupiria", "Deep Red") Creepers seemed to be in a class all by itself (at least to me anyway).

Jennifer Connelly plays Jennifer, a girl who is sent to a boarding school while her father is out of the country working on a film. Unfortunately for Jennifer and the other girls in the school there is a raving psychopath wandering the grounds and butchering the students. When Jennifer meets up with entomologist Dr. John McGregor, played by the late, great, Donald Pleasance (Halloween) she learns of her great power to control insects. If she is going to survive and save the other girls in the process she'll have to learn how to use her gift to stop the killer.

Creepers is very entertaining and moves at a good clip, it's original and well acted for a horror movie. From reading the other reviews I see that this seems to be a shorter version of Argento's "Phenomena". Where Creepers runs about 82 minutes, Phenomena is 110 minutes. I haven't seen Phenomena yet but plan on it. If your a fan of Argento's or horror movies in general this movie is for you.

Hope you're not afraid of bugs
Dario Argento's "Phenomena" is the story of young Jennifer (a very young Jennifer Connelly), who is sent to a Swiss boarading school for girls. She has a special talent for communicating with insects, especially maggots and flys. And it is a good thing, because she is going to need it to help solve a series of murders in the area. My first problem with "Phenomena" (which was relesed in the U.S. under the name "Creepers") is that it bears a large resembelence to Argento's earlier film "Susperia"; also about a young girl who moves into an all girls boarding school where weird stuff is happeneing. This film is another one of those movies that only work when you are caught up in the moment and do not think too hard about what is going on in the long run. Believe it or not, the fact that Jennifer can talk to animals is probably the most plausable aspect of the movie. Then you start trying to connect the dots, it makes for spotty work at best. For example, the characters seem to be able to make intuitive deductions without much evidence to go on; they seem to show up at the right place at the right time for no appeareant reason. And the pet monkey seems to be able to find a weapon just in the nick of time (I didn't know people just throw away perfectly good, never been used, streight razors all the time in a trash can in the middle of the woods) and know just how and when to use it. The audio mix on the DVD is also a little off, and I don't mean because it was dubbed into English from Italian. The soundtrack (which by the way is very cool, Iron Maidon and Motorhead!!) seems to have been placed in at the most inappropriot places in the movie. The actors just did what they had to do; Jennifer Connelly was playing the Nancy Drew bit to the hilt. Donald Pleasents basicly plays Dr. Sam Lomis (from "Halloween") again, this time wheel chair bound with a monkey and maggot covered severed head for company. The others are pretty forgetable. I did like the photography, it was well lit and the locations and settings were phenominal (no pun intended). So, it is just an interesting foot note in Italian cinema.

Horrors fans only
Occasionally I watch a gross-out horror movie, if I like the actor and it has high reviews. I tend to forget that the high reviews always come from horror fans.

And I have yet to see such a movie that was really good by ordinary film standards. This is no exception. Basically the story and logic is sacrificed for cheap horror effects, like maggot-eaten faces.

The one good thing about it is Jennifer Connelly, who even at this tender age was the prettiest thing on two legs.

4 words...
Jennifer Connelly, Iron Maiden.

That says it all. Any movie with Jennifer and the Maiden in it is just freaking awesome! ... Read more

Reviews (375)

There's No More Room in Hell, So the Dead Now Walk the Earth
1978's DAWN OF THE DEAD is the second entry in George Romero's "DEAD" trilogy, though it isn't as scary or as groundbreaking as his first, the classic NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968). Still, for a low-budget sequel, it is an interesting and entertaining film, an unusual mix of action, drama, comedy, and horror that actually functions on two levels: One, it is a stomach-churning study of the depths to which people will sink in order to ensure their survival; and two, it is a dark satire that takes several pokes at Western consumerism.

The plot of DAWN OF THE DEAD builds on the premise of its predecessor. The world is now becoming overrun with the flesh-eating zombies, and in the United States, martial law has been declared and all survivors are required to go to state-run "rescue stations" for shelter and protection. The manager of a TV station and her helicopter-pilot boyfriend decide to defy authorities and seek out their own save haven, and two police officers--friends of the helicopter pilot--decide to abandon their duties and go along with the couple. The group eventually arrives at an abandoned shopping mall, and when they realize that the stores within contain all they need to survive--food, clothing, and weapons & ammunition--they seal off the building, dispose of most of the zombies inside, and take up residence. But when their claim on the mall and its goods is challenged by a band of motorcycle-riding marauders, the quartet is soon fighting for survival against not only the zombies, but also against their own kind.

Although the audience has been made to sympathize with the film's four protagonists, there is no true heroism in this world of Romero's making. Instead, there are only different levels of self-interest and narcissism. After the four move into their new home and start living off the "fat of the mall," they quickly develop a sort of bourgeois attitude towards the comforts they now enjoy. Of course, that is exactly the Western attitude that Romero is ridiculing--that sense of security and satisfaction one feels after amassing material goods. And when the group's right to possession is violently challenged by outsiders, Romero clearly demonstrates just how tenuous a security based on personal possessions really is.

Romero is a master storyteller who knows how to manipulate the emotions of his audience. In this film, he creates a relentless sense of unease by juxtaposing the repulsive and grotesque with the lighthearted and humorous. For example, when the quartet of protagonists first occupies the mall, they turn on the mall-wide Muzak system to mask from the zombies the noises they make while looting the stores. So for several scenes there is this macabre contrast between bloody, pasty-faced zombies and syrupy instrumental music. Uncomfortably comical and humorously disturbing.

Creepy, bloody (FX by Tom Savini), boisterous, and constantly full of surprises, DAWN OF THE DEAD is easily one of the most entertaining zombie movies ever made. True, it does have an underlying anti-materialism message that is none too subtle, but that doesn't detract in the least from the enjoyment of being playfully spooked and repulsed by all the zombie grotesquerie. All in all, horror fans will have a good time watching this minor Romero masterpiece.

The Divimax Edition DVD from Anchor Bay offers an excellent digital transfer of the U.S. theatrical cut (often considered superior even to the director's cut), and there are lots of cool extras, too, not the least of which is a feature commentary with writer/director Romero and FX man Savini. A worthy addition to the film collections of serious horror fans, and well worth amazon.com's very reasonable asking price.

Dawn Of The Dead Is A True Horror Masterpiece!
An intense and overlooked horror classic, George A. Romero's "Dawn Of The Dead", the second and most popular in his Dead trilogy, is probably his most epic tale to date. Regarded by many, including Roger Ebert, as the ultimiate definition in horror films, "Dawn" is truly the thinking man's horror movie. Its horror is far more subtle than that of in-your-face suspense films like "Halloween" or "Exorcist" or for that matter, Romero's first Dead film, "Night". Where most slasher films provide those quick thrills that make us jump but dissapear from our memory almost as quickly as they appeared, "Dawn" creeps into our fears and shows us a view of our downfall as a civilazation.

"Dawn" centers around four survivors, two Philadelphia S.W.A.T. members and a couple from a newstation, who are trying to escape a zombie plague that has engulfed the country. The film opens with chaos ensuing as a handful of newscasters attempt unsuccesfully to put together an emergency broadcast. We move forward to a project house where the tenants are protecting the undead because as one of the central characters explains, "They still believe there is honor in being dead". Guns blaze as seemingly more humans are taken down than actual zombies courtesy of a SWAT team bigit who goes buckwild but ends up getting his before the smoke clears.

As the violence in the city seems to be piling up, our four characters use the local news chopper to escape to the country side where the situation isn't any less of a problem though a handful of trigger-happy rednecks seem to be having a great time with their beers and shotguns. After a brief touchdown at said location where the group runs into a few problems with both the zombies and each other while gassing up their helicopter, they head back up into the sky and eventually land at a shopping center, the film's cental location.

Placing the story at a mall makes for not only a unique and creative backdrop but also allows for Romero to provide an intriguing social commentary on the madness of consumerism that seemed to sweep the late 70's. The zombies who try to break into the center are portrayed as people who loved shopping there so much in life that all they want to do is be there after death.

Romero and make-up effects wizard, Tom Savini are at the most sadistic during the concluding act of this film as our heroes do battle with another band of survivors, a motorcycle gang who shows up and tries to take over the mall for themselves. The zombies, who prior to this were pretty much an afterthought regain their power because their human counterparts are far too busy with each other to notice that they are regaining control of the place. Savini's graphic make-up effects really make for a great finale.

"Dawn Of The Dead" is very much a different film from "Night Of The Living Dead". "Dawn" takes a far different approach to the "dead taking over the world" concept that George helped create in "Night". The mall setting is far less clostrophobic than the farmhouse in the original but it is the nightmare outside that our characters must deal with. In "Night", it was all about getting past the problem that lie in front of them and it's smooth sailing. In "Dawn", the problem is almost reversed. They are safe inside their location, though their safety is an illusion, and it is the outside world that is coming in. They don't want to get away. The outside world is falling apart and the mall is almost a false symbol of protection.

"Dawn" probably will not be an instant overnight favorite. I, myself, was expecting a much different movie than the one I watched. Having caughts bits and pieces of "Day" before I actually sat down to watch it, I was expecting it to have more of the look and feel that I associated with that movie. I honestly didn't know what to make of the weird clothing, the Smurf-blue make-up effects, and the strange Goblins music that popped up through out the film. Within two weeks of watching it, it had become one of my favorite films. All these weird visuals that I found strange actually kept dragging me in over and over again. Though the film is over 25 years old, I can still honestly say that there are very few films of any genre that resemble it.

THE BEST ZOMBIE MOVIE EVER!!! AT LAST!!!
A four disc edition? Who can ask for more? Obviously we saw it coming... the remake was there... the Divimax edition early this year... everybody was saying a big multi-disc edition was coming... and here it is!

To start analyzing this film we must take a look at NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. This film was a landmark as it introduced the zombies as we know today. Now, DAWN OF THE DEAD set a new landmark. In it, the zombies were a mature (sub)genre in modern cinema.

What makes this film so important? Everything! First it is the brilliant screenplay. The story... you already know: as the zombie population increases more and more, four people barricate themselves inside a big shopping mall, where they endulge themselves with all consumering desires they can think of.

Sounds simple? It is, but there is more than meets the eye: as the zombies try to get in (you'll have to wonder why) the four heroes inside discover their paradise makes them more empty than they would have thought it would... and slowly, life start making no sense.

DAWN OF THE DEAD is the kind of film that has been changing as the decades pass. Its violence seems to have softened if we think of all the action and horror films who came in the decades that followed (just like it happened with other horror landmarks like THE TEXAS CHAINSAW MASSACRE, FRIDAY THE 13TH, HALLOWEEN and NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD). Its makeup is not comparable to the vast majority of horror films that came after (who had bigger makeup budgets)... but on the other hand, elements like tension, drama, character development and social critique have all grown more powerful then in all of the films that followed.

In other words, audiences who see this film today, many times discover the fact that its weight is changing fields... from graphic horror to social horror. And this kind of horror is no less potent and much more rare.

Mr. Romero is one of those rare horror screenwriter/directors who do have a strong critic point of view (and we can see it as he continues to deliver so in his later third zombie film - the sadly underated gem - DAY OF THE DEAD).

Clearly, this is a multi-layered film that demands multiple levels of reading. You must be aware of all the issues put inside this film. Otherwise, if you're in just for the cheap thrills, gore and violence, you'll probably be disappointed.

As a product of the late seventies, this is a production triumph because it manages to deliver a lot with minimum budget. The remake released early this year made a great update on this basic premisse.

I loved them both.

This edition seems to be more than we've all asked for (now that the simpler Divimax edition made all the money it could...). Here, you'll find all the versions and lots of extras.

But again... DAWN OF THE DEAD is a film that I am sure will be seen and celebrated for years to come. See it with an open mind and you too will discover why.

DAWN OF THE DEAD
A GREAT ZOMBIE MOVIE AND SEQUEL TO NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. THIS IS A MUST HAVE FOR ANYONE WHO ENJOYS GUT RIPPING,FLESH TEARING ZOMBIE FILMS.VERY WELL DONE AND ACTED WITH LOTS OF GORE.ANOTHER MASTERPIECE FROM GEORGE ROMERO. GET IT!!!! A++++

Can't Wait
I must be honest, I almost got tricked into buying the DiviMax edition aswell, but after taking a look at what features it had on it and hearing rumours about this four-disc edition, I decided not to bother. All in all by looking at the cover art and reading about what will be on it, I believe that this edition will be a great buy for the month of September and for any Dead fan out there and, hopefully it will be the last edition for this particular movie. I can just see it now, six months from now, brand new "SIX DISC" Special Edition, that would be quite a sight . ... Read more

Reviews (39)

Underrated and Truly Chilling!
The first time I saw this movie was many years ago and I still remember being in complete awe over the fact that it was so much different than what I had expected. It was so incredibly dark and sadistic (which was very uncharacteristic for Hammer Studios, let alone any other film of this period) and it actually left a lasting impression on me for days. The entire look and feel of the movie was somehow EXACTLY the way I had always pictured old horror movies to be. I feel this is one of Hammer Studios best films and one of the best Dracula movies ever made. (which unfortunately isn't saying much.)

For once, Dracula gets to deliver some good dialouge and do some pretty cool things like scaling his castle walls, torturing his nim-witted servant, and might I also mention the inclusion of the most dramatic "Dracula demise" in the entire series. Christopher Lee will always be the irreplaceable crown prince of terror and the one and only Dracula! However, one has to wonder why Peter Cushing wasn't cast as the village priest. His great acting skills and shiny charisma always added a lot of needed credibility to these so called "B grade" imported horror films.

Anyway, if you like castles, costumes, and old fashioned gothic horror films you need to give this one a try! Just don't get yourself too upset over the fake looking bats!

EXCELLENT ATMOSPHERIC HORROR!
This entry in the series is perhaps the best, though it can be surpassed by HORROR OF DRACULA in some respects. A young couple runs afoul of the revived Count Dracula and his servant Klove, while in search of the man's missing brother. This film benefits greatly by an original and more elaborate screenplay, and Lee's phenomonal performance. Dracula is once again a more central character, giving him more to do and better lines. Lee gives his GREATEST performance yet, even though he personally disliked doing alot of Dracula films. Hammer also borrowed Universal's classic "firey mob" sequence for this film's opening, which also adds some early excitment as the mob of villagers attempts to end Dracula's reign by burning his castle. More is borrowed from Stoker's novel, such as Dracula scaling the castle walls and his vampire bats, whom he commands. This film is a bit gorier and has more sex than its predecessors, but don't let that stop you from buying this film(the gross scenes are few and brief). The night scenes filmed in daylight didn't bother me. Who cares? When you see Dracula awake, its night, so it doesn't matter. It helps the mood. The scenes outside the castle are dark, others are more light. This entry is very eerie, and well acted. Dracula's demise, while unorthodox, is the most original and is pretty cool!! Don't waste time, get SCARS OF DRACULA. It's the best example of Lee as Dracula, and is perhaps the darkest of the series!

Not the best, but the most horiffic of the entire series!
Great movie although I still say "Horror Of Dracula" was the best of them all. This film is the best of the sequels. Only one confusing part of it though. In "Taste The Blood Of Dracula", he is destroyed and rots away into dust at that ruined church. "Scars" begins, presumably, right after that film, yet we see Dracula's remains lying on a stone slab at a castle. How did this happen? Did someone pick up his dust at the church and then sprinkle it in the castle? Maybe it was the bat who comes in to drip blood on the remains? Who knows?

In any case, this was a rather good film. Unlike the previous one, Dracula is present for nearly the entire film this time. And, a great demise at the end this time.

If you buy any of the Hammer "Dracula" films, stick with this and the previous ones. Stay away from the ones that take place in the 20th century. Not the same.

A wasted effort...
This is one bad film. I'm a huge Hammer fan but my, what a waste of time and money. Sure Christopher Lee has more lines but they're awful lines and the film has absolutely zero artistry whereas the direction is concerned. The camerawork and photography have none of the excitement of the earlier Dracula films. The continuity is very bad indeed--night, now day, now...night again, all in the same sequence! The best set in the film is the bedroom with its black and deep red--a great looking set. Even on a low budget much can be done with lighting and camera angles, not to mention camera speeds and editing but apparently no one thought of those things when this film was made. This film is only slightly better than Dracula AD 1972, and not as good as Satanic Rites of Dracula which was awful. The only reason to own this DVD is if you're a Hammer completist. Then again, the commentary is mildly interesting because of Christopher Lee--also the bonus disc in interesting. In Dracula Prince of Darkness, Lee may have had no lines but it was an infinitely better looking film with more interesting characters and better direction by Terence Fisher. Sometimes not saying much speaks volumes.

No bonus DVD as the cover claims!!
The movie itself is very good if your a Dracula fan like me,however, I bought this movie for the bonus DVD thats suppose to come with it, however, there is no bonus DVD! I was sent a replacement movie hoping It would come with the bonus DVD as the front cover claims, but it did not. One reviewer out there says he got the bonus DVD but I don't understand why twice I did not get it. If anyone out there bought this movie and got the bonus DVD I sure would like to hear about it. You can email me at; mrfun100@hotmail.com and I thank you! ... Read more

Reviews (40)

Evil of the Vampire.
London ~ 1974. Dracula (Christopher Lee) is undead and plotting mayhem. With a select group of powerful men, the Prince of Darkness plans to unleash an upgrade of bubonic plague. This is the inherent vileness of evil, according to Professor Van Helsing (Peter Cushing). Van Helsing is a descendant of the 19th century vampire-slayer. He and his delectable granddaughter, Jessica (Joanna Lumley), join the battle raging against the menace from beyond the grave. Michael Coles repeats his role from "Dracula A. D. 1972" as a police inspector with a silly Buster Brown haircut that only the '70s could tolerate. A remote country house, full of devil worship and bloody ritual, conceals the vampire coven. Dracula's screen time is limited, but his first appearance is a great Hammer moment. The kiss of the vampire prevails, as fearful female captives become eagerly wanton women, consumed with unholy bloodlust. Instead of typical Hammer heaving bosoms in diaphanous gowns, there is good old bare-breasted nudity. Family viewing, of course, is not encouraged. Lee's towering image in the flowing black cape, and his menacing demeanor transcend mere acting and dialogue. This virtue carries the film over some weak points. In addition, never miss an opportunity to view Lee and Cushing together. Dracula's drastic plot to lay waste the world is one way to find final release from his peculiar malady. No more potential victims left alive. This is the last of Hammer's Dracula series. The ending is a little weak, but otherwise the series goes out in a blaze of glory. This movie is great fun for genre fans and Hammer Horror-Heads everywhere. ;-)

Hammer at it's Best
This was by far the best of Hammer's Dracula series. Chirstopher Lee and Peter Cushing square off for the final time as Dracula and Van Helsing and both end their seven film relationship with a bang. With a plot that contains more than just basic revenge this movie could hold the interest of a person that hates vampire films. Sure the movie contains a loophole or two but it is still and enjoyable film. I highly recommend you buy this movie.

SLOOOOOOOW MOVING
It's London in the 1970's, and Scottish Yard investigators think they have undiscovered a case of vampirism. Unbelievable, it becomes terribly apparent that the culprit may be none other than dracula him self, secretly plotting to unleash a fatal virus upon the world. this movie is only 87 minutes and it seems like it takes at least 4 hours to end! this movie makes no sense and the only reason why i gave it 2 stars is because it has vampires in it!

Stay away from this turkey!
Not worth watching unless you like silliness. Dracula gets hold of a viral plague that can wipe out the Earth's population? So, if he unleashes this plague, who's going to be left for him to feed on?

Dracula belongs in the 1800's, not the 20th century. Even having Professor Van Helsing in this film does not help matters. Thank goodness Christopher Lee knew what he was doing when he decided to not make another of these movies. It was time to hang it up for sure.

An all-time Hammer turkey to avoid all together.