Rating: 
Summary: Carpenter Takes On Lovecraft-And By Golly, It Actually Works
Review: This is one of the best horror films of the 90s. I ain't lying. Let the pimple faced critics say what they want, but this movie is very, very good. Especially when you see the horror films it's up against anymore. I saw this in the theater and I've never seen so many people jump. Of course you can put that down to the fact that this was when theaters first started using digital sound. I'd say this film is the most faithful screen depiction of Lovecraft, and it's not even based on any particular story of his. It's more of a Lovecraft tribute, but I'll take it over any of those rotten films that bear the Lovecraft name in the title. And there's no lame CGI. There are many slimy, Lovecraftian monsters, but they're only seen in quick flashes, which helps the film more than anything, considering the fact that Lovecraft's writing usually relied on the same technique to make the creatures scary-just in a literary way. Whether this film achieves creepiness, lameness or just confusion is up to the viewer, but nobody can tell me that the kid on the bike deal doesn't raise your hairs just a bit. I've never really though much about Sam Neill, good or bad, but I really think he carried this movie well. Carpenter once again chose the actor he felt was right for the part instead of just casting Vin Diesel or Ben Affleck right off the bat in order to guarantee ticket sales. It is too bad that this movie wasn't really a hit at the box office considering most of the people who see this movie usually tend to enjoy it. You really should make an effort to see In The Mouth Of Madness whether you buy it, borrow it or rent it.
Rating: 
Summary: Should have been better.. .
Review: this film is a disappointment. Lovecraft's vision has proven very difficult to film, and Mouth of Madness --which is a pastiche, not based on any single story-- is no exception. The problem is that when you put some of these things on film, they just look silly. "Have you read Sutter Cane" -- yeah, right, an airplane paperback that opens doors between universes. Lovecraft always made his dangerous books obscure, buried in dust covered shelves at Miskatonic U. The idea just doesn't work if the book is being sold at Borders (or Amazon. . .what would the popup be for this one be: "People who bought books by Sutter Cane also bought large axes?") Other things bother me about this film. I've enjoyed Carpenter's work ("The Fog", and especially "The Thing"), but he's not good here. Even his music is worse than normal (compare the fabulously atmospheric sountrack to "The Thing" with the screeching guitars which open this film) He wastes some very good actors-- Sam Neill, who's got horror film provenance, Jurgen Prochnow, and Charlton Heston. I've no idea what was going on with the casting here, but whatever the idea was, it didn't work-- these are three very good actors who appear to be in three very different movies here. Lots of film details are sloppy and hackneyed. . .the ambulance that arrives at the asylum in the first scene has silly screeching sound fx added to what otherwise is a nicely composed shot. Since its not being chased, and no one subsequently displays an overwhelming sense of urgency, what's the point of the screeching? Film continuity, editing and plot progression are jerky and not well thought through. . . the ending feels like "we got to ninety minutes and the actors want to go home so let's end it here". Not satisfying, highly predictable. Summary: Buy this film if you're interested in Lovecraft on film. The Pickman references are the only effective part, and actually would have made a much better film -- the hotel keeper is genuinely creepy. Oddly, the best Lovecraft on film is, to my mind, Hellraiser (I and II). Its true that Barker has some elements that are not of the HPL domain, but its a fully realized vision of "terror from beyond" which is permitted to pass into our universe by "opening doors". This isn't.
Rating: 
Summary: "Do you read Sutter Cane?"
Review: Do yourself a favor and run away if anyone asks you the question, "Do you read Sutter Cane?" Especially if the guy is weilding an axe! When this movie was released in theaters I was reluctant to go see it. John Carpenter, while doing a masterful job on "Halloween" and "The Thing" has also done some mediocre work in more recent memory. But I was very pleased with this film, which I actually think is one of his best, due in large part to a well-written script with touches of H.P. Lovecraft. Long before this movie was critiqued I was telling all my friends about the great gothic ambience that this film has. No other film captures the feel of Lovecraft quite the way this one does. Director Stuart Gordon's "Re-animator" and "From Beyond" were both great fun, and oftentimes creepy, but John Carpenter's "In the Mouth of Madness" captures the mood of Lovecraft's style the best. The lead actor here is Sam Neill, an actor that is a little unusual in his own right, and I rank this among his better work. Another Horror film, Horror/Sci-fi to be exact, that he was noteworthy in is "Event Horizon." But in "In the Mouth of Madness" his character is hilariously cynical and a skeptic to the bone. "Win a Sutter Cane lunchbox!" The film starts out with his character being brought into a Mental Asylum, and his story (the film) is told to a psychiatrist in retrospect. Or is it in retrospect? Is what he's saying just another chapter in the next Sutter Cane novel? For instance, Sutter Cane says to his editor, "You can edit this one from the inside!" The great thing about this story is that something shocking or weird could happen at any moment, which left my eyes fixed on the screen the entire movie. There is also a lot of humor, most of it subtle. One such instance is when Sam's character is locked in a padded cell, in solitary confinement, and he becomes aware that music is playing, The Carpenters, with all the other patients singing along. His reaction to this emotionally painful situation is very funny. There are also obvious nods to Lovecraft stories, for those who are acquainted with his work. In the film there is the "Pickman Hotel" which is a spin on Lovecraft's great story "Pickman's Model." There is more intelligence in this Horror film than would at first be believed. Most Horror films are more concerned with the amount of gore spilled rather than the characters and where they are going. However, there are some cheesy moments here, as well. The music during the opening credits is not a promising sign of things to come, being some fairly lame hard rock music, but the score settles into appropriately gothic tones for the remainder of the film. There is also the occasional hand reaching out to grab an unwary character from behind with a swell in the score, which is par-for-the-course for most Horror films. Just remember that this is a low-budget Horror film with the occassional cheesy moment, but it has sharp dialogue and many scenes loaded with mood and gothic texture. This is easily one of my favorite Horror films. Thank you.
Rating:
Summary: What A Trip and A Mind-Marker!
Review: By mind-marker, I simply mean that this movie's impact on me cinematically speaking was so massive that I still feel it today, from my first viewing. Although it is far from the scariest film ever, it certainly is one of them. There is just something about THAT mysterious knocking green hand and THE young bike rider-turned-old that creeped me out for years. I still can't imagine what that creature that tore up the insane asylum looked like, making multiple viewings of this film a must for me. If you want the best of Carpenter, see The Thing or Big Trouble In Little China, but for a good scare and a visually mind-bending journey into horror and hell, watch this movie.
Rating:
Summary: SCARY AND CREEPY TO THE MAX
Review: This is what I call a real horror movie. There's no splatter, but great horror. Don't get me wrong, I like splatter, but this movie doesn't really need it, it's a great movie because of its dark disturbing atmosphere and because you think to know the plot but it all changes at the end. Simply a great movie and Carpenters best movie. Sam Neill is also doing a great performance as in Event Horizon.
Somehow after watching it I thought this movie is as great as a book of Stephen King(whose films always are crap, but the books unbelievable!)
Rating:
Summary: Do you read Sutter Kane?
Review: What if you were fiction? Inspired by the writings of the Edgar Allen Poe of the Twentieth Century, H. P. Lovecraft, "In the Mouth of Madness" is a film so loaded with strange occurances, bizarre sights, and intruiging ideas that it's inevitable that most of them will be wasted/barely acknowledged/quickly forgotten as the plot demands to be followed and the story progresses from beginning to end. There's just so much going on in the brief hour and a half we're given to watch ... I would love to explore the locations of the town of Hobs End in more detail, observe its people, their pets, the shops, watch old movies of the townspeople constructing the church (why would a colonial American town even have a Byzantine Orthodox Church in the first place?) and most of all check out the creatures lurking in the shadows/behind everyone's backs (literally, sometimes)! But alas, we are not given a chance to do much of that... we're allowed by Mr. Carpenter only a taste if the feast and are then forced by him to turn our concerns to other matters (there is a story to be followed, after all). Sam Neil is an insurance agent that specializes in high-profile clients, who is sent to investigate the disappearance of horror writer Sutter Kane. He finds himself in the fictional town of Hobbs End, a place which up until that point only existed in Mr. Kane's novels, which seems to serve as the boundary between what is real and what is imaginary ... a boundary that is steadily growing weaker, as Kane's readership increases. In the Mouth of Madness asks some interesting questions, presents some fascinating ideas, and treats us with some fabulous visuals. It's got every horrible thing you can imagine, from creepy little girls to a crazy mob of gun-toting small-towners to a homicidal grandma to pictures that change (uncomfortably) behind your back to sickening contortions to mental institutions to much much much much more. If you can imagine it, it's here. It's not pretty, but it's fascinating nonetheless. In the Mouth of Madness is one of my all-time favorite films, one I never get tired of watching or thinking about. Check it out, and pick up a volume of Lovecraft's short stories while you're at it (especially one featuring the first Lovecraft story I ever read, "The Dunwich Horror"). After mentally injesting both, you'll be sleeping with the lights on for a week, but it will have been worth it. Carry on Carry on, MN
Rating:
Summary: GUESS YOU HAD TO BE THERE
Review: John Carpenter has given us some really good movies: HALLOWEEN, THE FOG, THE THING and even VAMPIRES. However, IN THE MOUTH OF MADNESS is one of those what's real/what's not real movies that leaves the audience wondering just what the heck is going on. That's not always bad, but there's so much about this movie we never can really figure it out. Sam Neill's performance is on target, but Julie Carmen, Jurgen Prochnow and even Charlton Heston are wasted.
Rent, don't buy.
Rating:
Summary: Lovecraft and Carpenter, together again
Review: "In the Mouth of Madness" is John Carpenter's second take on the Cthulhu Mythos (the first is "The Thing", it looked like Lovecraft's "In the Mountains of Madness"). It says in the credits that it is inspired by stories by H.P. Lovecraft; indeed there is no solid uniformity in theme, except for a passing resembelence to "Pickman's Model". Sam Neill is an insurence investigator who is assigned to find missing novelist Sudder Cain ("He out sold Stephen King," - says his agent...Yeah right). The more that Neill gets into the books and follows the trail, he finds that the line between reality and fantasy is thin at best. I loved this movie. It is the last movie that Carpenter seemed to care about. Indeed it is pretty spooky, creepy, with several 'boo' scares to keep you on your toes. Also I thought that this movie caught the essense of books better than most films usually get it. The monsters are truely horrible, authenticly menacing. Sam Neill is the heart of this movie, looking at things so coldly and cynicly, there for when he believes, we MUST. This is a great horror movie, I wish Mr. Carpenter would remember he is great.
Rating:
Summary: Strange, Surreal flick!
Review: I basically liked this movie. It tends to be somewaht like a Stephen king's film but not quite. One major flow of this movie is that it just shows too much rather than leaving certain things to the viewer's imagination, Also some scenes are somewhat out of place. Overall: Good!
Rating:
Summary: It was OK, but not a movie I enjoyed
Review: I'm seeing all these reviews about how this is an awesome movie because it's like H. P. Lovecraft. But being a person that doesn't know anything of or about H. P. Lovecraft I found this movie to be rather un-satisfying. If I need to know Lovecraft in order to like or understand this film, then I'm sorry, but that rather limits it's audience. It wasn't really all that scary; one part made me jump, but that was the extent of the scariness. Overall this is more of a psychological movie than horror. The only part about this movie that had to do with horror was the fact that there were some slimy creatures, and some axes in it. Otherwise this film could've meant anything. It's all about what you interpret it as in the end. As far as directing goes, this isn't Carpenters finest work. For example, in one scene we see Trent (the main character) enter a room as he sees someone he knows (trying not to give anything away). Next thing we know there's a cut to the hallway and he's flying through the door. There's no real explination for this, and the cut is so fast it distanced me from the film. There are a few spots in the movie like this. I hate to say it, but even Carpenters Vampires was directed better than this film. The film had good potential, a great original idea, but about halfway through it just fell apart. If you're looking for a strange psychological thriller, check this out if your bored. But if you're looking for a good Carpenter film I'd suggest The Thing.
|
