Plot:
In Germany - Cheryl is given free tickets by a mysterious masked man to a movie premiere. Her and her friend arrive at the brand new Metropol theater where others have been given the tickets too. They all sit down to watch an unknown horror movie, where unbeknownst to them- what ever happens on the screen, happens inside the theater. Soon, a contagious zombie-demon plague breaks out and slowly infects almost the entire audience, who have been cemented inside so they can't escape.
Thoughts & Observations:
It's time we should all get smart about Italian horror. Many fans are not. Take for example, how many people thought Dario Argento directed this 1985 splatter film about a demon plague passing from person to person in a movie theater. I'll bet even after watching the first 23 minutes, they still thought Argento was behind this. First of all- it says "Dario Argento presents" on all the trailers, posters, ad material, and even the first seconds of the movie. He didn't direct it. Lamberto Bava did. But should this confusion surprise anyone? Some complete dummies even thought Wes Craven made the godawful Wishmaster just because it said "Wes Craven presents" on all the stuff for that movie. Some horror fans make too many mistakes like these.
There is of course a slight difference between the two becoming name brands. Wes Craven was only a name on those films and he made money off of the usage of it. With Demons, Argento was a little more hands-on. He even was on the set for some of it. Another mark of the "Dario Argento presents" stable is that he knew all the filmmakers who made those films and co-wrote and produced all the films. But having his name on these films means nothing. If you've seen an Argento film- you know he would never direct something like this. It's a whole other ballpark, as some might say.
Argento's films are so much more graceful, complex, fascinating, and stylish. Not that Demons doesn't have its' moments. It does. But it's far more in the vein of something Lucio Fulci would have made. Only much harder and faster. Sort of like - if Fulci had made a more teenaged, pop culture appealing version of The Evil Dead. That film being the standard of making something like Night of the Living Dead more hardcore, or taking it to the next level. Cutting out some of the substance, which takes time to carefully orchestrate properly. Turning the substance into the shocks and awe of the filmmaking tricks.
Demons is meant to take Evil Dead to the next level, the way that film did with Night, and The Exorcist. And, arguably, The Shining. In terms of gore and body count- it does. Both are doled out in far higher quantities than Raimi's 1981 masterpiece. However, the hard and fast law that rules Demons makes it an empty and cheap film. And one that will bore you several times before it's over. Especially, since the plot revolves around a large group of people trapped in a place. Like other films, namely The Return of the Living Dead, it takes the rest of the movie for anyone to escape. Finding a way out dominates the whole thing.
Fortunately for Return, the characters are really interesting or fun. So even though they're breaking down, stressing out, and flipping their wigs- you like watching them through to the end. Unfortunately for Demons, it's just a bunch of nobodies. Mostly faceless and nameless people who've already made themselves annoying to establish as they enter the theater that we're supposed to enjoy them being killed. That's one of the things that puts huge strain on this film. For example, as we discover they've been cemented up inside, they start losing their cool. As anyone would. But that kind of stress isn't fun to watch. It's maybe a little too real for an Italian gorefest.
Another example of this is when the movie starts. Tony the pimp is a real bang-up guy. He insults his prostitutes by calling one of them ugly, and frequently calls them "bitch"es. Then, there is a husband and wife. He's a real romantic type. He only takes his wife to free horror movies and when she complains (which she only does maybe twice), he yells at her. Then, he starts complaining because he knows the women sitting nearby are prostitutes. Yeah- like he wouldn't pay to have a night alone with either one of them. Seriously, this guy is a class-A jerk! And it's the night of their Anniversary too.
But back to the mass of people trapped. This leads to sequences like screeching wives with run mascara, people clawing each others' fingers bloody to try and dent the concrete walls, and a room that has the supernatural power to make all females spontaneously burst into hysterical screaming and nervous breakdowns. I'm a little confused about something - what's with the sexist character portrayals of women in films like these? Fulci had a similar relationship with his female characters in his films. Which I'll try to explain when I tackle his work a little later. It's not that serious in Demons, but it's still highly prevalent throughout.
Especially in scenes in a car with a bunch of cocaine-snorting juvenile delinquents. The young blonde girl is insulted viciously left and right, including incredibly personal and sexually demeaning things. And she's portrayed as so... to say stupid would be dismissive. She's trying to get along with the group of 3 guys, although the only one she likes is the violent psychopath with the car, Ripper, who is also the meanest one to her. Though overall, I'm not complaining about these interludes. The punks are really the only people I enjoy watching, as well as maybe George and Cheryl. The reason why is because we get more 80's pop-rock music, we finally get out of that damn theater, and because there's a strangely potent and erotic scene where the guy nicest to the girl, Nina, gently scrapes her skin with a razor blade, which she seems to be loving.
Grades:
Writing = D
It's been said of Italian horror films that story isn't that important. I would agree, but after being spoiled by more than 10 truly engrossing Argento films- ideas are important. And that counts for every horror film. As a matter of fact, they don't get cheaper than Fulci and his ideas are genuinely scary even if the finished products are usually laughable and sometimes embarrassing. But this movie's characters and plot development just don't work, overall. If the point really is watching a bunch of people load in and get knocked off, why is the fact that some are prostitutes important? Why is a sophisticated looking woman who takes care of a blind man sneaking off to meet some gross sleazeball like she's having an affair? And why is the awesomely ice cold Usherette character so mysterious and creepy, if she's going to end up being picked off like all the other victims? What's the point of the character build up if it's one big free-for-all?
Style / Direction = B+
Like almost all other Italian horror films- if it doesn't look good, it doesn't draw in the crowds over there in Italy. The 70's and 80's theater-goers over there were really in love with style. And so, Demons looks fabulous. A little gothic, a little gritty, grotesque and a little eerie, very flashy camerawork, and the pacing is highly effective. For a brainless gorefest meant to make you recoil and talk about the gore scenes and such later on with your friends, this works.
Acting = B-
Acting is a very hard thing to criticize and discuss in an Italian horror film. When shooting most of their films, Italian directors and crew don't use sound. They just shoot camera footage with people talking and dub the dialogue later. This allows them to get the performances they want without worrying about the actors getting their lines right and all that. So, the facial expressions seem to be working just fine. But the English dubbing voices for the characters is almost always horrendously over the top. This film is no exception.
Special Effects / Gore = A-
This film belongs to a select group of Italian horror films that form the heyday of Italy's best gore and special effects work. Even Argento's skin and flesh tearing doesn't usually look this good. And Fulci's stuff almost always looks terrible. Demons is the cream of the crop of Italian gore films. Especially when it comes to the film's big transformation sequence, with the second prostitute who crashes through the screen. The teeth and claws ripping through her hands. Excellent makeup and animatronic work! These are some damn scary-looking zombie creatures (they don't really classify as demons, since demons are actually possessed human beings in religious mythology).
Music Score = A
Argento's go-to guy, Claudio Simonetti from the legendary rock group Goblin does the more impressive score pieces here. Creepy, brooding, unusual, almost bug zapper-like numbers with chime and whirlwind sound effects that set a great little mood. The best thing about the smaller music tracks is how you almost don't notice them at all. But they're there. Also- how different they are from anything you've heard before. Just shows how valuable Simonetti is to the Italian film industry. The man is a genius, always inventive.
Atmosphere = C
The film does have atmosphere. Some. Especially in the first maybe 11 minutes. But that theater begins to get mighty boring after a short while. And something like the projection booth scene, where we find ourselves somewhere new, is too rare. The best attributes here are the camerawork, the music, and the lighting. Which is moody. But after 40 minutes, the movie drags on too much.
In Conclusion:
While the technical craft is strong and it's a good enough looking little ugly thing that will surely have you on the edge of your seat the first time you see it, the second viewing is guaranteed to be a snooze. For a more "hard rock" version of The Evil Dead, this film doesn't quite have its' staying power. It hasn't stood the test of time nearly as well. Had it been a little more interesting or carefully planned out, it could have been Argento's zombie film. Instead it's Lamberto Bava's claim to fame. And though I'd rather watch this again than any of his father, Mario Bava's stuff- he's just more of a follower than his father was. It unfortunately feels as though Fulci accomplished more. I recommend the film's quite superior sequel (also directed by Lamberto) over this.
Final Grade: C (5.5 out of 10)
