raymond-x-jacobsen

I just had the pleasure of watching the Cinefear DVD that's been released of this forgotten treasure. What a treat!!! It's really a very good film, and considering the source for the transfer was a 16mm print, overall the picture is very good. It's full-frame, but they even have a disclaimer on the back of the DVD box that explains it was filmed in Scope, so therefore it has never been, or will be, available in widescreen. With that being said, I don't understand why Warner Bros. sued, and won, for this being a rip-off of "The Exorcist"----two, completely different horror films---in story and style. This actually reminded me more of "The Evil Dead", than "The Exorcist". I won't belabor the readers with a synopsis of the story, as it's been told here on the boards many, many times. I'll just end by saying this was highly entertaining, had some good jumps, an overall creepy atmosphere, and I'd take watching this film over any of the Hollywood crapfesthorror wannabees like "The Grudge" any day. Great popcorn fodder----turn down the lights, and enjoy!!

I saw this when it first came out in the theatres, with my sister---we loved it and were blown away!! I've since owned it on VHS, and now have the wonderful DVD that was just released. Honestly, given the year it was made and such, it's not a bad film at all, and is one I regularly watch!! Sure, it's a preposterous story, and the effects come off a little dated, but I thought the ensemble acting was great---loved seeing Ann Southern, Stella Stevens, Susan Strasburg, Tony Curtis Et Al tackling this unique idea for a horror film. I thought many, many scenes were intense (the séance scene is a highlight!), and loved how William Girdler interpreted the story. I actually rate this very high, and only ding it because of the slightly dated effects. "Hamlet", it ain't , but it's a very enjoyable horror-romp for the evening, perfect popcorn fodder!

Everything a popcorn/horror movie should be, and more!! I was pleasantly surprised at how well-made this little shocker was, and to me it delivered all the goods. I thought the effects were a heck of a lot better than "Nightwing", and after sitting through the god-awful "The Roost", this looks like an Oscar contender!! I thought the story served the effects well, and most were rather convincing, and the film had the charm reminiscent of older horror films from the 50's. Sure, it's not "Titatic", or "Gone With The Wind", but what were you expecting with a movie called "Bats"? Thoroughly entertaining in every respect, and certainly a few surprises here and there----perfect popcorn fodder for a rainy, dark night. Again, I know I'm in the minority here, but honestly it's a pretty good little film, and does exactly what the title says.

What could have been a great, low-budget shocker, is instead just a regular, boring movie. I appreciate low-budget films (heck, my 600+ attendances to "Evil Dead" probably funded Sam Raimi's house!), but this was just dreck. Actually, at the beginning of the film I had high hopes because I was very impressed with the dialog---these characters seemed believable, and the words they were saying were not clichéd (which is usually the downfall of most horror films). But, the film really never gains momentum, and never really pays off---definitely has a "made-for-TV" feel to it. If you want a schlocky killer bats movie, try "Bats"---much more entertaining!

No need to rehash what many people have already said on this film---it is just plain awful!! Everything from the story to the special effects was just plain lousy!! Where did all the $$$ go? There is absolutely no reason to put yourself through the pains of seeing this tripe---and trust me, I'm a HUGE Wolfgang Peterson fan. I really was hoping for something along the lines of "A Perfect Storm", but alas........it seems we were given what was left on the cutting room floor from the made-for-TV version that starred Rutger Hauer. If your interested in seeing this story, and haven't seen the original---save yourself the time and money, and buy or rent the original----an all-star cast with top-notch effects and great writing----you'll thank me by the end of the movie. Stay away from this putrid crap.

I saw this movie when it first came out, and have watched it numerous times since then. There is no comparison to the two remakes that came out---both pieces of crap. The original has it all---an all-star cast that shines, great effects, and most of all a story that grabs you from the very beginning. I find it interesting that so many people blast it for the "hammy" acting. Sorry, people, but these characters are REAL---I know people like the Rosens, the Rogos, the preacher, all of them! I found the portrayals dead-on, and very realistic for the situations that confronted them. They developed these personas in such a short period of time to make you care about them, that's where half of the tension comes from in this film. The special effects still hold up remarkably well for todays CGI-induced public---the capsizing scene still gives me the shivers. Of course, most of this movie is lost in its cropped format---it has to be seen in all of its widescreen splendor. Airport and this film are to me the granddaddy of all disaster films---they incorporate the best that soap-operas have to offer, along with top-notch casts and special effects. Pop a big bowl of popcorn, and enjoy!

My partner and I just rented this film, and I have to concur with most of the negative reviews---WHAT A WASTE OF TIME, TALENT, AND FILM!!!!! My God, they could not have made a more boring film---advice to all those with sleeping problems----forget the Tylenol PM, Ambien, etc.---rent this movie, put it in and welcome a beautiful nights sleep. The dialog, as most have noted, was unintelligible, like they were speaking with marbles in their mouths at the lowest recordable decibel level they could do. And the action, or lack thereof----so, so, sooooooooooooo boring!! I'm by far more entertained by my cat going in and out of a paper bag for three hours than to be subject to this drivel---lackluster all around. The characters were never fully developed to where you give a rats ass about any of them, the photography of the Miami locals was stupefyingly dull, and just overall a poorly made movie. Avoid at all costs.

By far one of the best and most influential horror movies of our generation. When this movie came out, I was only a child, and I remember the commercials vividly---scared me out of my wits!! I remember many of my relatives seeing this film and trying to describe it to me, but for obvious reasons that just can't be done---it's something you have to see and experience for yourself. I think perhaps the negative comments come from people who haven't seen the widescreen version in it's full surround sound. Years later when I was old enough to see this, I was blown away!! The story, the design, the music, the mystery---instantly made me a Dario Argento fan (and also influenced me to become an actor and writer of the macabre!). European countries have such an ethereal feel and look to them, which only intensifies the overall effect of the film. I backpacked around Europe when I was in my twenties----I saw buildings, streets, areas very similar to what's in the film. Remember also that there's soooooooo much more history in these countries, and that the black arts have been part of their cultural history. I'm not going to retread the story line at all here, but this movie, along with many other European horror films of that era (like, "Let Sleeping Corpses Lie", etc) are to me much more creative, horrifying, and better made than the American counterparts. Every film Dario Argento has created, to me at any rate, rank up there with the best-of-the-best---they're all obviously labors of love, but Suspiria shines above the rest. As far as a remake, unless Dario's directing, why even bother?