Eyes Behind the Stars (1978) User Reviews (24)

Pretty Dull

[Maciste_Brother · 4/10 · 13 February 2003]

I like movies about UFOs, which is why I recently decided to rewatch EYES BEHIND THE STARS after seeing it when I was a kid back in the late 1970s. And now I'm compelled to write a review about it because I'm afraid I'll start forgetting everything about it FAST. You see, even though EBTS ain't bad, it's VERY dull and nondescript. The story is sorta interesting but flat. The actors are good but their roles are boring and a little confusing. The FX are terribly amateurish but I can overlook something like that if the movie is compelling, which, unfortunately, this one ain't.

Also, there's very little violence and there's no nudity whatsoever, which makes this 1970s Italian sci-fi opus a TRUE oddity, because if there's one thing that distinguishes Italian genre movies made in the 1970s from genre movies of other countries made in the same decade, it's the astonishing amount of violence and sex to be found in them. Oddly enough, because of the almost complete lack of exploitive elements, EBTS stands out from the rest of the pact. I don't know if this can be seen as a compliment though. Personally, I can enjoy a movie without sex and violence but I think EBTS NEEDED more violence and some sex here and there to spice it up because it is so deadly dull and dry. And the special effects aren't that special.

The story itself is actually interesting. It's a combo of THE X-FILES and Antonioni's BLOWUP: a photographer accidentally captures aliens on film during a fashion shoot in the country. The aliens know they were captured on film and they proceed to kidnap the photographer and a model, subsequently destroying any evidence of their presence on earth. The problem starts when the model meets a man at the recently abducted photographer's apartment (this taking place just before she's to be abducted herself). The man takes some of the negatives and leaves, with the aliens having no knowledge of the missing negatives. The whole story is about this man wanting to know more about the aliens and a secret spy group who want to get a hold of the negatives. The majority of the movie centers around boring political intrigue, in the spy vs spy variety. The UFO element of the story is almost unimportant and could have easily been replaced by any cold war McGuffin. But as dull as EYES BEHIND THE STARS is, it does resemble THE X-FILES a LOT! I wonder if Chris Carter saw this movie. Anyway, the best thing in EBTS are the POV shots, which are creepy and effective. But the rest is almost completely forgettable, including the goofy looking aliens.

Even though I've been mostly negative about this film, I sorta cherish it nonetheless. I still remember the effective ad campaign which scared me when I saw it as a kid. And I own the video. The film could have been so much more if it had been done properly. Oh well...

Unintentianally semi-hilarious

[junk-monkey · 3/10 · 31 January 2005]

Why do I watch movies like this ? - other than I have some weird misguided masochistic belief that one day I will find a true gem amongst all this dross I can't think one one good reason. This movie was dross from start to finish - but semi-hilarious dross. Where else but in a bad Italian dubbed movie could you find heated exchanges of surreal mangled English like this one between a honest military type and the sinister chief of a secret X-files like organisation dedicated to hiding "The Truth":

Man in Black: Silence is best for us until we are able to prove that the UFOs have no bellicose motives.

Military Type: In any event I find your interference abusive.

Man in Black: Whoever has to impose his will is.

I rewound the DVD (you know what I mean) a good half dozen times and I still can't make those lines mean anything sensible. My other fave line was:

"We can be quite hard on those who contravert our interests."

It's English Jim, but not as we know it.

The other highlights of this dull plonker of a movie for me were the totally spaced out acting of the photographer character at the start. Saddled with the worst haircut EVER in the history of everything, the man just wandered around looking like a stunned fish in a bad wig till kidnapped and forced to look at a piece of Plexiglas by some aliens. The aliens are most effectively not seen as a POV shot - hand held camera with a fish-eye lens - sort of spooky the first time but, used over and over again it lost its power (incidentaly, if it is a Point of View shot, it means the aliens always walk out of rooms backwards for some reason).

The film was set in "England". This meant the Spanish Italian set designers put some British number plates on a couple of English cars and put a Union Jack on our hero's press card... and that was about it. No other attempt to make it look like the UK at all.

Favourite moment? When the Foley artists didn't notice that characters they were foleying (is there such a word?) were no longer walking on gravel but were now on the lawn so their feet kept on making loud "crunch! crunch!" noises. Other than that, another total waste of 90 minutes of my life. I hope they prove those UFOs have no bellicose motives soon...

Alternates between amusing, awful and interesting

[mstomaso · 3/10 · 3 September 2005]

This film was not nearly as much of a chore as I expected it to be. There are a few seconds of brilliance in this somewhat idiotic hardcore UFO conspiracy paranoia-fest. Most of the acting is mediocre, but fairly typical for 1970s-style stuff replete with pregnant pauses. A photographer and a model witness some strange goings-on in the woods and soon fall victim to these same goings-on. Flying saucers are spotted, more people disappear - but is it the aliens or our own government's ultra-secret group of cover-up guys? Soon enough, a reporter and a "UFOlogist" (apparently modeled on the character of the writer-director) are drawn into this unraveling fiasco and become the target of the ultra-secret agents who are as menacing as they are improbable and witless. Then the fun really begins.

The movie, predictably, makes about as much sense as the average UFO conspiracy theory, but should be commended for taking itself so seriously. The camera work is OK for a low-budget film, the pacing is pretty good, the script is silly and absurd, and there are continuity issues which are fun to look out for. What are the few seconds of brilliance I mentioned? Honestly, I can't say much you without writing a spoiler. Suffice to say that the end of the film is, at least, worth fast-forwarding to if you can't take the middle.

it's bad, but if you have the stamina, this movie has a few things going for it

[gene-33 · 30 December 2002]

First, this movie contains no excitement. None. Not an ounce. If you don't like watching B-movies, you don't need to see this. Even if you like B-movies, this one is difficult to sit through, but it has a few things going for it.

Second, it's hardly an ET rip-off. (Did the previous two commentators see the same movie? No way.)

Rather than ET, it more resembles the TV series called "UFO". Some of the characters even pronounce that abbreviation as a word, like "you-foe", which is how they always pronounced "UFO" on "UFO". Early on, the movie does a decent job of presenting a mildly creepy "the aliens are stalking us" mood, & in one or two places, characters speculate that aliens abduct humans to experiment on them. Both of those aspects reminded me of "UFO". Also, there are some scenes through an alien's eye-view. (Oh yeah, & during those scenes, one of the sound-effects is definitely from the Doctor Who story called "Robot".)

But the plot doesn't stay with the "aliens are stalking us" premise. It meanders all over the map of plots. It goes nearly everywhere a plot can go: creepiness, missing persons, journalistic story-hunting, police crime investigation, government conspiracy, international conspiracy, double-crossing double-agents, & even psychics. The plot changes so often & so thoroughly that I felt almost like I was watching different movies. I'd say this is the movie's biggest problem; it's like the writer didn't know what kind of movie he wanted to create.

There's a character who just HAS to be the inspiration for The X-Files' Cancer Man. Even the actor looks like the one who plays Cancer Man. When I saw that character, which is also about the time the plot turns to conspiracy theories, it made me suspect that this movie was some of the inspiration behind The X-Files. I'd almost bet on it. There are also some alien-abduction scenes & talk that resemble that same theme as it's expressed in The X-Files. (But if you are an X-Files fan, don't count on this movie to give you a supplementary X-Files fix. Your standards are probably way too high.)

A curiosity: The version I watched had an English dubbed sound-track. I believe the movie is Spanish (?), but every printed word I recall seeing was English. I thought that was mildly interesting.

The ending was unexpected, I'll grant. I'm not saying it was inspiring, insightful, or clever. I just didn't see it coming.

So, it's a bad movie, for sure, but there are some things about it that provide some food for thought or analysis if you're the kind of person who wants to look for it. (But it really is a pretty bad movie.)

Quiet... they might be listening...

[BA_Harrison · 1/10 · 26 May 2013]

Photographer Peter (Franco Garofalo) and his model Karin (Sherry Buchanan) are abducted by a UFO. Reporter Tony (Robert Hoffmann) investigates and discovers that a mysterious organisation called 'The Silencers' have been covering up evidence of alien visitations to Earth.

Less than 48 hours after watching Eyes Behind the Stars, which pertains to be more sci-fact than sci-fi, the precise details of its plot escape me. I can vaguely recall terrible acting, numerous protracted scenes of inane dialogue between extremely dull characters, some really crap alien costumes, and the overuse of a fish eye lens to give the effect of an alien presence, but very little else.

While this is probably due to the fact that the film bored the hell out of me and my brain has refused to retain anything more than the basics, it might just be because, having seen the film, I knew too much and The Silencers have wiped my memory (cue eerie sci-fi music......).

Brainless behind the eyes

[Zontar-2 · 3/10 · 8 July 2005]

In this paranoia-driven potboiler, our reporter hero battles hindersome authorities, duplicitous co-workers, renegade UFO debunkers, and silent, skulking aliens. (Though capable of mind control and zapping objects from afar, it takes three of them to operate a control panel of about two dozen buttons.) The script clomps from event to event,leaving puzzlers aplenty. Why did the aliens blind the dog? Why do they fry the soldiers with radiation when they're only patrolling an empty landing site? And what space dudes worth their moon cheese abduct the ugly photographer first instead of his model? Inquiring minds want to know! Writer-director Mario Gariazzo apparently researched his subject by skimming a stack of UFO-themed tabloids as he took in a Sunn Classics double feature. (The closing screen crawl boasts that it's based on actual events...just like "Plan 9!") Some may feel burned by the abrupt finale, but it should still appeal to conspiracy cranks.

A somewhat forgettable Italian sci-fi thriller

[Red-Barracuda · 4/10 · 7 March 2014]

While out in the woods on a photo-shoot, a photographer accidentally captures pictures of aliens. He soon comes to the attention of secret government men who seem hell-bent on a cover-up.

The Italians were pretty adept at making entertaining movies in all genres of film. But if there is one thing I have learned it is that, aside from the early 80's post-apocalypse cycle, they weren't very good at sci-fi. The Eyes Behind the Stars is yet another example of this unfortunate observation. It's not as if this is a terrible movie – it has some good parts to it – but it really is a bit of an unfocused mess. The two threads of the story – the aliens and the paranoid thriller – aren't especially well integrated. It's like two completely different films merged together pretty ineffectively and awkwardly. There's probably a good basis for something reasonable to tell you the truth but they sure never put the ingredients together in a form that remains in the mind for very long that's for certain. Ironically, not long after viewing this movie you sort of cannot really remember it at all, as if you have been abducted by aliens, been probed and had your memory of the unfortunate incident completely erased. Most strange

"The public is impressionable and easily panicked"

[hwg1957-102-265704 · 4/10 · 18 November 2023]

Early on in the film a character exclaims "What the deuce is that?" and that probably describes the unfathomable plot of the film. It ranges from aliens in woolen balaclavas abducting people to conspiracies to shadowy government machinations and then out of the blue at the conclusion a psychic woman is consulted. The abrupt ending doesn't help clarify matters. It is narratively set in England but is the most un-England version of the country ever committed to film. It looks decent enough though the POV shots are achingly slow so you get a lengthy entry into a room forwards and a sedate withdrawal from the room, backwards! Marcello Giombini provides the music score but one hardly notices it. The acting is OK with Robert Hoffman solid as the main lead. The great Martin Balsam plays a detective but isn't in it much. He is unfortunately dubbed with an ill-fitting voice.

Some reviewers cite the similarity of this movie to the later television series 'The X Files'. I agree. I couldn't understand that one either.

Honey, they're being stalked by a synthesizer!

[carguychris · 3/10 · 6 March 2015]

I got this title as part of a cheap 100-movie sci-fi set. I'm a big fan of 1970s exploitation cinema, and at first, I thought the film had some promise - it looks like it has some good creepy atmosphere, and it's Italian, so there's bound to be some gratuitous violence, gore, and nudity, despite cheesy special effects and a sketchy plot. What's more, even if it's stupid, it's bound to be entertaining!

Okay, I was right about the cheesy effects and sketchy plot, but the rest? Not so much.

This is one of those films in that uncomfortable middle ground in the B-movie hierarchy – it's not sensational enough to be a guilty pleasure or awful enough to be unintentional comedy, yet it's far too incompetent to be considered good on its own merits.

The basic premise is that extraterrestrials are lurking around an unspecified location in the UK for reasons that are never entirely made clear. These aliens can make themselves invisible, but they apparently show up in photographs, as a photographer inadvertently takes pictures of them during a photo shoot with a beautiful female model in the woods. (Note to Italian exploitation fans: She remains fully clothed.) The photographer takes the photos to a journalist and complications ensue; the aliens pursue and abduct the photographer, killing a bystander in the process. The police and the military get involved. More people die. (Note to Italian exploitation fans: There is zero gore.) The journalist consults with a paranoid UFO researcher, and both of them wind up being pursued by shadowy government agents known as the Silencers, along with the aliens. It's basically like an extended episode of the X-Files.

The plot is full of holes and is nearly incoherent at times, which is not necessarily unusual for 70s Italian fare, but the filmmakers take far too long getting to the point. The screenplay and direction are limp and leaden for roughly the first hour of running time; there is virtually no sizzle or excitement until the third act, by which time the viewer is hardly paying attention. Like the American UFO researchers who apparently inspired this piece, the filmmakers evidently took themselves far too seriously to have any fun.

It would be neglectful of me not to explain the title of my review, and give some examples of the filmmaker's incompetence while I'm at it:

~ The sequences of the "invisible" aliens stalking the characters are filmed in the first person, using a fisheye lens, accompanied by a mindless droning high-pitched "chirp-chirp-chirp-chirp" synthesizer track and an occasional metallic heavy-breathing sound. As the aliens approach, the room lights go out, and the characters usually stand still rather than investigating why the lights went out as most normal people presumably would. (Note to Italian exploitation fans: Although the beautiful model is involved in these sequences, she remains fully clothed here too, and the aliens never do anything truly exciting like, say, beheading a character.) The director obviously intended for these sequences to be suspenseful, but he relies on them too much and drags them out far too long – one gets the sense that he was simply padding the movie's running time. What's worse, I could still hear the obnoxious "chirp-chirp-chirp-chirp" in my head the morning after watching the film.

~ The film's British locale is never believable. Not only do none of the buildings look British, but the cars are left-hand drive, and characters' offices and apartments are decorated with picturesque posters with British tourist attractions on them, making the sets look as if they were decorated by a travel agent – which they probably were.

~ Important and potentially exciting plot points happen off-screen. Several deaths are either only discussed, or we only see the aftermath as the police are investigating. What's worse, most of the deaths that occur on-camera are dull – the aliens kill with mysterious "radiation poisoning" and the characters merely keel over. We also never actually see the aliens abduct a character; the abductions are merely implied by fast edits of flashing lights, the camera zooming in on the open door of the flying saucer, and the character appearing inside.

~ The dubbing is truly awful, and annoyingly vacillates between spelling out the letters "U-F-O" and pronouncing it like an acronym, "You-foe." The movie also features some of the most atrociously overblown, pretentious, and utterly nonsensical dialogue I've heard since watching 'R.O.T.O.R.' On the other hand, hearing Martin Balsam being voiced by another person who sounds nothing like him is rather novel and entertaining. (Mr. Balsam must have been really hard up for a paycheck at this point in his career.)

~ The Silencers are some of the sloppiest secret agents in movie history; they travel in an enormous and conspicuous black Cadillac, frequently tailing other characters by only a few car lengths, and they hand off a "secret" audio tape in the middle of a city street in plain view of the character whose conversation they just recorded. In another sequence, the head Silencer dramatically puts on sunglasses indoors before shaking down a character, presumably to conceal his identity, but then he takes them off!

~ When the journalist character finally goes Action Hero in the final act, it comes across as unbelievable, but at least this results in a beat-down sequence that's arguably the film's only high point for Italian exploitation fans (I won't spoil it for you).

~ The ending is rather sudden, and was probably intended to be ironic and cynical, but it came across to me as lazy on the part of the screenwriter and director.

Frankly, if you're looking for low-brow sci-fi thrills, I would skip this one.

Corrected running time

[phasedin · 4/10 · 13 May 2006]

For some reason, in the late 70's and early 80's the local CBS affiliated station in New York kept playing this movie in it's late-night slot on Friday or Saturday nights for several years, usually at 2 a.m. or some such time. It's a fitting movie for that time slot since it's really hard to follow and quite odd (see the other reviews for specific story info). Anyway, after catching it numerous times in those days just before cable TV (And even after it hit but before they offered much all night programming), I kept catching this little oddity. After not seeing it for many years I decided to see if I could find it on DVD. Well, it is only available (from every search i've conducted anyway)in a pretty lousy grainy print on the budget label "Brentwood Video" as part of a 4-pack of movies (4 movies on 2 double sided discs)called "Alien Worlds" if anyone is interested. It's usually available for around $10-but even much less if you shop around. The other 3 movies on this set are readily available in numerous other collections of public domain movies, so no need to comment on them here. But I haven't seen "Eyes" available anywhere else. Though hardly a "restored" version in any way, this print runs exactly 92 minutes, so for once IMDb's stated running time of 90 minutes is not correct. Even with the 92 minute running time it's not unusual for a movie dubbed into English from another language to also have some of the running time trimmed. It seems to be a common budget-conscience practice to sometimes save money by not bothering to dub some scenes at all if they are not considered to be important to the story. Would a longer version make in any less confusing? Who really knows-unless you've seen it in it's native language... By the way, my attempts to watch this during the day don't work and I end up just turning it off. There's something about watching this in the middle of the night that just fits this movie..or maybe it's just from my earlier experiences, who know??

The Crap Behind The Stars

[chow913 · 1/10 · 16 February 2016]

Just like other reviewers of this film I must concur, "Huh?"

The film claims to be "based on a true story." Not only is this farcical but since all the characters die at the end who would be alive to tell it?

The paper thin plot revolves around a fashion shoot with catches a flying saucer in the background and the aliens are DEAD serious about recovering the negatives to cover up their existence.

The main characters then switch to a reporter investigating the disappearances of the photographer and model.

The reporters discover an elaborate cabal "The Silencers" men in black whom cover up the existence of aliens by killing all witnesses.

This begs the major question, if there is an international cabal already covering up alien existence why would the aliens give a damn about some blurry photos?

The production quality is shot on sxxtyo and the plot is just plain silly. I can't even think of a drinking game based around the film it's so devoid of any substance.

Hits a few marks

[gengar843 · 8/10 · 21 April 2021]

(1) This is well before the X-Files, and it feels like it. Yes, it's cheaply-made, doesn't have the snarky quips, and there are many technical flaws (dubbing, continuity, etc), but you can't deny this plays out like Mulder and Cigarette-Smoking Man. In this regard, I was able to forgive much in order to receive what was offered. Was it good? You know what? The aliens on X-Files weren't always great-looking either. And the action was good, the logic followed, and it was tense. The alien abduction, the operations, the lost time, and other elements all added up to a good experience. Not the best of the lot, but the effort and good intentions of the film-makers was on display every moment.

(2) Technology. This has James-Bond level spy equipment, including a watch that records and sophisticated bugging. There is no hesitation that the governments of the world are all in on it, and that they have whatever they need to keep us in the dark, while knowing our every move. Just like today. However, it's also 1978, so we also get old-school typewriters. I love this kind of juxtaposition.

(3) Emotional impact. SPOILERS AHEAD: (a) Gunning down our heroes hits hard. It wasn't even nihilistic, just fatalistic, that we must lose this information war. (b) Female infiltrator getting smacked around but good was strange to see, but made total sense in the scheme of it. There was a visceral disgust and thrill at the same time. (c) Police-state actions, from the "silencers" to the inspector, whether in big chunks or small nibbles, always leaves an impression, and this film made it clear from start to finish that it wants the truth to be outed, and the police state to be at least interrupted.

So why 8/10 and why not 5/10? This movie was not arrogant in its aspirations or delivery. It did not pretend to be big-budget, and it did not settle for less than it wanted to be. The acting was actually very good, and the dialogue not ludicrous at all. I give rating based on whether a movie does what it sets out to do, and except for being grainy and dark, with cheap special effects, this movie does it. I will watch this again.

Eyes behind the arse

[Bezenby · 7/10 · 25 July 2014]

Franco Garofalo, some years before quite rightly winning best Oscar for his performance as the undead-baiting, wild eyed Santoro in Zombie Creeping Flesh, plays in this film an alien-baiting, wild eyed photographer called Peter. Now, Peter's out on a photo shot with girlfriend Sherry Buchanan (some years before SHE won best Oscar for having her vocal chords removed in Zombie Holocaust), and although he notes that it's rather creepy out there, it's not until he gets home when he notices he's captured some strange figures in the background.

Heading back out to the photo shoot, Peter is then abducted by some aliens who also blind a dog and irradiate some poor fellow. Sherry informs her journalist friend that she's going looking for him, but not before giving him some negatives. Then she vanishes too. Now our hack Tony's going to have to do some investigating, which isn't going to be easy as the cops (led by Martin Balsam, who's hilariously been dubbed by a Yorkshire accent) tells him to take nowt to do w' it.

Tony teams up with his UFOlogist mate Coleman and with his secretary also helping out, Tony has to deal with the cops, a special, creepy branch called the silencers, and those aliens themselves, who tend to turn up rather a lot to clear up some clues themselves.

At first, I thought this was going to be a snore-fest. Although there was plenty of atmosphere to begin with, it looked like there wasn't going to be too much going on after that. I was wrong though. If it isn't the Silencers turning up now and again to put the squeeze on Tony and give him a kicking, the aliens also appear often to make sure no ones got evidence. These days it would be all posted on Youtube and the aliens could have just typed in 'Fake!' and that would be that.

There's loads of double crosses, espionage, proper references to UFO occurrences, and a nice soundtrack. For a late seventies Italian film, there's absolutely no gore, sex and (thankfully) animals getting killed, so that's refreshing for a start. As daft as the aliens look, they still manage to be creepy, as does the final image of what happened to Peter.

This is a nice diversion from the usual carnage. Those with patience might like it.

aliens

[kairingler · 4/10 · 4 June 2014]

A man is doing a photo shoot with a model out in the middle of a field somewhere, and unknowingly he get's footage of alien craft, and aliens. Once he finds out what he's got he stashes the negatives. Sooner or later someone finds out about it,, a clandestine group within the World Government find out and they will stop and nothing to get the negatives back, because they feel if the information is released to the public at large, it will cause a worldwide panic. Meanwhile the photographer place is tossed and everyone is looking for the negatives, the model shows up later in the movie after being traumatized by the aliens although we do not see this part in the movie,, overall it wasn't bad the first half of the movie,, but the second half just turned me off. so that's why I'm going with a 4 rating.

A huge HUH??

[Serpent-5 · 4 August 2000]

What was this film?? It begins with the great Italian star Sherry Buchanan doing a phoot shoot in the woods, then the photographer thinks he took a photo of something odd. Then he realizes he took a photo of a UFO, then he goes back to that locaton, gets chased by something (we only see their POV) then gets abducted, then the aliens kill a local old man, and blinds his dog! Then they capture Sherry, then we finally see the aliens, who look like a bunch of guys in sji mask and goggles, then it becomes a detective movie with martin Balsam (dubbed by someone else) and the lead and Natalie Delon trying to find out what happened, as the Goverment "Silencers" are out to stop them! The ending is a real mess, and you realize that in the end, you couldn't root for anyone,and no clear explaniation on what the aliens were dong here, and why were they in cahoots with the baddies! A big bore from Italian cinema, but maybe if it gets re-released on video again, it might find an audience. Not with me though.

Typical Close encounters era knockoff.

[berg-74532 · 4/10 · 1 February 2020]

While my title sounds negative and it is I do like this film mainly because I've seen both versions. When I saw the original and was a unaware the other existed I thought it was crap. When I stumbled on the English language version it changed the movie so dramatically it was startling. And while I think this was an accident it changes trash ufo nonsense into something of a conspiracy piece like the US military stepped in and changed the version that was released to vague references to aliens and ufos that go unseen from what was intended as a straight forward alien invasion movie. Again I'm positive this was not a plan just a strange series of events that changed things completely by chance. It's very easy to look at these two versions of the same film and see how this piggyback Close Encournters could be used as a piece of disinformation. The best part is how they use parts of the Roswell story even the actual events and add so much garbage that if you are aware of the of what's real it adds a menacing and completely ridiculous spin that if you are so inclined make this some dramatic recreation of actual events and it surprises me that those people who make money off this stuff haven't tried using it as "conformation" of meddling by US military and a shadow world government agency because this would fit so well mainly for something pointed out as trivia. This movie has a well known and well respected actor clearly hired because of that yet in both versions he's been dubbed this is exactly the kind of thing that's seized upon to use as some proof of malfeasance and shadow government activity. This movie is mainly nonsense but if you add the twist I add to it and watch both versions it's interesting at least to me. Each on its own is hard to follow and make little sense. Watch at your peril and if someone starts using this the way I stated I want my cut.

Really blah

[Woodyanders · 4/10 · 24 December 2012]

A nefarious government group tries to prevent news of aliens visiting Earth from being made public. Sound exciting and interesting? Well, it just ain't. Writer/directer Mario Gariazzo relates the meandering and uneventful story at a plodding pace, fails to deliver much in the way of either thrills or tension, and gets bogged down in way too much numbing tedious talk. Robert Hoffman as crusading journalist Tony Harris makes for a bland hero while token American name Martin Balsam is underused as an inspector investigating the disappearance of a photographer. The chintzy (not so) special effects don't help matters any. On the plus side, both the gorgeous Natalie Delon as Harris' assistant Monica Styles and the lovely Sherry Buchanan as traumatized model Karin Hale are real easy on the eyes. Gariazzo manages a few inspired bizarre moments, but they are not enough to overcome the general dullness. Marcello Menczer's wonky score hits the groovy syncopated spot. An instantly forgettable fizzler.

It Started Out Good But What Happened?

[Rainey-Dawn · 2/10 · 10 November 2016]

Well... ahhh it started out really good then I have no idea what happened - it turned boring. Usually some films will start out slow then become good by the 30 to 45 minute mark but this film was the opposite! It was good for about 30 to 45 minutes then went very boring. What happened? It's like the writer had some great starting ideas for this film but didn't know what how to handle it after that.

The very ending of this film claims that all the events really happened but at different times. Whether or not that is true or false is not my point but my point is it doesn't make a good film to have all these "true stories" jumbled together in one movie - it made for a very confusing and awful film that started out great! It's bad the filmmaker didn't realize he started out with a great idea and continued with it instead of messing up a film that had the potential to be a pretty good sci-fi.

2.5/10

I like this true UF0 film

[midge56 · 6/10 · 16 August 2015]

The sound effects & pursuit technique scared the hell out of me and this is saying something because I was raised on Twilight Zone, Outer limits and a plethora of drive-in horror movies as a child & toddler. So less than a handful of thousands of films ever affected me. Those were "The Brain that wouldn't die" "Five" "Saturn 3" and "Darkness". To a lesser degree "Haunting in Connecticut" "Ring" & "The Grudge".

Most of the other reviewers were either neophytes who were not born when this film came out or skeptics who would not appreciate any UF0 film. It would be tantamount to me reviewing Westerns. I don't like Westerns, so I have no business reviewing one since I could never give a fair opinion of a genre I didn't like. Neophytes who were not alive in the 50's-80's should not be judging films or methods which they have no direct knowledge or experience of those timeframes. Much less compare them to modern styles & technologies.

At The end of the film is a screen statement which says it is based on a true story & all the gov't info was factual. You cannot apply cinematic criticism to a true story. To do so demonstrates the lack of maturity level in someone who cannot separate depiction of truth versus fiction. Let's give this film the leeway that it is based on a true story as it has stated. We cannot dispute this claim since none of us were present. Those who go out of their way to dispute the veracity of these events are usually some gov't hireling spreading disinfo or some know nothing bully trying to exert dissension & control to satiate their need to belittle others. So let's take the producers word that this film is based on true events.

This is a British film setting so it is typically low key.

Here are the spoiler events of the film: The film begins with a photographer & his model accidentally filming ET's in the background of a photo session. The photographer returns to the location, becomes terrified & runs to a nearby home for refuge. The model becomes concerned & a media friend takes the photographers negatives & consults a UF0 expert while the model returns to the location to search for the photographer who was since taken by the ET's. The model also disappears.

Neighbors notice 2 abandoned cars & call police. The house the photographer sought for refuge was discovered to have a fired shotgun in the yard, an unconscious owner who died soon after & a blinded dog. The ET's go around destroying evidence. The couple reporting the cars are found dead and military soldiers guarding a UF0 landing site are found dead from radiation. A "men in black" British organization called "the Silencers" takes over. Unlike MIB, they beat up, steal evidence, & kill witnesses with brutal deliberation. They confiscate the negatives & everything else. Police find the model catatonic. The media reporter discovers his assistant is a Silencer who has been spying & helped kidnap the model.

The reporter & UFO expert rescue the model, kill the bad guys & find a psychic to communicate. The model dies. The Silencers arrive & machine gun down the reporter & UF0 expert. The photographer is shown dead in the UFO which departs after all the evidence & witnesses are dead.

Despite the pace & low key style, I found the movie quite interesting & downright scary.

I only recommend this movie to UF0 buffs.

A Spanish-Italian ET rip-off

[Hellraiser-1 · 1 October 2002]

Well, I watched this movie at a friend´s home some time ago, we began to laugh almost from the beginning and we didn´t finish until the end. This is the best unintentional comedy I have seen in all my life, special effects are terrible and the filmmaking is still worse( in one scene we are in the afternoon but when the spacecraft changes to the following landscape then we are suddenly at night, and in other scene when the spacecraft stops over the sea we noticed that the waves in water had also stopped their movement, that was marvelous)and there are other many memorable moments here. Apart from that, music is just unbearable and the plot is a shameless ET rip-off only that with religious elements, which was a bit non-sensical because they are pretending that the extraterrestrial knows who Jesus is(quite difficult, I think). To sum up, Ed Wood would be happy to watch this and with this movie José Frade produced his second ridiculous fantastic movie after "Sea Serpent" which was also very worthy as a comedy but believe me, not so much as this. Rating: 2 out of ten, and just because I laughed as never before watching a movie.

Messy and fun junk

[BandSAboutMovies · 6/10 · 2 November 2020]

They might say that this was directed by Roy Garrett, but that's really the Americanized name for Mario Gariazzo, who directed Enter the Devil, AKA The Sexorcist, AKA The Eerie Midnight Horror Show, which is perhaps the scummiest of all Italian sexualized ripoffs of The Exorcist (and also the most awesome). He also made Play Motel, which is a giallo complete with hardcore inserts.

If you're reading this and suddenly got a little flush, you're my kind of people. I feel the same way about as I am about to watch Gariazzo make the first of two Close Encounters of the Third Kind cash-in films that he'd direct in 1978 (the other is Very Close Encounters of the Fourth Kind, in which three nerds dress up like bondage-loving aliens to get their astronomy teacher into bed.

Peter Collins (Franco Garofalo, The Return of the Exorcist) is a photographer who cuts a session short with model Karin Hale (Sherry Buchanan, who was Emanuelle in Emanuelle and Joanna and is also in The Last House on the Beach, Dr. Butcher M.D. and played Belle Starr in Escape from Galaxy 3) after they both start to feel like they were being watched. When he develops the photos, he discovers evidence of alien creatures, which puts them both into a nascent X-Files conspiracy plot.

This being an Italian film, you need some more star power, so Monica Stiles is played by Nathalie Delon (A Whisper In the Dark, Bluebeard; she was considered one of the most beautiful women in the world at one point and dated Richard Burton and Eddie Fisher after both divorced Elizabeth Taylor, which is pretty odd when you think about it), Robert Hoffman (Naked Girl Killed in the Park, Death Carries a Cane) is in this as Tony Harris and Martin Balsam appears as Inspector Jim Grant. And The Silencers, a government organization, soon are on his trail, led by Sergio Rossi, who was the narrator of Africa Blood and Guts, who has Mario Novelli (the engineer from Beyond the Door III/Amok Train and Tango from Fulci's Warriors of the Year 2072) and George Ardisson (Theseus from Hercules In the Haunted World) under his command.

The poster and giallo sounding title of this movie have always placed it on my watchlist and that's why I love Mill Creek month. It's an opportunity to finally get to watch movies that I keep saying, "I need to get to that" and then for some reason always overlook.

It has aliens that wear full-body suits with mylar faces and the cleanest space ship you've ever seen and the ability to blind dogs, as well as Hoffman and Stiles pretty much playing Mulder and Scully* 15 years before the show even existed while also ripping off Gerry Anderson's UFO, a soundtrack of drones and buzzes, plenty of alien point of view shots and a movie that switches protagonists midway through, which is ironic when you consider that Martin Balsam is in this.**

This movie has more twists and turns than any giallo and isn't afraid to change gears quickly, going from alien movie to conspiracy tale to bringing in psychic and then remembering that it was made in the 1970's and the rule that all seventies science fiction must have a downer ending.

Plenty of the reviews that I've read for this movie hate it. Perhaps they haven't watched hundreds of Italian genre cinema and want everything to be paced normally and make sense. For those of you who have given up on movies that are sane and are thrilled by warming up leftovers from another era that don't always taste as good as they once did, you're going to really love this one.

Everybody smokes. Everybody punches one another in the face. The aliens are barely in it. The soundtrack is atonal and annoying. These are things that would chase off the hardiest of film watchers. To me, it's the bread and butter that I dip into the sauce after devouring the cinematic pasta.

To make things that much better, it ends with a "this really happened" title card. I didn't know I could be so happy.

*Ardisson is pretty much playing the Cigarette Smoking Man, when you come to think of it.

**Sometimes when you explain the joke it is no longer funny. However, for the non-watchers of ten movies a day, this is the exact same thing that happens in the movie that Balsam is best known for, Alfred Hitchcock's Psycho.

I never thought Italians in scuba gear and ski masks could be so scary..

[ponchodrummer · 12 January 2004]

Eyes Behind the Stars shows us why Italy is good for nothing more than breadsticks. I was slightly confused when the movie was drug along by dulling conversations between two, poorly dubbed, characters. They were then later killed by people in a black car, why you ask? I have NO idea! Im normally not an advocate of drug use, but if you are going to watch this movie, I suggest being very high, or on SOME kind of trip. Did they hire Atari to do the sound track for this film? Or maybe it was a 12 year old kid that had seizures behind his toy synthesizer? Oh and did anyone else notice Raffi's cameo in this film, as the doctor who intelligently states, "The man's dead." And the other doctor was out to start the early 70's mullet craze. One other thing, who is a script girl? (watch the credits)

Great acting. Incredible cinematography. Outstanding sfx.

[bmbelko · 26 September 2020]

Ha ha. Kidding. Sometimes these old Italian films do have incredible cinematography, I think because Italy is gorgeous. But partly because scenery doesn't act badly or move. There were some very good camera angles, which Italian films often rely on. They did not overcome the Captain Kirk-like acting. The story line was....there....but there was no resolution. If it intended to leave questions, that's okay, but zero answers is not okay. Sort of the "life is a s*** sandwich and every day you take another bite then you die" low budget existential....thingie. Very Italian.

Highlights:

Great use of bland facial expressions Great use of Italian, British, fake British, American, and fake American accents Great placement of arbitrary commercials on the service I was using to ensure something interesting periodically showed

Favorite highlight: The aliens. Great button pushers and toggle flippers. I especially liked the one whose job was to push and hold the red button the entire time.

"Who Are They? Where Do They Come From? What Do They Want?!"...

[azathothpwiggins · 19 July 2021]

Photographer, Peter Collins (Franco Garofalo) is stalked, abducted, and duly probed by aliens. When his friend and model, Karin (Sherry Buchanan) goes looking for him, she winds up in the same predicament.

Unfortunately, Peter and Karin have little to do with the rest of the story, which delves into the investigation into the disappearances by a police inspector (Martin Balsam) and a reporter (Robert Hoffman).

There's also a secret government organization known as "The Silencers" (!). Peter has something that "The Silencers" desperately want.

This is supposedly an Italian sci-fi / thriller film, but those expecting any actual thrills may be disappointed. It's mostly driven by windy, UFO conspiracy theory dialogue. That is, right up to the final 15 minutes. Even the finale isn't all that interesting or exciting...