johnpetersen

Wow. I am not sure what I missed, but it must have been a whole movie, because the pile of trash I just sat through is far from "The 80's best slasher." In fact, I would rate it among the very worst, which is saying a lot. It seems to me that a whole lot of Soavi fans have grouped up here to give this piece of junk great reviews because they like the director. Well, no matter how good Dellamorte Dellamore was later in his career, it doesn't change the fact that Stagefright (or whichever of its million titles you may have seen it under) just plain stinks. Well, thank you very much, Soavi fans, for wasting an hour and a half of my life.

Honestly, there is not one single element of this movie that is even tolerable, let alone "good" or "great." The acting is unbearably bad, even for an Italian slasher. The intro was about the slowest, cheesiest and out-of-place thing I have ever seen. I sat down to watch a horror movie, not a pathetic play rehearsal. The much-hyped gore in this movie was there, I guess, but so poorly done that it was laughable. Not to mention that the atmosphere surrounding the deaths was so bland and the characters so unresponsive that no sense of tension was present at all. The "ingenious" killer was pathetic. NO, the owl mask was NOT a good idea. And the soundtrack. I honestly don't know how it could have been worse. It was SO overdone that I actually muted the movie whenever the "scary music" came on, because I was so embarrassed for the filmmakers.

I am tired, and really don't know what to say except to avoid this garbage, despite what many of the reviewers here might say. And a note to those reviewers: a movie is not "atmospheric" just because it's Italian; a movie is not great just because the director had some other decent projects; and a mask is not "ingenious and original" just because no one else thought to stick a featureless pile of feathers on their killer's head.

In short, an utter waste of time. 2/10.

Candyman is one of my all-time favorite horror movies, and it seems to me that it is often underappreciated and misunderstood. It is a rarity in its genre, for it goes deeper than the standard formula horror movie, presenting a story under a story. While it contains plenty of frightening shocks and gore, that is only the suurface level, and the focus for watching it the first time. After the first time, pay careful attention to the dialogue and the interactions between Helen and the Candyman. The Candyman is not what he first appears to be.

<SPOILERS FROM THIS POINT ON...STOP HERE IF YOU HAVE NOT SEEN THE MOVIE!>

The biggest complaints I usually hear about this movie are of plot holes. People often ask, "Why does the Candyman haunt the black population instead of the descendents of those who killed him?" or, "Why does the hook make Helen come back when it is not what made Candyman come back?" or other similar questions. These are valid questions about the ghost story concerning Daniel Robetei, but they entirely miss the point of the movie. That point is that the incarnation we see of Candyman in the movie is NOT the ghost of Daniel Robetei. Forget what the pointless sequels lead you to believe, for in the first movie, as well as the original story "The Forbidden" by Clive Barker, the Candyman is an incarnation of the faith of those who tell stories about him. There is no ghost of Daniel Robetei, but rather an entity that is formed by rumor, faith, fear, and the story itself. It seems to me that almost everyone misses this point, but it is there, clear as day, if you listen closely to the dialogue. Of course, reading the original story helps shed a little light on this as well, and it can be found in Clive Barker's "In the Flesh," a collection of short stories. So, Candyman haunts the black population because they are the ones who tell the stories and believe in him. He is constantly asking Helen to "be his witness" in order to strengthen their belief, and his offer to her to live forever is literal. If she does become his witness, she will become a part of the story, and a part of the creative force that allows Candyman to exist. In the end, Helen returns because the population of Cabrini Green makes her a part of the story.

I hope this sheds a little light on the story for those of you stuck on the plot holes. This really is a fantastic, original story that is much more complex than that of any other horror movie I have seen. Not to mention that the performances are fantastic. Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen have a fantastic chemistry that is very convincing. The only gripe I have about this movie is the p***-poor actress they picked for Helen's husband's girlfriend. So, watch it first for the shocks, but watch it again for the deeper story buried within.

Definately a perfect 10/10.