Dario Argento's Dracula Anticipation Thread

[Prince_Vajda]

Originally Posted by Daemonia

I hear what you're saying, James. And as a film in its own right I might have been more forgiving. However, try this: watch Suspiria, Inferno and then Mother of Tears in immediate succession. You'll quickly see how it's gone to shit with the final instalment. It's an embarrassment to the trilogy. To conclude such a magnificent series with this turd is what I found most insulting.

I haven't commented on all this Mother of Tears criticism yet, as this is exactly what I am going to do before Christmas. Expect some extended reviews of Argento's Three Mothers pretty soon!

Greetings!

[James Morton]

Originally Posted by Daemonia

I hear what you're saying, James. And as a film in its own right I might have been more forgiving. However, try this: watch Suspiria, Inferno and then Mother of Tears in immediate succession. You'll quickly see how it's gone to shit with the final instalment. It's an embarrassment to the trilogy. To conclude such a magnificent series with this turd is what I found most insulting.

no way is MOTHER OF TEARS is insulting, just entertaining imo in Argento's style

no way a turd, but I can think of a lot of so called horror films that are....

[Paul@TheOverlook]

Originally Posted by Daemonia

I hear what you're saying, James. And as a film in its own right I might have been more forgiving. However, try this: watch Suspiria, Inferno and then Mother of Tears in immediate succession. You'll quickly see how it's gone to shit with the final instalment. It's an embarrassment to the trilogy. To conclude such a magnificent series with this turd is what I found most insulting.

I couldn't agree more, spot on there, bud.

[Delirium]

Originally Posted by Daemonia

I hear what you're saying, James. And as a film in its own right I might have been more forgiving. However, try this: watch Suspiria, Inferno and then Mother of Tears in immediate succession. You'll quickly see how it's gone to shit with the final instalment. It's an embarrassment to the trilogy. To conclude such a magnificent series with this turd is what I found most insulting.

I don't think anyone is disagreeing that it's unsuitable for the third in the trilogy, but I disagree that it is a bad film.

Take the dates, Suspiria ('77), Inferno ('80), Mother of Tears ('07). I'm sorry, but I just wouldn't expect a film made 27 years later from when the director was at his peak to be exactly the same - so watching them back to back, when it's clear the director has drastically changed his style, seems somewhat futile. Again, it's his fault for making it the third in the trilogy and I wouldn't argue that.

But on its own terms - which is how I personally prefer to take the film - it's great fun. Despite my reverence of the first two films, I can't ignore the basic fact that Mother of Tears still entertains me no end.

[Gojirosan]

I'm not entirely sure that Inferno comes out of it very well if you watch it straight after Suspiria!

[Daemonia]

Yes, I realise Argento's style has changed a lot between Inferno and Mother of Tears. However, if this is Argento's idea of 'moving on' then it would have been better to have remained firmly rooted in the past. Personally, I think Argento's 'new style' is rubbish. My argument is this: when you watch Mother of Tears do you really believe you're watching an Argento film? Be honest, if you didn't know it was Argento, the film is so generic, you'd think just about anyone could have made it, but you certainly wouldn't accredit it to Argento (well, I wouldn't, anyway, if I'd been shown the film with no idea who made it). That's my problem with Argento's new films. They're not unique. They're films that could have been made by almost anyone. Gone are his trademark signatures and directorial flair. They're bland, uninventive and dull. I know some don't agree with me, and that's fine, but that's my view and opinion.

[Delirium]

Originally Posted by Daemonia

Personally, I think Argento's 'new style' is rubbish. My argument is this: when you watch Mother of Tears do you really believe you're watching an Argento film? Be honest, if you didn't know it was Argento, the film is so generic, just about anyone could have made it.

See, I don't think it is generic, as other than an affectionate and glorious hark back to 70's/80's Italian horror it's still a wild and out there film. It appears to reference (intentionally or not, who knows) everything from Fulci to Bava to Argento himself - the ending is particularly Fulci-esque, and there's a few nods to Argento's earlier work, even if it has been stripped of the visual aesthetic we're accustomed to. It's less Argento trying to emulate himself (and if you want to see a modern interpretation of that visual aesthetic, I recommend Amer) than ironically winking at the whole scene and having fun with it.

[stefanmetal]

Originally Posted by Reaper@Cult Labs

****,a lot of thought and effort there eh?

It looks like the sort of knock off film that you would typically buy in Poundland.

[sjconstable]

Originally Posted by Gojirosan

I'm not entirely sure that Inferno comes out of it very well if you watch it straight after Suspiria!

Yeah it does, it has more occult atmosphere, it's brilliant.

[Daemonia]

Originally Posted by Delirium

See, I don't think it is generic, as other than an affectionate and glorious hark back to 70's/80's Italian horror it's still a wild and out there film. It appears to reference (intentionally or not, who knows) everything from Fulci to Bava to Argento himself - the ending is particularly Fulci-esque, and there's a few nods to Argento's earlier work, even if it has been stripped of the visual aesthetic we're accustomed to. It's less Argento trying to emulate himself (and if you want to see a modern interpretation of that visual aesthetic, I recommend Amer) than ironically winking at the whole scene and having fun with it.

Okay, granted, it has that kind of 80's throwback feel. But more of a late 80's Italian-cinema-in-decline vibe. In that context, and I was shown the film, I'd think it was a Bruno Mattei knock-off of an Argento-styled film. But certainly not from Argento himself. In fact, Mattei could probably have done better.

The thing is, the film isn't 'wild and out there', it's incredibly restrained and dull. Not 'out there' at all. Unless a couple of goth-wannabe-witches and three people smashing up a car is considered apocalyptic and 'out there'. Sorry, I don't buy it. It's inexcusable rubbish form a former master of horror. Put against his classic works, it pales in comparison and shamefully goes and hides in the corner.