I just saw "La Noche del Terror Ciego" after all the impressive reviews I had read about the film. And once again, a movie failed to deliver, at least in my humble opinion.
First of all, I'll say that I saw the uncut version in Spanish. It also came with the English subs, but the translations are not too accurate, but rather generic. However, the original dialog is rather lame anyway, so that's not a problem.
On the good side I'll say what everyone has to say about this film: it's creepy and drips with atmosphere. The creatures look really cool, and I like the fact that they are so slow yet they always end up trapping their victim. But where do the horses come from? Yes, it's very visual and poetic that they are horse riders but, seriously, where were the horses when the Blind Dead were in their tombs? I'll admit the scenes of the creatures look pretty good. Even Peter Jackson ripped them off for a couple of sequences in Lord of the Rings "The Fellowship of the Ring" (1- when the Nazgul surround Frodo before hurting him with the morgul blade 2- when the Nazgul pursue Arwen and Frodo on horseback when Frodo is fading from the wound mentioned in point 1). But in my opinion, that alone doesn't make the film good.
I don't complain it is a slow movie. I love Lucio Fulci movies and they are the slowest you can find out there. I don't complain about the lack of gore, I know there are other types of horror film, and I love them (I can think of a good combination of lack of gore and atmosphere in "Lemora" for instance, and I love the film). What I complain about is a bad script, a lack of interesting situations, the plot holes (what was the deal with the dead friend that came back to life? It is never explained why and after that she dies in a second engulfed by flames. I was like "HUH?"), the introduction of new characters that never appear again to have a ROLE in the situation (the policemen, the mad scientist that explains the legend, the creepy guy at the morgue that looks like a good character but in the end he does nothing...). That's what really bothered me about this film.
I can even forgive that in the last sequences when Betty is running to the train pursued by the Templars, she falls down and when the young guy jumps to help her it looks that she is actually preventing him from helping her, so that the Templars get them. It's a horror movie, we all know that the protagonists do dumb things, so I can bear with that. But not the fact that 40+ minutes of the film deal with characters and situations that will have no impact on the final outcome. I mean, Betty and Roger might as well have waited in the citadel when they first go there to look for Virginia, and De Ossorio would have saved us 40 minutes. The outcome would have been exactly the same (for the record, I think the last scene and its idea are fantastic even though it could have been filmed a little better).
I give it a 4/10 for the cool creatures, the atmosphere and the good ideas. Any horror buff has to see this one, but maybe it's not as good a movie as you expected. It certainly wasn't for me.
First of all, I'll say that I saw the uncut version in Spanish. It also came with the English subs, but the translations are not too accurate, but rather generic. However, the original dialog is rather lame anyway, so that's not a problem.
On the good side I'll say what everyone has to say about this film: it's creepy and drips with atmosphere. The creatures look really cool, and I like the fact that they are so slow yet they always end up trapping their victim. But where do the horses come from? Yes, it's very visual and poetic that they are horse riders but, seriously, where were the horses when the Blind Dead were in their tombs? I'll admit the scenes of the creatures look pretty good. Even Peter Jackson ripped them off for a couple of sequences in Lord of the Rings "The Fellowship of the Ring" (1- when the Nazgul surround Frodo before hurting him with the morgul blade 2- when the Nazgul pursue Arwen and Frodo on horseback when Frodo is fading from the wound mentioned in point 1). But in my opinion, that alone doesn't make the film good.
I don't complain it is a slow movie. I love Lucio Fulci movies and they are the slowest you can find out there. I don't complain about the lack of gore, I know there are other types of horror film, and I love them (I can think of a good combination of lack of gore and atmosphere in "Lemora" for instance, and I love the film). What I complain about is a bad script, a lack of interesting situations, the plot holes (what was the deal with the dead friend that came back to life? It is never explained why and after that she dies in a second engulfed by flames. I was like "HUH?"), the introduction of new characters that never appear again to have a ROLE in the situation (the policemen, the mad scientist that explains the legend, the creepy guy at the morgue that looks like a good character but in the end he does nothing...). That's what really bothered me about this film.
I can even forgive that in the last sequences when Betty is running to the train pursued by the Templars, she falls down and when the young guy jumps to help her it looks that she is actually preventing him from helping her, so that the Templars get them. It's a horror movie, we all know that the protagonists do dumb things, so I can bear with that. But not the fact that 40+ minutes of the film deal with characters and situations that will have no impact on the final outcome. I mean, Betty and Roger might as well have waited in the citadel when they first go there to look for Virginia, and De Ossorio would have saved us 40 minutes. The outcome would have been exactly the same (for the record, I think the last scene and its idea are fantastic even though it could have been filmed a little better).
I give it a 4/10 for the cool creatures, the atmosphere and the good ideas. Any horror buff has to see this one, but maybe it's not as good a movie as you expected. It certainly wasn't for me.