lime-3

Clive Barker is, by far, the best horror writer of this century, and a fine visual artist as well. Few of the films made from his fiction are satisfactory "Clive Barker Experiences". This is partly because his main strength as a writer is, naturally, his use of language to provoke emotional reactions and to evoke very special moods above (beneath?) and beyond ordinary shock and revulsion. He raises horrific imagery and psychological situations to the level of poetry. This is not easy to do in film, a purely visual medium. The image of a monster or a monstrous act in film is a picture: there it is before you. A description of same in fiction can be given all sorts of depths and angles in the mind in writing. "Nightbreed" almost works as an adaptation of Barker's "Cabal". Unfortunately, as is apparent, most of Barker's budget was blown on the monsters (which are excellent movie monsters), with insufficient funds remaining for factors like cast. The actor who played the all-important role of Boone was not up to it at all. He conveyed almost nothing of the depth of Boone's torment, which exists on a number of levels. A talent should have been sought instead of a hunk. This is symptomatic of the film's weakness in general. Too many (albeit high-quality) monsters and too little time and attention spent on the basic human values (simply, character) which must underlie all fiction, no matter what its genre.

I found this film to be one of the most original and powerful I've seen recently. It is based on a once-in-lifetime idea. The story is told in a totally subjective, POV manner, more so than any film I know. I can understand why many people disliked it. It made no concessions to the expectations of mainstream filmgoers, or even of horror film fans. And once the "mythic" groundwork was laid, plot points tended to be made subtly, and with "don't blink" speed. Anyone used to being "spoon-fed" plot and character would likely miss much. The characters' realization of their situation and increasing terror were revealed gradually and very naturalistically, which may have made the film seem slow to some. It is, in its way, a great film, and a greater horror film, but I cannot see how it can be followed up at all effectively. It would do better to remain unique. A sequel would surely seem contrived and redundant, and a different film using same or similar technique would merely seem derivative.

I have been curious about this film for many years. Rented it only recently. I did not expect it to have much to do with Poe, since the title is that of a lyric poem and not a narrative. What interested me was that it is the only attempt I know of to film Lovecraft's "Case of Charles Dexter Ward", one of my favorite stories. The film didn't have very much to do with Lovecraft either. I suspect I would have liked it better if I hadn't read the book, which is often true. Vincent Price, good at this sort of thing, and always a consummate pro, did quite well. Elisha Cook also did his usual thing very well. Debra Paget was no more than adequate in an underwritten role, and was exquisitely beautiful. The paintings and mats were obviously mats and paintings. The budget should have been doubled. Most of the quality was thanx to Price.