Reviews

3 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
A brilliant psychological study of a jilted lover.
30 October 2001
Okay, so Nicolas Cage eats a real cockroach. So the majority of the people who've seen this film don't understand the plotline. So black comedy is new to a late eighties audience. These points are minimal considering the great lengths to which the filmmakers go to to reveal the downfall of a hideous relationship between two people. A relationship gone so wrong that the male has to commit himself to therapy and conversely...murder.

Imagine a relationship wherein the woman was so soul sucking, so evil in her ways that you now feel as if she has sucked you dry - literally and figuratively - you are left as nothing but (in this case) a shell of a man - a walking corpse, yearning for the life's blood that she has stolen from you through your very own veins!

Cage gives the performance of his career and should have received an Oscar as the twisted, quintessential jilted lover who now desperately tries to recapture the joy of his most passionate and influential relationship by revisiting the empty, vampiretic bar hopping lifestyle where he found her - working his way through subsequent women, then just as unsatisfactorily moving his way through rape, suicidal tendencies and ultimately, murder.

It's tone is unforgiving alternating comedy and tragedy, confusing us as to whether he is really a vampire or just thinks he is. By flipping from his therapeutic sessions to his bitter and pathetic reality we see just how badly his male ego has taken rejection.

Here is a film where the simple plotline of a man being bitten by a vampire and believing he has become one becomes one where we see a man disintegrating before us, sliding into madness because he is forced to face his empty life.

His obsessive attention to detail, penchant for house bugs, absence of reflection in the mirror and avoidance of sunlight all match the prerequisites for vampirism, but his clumsy attempts at finding another woman and to fill the void that is left by a woman put so far onto a pedestal he cannot reach are overshadowed.

This is not a film for the feint of heart but for anyone who has ever been screwed over by a woman they have loved (or imagined they did) this is a welcome little cult revelation that makes them laugh and brood at the same time.
68 out of 102 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
1/10
A WARNING TO ALL DEAD FANS!!
17 May 2000
Okay, so I go out and buy *what I think* is 'Night of the Living Dead' on DVD. What a sham! This is a hacked and mutilated "update" to the George A. Romero classic! DO NOT PURCHASE if you care anything about preserving an auteurs' vision!

Russo and Streiner shoot moronic footage in 1988 and edit it into the 1968 version 'expanding' an already **finished film**! What in God's name did John A. Russo think he was going to improve upon?!! Was Russo playing God? Did he go to the George Lucas school of 'film enhancement'?? Was he taking out every writers' fantasy and overriding the vision of the director with his own??

Honestly...Would DaVinci repaint the 'Mona Lisa' once he discovered a better set of oils??! Idiots!! Let this be a lesson to all budding filmmakers out there - if you care one bit about what happens to your film's 'vision' - make sure you secure proper film rights before distribution! I am disgusted and abhorred.

To add 'insult to injury' these boobs had the audacity to rescore the soundtrack!!! I sat there dumbfounded at the destruction of not only a great horror classic, but my memory of the film as well!

I cannot express my disappointment at the travesty of justice that has been inflicted, time and again, on this film...! Even Savini's version was superior to this piece of garbage! Good Lord....Once again, buffoons rein supreme in the film industry....
2 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Fine Double Feature With Kaufman's Other Classic!
22 April 2000
First of all, I cannot believe the primary user review for this film is Leo Whatshisnam. I may have had a similar opinion of the film when I was a child of 15 - unware of love and loss. But this film is a beautiful companion to 'Henry and June'. (which most of my friends yawned through as well, not being seasoned men of love, lust and women in general.) Sure, you can take your female companions to this film and they will enjoy the depth of emotion involved (as well as being a great literary translation), but if you're a man who loves football and potatoe chips, take your significant other to 'The Waterboy' instead.
1 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink

Recently Viewed