GamerTab That was an excellent one.

Beanbioca As Good As It Gets

Gutsycurene Fanciful, disturbing, and wildly original, it announces the arrival of a fresh, bold voice in American cinema.

Kaydan Christian A terrific literary drama and character piece that shows how the process of creating art can be seen differently by those doing it and those looking at it from the outside.

Michael Ledo This is a mystery semi-horror film. Mary Woronov starts off with a narration, although at times Staats Cotsworth narrates for the dead Wilfred Butler. The film opens with a killing ruled as an accidental death. Jeffrey Butler inherit his grandfather's "inhumanity" house and must leave it intact. After 20 years he decides to sell the home at the same time a man escapes from the local asylum. Oh yes, its Christmas, which really doesn't play into the story but allows us to think of a clever title and have the song "Silent Night" murdered also.The house boasts an underused harpsichord and the film an underused John Carradine. The characters are rather boring and the film utilizes a plot twist that has become far too common to mention. I was bored from the start of Woronov's opening monotone all the way through the end credits. There is a good reason why you never heard of it.Parental Guide: No f-bombs, sex, or nudity unless you count Patrick O'Neal's man boobs.

mfnmbessert-224-279128 Extremely campy, low-budget, Christmas cult horror flick from the early 70's? I'll take it. Take it for what it is though, which is a cultastic piece of low-budget goodness. The film moves along slowly for the first half hour or so, but by the middle of the film, things begin to pick up speed. None of our players are very notable, with the exception of the beautiful Mary Woronov, James Patterson, and the wonderful John Carradine, who doesn't utter a single word throughout the entire film.The film is mostly visual, and is pretty scarce on every character's dialogue for most of the film, but the visual telling of the story is nice and atmospheric, and the diminished quality of the 16mm print only adds to the film's nostalgic feel. The ending of the film begins to drag again, but like I said, it is well-photographed and still manages to keep you intrigued enough to finally see the mystery solved. The long flashback sequence near the end is very Warholian, which makes sense when we realize that a lot of these people were involved with Warhol during his Factory days in the 1960's, and the end even manages to look a little 'Night Of The Living Dead' at times. And dare I say that I might possibly be able to pick out some images and some storyline that may have inspired John Carpenter to write 'Halloween' a few years down the road? In all, it is definitely well-written, and worth watching for the holidays, to get your fill of Christmas horror.SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT -----7/10.

Wizard-8 I wanted to like this movie. In fact, I like watching low budget horror movies so I thought I would like this. But it didn't work for me. To be fair, I didn't find the movie to be awful or even bad. There are some things that work. The movie often has a moody, somewhat creepy feeling to it. Occasionally there is a striking image that burns itself in your mind. There is also some mystery at the beginning, and the movie does its best to play tricks on us, even pulling a "Psycho" on two characters we think will be the central characters. But eventually, the movie runs out of juice - the second half of the movie has next to nothing of importance happening. You'll be squirming in your seat with impatience. And whether it was due to the dark print or the garbled storytelling, I couldn't figure what was happening or revealed at the climatic sequence. It's a close call, but I can't recommend this movie. By the way, if you're a John Carradine fan, be warned - the movie gives him next to nothing to do.

ajb60-1 I enjoyed this and did not guess the killer. That is always a good thing. The film obviously was made on a very, very slim budget, the night scenes are almost impossible to see. In a film like this, that can be good and bad. There was potential here for a real old fashioned early 1970's Gothic thriller. It has its moments, and you can see the potential is there. The director had some good ideas, and several scenes are memorable. But the cheap budget does hurt. The performances by Mary Woronov and James Patterson are perfect for this kind of film. Patterson always intrigued me, you cannot really find anything about this very interesting actor who died very young. I know he won a Tony award, did a lot of stage work, appeared in two interesting Mission Impossible episodes, and died either while filming this movie, or shortly afterward. He was only 40 and apparently had terminal cancer. He reminds me a an early version of Robert Davi in appearance, and could have had a good career as a character actor had he lived. I wish we could find out more about him. The film does mislead somewhat in listing Patrick O'Neal and John Carradine as stars. I am not sure what Carradine is even doing in the film, and O'Neal is not in it for very long. All in all, though, I enjoyed this film.