Tobe Hooper's Living Nightmare

1st watched 8/26/2001 - 3 out of 10(Dir-Tobe Hooper): Scary, yet sadistic(which makes sense) portrayal of a relative of the Marquis De Sade carrying out the same sadistic acts and enjoying it that supposedly his predecessor did. This Tobe Hooper film really doesn't do a whole lot different than his similar in style Freddy Krueger movies with the same star (Freddy himself - Robert Englund) playing a dual role(the Marquis De Sade and his relative). It is also seems like it wants to really poke at Christianity but then loses that in the end much to my chagrin but leaving an inconsistent feel to the movie. Could have been much worse if excesses were taken in sex and violence, but they try to keep this at a minimal despite some disgusting scenes. My final thought is why would Hooper want to make this movie. It obviously took awhile to actually get distributed, then it has to be advertised gruesomely and with Hooper's name in the title to hopefully make some money on his name and his gore. It's obvious this didn't work.

The Marquis De Sade, Egypt, ancient Gnostic cults, Robert Englund in a dual role, gratuitous sex and nudity, murder and mayhem... on paper Tobe Hopper's Night Terrors sounds like it should be at least a fun, entertaining flick given the ingredients. It's not. It is a plot less, incoherent shambles that brings little entertainment. There is basically no plot beyond some vague stuff about a cult that follows the work of De Sade who for some unclear reason feel the need to seduce the daughter of a local Christian archaeologist and kill her. That is pretty much it- I think it has something to with the Gnostics but who knows what the writers were thinking. Most of the movie is a meandering mess as the heroine is exposed to various weirdness, dream sequences and erotic encounters, intercut with scenes of Englund as the imprisoned De Sade in the 19th century chewing the scenery. It seems like the makers were trying for something serious but whatever their pretensions were they are buried in the cheesiness, bad acting, sleaze and fake looking decapitated heads.

There aren't too many good points. Robert Englund is fun to watch, as always and the lead actress, Zoe Trilling, whilst not very talented, is attractive and in various stages of undress through the movie but watching Night Terrors is a chore. At least I got to see the movie from which the "When you're as criminal as I" bit from the Australian film certification ratings guide that was on the front of so many VHS tapes from the nineties came from.

Eugenie Matteson (Zoe Trilling) arrives in Alexandria, Egypt to stay with her father while he is on an archaeological dig. Her father, a Christian religious fanatic who often quotes from the Bible, believes his daughter to be little Miss Innocent - but he doesn't realize that he has brought her to the one place that will corrupt her. Walking in the market place dressed like a regular American teenager would in hot weather, Genie is attacked by a group of perverse Egyptian men looking to get lucky, but she is saved in time by Sobina (who apparently has a sexual relationship with Genie's father) who introduces her to the work of the Marquis de Sade, as well as the darker side of life in Alexandria. Sobina takes Genie to a club where the first act of corruption is committed when Genie is given opium. Before long she begins seeing things - sexual things with her father coming in and preaching in the background. (This is arguably representative of her conscious telling her to get out, yet she's fascinated by this crazy world of sex and drugs)The next day she meets Mahmood, a hunky, intelligent and wealthy Egyptian and they quickly strike up a romance. As time wares on, Genie finds herself the target of a cult obsessed with the Marquis de Sade and led by one of his relatives (Robert Englund stars as both the Marquis and his descendant).

I found this film entertaining but disturbing and weird as well. I saw it for Robert Englund (I love his work)and I was pleased with his performance. Zoe Trilling isn't much of an actress, but I've seen worse. There is a lot of erotic sex scenes and nudity in this film, but honestly, it's a horror film about the Marquis de Sade, people, what did you expect? I actually didn't mind the sex - it all relates back to the theme of the corruption and perversion of this one young woman. The snakes are obviously symbols of the serpent in Eden's apple tree; the film takes a jab at religious fanaticism as a whole. (i.e. religious zealot father is into bondage games with the local prostitute...) I do have a problem with the fact that the connection between the de Sade cult and the religious circuit that Genie's father's archaeological dig is based upon. (I think it has something to do with hidden treasure...) This is a huge plothole that has always bothered me.

This is not the perfect movie, and no way is it a classic, but it's not incredibly terrible either. The acting is decent and there is some symbolism littered throughout. I think they tried to make this a deep film, but failed to answer some necessary questions when it came to the end of the story. The scenery and sets are great as well, I just wish they filled in the plot holes before wrapping this.

For people who like to analyze films, you might have fun with the symbolism in this. I did. BEWARE the sexual content - if sex scenes make you uncomfortable you might want to skip this flick because there's a lot of sex and nudity throughout the film. There is also mild torture, drug use, and violence. Worth a watch in my opinion.

I don't know much about Tobe Hooper, or why he gets his name in the title, but maybe he shouldn't have bothered. As another commenter mentioned, there isn't really enough horror or erotica to bring in fans of either genre. The plot is incoherent, the Sade sequences are gratuitous, and most of the acting is so-so. Englund was doing his best with weak material, and Zoe Trilling has a really great bottom, but neither is enough to carry this film. This one's a tape-over. Grade: F

I like Tobe Hooper's work, but like all artist he has hits and misses. I think that horror is a very personal thing, akin to what turns a person on sexually. What is hot for one is an off for another.

The movie has an interesting concept.

I feel the acting is good. Robert Englund is wonderful as the Marquis De Sade and it was nice to see William Finley again. (He is also in one of my all time fav's "Funhouse" also directed by Hooper. )

Set design, editing, costuming, score and photography all have a very 80's feel to it although the movie was filmed in 1993. It has that high glossy feel to it.

The movie is neither as artist as it would have like to have been, nor is it completely terrible. Trust me there are A LOT worse out there. If you like Robert Englund, or have a kind of fascination for the Marquis, then this maybe worth your time. But if you are looking for chills, gore or T&A skip it.