Horror

Okay, I first want to state that I had seen Dante's first effort "Desecration" and thought that it sucked. Of course it didn't totally suck, but it fails on the same level that "Horror" failed on - its beautiful crap.

I really wanted to love both films after hearing that this filmmaker was a Godsend to horror fanatics everywhere – so me being the huge horror fan I am was excited. My excitement was lessened after seeing "Desecration," and even more so after "Horror." "Horror" has so many flaws it would be impossible to name them all off, but I'll try. At the beginning of the film the audience is introduced to a group of stoners escaping rehab and venture off to Rev. Salo's house of horror, unaware that horror is what awaits them. Then one kid turns blue, pukes, and then never seen of heard from again after the camera cuts as all the blue guy's friends are trying to help him! What the hell? We as an audience are introduced to a character only to forget about? Why was he there in the first place? Dumb.

The editing is also done poorly. We as an audience haven't the slightest clue as to what the hell is happening - usually that would be effective, but in order for it to be effective the audience must feel for the characters, so it didn't help too much that the actors were on and off – but mostly off – and the delivery of the dialogue is bad... maybe because the dialogue given was god-awful. So, in terms of the effective "what the hell is going on?" scenario, I really couldn't care less.

It doesn't help when the ending makes no sense and is cheesy as hell.

Oddly, the set design and cinematography are unbelievably gorgeous, and the camera-work is terrific. The landscape of a snowy wilderness is both haunting and beautifully Gothic. The use of Christmas lights and ornaments is the perfect contrast to the eerie going-ons (I will admit, some of the more macabre moments are deliciously effective, just most are just plain stupid) and the lonesome, haunted look of some of the homes. The use of the POV shots, ala "The Evil Dead," are very cool… and the goat is creepy. More of the goat would have been more than welcome.

Sadly, overall "Horror" was just a perfect example of what we all hate in the genre some of us hold dear. I have noticed a lot of people, as well as critics, have loved this movie and admired its strangeness, but as much I love horror and generally strange surreal rides, I couldn't like this movie. It's still worth a look for its look, but (at least for me) there is nothing else beneath its beautiful, Gothic surface.

Hopefully Dante's next effort – "Satan's Playground" – will be more of a departure of what "Desecration" and "Horror" were: beautiful trash.

3 out of 10

I like horror movies. Don't let the title mislead you, this was not horror it was CRAP. A van full of losers escape from rehab and end up being pursued by bad visions, some evil folks and a Big Black Goat That Is Supposed To Scare You.

Slamming doors, horrible done "evil" pumpkin heads and an entire cast of characters you won't have a shred of empathy for.

I've seen worse, but not much.

I was very impressed by Desecration...it had some of the creepier images I have seen in some time and the story held me...Unfortunately that was not the case with HORROR. Yes it had some great images and atmosphere but that is not enough to make a good horror film. No the story doesn't have to be amazing, but this film's story was weak...the dialogue was weak and the acting was weak...I am a firm believer that even the lowest budget horror films can and should have strong acting...strong actors are what actually sell the fright side of any horror film...This would have made a really good 10 minute short, or if it has a strong script and good actors, could have been a really great horror film.

First off, I am a fan of Dante Tomaselli's work, ever since seeing the creepy and bizarre "Desecration," with it's disturbing visuals and obscure dark/erotic overtones. (A film featuring zombie nuns from Hell cannot fail IMO.) His other film, "Satan's Playground" I liked immensely as well, and found it a fun, atmospheric classic of low budget horror. So what happened here, i wonder? "Horror" is a disaster, and seems like it might have been his first film. While the eye catching cinematography is there, the style, the weird atmosphere etc, this one is sabotaged by the most laughable makeup effects since Ed Wood was making films. The "ghouls" here look like the kids on Halloween after being made up by their mothers with food coloring and cookie dough! Props meant to be scary look like plastic decorations you would find on any suburban front yard around the holidays. None of the "actors" could land a part as a bush in a high school play, and Kreskin is more zombie-like than the laughable zombies who appear halfway through the film (for no reason whatsoever.) What a wasted opportunity, as there are good things about this film, like the beautiful cinematography, the seeds of a fascinating story, and an ending that is actually the best thing about the whole thing. I like actor Danny Lopes, who appears in all of Tomaselli's films so far. He was good as the teen loner in Desecration, and believable as the autistic boy in 'Satan's Playground," and has a definite screen presence. "Horror" also suffers from going the sellout route of using the tired "teens in a haunted house" setup. A few good scenes drown in a sea of underwhelming tripe, "Horror" is perhaps the only film in history where the most interesting character was a billie goat...

First of all I must say that this is definitely NO HORROR movie, and it's not an art-house movie either... so what is it?

If this was a student's high school film project I would be impressed, but this is supposed to be the work of a "indie-maestro" director??? Oh my...

The "story", if you can find one, has absolutely no coherence and is really totally confusing. And in this case that is NOT a good thing! You do not WANT to think (or care) about what is going on in this senseless mess. If you are into weird confusing plots that make you think - go Lynch!

Can't say a good word about the "acting" either, i totally agree with one reviewer who said that the best actor was the goat! LOL

The visuals... OK let's give him some points in that area. The cinematography is quite well done, there are some quite nice shots and it is really obvious that the director is into "eye-candy". But he's far too hard TRYING to be surreal and artistic, and ends up only RIDICULOUS. If you're into psychedelic visuals and surreal/symbolic Horror - go Argento or Ken Russel.

There are also a lot of references to genre classics, which are really dilettantish or blatantly stolen.

Unfortunately I also cannot agree to any comedy value, but i have to admit that i was laughing when the Jack-O'-Lantern "Demons" first appeared - unbelievable that this was meant serious!! Oh my...

According to the director the movie is about eternal damnation, it's meant to be a nightmare that never ends - its not true - it ends when this shitty movie is finally OVER - thank god!!!

This is just a "wannabe" pretentious NOTHING...

I also suppose the very obvious correlation to massive drug abuse means you have to be in the same state to "understand" or really appreciate the director's visions...

I rather would NOT, thank you!