La noche del terror ciego

Yet another example of the perception of a film being superior to the reality of actually sitting and watching it. There is no argument from me that the Blind Dead (The Templar Knights) are fantastic creations and director/writer Amando de Ossorio is to be revered for their birth. The scenes of the Templars stalking their victims and chasing them on horseback are striking and haunting and now occupy a special place in the pantheon of fantastique cinema. Unfortunately, "Tombs of the Blind Dead" is also a slow, boring, illogical mess. The performances are terrible, the "suspense" scenes are hit-and-miss, and the day-for-night photography, though effective in parts, is not believable. The film's bloody climax is a good one and the final freeze frame has some power, but it's sad to see such a wonderful concept handicapped by mediocre scripting and appalling acting. Still, there are defining moments of horror within the frames of this Spanish potboiler.

Despite a slow start, Amando de Ossorio's Tombs of the Blinddead soon picks up and morphs into the exploitation highlight that you were no doubt expecting going into it. Naturally, it's full of plot holes and dubious character decisions; but it doesn't matter, because it's Ossorio's story surrounding the knights, along with the terrifying spectacle of the Templars rising from their tombs that makes this film what it is. The intro to the film gives you an impression of what you're in for, as we glide through an ancient monastery. This creepy sequence is very much coherent with the style of this film. Amando de Ossorio seems more concerned with making sure that his creations, the knights themselves, look as decomposed and disgusting as possible - and he truly succeeds. The gore takes a backseat, therefore, but it doesn't matter at all. The plot follows three friends on a train, one of which decides to leave that safe haven and spend the knight in the deserted town surrounding the monastery. Unbeknown to her, that's the same place where Templar knights were left to the crow's years earlier - and they're still mad about it.

When you think of zombie movies, it's always George Romero's gory classics that spring to mind - and that is another thing that is great about this movie. Tombs of the Blinddead has completely made it's own style, and originality is something that the horror genre could use more of. Of course, similar plots to this one have been used before, but never in exactly this way. Another thing I admire about the director is the fact that he's obviously more concerned with the horror of the story than anything else. Exploitation flicks like this tend to show a lot of nudity or other things that aren't really relevant - but this flick has made a real effort to stay away from needless elements as much as possible. Fans of intellectual cinema wont find much to like here - the dialogue is trite and the acting is rubbish - but there's no denying that this film has at least something resembling a respectable status within the horror genre. The fact that it's been remembered over thirty years on shows that - and if you're a fan of this sort of film, then you should definitely make sure you see Tombs of the Blinddead!

'The Tombs Of The Blind Dead' is not strictly a zombie movie, but involves the resurrected dead (in this case blind heretics from the 13th Century). While not as explicit as Romero or Fulci it should appeal to fans of the living dead genre. The movie is strong on atmosphere and style, similar in some ways to Jean Rollin, but without the sex or pretension. The "blind dead" themselves are one of the creepiest and most effective concepts in any horror movie. Slow moving, relentless and deadly, with a penchant for flesh eating. The scenes where the dead ride horses to hunt their prey are classic horror. My only small criticism of this movie is that there were so few scenes of them. Modern horror fans who require wall to wall FX and a killing every 15 minutes will probably find this slow going, but true buffs will be mesmerized. Highly recommended.

The story is about a renegade band of crusader-priests that turned from the Church and embraced the black arts. The opening sequence takes us back to the living Knights Templar and their cruel and graphic killing of a scantily-clad young female sacrifice. We then move up to the 20th century and the churchyard is nothing but a ruin, however, at night when females wandering about in the middle of nowhere chance upon the ruin, the knights wake from their crypts to feed on the blood of such passersby. Interesting story and one that has many problems of belief. These knights rise from the ground one moment, and in the next they are galloping on horses. Where did the horses come from? I couldn't find an answer....perhaps you can. The acting is passable, and I concede that grudgingly. But do not think I hold only contempt and despair for this film, because I really heartily recommend it. It is scary. It is very atmospheric. It is very intense at times. These dead knights are wonderfully made-up and really create frightening moments in the film as they walk toward their victims screaming. The knights were blinded after death and now when they rise from their earthy chambers they can only hear their way toward their victims. That is a very inventive concept. The director, Amando de Ossorio, knows what to do with lighting, set creations, and pacing the plot. There were three sequels to this film and that in itself shows it has SOME merit. The film also set the trend for mixing sex and gore. There is a good bit of both, more on the sex side, and what the female leads lack in acting ability they certainly make up for some of it in their...well how shall I put it....their physical presence.

There's only one reason to watch Tombs of the Blind Dead: Zombies on horseback in slow-motion...look cool as hell!! The make-up department made the Templar's the scariest looking zombies I've seen in a while. Other than that, we've got an overrated Spanish bore. The pacing is slower than the blind dead themselves. If you're going to have a slow movie, you have to make it interesting. There are times in the movie when nothing is said or happens for 7 minutes at a time. There are some serious believability issues as well. I mean, for a bunch of slow, blind dead guys, they sure are hard to get away from. All in all, Tombs is not half as bad as I remember it being. I believe the DVD transfer can be thanked for that though. A clear, crisp picture can make any flick better. This film has a large cult following, however, there's just not enough action to keep me satisfied.