Avis des utilisateurs

The infamy of "Nightmare" no doubt largely centers on the fact that the film's distributor faced prison time for refusing to cut down one scene from the film for its release in the United Kingdom. I mean, after all, how many horror films have that under their belt? The plot follows a disturbed schizophrenic who escapes from his experimental psychiatric hospital in New York City and heads down the coast to Florida, where his wife and children reside, killing along the way before making an attempt at his final hometown hurrah.

With "Halloween" and "Maniac" being obvious influences here, "Nightmare" feels much more like a '70s picture than it does a product of the '80s, and its confluence of influences might be precisely why. The film's formula is fairly straightforward, although its subject matter is remarkably dark, insofar as it has to do with a man who can't help but want to slaughter his own children— it's a macabre affair all around, and the grindhouse aesthetic only bolsters the film's sinister tone. It's part slasher film and part psychosexual thriller, with leading man Baird Stafford playing the villain who's entire distorted existence seems to hinge on his childhood experience of witnessing his father's affair (and subsequently slaughtering both parties in their bed). The film does meander a bit between the realms of dramatic thriller and splatter epic, but it's an engaging watch none the less.

I'd be lying if I said that the real attraction here for most people is the remarkable gore effects, which were controversially credited as being the work of Tom Savini— turns out Savini was apparently just a friend of the effects director and didn't actually work on the film, but regardless, the film showcases a plethora of elaborate murders with some remarkably nasty special effects; throats are slashed, people are stabbed, and heads roll, and Romano Scavolini makes sure his audience has front row closeups to all the nitty gritty details. The special effects work, though dated in some regards, is still surprisingly effective.

Overall, "Nightmare" is a deserved cult classic that would appear to have come from the drive-in era of the late '70s; despite the fact that the film was made in the following decade, it retains a gritty exploitation feel in which violence is the central spectacle. Like I said, it's a dark movie— and a gratuitously violent one. It's the kind of thing you watch and then want to shower after. Like after a humid Florida evening, the film leaves you feeling slightly grimy, but that's what it sets out to do from the first reel. 7/10.

This is one of the most prominent films on the legendary video nasty list. For those who do not know, this was a list of videos that were considered obscenely violent by the establishment in early 80's Britain. Nightmares in a Damaged Brain was one of the first to be tagged as problematic and it's distributor even served six months in prison for releasing the thing. The question now I suppose is how does it shape up today? Well, on the one hand, it isn't at all hard to understand how it made the list in the first place. On the other hand, it still works pretty well as a sleazy grind-house slasher movie.

The film in a nutshell is about a troubled man who is released from an asylum. Too early it seems, as he pretty much immediately starts committing brutal murders.

The film's primary notoriety I am guessing comes from the very mean-spirited violence. There isn't an awful lot of it but when it does happen it's very gory and brutal. Particularly nasty is a knife attack on a woman in her home, while the carnage inflicted by the little boy near the end is pretty intense. The film also has some scenes in New York where the psycho visits sex shows and starts to lose his fragile mind - these sequences resemble an exploitation version of Taxi Driver. So the film is essentially well served on the violence and sleaze fronts. The biggest problem is that it drags in the middle section. In this part the story relocates to follow the goings on of a family, one which our psychopath seems to be stalking for some reason. The pacing takes a dive here when we focus on these none too interesting characters. However, the aforementioned parts that bookend the family drama are certainly not boring.

Nightmares in a Damaged Brain is ultimately one of the better video nasties. Unlike many on the list it's actually pretty nasty at times. And that is kind of what you want really.

A mental patient (Baird Stafford), who is troubled with horrible nightmares, has escaped from his hospital. Now on the streets he cannot help killing innocent people. But there is one family he is more than interested in and when he tries to kill them, he finds that it is not that easy.

First of all, to properly enjoy this film, you need to see a good copy of it. Although I have not seen it, the Code Red DVD is apparently the best and as clear as could be wanted. The version I watched was pretty awful, grainy and discolored. This took nothing away from the fun, but made it seem even cheaper than it needed to be.

The plot is a bit disjointed, incoherent, and the editing is not flawless. Maybe Code Red fixed this, but it is most likely just a part of the film. The plot still makes sense, but trying to figure out who all the characters are and why they matter might take a bit of work even if you pay close attention. A second viewing (or third) could not hurt.

The best thing about the film is either the gore (which is great whether or not it was done by Tom Savini) or the kid (C. J. Cooke) who plays CJ. When he faces off against the "bad guy", the whole scene is priceless and well worth the build up.

Although Romano Scavolini has been directing since the 1960s, this is his best-known title and he has never really made himself a big star from his work. Baird Stafford has only one other credit, appearing in Scavolini's war film "Dog Tags" (1985). C. J. Cooke never acted again... a real shame.

Caught this at an Arizona drive-in, back about 1983. It truly bothered some of my friends, but we all thought it was better than the co-feature, "Happy Birthday To Me". I hunted for quite a while looking for this, and finally found it at a Pawn shop in St. Paul, on VHS. Guess some folks have also been looking, and it is on DVD as "Nightmares In A Damaged Brain". But the disc runs about 94 minutes, and is missing some gory highlights, as well as a few touches of plot. the one you want was just "Nightmare", and runs about 98 minutes. the version you want came from 21st Century releasing, and is worth the hunt, if this is your sort of thriller. I wish everyone good luck, but I'm not giving mine up.

Trying to bring the Italian giallo genre into the then-popular American slasher genre, Nightmare is a half-clever attempt. Those two extremes don't seem like a good fit, with the typical slash-and-hack, one-by-one structure of the slasher genre mixing a bit awkwardly with the more flamboyant, open-ended and director-focused giallo film movement. "Nightmare" isn't particularly coherent and can feel a bit half-hearted at times, but it has enough startling moments and a truly twisted (and brutal) view of sexuality to at least be interesting beyond it's initial viewing.

Often considered a Grindhouse staple, it shares the qualities of many other films of that "genre": lousy dubbing, horrid acting, completely conspicious continuity blunders, a soundtrack and film print that makes the viewer feel like their head is being held under muddy water. It's also unusually bleak and morally ambiguous for an American film, a telling sign that this was directed by an European. There's also a sense of the American-slasher puritanism, as noticed by the Killer's view of promiscious adults around him, but it's not quite as black-and-white as many of the like-minded films at the time. Largely because we're asked to look at the film's largely unseen killer with a more subjective eye.

"Nightmare" may be poorly made, although a few cat-and-mouse sequences are well-staged and engaging enough, but it's far from useless. It's cross between American DIY ethos and lavish, fetishitistic European flavoring is uneven and sloppy but always weird and alluring enough to keep you watching. The film's modest cult following is understandable.

Better known in the UK as Nightmares In A Damaged Brain, this is one of the more interesting films placed on the video nasty list. Suffering from night terrors, George (Baird Stafford) is released from a mental hospital earlier than was recommended after judging that he is sane enough to separate the real world from his incidents in his nightmares. After realising their error, a doctor, psychologist and the police try to hunt him down before he is tipped over the edge. George wanders the streets looking at strippers before he begins his search for a seemingly random family who have their own troubles with their strange, mischievous son C.J. (C.J. Cooke),

The problem with the film, or should I say main problem, is that it never seems to decide what kind of film it wants to be. What starts out promisingly as a kind of Grindhouse Taxi Driver, soon switches to family drama, to police chase, to all-out stalk-and-slash. The moments when the action focuses on the family, which is the majority of the time, it loses pace and I lost sense of the main characters personal plight. George makes for an interesting 'bad' guy as he is psychologically torn and disturbed by the nightmares of a little boy butchering a man and a woman with an axe. The end, which I obviously won't reveal too much about, begins as a Halloween-esque set-piece complete with a funny mask which is rather silly and run-of-the-mill, but then suddenly engages again, as a key factor about our protagonist is revealed. Yet the director ruins it all with a rather cringe-worthy last frame, with which I shook my head in bitter disappointment.

www.the-wrath-of-blog.blogspot.com

Seen a lot better video nasties. The gore and storyline are ok but the acting is dreadful, even for 1980s video nasty standard

OK i'm a little rusty right now when it comes to reviews as I haven't written one in years.

I won't bother explaining the plot, courtesy of the IMDb plot profile and other users you should be able to get a rough idea about it yourself.

So lets get down to the nitty gritty. Nightmare(s) (in a damaged brain) is kind of like the horror film you watch through the eyes of a child. Remember when you were a kid and horrors weren't so much entertaining as they were (mildly) traumatising? That would give you sleepless nights for quite some time? Well nightmare is one of those films that can have that effect on you AS AN ADULT.

Imagine the original 'texas chain saw massacre' but a lot more psychological and involving children, and A lot more gore, and you get the rough idea of what this film is all about.

Now I'm a big fan of horror, I can sit through (almost) anything but I've seen this film one and a half times (the uncut version) and have had it for quite some time. And thats NOT because the film is bad, its cause its so frigging' creepy. First time was a curiosity as I'd heard so much about it and was desperate to see why it had been banned, the second (half) time was because I hadn't seen it in a while and fancied giving it a second go. I couldn't do it! It really is one of those type of horrors thats hard to sit through, its tone is so sinister and you feel almost perverted and sick and evil for just watching it, even though there are no real animal killings or anything like cannibal holocaust/ferox and it's only a movie and nothing more.

Anyways, if you like genuine, creepy, under the skin horror then this one is for you. If, however, your not a fan of the whole 'grind-house' scene, don't like films with low production values and risible acting and prefer your horror to be modern, over produced and polished, then avoid this one.

In either case its very underrated as being 'one of the scariest horror films of all time'.

Nightmare may not be on anyone's list as 'one-to-watch' with the abundance of new Hollywood horrors that swamp our DVD shelves and VOD highlights, most of which are barely worth the rental, but for any fan of horror, more so that of real horror from the 80's when it was about being real, then Nightmare surely still holds up as one of the most gruesome pictures of its day, and still is!

Slightly dated, but only in looks and acting, the tension and thrills behind Nightmare still stands strong complete with some infamous and disturbing FX scenes that hailed it as a video nasty back in the day, leading to its cuts by the BBFC and lack of distribution.

I'm surprised a remake hasn't already surfaced, but then again, possibly glad at the same time!

Nightmare is twisted, but with a good dose of realism to it based on certain links in the story, characters and outcome.

Well worth the watch, but most definitely not for the squeamish!

A mental patient has recurring dreams concerning a horrific event where a child kills his father and a hooker (I think) with an axe. He tells psychiatrists that he's not sure whether he IS the child, or simply watching from distance. Anyway, this model citizen gets released and shortly thereafter he starts killing people in gruesome fashion. He becomes fixated on a family living in Florida, a divorced wife with three kids, one of whom seems to be somewhat less than stable.

It doesn't take Sherlock Holmes to figure out the dream sequences or why he chooses this particular family but this film is nonetheless very nonsensical. It looks cheap and not very professionally made, shaky and flavourless photography, mediocre script at best and very badly acted. The film is widely known for it's gore drenched set pieces, but I must have watched a censored edition because the gore here is nothing to write home about.

It picks up a bit in the end and what gore there is is pretty well done but overall this is a pretty lame horror film.

"Nightmare (in a damaged brain)" is a dark and sinister mixture between William Lustig´s "Maniac" (1980) and John McNaughton´s "Henry: Portrait of a Serial Killer" (1986). The nightmarish atmosphere of Scavolini´s film is combined with some creepy and bizarre flashbacks - the most memorable one is the scene when young madman George Tatum beheads a prostitute and splits the head of his father with an axe..! Gore galore!! Main actor Baird Stafford is almost as great as the legendary Michael Rooker, supporting actor Mik Cribben filmed some years later the Troma-shot "Beware! Children at play"... "Nightmare" is one of the most disturbing, but also fascinating movies about psycho-killers that deserves much more praise and attention than it actually gets!!

George Tatum (Baird Stafford) is a murderous nut-job who, having been treated with revolutionary new drugs, is declared sane by his doctor and released back into the community. Of course, despite what his shrinks think, George is still as mad as a bag of badgers, and it's not long before he's off proving his psycho-killer credentials, eventually choosing to torment a young boy named C.J. and his dysfunctional family.

Released in the UK as 'Nightmares in a Damaged Brain' (a much better title than just 'Nightmare', don'tcha think?), this mean-spirited shocker got itself into trouble with the DPP thanks to a couple of particularly gruesome scenes of extreme gore. Matters were not helped by the fact that the distributors of the film decided to promote its release with a tasteless 'guess the weight of the brain' competition. Needless to say, the film soon found itself on the notorious Video Nasties list.

Director Romano Scavolini opens his film with a nifty dream sequence in which George discovers a severed head at the foot of his bed, and ends it with a superb double murder which features a cool decapitation and an axe in the face. Between these standout moments, we get a bit of strip joint action and a pretty good throat slashing, but also have to suffer through tons of tedious guff in which our frothy-mouthed loony makes threatening phone calls to C.J.'s house, whilst officials try to locate him with the use of a powerful (ha!) computer.

From the first 30 minutes or so, it is easy to be fooled into thinking that this film is going to be a real treat: it certainly has the grindhouse vibe and manages to be quite sleazy at times, occasionally reminding me of William Lustig's excellent movie Maniac. However, after the introduction of C.J. and his family, it becomes apparent that the film Scavolini is really trying to emulate is Halloween—it's just that he isn't doing it very well. The family scenes are clumsily handled and are tedious in the extreme, C.J. is such an irritating brat that one actually longs for him to suffer a painful death, and Tatum's ability to shrug off numerous bullet wounds (ala Michael Myers) is laughable.

However, if, like me, you are a purist and loathe to use the fast-forward button, no matter how dull the action, I can say that it is just about worth hanging in there for the gruesome finalé, which is a real humdinger.

Firstly make sure you see the UNCUT version. There are clearly to many reviews on here from people who have been watching the cut version without realising it, then giving the film a bad review because all the shock gore is missing.

Because the cut version removes most of the shocking scenes and bloody effects it really has damaged the reputation of the uncut original.

I have watched almost ever horror film worth effort from the 1980's, and I can safely say that Nightmare ranks close to the top of the list.

Atmospheric, quality performances, original script, nicely shot and the scenes of horror are at the top of there game and brutal. There are so many horror films from the 1980's that people talk about because they were the most mainstream, but real fans of horror will know about films like nightmare.

Its an all round quality production and its no nonsense horror, unlike many films from the 80's where you laugh because of the bad dialogue, shoddy acting, poor effects or talentless script. Nightmare really delivers horror in a way other movies fail to do.

Parts of the movie can seem a little slow, but if you hang in there you get the rewards. Unlike other horror of that period it has aged well in comparison. After watching I sat back satisfied and thought to myself "that's what a real horror movie should look like"

A mentally disturbed man kills people.

That's it. There's next to no plot, no brains, no nothing! I saw this thing back in a movie theatre in 1981. I was equal parts bored, sickened and just amazed at how STUPID this was! The audience had a great time...after half an hour of trying to take it seriously they tore into it. They yelled back at the screen and threw things...it made the movie more fun than it actually was.

The VERY gory finale (in slow motion no less) was a definite highlight. It was sick but at least it wasn't boring. That's the part when most of the audience walked out.

Also Tom Savini did NOT do the gore effects here. They advertised that heavily until he sued them--he said he made some suggestions but that was it. Still, the gore is very good.

Still...no plot, lousy acting and slow motion axe murders. You decide whether this movie is for you.

The 1981 splatter film NIGHTMARE hearkens back to a long-passed time in American horror cinema when "slasher" flicks were not only excessively gory, but also deeply disturbing in their underlying themes. These films not only outraged elitist film critics and general audiences, but also worried many horror film enthusiasts who felt that such films had "gone too far" in their uncompromising brutality. While a few of these films, most notably William Lustig's masterful MANIAC (1980), have attained cult status and been rereleased to DVD and VHS, most of these films have fallen out of print and into obscurity. Unfortunately, this is the case with NIGHTMARE, one of the better examples of the visceral, uncompromising horror films of the late 1970s and early 1980s.

Admittedly, this film does not start off very well. The first 30 minutes or so are pretty sloppy and hard to follow, largely because of choppy editing. However, once the film's story gets on track, what follows is a truly disturbing and horrific splatter film. Director Romano Scavolini, obviously working with a very low budget, nevertheless delivers some genuine suspense and adds touches of style (though he can't touch Dario Argento). The acting by the cast of unknowns is also surprisingly good. While the music during the opening and closing credits is pretty lousy, the score during the rest of the film is terrific, effectively creating an atmosphere of dread and fear. Of course, there's also the unforgettable gore effects by Tom Savini, displayed most spectacularly at the film's finale.

It goes without question that NIGHTMARE is definitely not for all tastes. Non-horror fans should stay far, far away. Additionally, I must note that more than any film I have ever seen, this film should not be viewed by children or impressionable young adults. However, hardcore fans of horror should definitely give this example of a bygone era a look. Watch this with some teeny-bopper flick like I STILL KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER and see which film leaves a longer lasting impression.

**1/2 out of ****

Once again, in a slasher movie, the people behave like nobody else would in that situation, unless they knew they were in a movie and they knew it was their job to act dumber than roadkill. Check this lot out:

1. Would you REALLY leave an adult patient who, as a child, hacked up his father and the woman he was having an affair with using an axe, alone as soon as he was released... regardless of what 'experimental drug' he was on?!

2. If you received a phone call which told you your kid had been stabbed by a mysterious stranger and was bleeding to death, wouldn't it be wise to inform the caller to contact the hospital FIRST, rather than wait till you got off a private boat with your beau, got dressed and rushed home in your car?

3. Your nine year old son is suspected of the murder of his best friend and a teenage girl. I would suggest that a) You as his mother would not be able to go out the following evening and have a great time at a party and b) The chances of finding a babysitter for this potentially psychotic tyke would be slim to none.

4. ALWAYS aim for the head with a gun. Bullets to the chest don't work... they only slow down your pursuer. When will they learn?!

Yep, this is a disjointed effort indeed, with a meandering story full of weird goings-on. The best entertainment value can be found in unintentional laughs, like the bubble bath foam that emits from the mental guy's mouth whenever he has a 'fit', or the horrendous acting you can find in most scenes.

If you can hold on though, it delivers the goods in the final reel, with decapitations and bloody stabbings aplenty. It's just that the rest, well... it's a bit crap, isn't it? 4/10

Came across this really by accident as something that might be slightly different to watch. It turned out to be one of those 'video nasty' films that we used to rave about on Beta or VHS in the early 80s. At the time (and our age then) we thought these films were pushing boundaries and giving us what we wanted - a new wave of gory horror.

These films are all now dated and look cheap, nasty, and plastic. However, some of them still work because of this punk aesthetic. This is one of them and is worth watching. It isn't a classic or must see by any means but is a good watch. This is probably because, rather than despite, the basic amateur nature of the sets, the acting and the story. If you don't compare it with horror films made over the last thirty years and all the advantages those movies have in terms of technology then this is something to still sit back and get scared by.

As a side note I often wonder what happened to the people involved in making these pictures. Did the actors think they had a career in film or where they just friends of the director? Where are they now and do the wear their badge of genre horror proudly or would rather that people they know now don't know the sort of film they starred in? then.

Unlike most slasher films with masked killers or deformed monsters, Nightmare tries to keep things fairly realistic which adds a layer of uncomfortable sleaze. The death scenes are probably some of the goriest and nastiest of that era if you can find the uncut version, but it would be nice if the victims were people we cared about. If they'd done that, this one would have really been one to be reckoned with.

NIGHTMARE IN A DAMAGED BRAIN is a rare treat of early 80's American low-budget horror, as it has both a decent story/plot and a considerable amount of gore for the era...

George is a schizophrenic psychopath who escapes from the care of his physician. The "wonder drugs" that George takes to combat his spells of delirium and psychoses don't work too well, and soon he's on the loose and up to no-good. We find that George's problems are deep rooted within his family and have to do with an experience he witnessed involving his father and some random hooker-ish chick when George was a boy. George's psychiatrist is on the chase to track him down and all is revealed in the "shocking" conclusion.

NIGHTMARE IN A DAMAGED BRAIN is a very decent horror film. A little dated by today's standards but still has more gore and cool kill scenes than you average current U.S. theatrical release. An over-looked film that could use some more recognition. If you dig slashers/psychological horror then you'll probably feel this one. Recommended 8/10

It's best to know going into it that Nightmare is a sleazy and reprehensible film with just about no redeeming value whatsoever. Not only is the lead character a sweaty, disgusting murderer but his victims aren't much better and you might find yourself rooting for him to dispatch them as quickly as possible.

Baird Stafford plays George, a mentally unwell man who is let out of an asylum and goes off to search for new victims. But not before stopping off at a scuzzy Times Square peepshow.

The effects are impressive and some of the best and most stomach-churning in the genre, but there's an unpleasant coldness to the film that'll really upset your stomach.

When I was a kid my school friends would rave about the latest Bond film or Ghostbusters, Gremlins, Back to the Future or Indiana Jones. However there was always one lad raving about the latest video nasty he just watched and go into detail the gruesome scenes in the film. I think he went on to become a Bishop!

Nightmare from 1981 would be that type of film. It has some nasty murder scenes of several women getting their throats cut or heads decapitated.

This is a low budget horror film featuring George who as a child saw his father having S&M sex with a prostitute and killed them both. Now as an adult George is supposedly cured after taking a new experimental drug.

However George has disappeared somewhere along the Florida coast but not before he visits the then seedy Times Square of New York and goes to some sex shows. Of course his psychotic, murdering urges get the better off him.

There is another storyline of a family with a small child who plays pranks on his family. Eventually you know George and this family will collide. Especially at the end scenes where we have a clearer picture of what George did as a child and why he might had been stalking this family.

It is an ultra low budget, seedy film but also dull. The prankster kid is the best thing in it and it's no surprise that he still works in the film industry.

A lot of it is just boring with the older George in white underpants distressed and having bouts of screaming. In fact there are a lot of guys in white underpants in this film. You actually think that some of the actors just walked off from some porn set.

The film has elements of Taxi Driver, The Shining and the fairy tale of The Boy who Cried Wolf but with some really bad acting.

Apart from the gore and its reputation as a video nasty there is very little that is good about the film.

I liked the doctors using early 1980s computers trying to track George down. Compare this to John Carpenter's Halloween and it is a no contest.