Cradle of Fear

I didn't have very high-hopes going into CRADLE OF FEAR. The first scene shows some "scary" goth-kid killing some guys in an alley, with pretty poor gore FX and an insanely obvious SOV feel to it. Number one - people who dress up like vampires at an S&M party are about the most un-scary things humanly possible - and two - I typically don't care for extremely obvious SOV productions...so you can see as how from the first five minutes I didn't think I would be feelin' this one. I have to admit though, that as it went along, CRADLE OF FEAR ended up being quite entertaining, despite (and in some cases because of...) it's numerous flaws...

The film is made up of four vignettes that center around a mental patient who was a hypnotist and child rapist/murderer. In each vignette, one or more people die in different splattery ways, that are related to people that had to do with the hypnotist's incarceration. The stories themselves are all relatively entertaining: the first dealing with the same goth kid from the beginning (who is apparently mind-controlled by the hypnotist) who bones a semi-hot goth whore and some crazy baby/spider-thing busts out of her stomach. The next has two friends who rob an old man and the robbery goes seriously wrong. The next is about a one-legged guy who goes to seek a "donor" for his missing leg, and the last (and in my opinion, most interesting) story deals with a kid who becomes obsessed with a snuff web-site. The four stories are all semi-amusing excuses to show some tits and gore, and still stay within the context of the film...

CRADLE OF FEAR is a very disjointed film. The way it's shot makes it look like a bad UK soap-opera. There are some decent performances from some of the cast - others are atrocious. There are a few sets of decent goth-chick tits in this one, and that's never a bad thing. Some of the gore FX are convincing or at least decent - others suck completely. There are a few CGI special FX that are so bad they're absolutely hilarious (car-chase/crash, anyone???) - but somehow this mess of a film still works. It is a little long, clocking in at a solid two hours, and could probably use a little bit of a trim, but even so - it manages to stay pretty quick-paced and entertaining throughout. Not a great film by any stretch - but it's quirky and worth a look to splatter fans...8/10

...and you can look at that statement in different ways, by the way. First of all, it's a mess because of all the gruesome and extremely violent scenes. Your wildest imagination doesn't even come close to some of the explicitly shown scenes here. Entire parts of this movie are just plain sick, disgusting, offensive, brutal and they bring you close to puking your guts out. Now, I love horror movies and I am very 'pro-violence', but I do think that it has to lead somewhere !! Is that too much to ask ? Cradle of Fear is just a series of utterly sick and twisted thoughts. The "movie" contains out of four separate chapters connected by a wraparound story. This results in endless showing of torture, murder and sickness only to find out that the victims have something in common. Not very informative, if you ask me. And yet - it has to be said - the basic plot idea surely HAS potential. It's about a cannibalistic hypnotist who made a deal with the devil himself to avenge himself and cause misery and death to everyone who was involved in his trial. Personally, I think that is an interesting topic, so they should have focused on that a little more instead of wanting to create the most disgusting movie ever.

Secondly, the whole production of this movie was a mess. They didn't have much of a budget and they spent it all on fake blood and guts...Tons of it !! The acting performances are a joke and some of the worst I've ever seen. Any other special effects besides the make-up looks very amateurish ( Like that attempt to a realistic car crash, for example ). There's no tension or atmosphere to detect anywhere...not even an attempt to build up one.

Cradle of Fear is a failure and a missed opportunity to say the least. With the presence of death-metal icon Danni Filth ( from the band Cradle of filth..get the link ? ) this movie is obviously only meant for the eyes of twisted teenagers who try to be controversial. Troubled girls and boys who take pleasure in worrying their parents by watching crap like this. And then people keep complaining that the amount of suicides and juvenile delinquency is increasing...Bah. I can imagine that this movie can cause a lot of damage when you're easily influenced or dispose of an unstable mind. For every self-respecting horror fan, this movie is an insult.

Cradle of Fear is an anthology of icky tales that revolves around a police detective, an imprisoned madman, and "The Man" (played by Dani Filth, frontman for Cradle of Filth). Although the stories are meant to tie in together by using wraparound characters, they don't. Some of the stories don't even make sense on their own. However, the first story is quite good and graphic, but it's all downhill from there. The remaining tales just fail to generate any feelings out of me because there is no logic. There's lots of gore throughout, just not enough real story. That's the film's downfall and that's why I'm giving it a negative review. I will say this for the movie, it is undeniably horror. The lengths London filmmaker Alex Chandon will go to shock you will, well, shock you. I like gore. I love gore when it serves the purpose of the story. But I hate mindless gore. That's what the majority of the film is, not to mention pretty disgusting. Cradle of Fear is a gorehound's wet dream, but I desire a little bit more.

Having been a fan of the band Cradle of Filth for many years, I was inclined to watch this movie. Alex Chandon had previously done a video for the band (From the Cradle to Enslave) which is one of the most visually original music videos of all time. With this background information out of the way, here is a checklist to see if you will like this movie. 1. Can you tolerate bad special effects? The effects in this movie are about one step above crappy because it had a limited budget. It does take some work to get past the poor effects and get into the story, but it can be done. 2. Do you have ADD? One thing I did enjoy about the movie was that it weaves together 4 story lines which really helps to keep your focus during the movie. It's far from stagnant. 3. Are you offended by anything? Anything at all? If so, you will hate this movie and possibly feed the need to speak to a pastor after viewing it. The effects, as previously stated are poor, but the material the movie deals with is very intense and often satanic with references to Crowley. If you answered yes to 1 and 2 and no to number 3, you will probably enjoy this movie. In my opinion, it's worth at least one watch if you enjoy horror movies. One last time though, the special effects are weak and this movie is not for the faint of heart.

I just saw the DVD of this and I belive it to be the biggest waste of aluminium and polycarbonate issued in years. Now, let me get this straight: I love low-budget films. I love really gory, gross-out films. I love horror anthologies. I also used to be a goth for several years. Sadly, this film does a grave disservice to all of the above (no pun intended). The film was produced on DV and therefore looks home-made. The fact that the budget didn't extend to getting it transferred to film says a lot. Sure, there's nothing that says films can't be low-budget and many people have made some excellent pieces using little more than a home DV camera. The difference is that most people don't usually try and pass them off as feature films.

The plot attempts to tie four small stories into some kind of cohesive whole, but the fact is that most of these segments don't really make much sense. Only the "sick room" plot holds your attention and looks as if it might be going somewhere interesting, but then it spectacularly drops the ball with the sub-Twilight Zone predictability of its denouement.

The dialogue is a low point amongst a sea of low points. Expletives are clumsily dropped into scenes, giving the impression of the writer somehow trying to prove how grown-up the film is.

Acting throughout is mostly appalling. I mean, really bad. The usual-suspect rent-a-goths Emily Booth and Eileen Daly give the type of performances that will see them typecast in this kind of tripe until they no longer look good semi-naked. As for Dani Filth, his virtually-silent role merely gives him the opportunity to carry over his stage persona and- if possible- look an even bigger berk than usual.

As for the effects- well, if indeed Creature FX really were involved, then I can't see that they got paid more than twenty quid for their contribution. There is shocking gore, yes, but only shockingly bad. It almost made me laugh, but I was so depressed by the rest of the experience I couldn't raise a smile. Oh, and the CGI is truly, deeply, totally unspeakable. This is not one of those films that's so bad it's good, so don't get taken in by that line of reasoning.

In my experience, the music and imagery of Cradle Of Filth appeals mainly to young, oh-so-rebellious just-turned-teenagers and goth/metal fans who take themselves far too seriously. If this describes you, you'll probably love this film. If it doesn't, then don't insult your own intelligence and just walk away...