Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueThe abandoned home of Wilfred Butler, a wealthy but troubled man who committed suicide, has been willed to his grandson, Jeffrey. But an Axe wielding maniac has set up residence in the house... Tout lireThe abandoned home of Wilfred Butler, a wealthy but troubled man who committed suicide, has been willed to his grandson, Jeffrey. But an Axe wielding maniac has set up residence in the house - and he doesn't take kindly to strangers.The abandoned home of Wilfred Butler, a wealthy but troubled man who committed suicide, has been willed to his grandson, Jeffrey. But an Axe wielding maniac has set up residence in the house - and he doesn't take kindly to strangers.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Ella Stockton
- Smiler
- (as Rorie Stockton)
Lee Bane
- Dr. Gershuny
- (voix)
Melanie Stevens
- Diane Adams
- (as Mel Stevens)
Natasha Bunce
- Nancy
- (as Natasha Jenkins)
Avis à la une
Silent Night, Bloody Night: The Homecoming (2013)
* (out of 4)
Wilfred Butler commits suicide by setting himself on fire. His grandson is left his mansion but when he plans to sell it a maniac with an axe shows up to start killing people.
SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT: THE HOMECOMING is a British remake of the 1972 cult film that features Patrick O'Neil and John Carradine. When this film first went into production it really wasn't clear if it was a remake or a long-rumored sequel. Well, it's certainly a remake but those hoping for a sequel to the original film will be happy to know that it's on the way too. As for this film, it's a pretty bad film on many levels and also a very frustrating one.
I say frustrating because even though the original was quite good, there were some flaws that could have been ironed out and made into an even better movie. Sadly this isn't that movie. In fact, the flaws in the original are somewhat made worse here. On a technical level this film, like the original, really shows its budget. The entire thing has a very cheap look and feel to it and there's really not a bit at atmosphere or anything else creepy. The film contains one of the worst CGI effects I've seen in my life and it won't take long for you to know what I'm talking about. The gore effects really aren't any more impressive, although I must admit that they did have a certain charm if you grew up in the 80s watching those direct-to-VHS titles. These low-budget films often featured kills off screen and then someone throwing blood onto a blanket or wall. The same type of stuff is used here.
The performances are pretty much what you'd expect from a film like this and that's not very good. The biggest issue I had with the movie is that it pretty much copies the original film with only some changes towards the end. The original film had a terrific plot but there were a few things that could have been changed for the better but that doesn't happen here. In fact, I'd say the story appears to be the least concerning thing to the filmmakers. Instead they go for the blood effects and these here just aren't enough to carry the picture. Fans of the original Friday THE 13TH might want to check this out for Adrienne King but be warned that she only supplies a voice.
* (out of 4)
Wilfred Butler commits suicide by setting himself on fire. His grandson is left his mansion but when he plans to sell it a maniac with an axe shows up to start killing people.
SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT: THE HOMECOMING is a British remake of the 1972 cult film that features Patrick O'Neil and John Carradine. When this film first went into production it really wasn't clear if it was a remake or a long-rumored sequel. Well, it's certainly a remake but those hoping for a sequel to the original film will be happy to know that it's on the way too. As for this film, it's a pretty bad film on many levels and also a very frustrating one.
I say frustrating because even though the original was quite good, there were some flaws that could have been ironed out and made into an even better movie. Sadly this isn't that movie. In fact, the flaws in the original are somewhat made worse here. On a technical level this film, like the original, really shows its budget. The entire thing has a very cheap look and feel to it and there's really not a bit at atmosphere or anything else creepy. The film contains one of the worst CGI effects I've seen in my life and it won't take long for you to know what I'm talking about. The gore effects really aren't any more impressive, although I must admit that they did have a certain charm if you grew up in the 80s watching those direct-to-VHS titles. These low-budget films often featured kills off screen and then someone throwing blood onto a blanket or wall. The same type of stuff is used here.
The performances are pretty much what you'd expect from a film like this and that's not very good. The biggest issue I had with the movie is that it pretty much copies the original film with only some changes towards the end. The original film had a terrific plot but there were a few things that could have been changed for the better but that doesn't happen here. In fact, I'd say the story appears to be the least concerning thing to the filmmakers. Instead they go for the blood effects and these here just aren't enough to carry the picture. Fans of the original Friday THE 13TH might want to check this out for Adrienne King but be warned that she only supplies a voice.
Was drawn into seeing this, with a cool poster/cover, a somewhat intriguing if very derivative premise and as someone with a general appreciation for the genre it fits under. That it was low-budget, which from frequent personal experience is rarely a good sign due to that there are so many poor ones out there (though there are decent to good ones as well), made me though apprehensive.
It is sadly however yet another film seen recently, hence some reiteration because the exact same strengths and flaws present in those films are here, that to me was incredibly disappointing considering its potential which it doesn't do anywhere near enough with. The film is really very bad, with so many huge flaws and doesn't do anything with any potential it had. There is net to nothing good here. The best thing about it is the house, which is actually quite creepy. Shame the rest of the film wasn't.
Going on to the negatives, the story does feel over-stretched and some of it comes over as vague and under-explained in the last third where the film especially became duller, more predictable, more senseless and less unsettled and never gaining momentum. All the characters are too sketchy and with cardboard thin and colourless personalities and with nowhere near enough to make one want to endear to them. Their annoying and illogical decision making and behaviours frustrates. The chemistry is bland and unfocused.
The sound quality is obvious and utilised cheaply (being too loud in the build ups and people's reactions), the effects are shoddy and nearly all of the acting is lacking severely on the whole, though Lee Bane tries. There is no sense of horror or engagement with the awful predicament they're in, and no connecting with the character, it just reeks of indifference which makes the viewer not care less too.
Dialogue can be stilted and rambling while the pace and film drags on forever, apparent from the very start, never recovering that interest is lost fast. The ending has no build-up and just ends ridiculously. Found too many of the supposedly shocking moments not surprising or scary and the atmosphere dreary, due to the excessive obviousness, a lot of dumb and vague moments and explanations and the lack of tension and suspense. Thrills are none, thanks to stodginess and excessive over-familiarity, and found myself never invested in the drama, which tended to be indifferently acted, interminably paced and statically directed.
There are a lot of really dull and going nowhere plot elements and often nonsensical and confusing character motivations, while too many of the things to make you shocked are far from creative or unsettling. It all feels rather tame and so what-like, while there is no real feel of the Christmas spirit here.
Nothing freaky or interesting, no development and too derivative, while everything is unimaginative and are more odd than scary, completely failing to show any sense of dread. There is nothing interesting or illuminating with what the film was trying to do and the drama is overwrought with no momentum and a lot of weirdness. The direction is barely there and disorganised and the music is ill-fitting. The film is very amateurish visually, too drearily lit and shows no care in the way it's shot. The opening shot is a good example at how shoddily the film is shot.
Summing up, very bad. 2/10 (only for the house) Bethany Cox
It is sadly however yet another film seen recently, hence some reiteration because the exact same strengths and flaws present in those films are here, that to me was incredibly disappointing considering its potential which it doesn't do anywhere near enough with. The film is really very bad, with so many huge flaws and doesn't do anything with any potential it had. There is net to nothing good here. The best thing about it is the house, which is actually quite creepy. Shame the rest of the film wasn't.
Going on to the negatives, the story does feel over-stretched and some of it comes over as vague and under-explained in the last third where the film especially became duller, more predictable, more senseless and less unsettled and never gaining momentum. All the characters are too sketchy and with cardboard thin and colourless personalities and with nowhere near enough to make one want to endear to them. Their annoying and illogical decision making and behaviours frustrates. The chemistry is bland and unfocused.
The sound quality is obvious and utilised cheaply (being too loud in the build ups and people's reactions), the effects are shoddy and nearly all of the acting is lacking severely on the whole, though Lee Bane tries. There is no sense of horror or engagement with the awful predicament they're in, and no connecting with the character, it just reeks of indifference which makes the viewer not care less too.
Dialogue can be stilted and rambling while the pace and film drags on forever, apparent from the very start, never recovering that interest is lost fast. The ending has no build-up and just ends ridiculously. Found too many of the supposedly shocking moments not surprising or scary and the atmosphere dreary, due to the excessive obviousness, a lot of dumb and vague moments and explanations and the lack of tension and suspense. Thrills are none, thanks to stodginess and excessive over-familiarity, and found myself never invested in the drama, which tended to be indifferently acted, interminably paced and statically directed.
There are a lot of really dull and going nowhere plot elements and often nonsensical and confusing character motivations, while too many of the things to make you shocked are far from creative or unsettling. It all feels rather tame and so what-like, while there is no real feel of the Christmas spirit here.
Nothing freaky or interesting, no development and too derivative, while everything is unimaginative and are more odd than scary, completely failing to show any sense of dread. There is nothing interesting or illuminating with what the film was trying to do and the drama is overwrought with no momentum and a lot of weirdness. The direction is barely there and disorganised and the music is ill-fitting. The film is very amateurish visually, too drearily lit and shows no care in the way it's shot. The opening shot is a good example at how shoddily the film is shot.
Summing up, very bad. 2/10 (only for the house) Bethany Cox
SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT: THE HOMECOMING (2013, UK, dir. James Plumb) is a remake of the American horror flick SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT from 1974, this one made in Bridgend on a tiny indie budget. The story involves an ancestral home being visited by various characters and one of its previous inhabitants returning to get rid of the intruders who've dared to show themselves...
Truth be told, this is awful stuff, the very worst kind of material that you see in independent cinema. There's no plot to speak of, the script is dull and the acting is seriously awful. The story merely consists of one murder sequence after another, as various courting couples turn up at the house and are bumped off by a mystery villain with a covered face. The gore is slapdash and typically involves scenes of an axe rising and falling and blood splashing on a wall. There's an obligatory shower scene and a boring reveal at the climax, but it's all so appallingly conceived that I hated every minute of it. The nice slipcover art is the only thing good about this film.
Truth be told, this is awful stuff, the very worst kind of material that you see in independent cinema. There's no plot to speak of, the script is dull and the acting is seriously awful. The story merely consists of one murder sequence after another, as various courting couples turn up at the house and are bumped off by a mystery villain with a covered face. The gore is slapdash and typically involves scenes of an axe rising and falling and blood splashing on a wall. There's an obligatory shower scene and a boring reveal at the climax, but it's all so appallingly conceived that I hated every minute of it. The nice slipcover art is the only thing good about this film.
James Plumb's gory, violent festive horror is for adults only, about a man who inherits his grandfather's home, unaware that an axe killer lives there too.
This is a British remake of the original version of Silent Night, Bloody Night, released 41 years earlier - and the final product here is one that should never have been done.
The story concerns the uninhabited house of Wilfred Butler (Philip Harvey), a rich but concerned man who killed himself in 1987, who has been willed to his grandson, Jeffrey (Alan Humphreys).
The home has sat in turmoil since Wilfred's demise, standing in the way of creators who desire to turn the property into residential homes.
This is a British remake of the original version of Silent Night, Bloody Night, released 41 years earlier - and the final product here is one that should never have been done.
The story concerns the uninhabited house of Wilfred Butler (Philip Harvey), a rich but concerned man who killed himself in 1987, who has been willed to his grandson, Jeffrey (Alan Humphreys).
The home has sat in turmoil since Wilfred's demise, standing in the way of creators who desire to turn the property into residential homes.
Silent Night, Bloody Night: The Homecoming is an extremely low budget, modern, British remake, of the classic 1970's Christmas slasher of the same name (less the subtitle, of course).
And...while it's a well-meaning homage and all...it begs the question...why?!
Sure...it does make an effort to remain true to the viciousness of the original.
It just seems completely unnecessary, is all.
Mainly due to the fact that it's such a low effort reproduction...that it comes off as a disservice, if anything.
Like...why not make a more original film that riffs off the idea on which the original was based...instead of a direct remake that fails to capitalize upon the nuance that made it such a classic.
It just doesn't make sense.
I can appreciate the obsession the filmmakers, here, have for the original cult classic.
But just can't fathom why they felt the need to re-create it, in a format that is clearly inferior in every way.
Unless, maybe, it was a school project or something.
That aside...there's not much to say about the whole thing.
It's just a cheap, poorly made, ripoff of the original.
And that's that.
2.5 out of 10.
And...while it's a well-meaning homage and all...it begs the question...why?!
Sure...it does make an effort to remain true to the viciousness of the original.
It just seems completely unnecessary, is all.
Mainly due to the fact that it's such a low effort reproduction...that it comes off as a disservice, if anything.
Like...why not make a more original film that riffs off the idea on which the original was based...instead of a direct remake that fails to capitalize upon the nuance that made it such a classic.
It just doesn't make sense.
I can appreciate the obsession the filmmakers, here, have for the original cult classic.
But just can't fathom why they felt the need to re-create it, in a format that is clearly inferior in every way.
Unless, maybe, it was a school project or something.
That aside...there's not much to say about the whole thing.
It's just a cheap, poorly made, ripoff of the original.
And that's that.
2.5 out of 10.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesRemake of 1974 film Silent Night, Bloody Night (1972).
- ConnexionsReferenced in The Cinema Snob: Silent Night, Bloody Night (2016)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Stille Nacht - Blutige Nacht
- Lieux de tournage
- Sociétés de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
Box-office
- Budget
- 20 000 $US (estimé)
- Durée
- 1h 25min(85 min)
- Couleur
- Rapport de forme
- 2.20:1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant