Spettri

I wonder if, back when he was wowing audiences with great performances in films such as Cul-de-sac and The Flesh and the Fiends, Donald Pleasance ever thought he'd be starring in dross like this? Anyway, I have to say that I wasn't surprised to find that Specters is basically the film I thought it would be; namely, a poor Demons-style trashy eighties horror flick with little in the way of redeeming features. The plot is just common horror fare and features a bunch of researchers digging into places they shouldn't be digging and revealing a load of ancient catacombs that warn of impending doom. Naturally, the evil is unleashed. At the very least from this, I was expecting some decent gore; but all we actually get is cheesy crap which is matched by the trashy atmosphere and typically cheesy eighties soundtrack. The plot is a complete mess and I found it very easy to get bored. Donald Pleasance was obviously bored too, and that's not surprising considering the talent of the people he's working with; naturally, Specters features some awesomely terrible acting. It all boils down to a typically pointless ending and overall, this is one of the few films that is bettered by the lamentable 'Demons 2'!

Well, what do you know, they do make horror movies in Italy that do not appeal to me after all. The Italians were the undeniable masters when it comes to horror, especially during the seventies and eighties, but obviously not all films can be winners. Just like "Manhattan Baby" and "Zeder", which more or less revolve on similar themes, "Specters" is an incredibly incoherent and painfully tedious film.

The basic premise holds a lot of potential, for sure, but director Marcello Avallone - as well as his three (!) fellow writers - couldn't turn it into a compelling script. Several of the story lines are underdeveloped, the film wastes far too much time on irrelevant sub plots and insignificant supportive characters, the evil's true nature remains a mystery even after the film has ended, the lead roles aren't convincing, and the production incomprehensibly doesn't take full usage of the marvelous filming locations and scenery! Here they are shooting a film in one of the most beautiful cities in the world, below ground as well as on the surface, but all we get to see are pitiable images of some lame ruins.

There's something evil lurking under the city of Rome... The acclaimed archaeologist Prof. Lasky and his crew have been searching for a 19 centuries old tomb for many months now, but it seems that the nearby subway construction works have finally exposed the entry. The discovery might not be such a triumph after all, since the occupant of the sarcophagus - a bizarre type of feline monster - is awakened and promptly goes on a rampage. Well, at least I think it goes on a rampage, because that's the point where the "Specters" really stops making sense.

Many sequences, like the "Nightmare on Elm Street" similar suck-into-the-bed death scene, are played like they are hallucinations whereas other ones, like the head crushing sequence, are reality? There clearly is some sort of (spiritual?) link between the monster and one of the archaeologist's girlfriend (played by the former Miss Denmark Trine Michelsen who recently passed away as a result of bone cancer) but that story aspect is never at one point clarified. You get used to that, though. What's the deal with the blind tour guide in the catacombs? What inflicted the veto between Prof. Lasky and the exaggeratedly gay-behaving elderly antique dealer? Why does literally everybody in this film insist on having extended conversations with themselves? Why isn't the couple from the beginning of the film mentioned anymore?

Never mind all that, it's a silly and lackluster film; - let's jut keep it at that. As usual with the productions he was involved in, special effects wizard Sergio Stivaletti delivers the finest piece of work. The budget was clearly minimal, but he nevertheless still managed to provide some pretty cool and engrossing effects. The always reliable Donald Pleasance, who regularly appeared in Spaghetti horror at that time ("Phantom of Death", "Nothing Underneath", "Nosferatu in Venice", "Phenomena"...) is on auto-pilot, but he always remains a joy to behold.

There is never any mention of a "specter" in this film. The creature we finally do see (other than Universal's Gill Man) is an ugly beast not unlike the She Creature. If it weren't for the ridiculous horror clichées, this film might have worked, as the set design is fascinating and some scenes are actually suspenseful, and the archaelogical dig is exciting. Unfortunately, a lot of it deals with stupid teenagers, gratuitous pop songs, sex, and topless scenes, and predictable junk make much of the film annoying. When wine bottles start spraying and catacombs are collapsing, it's interesting, but it has the cliché horror it's not really ending, no one survives by the main fornicating couple, and girls panicking from little mice. The blind man's beating heart getting ripped out is the ultimate in gratuity, since it lacks all the significance of Evan pulling out his own heart in Michele Soavi's _La Chiesa_. It could have been better than _Demoni_, but at least it's not worse, nor as disgusting.

My review was written in May 1987 after a Cannes Film Festival Market screening.

"Specters" is a disappointing shaggy-dog Italian horror film, technically okay but not delivering any scares and hardly any action until the finale. Helmer Marcello Avallone gets the technical side right but has a lot of stylistic (and pacing/construction) lessons to learn from the maestros of horror.

Story is similar to Nigel Kneale's classic "Quatermass & the Pit" (a/k/a "5,000,000 Years to Earth"): work on the subways in Rome disrupts an archaeological dig nearly run by Professor Lasky (who else but Donald Pleasence), opening an ancient vault. It takes a full hour of red herrings until the monster shows up, a barely shown imitation of the tacked-on crfitter in Jacques Tourneur's "Night of the Demon".

Topnotch lenser Silvano Ippoliti provides some nice travelling shots through the catacombs but pic is all buildup and no delivery. Pleasence hams it up as the only cast member whose English language voice fits his mug.

I'm guessing you've got like late-era Italian films to enjoy this, but I liked this film a lot more than anyone that's reviewed this film here.

Why? For all the reasons listed as negatives elsewhere, that's why! Sure, the plot doesn't make much sense, and barely exists. Sure, there's bad eighties hair, bad eighties music, and bad eighties everything else, but come on, these are good points! I had a good laugh with this one. I loved the way the first guy they sent down the tomb had to crawl for ages to get to it, but by the time Donald Pleasance et al got down there, it was as easy as walking into your back garden! Brilliant.

It's suspenseful in places, with a good atmosphere and setting. I've been down to the catacombs in Rome and they really do warn you not to wander off. I thought that was because they were so large, but after watching this film, I guess it was to stop me falling foul of a demon.

Good stuff, if you know what to expect.