Nascido do Inferno

The directors cut version, which was the one I saw, was very long for this type of movie. Almost two hours is way too long. If you have the choice, definitely go for the non-directors cut.

The main plot is almost not taken up at all, the movie consists to the main part of several murder scenes, which are connected but the feeling is that they're only shown in order to fill the movie with splatterish violence. The connection is not revealed until the latter part and the lack of context bored me out long before I was there.

As a horror movie it doesn't work. You never get the required feel for the characters due to mediocre acting and the general disposition (character is presented, 15 minutes later character is dead). This pictures strong side lies in the splatter part.

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...

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.

Home video filmed (with what looks like they only had one camera to film with) crap. Truly appaling CG effects that are not going to convince anybody. 4 stories linked by a stupid looking goth murdering people for no apparent reason other than doing a favor for a jailed psycho.

Remember those dreadful american daytime soap opera with the worst acting ever?, well this makes them look like Oscar hopefuls. The gore is over the top but as mentioned in another posting, this film is so amateur, they are not going to be offended by it, and require cuts.

The back cover of the DVD, list the FX done by the team that did the FX for 'Black Hawk Down', well it must of been the runner who was the link, as there is no way in hell anybody involved in this peace of crap will ever have a any professional work on a "real" movie.

Avoid like the plague.

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