O Retorno da Maldição: A Mãe das Lágrimas

I'm sorry, Dario but this doesn't belong next to your other "Mother" films. It's really funny that some people dare compare it to his older films and especially to Suspiria.

On the good side, Dario proves that he is still inventive in his killing scenes. Actually, this may be his most gory film. Violence and gore are really over the top, sometimes to such a degree that it can be comic. But in the direction/atmosphere department things don't look that good. The film never manages to build the really tense atmosphere we've seen at other Argento films and old masterful camera moves are mostly absent. The special effects don't help much, either. Blood and gore is done pretty good, but the Spirits and other CGI moments (God, I hate CGI in horror films) are at least cringe-worthy.

Of course Dario's decline hasn't started now, I consider his last decent film to be Sleepless (2001) and before that, Opera (1987). It's just that the story and the acting don't help either. What's new ? you'd say. Admittedly, especially in the acting department Dario's films were never that good, but here most of the acting is really bad. Especially his daughter (which he so much likes to torture in his movies) delivers some of the worst acting I've seen. She was never that good an actress, but especially in this film she's very bad. The fact that she has lost that exotic youth she portrayed in his older films lessens even more her overall appearance.

I'll give it a 5/10 because there *are* some strong moments in the movie (albeit a few), but all and all I would only recommend this film to die-hard Argento fans, or people that badly want see some over-the-top gore. There can be no comparison whatsoever between this film and the previous "Mother" movies, or his other golden-era films. If you really want to get to know one of the best horror filmmakers ever, watch Suspiria, Tenebre, Phenomena, Inferno and Profondo Rosso.

This was one of the biggest disappointments for me in a long time.

If you've ever heard the name Dario Argento - it's probably because in 1977 he crafted one of the most stylish and genuinely creepy horror movies of all time, called "Suspiria". It's one of my personal favorite movies of all time, from one of my favorite directors. If you can appreciate horror, or even if you can't but you're an open minded person, I suggest you give SUSPIRIA an hour and a half of your life because it's unlike any other horror experience you will ever have.

SUSPIRIA was intended to be the first movie in a series of three, known as the "Three Mothers Trilogy". After Argento's crowning achievement, he did the 2nd in the series in 1980 which was called "Inferno". Although Inferno was just as stylish and just as mysterious, it was not quite as effective or fulfilling as Suspiria in the end. Yet, it is still a bizarre cult classic. The soundtrack from Keith Emerson is probably even better than the movie itself.

Anyways...Argento decided to hold off from finishing off the trilogy, and ended up holding off for 30 YEARS..., so finally in 2007 he decided it was time to create the finale, The Mother of Tears.

What can I say? There are maybe one or two gratuitous murders that are worthy of the Argento name, specifically the very first in the movie which comes out of nowhere and may have you clenching your mouth to make sure your teeth are still there. It is always lovely to see Argento bringing back actors and actresses from classic Italian horror films - in this case it's Coralina Cataldi from his awesome 1987 film, Opera, and the roller-coaster ride that is DEMONS 2.

Aside from a few memorable deaths, this movie really has almost NOTHING to offer. It is nice to see someone making movies about black magic, demons, and sorcery since no one else really does that anymore. The concepts are wonderful but unfortunately NOTHING is pulled off effectively here.

For one, the CGI totally abolishes the legitimacy of the movie. It's some of the cheesiest CGI i've had to bare with in some time. I figured Argento would be smarter than this - but then again, he is getting really, really old...

Asia Argento (the director's daughter and lead actress) can act but she isn't given much to work with here. The script, as usual with Argento's films, is the weakest part. The dialogue is far too basic to keep your emotions invested in the characters. No one else stands out as a particularly great performer either.

The saddest thing of all is that the movie completely lacks atmosphere. The setting and atmosphere was always the absolute BEST part of the director's classic films. And the fact that one of my favorite bands of all time, Goblin, provided the majority of soundtracks heavily added to that. But they've been out of the picture since his 2001 movie, Sleepless. The sets were completely plain and in no way stand out. I appreciated the shots of the creepy old mansion like building towards the very end, but even that building looked fake and CGI-induced...and it was clear that it was not actually filmed there - which took a lot away from the entire finale.

The finale was probably the most depressing part. It felt extremely rushed, and aside from that, the "lead villain" who is supposed to be "the most evil of the three mothers" was SO half assed. A good looking chick with nice tits and some black make up around her eyes?????? c'mon!!!!!!! what IS this?!?!?! I wanted to laugh at it but was way too saddened by the film overall to have a good time with it. And then all of a sudden, it's over...

I was so let down!

I guess I'll have to depend on Asia Argento to make good movies instead from now on. Her last one, The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things, was a masterpiece of it's own kind!!! See it!

It took me several viewings of Argento's final film in his Three Mothers trilogy before I finally arrived at a sure, albeit ambivalent, conclusion.

The "plot", as they call it, involves an ancient urn which causes the city of Rome to erupt into violence. Robbery and murder run amok and it's all the result of Mater Lachrymarum (the Mother of Tears.) It's ultimately up to a young art student by the name of Sarah Mandy to stop the chaos.

Asia Argento plays the role of Sarah. I don't think Asia is without talent (I enjoyed her performances in Trauma and the Stendhal Syndrome – two earlier Argento efforts.) But while she shouldn't entirely be held at fault here, her performance isn't exactly great. She frequently comes across as wooden, although I believe much of this is a result of the poor dialogue. And perhaps more importantly, her wooden delivery and still fairly thick Italian accent give the proceedings quite a bit of charm. I wouldn't say her performance enhances the film, but I suppose her looks are enough to keep the film going. Adam James' character is boring and not at all engaging; this is true even when we're given the chance to poke fun at him. He does nothing for me, and, at best, is forgettable. And then there's Udo Kier. Doing what he does best, he's over the top enough to be memorable, but he somehow never crosses into "too ridiculous" territory. His screen time is short but worthwhile.

One of Mother of Tear's saving graces is its gore. Gone is Germano Natali's (Deep Red, Suspiria) garish, paint-like blood (excellent in its own right); instead, Argento opts for a more Fulci-esque display of bloody mayhem. The camera lingers on every moment of gory detail. Argento has rarely been this brutal; there are plenty of memorable moments for gore hounds and the film's first big sequence is a perfect example.

Mother of Tears' soundtrack frequently pays homage to Argento's past supernatural related works. The music during the aforementioned first murder sequence is a clear nod to Suspiria's over-the-top, yet haunting operatic music. And later scenes do more than enough to hint at Inferno's piano-based instrumentals. Overall, the film does a good job score-wise.

From a visual standpoint, Mother of Tears is hardly lacking. It may not have the Technicolor look of Suspiria or the nuanced production design of Inferno, but it's hardly dull. It takes some of the artsy indoor/outdoor scenes of The Stendhal Syndrome and combines it with the more elaborate set-pieces found in previous "mother" films.

Overall, Mother of Tears is a mixed bag. It has its boring moments, but it's also a good example of Italian Horror's love for grandeur and charming carelessness toward what is considered logical or politically correct. Those comparing it to films of Argento's golden era need to stop living in the past. Mother of Tears has its great moments and not so great moments and it is neither a failure nor a rousing success. If you're a fan of 80s "godfather of gore" era Fulci and take into account the 21st century's distinct lack of anything Giallo/Italian Horror-related, Mother of Tears is worth a watch.

There is much to like here and I found myself more impressed with the film on 2nd viewing. I particularly liked the monkeys. But what kills the film for me is the lack of gravitas around the Mother figure here. she is too soft porn and thus difficult to take seriously. Her henchmen are fine, but she lacks genuine magic, and i. a film that takes magic as its subject, this pulls it down. In an Argento movie, we Can swallow the odd bit of scenery chewing (Udo) and even lack luster CGI and a lessening of the visual poetry of suspiria.... but only if that underlying sense of magic works. It half does work until the Mater turns up looking like a playboy centefold in a cape

I saw this a few weeks ago and am still "processing" it, which I think is a good sign as there are some images and tonal aspects of the film that linger longer than its time on screen. That said, my initial reaction was a bit mixed. I hadn't seen any of Argento films after 'Two Evil Eyes' in 1990 and the overall look and loss of artistry was a bit jarring. It has a "made-for-TV" feel throughout and some rough CGI that really drags it down. The stylised "otherworldliness" of Suspiria, Inferno and many other Argentos (including some of the earlier giallos) is sorely lacking, with some quite everyday locations and characters (some of the witchy characters are basically goth teenagers that hang out at the shopping centre). Mother Lachrymarum herself also lacks serious gravitas: yes, she's be touted as the youngest and most beautiful of the three mothers, but her overall look and presentation seems more appropriate to soft porn. This, along with some very vicious violence that lacks the stylised aesthetic of his older work, contributes to an overriding tackiness in the film. Whilst some of Argento's 80s films may have sometimes seemed lurid, they were never tacky.

And yet, the extremity of the violence is what in some ways lets you know that this is an Argento, and it turns out to be one of the most hectic and crazed films I've seen of his. What it lacks in charm it makes up for in feverish brutality. You may call it undisciplined, but the accumulation of outlandishness in this film starts to have an effect and as it becomes more and more madcap, it also becomes more entertaining. The culmination is one of the most OTT and blood-soaked (until Luca Guadagnino's Suspiria came along, which possibly takes some inspiration from Mother of Tears). Along the way a fairly compelling mystery is spun with some cardboard characters, but the ending delivers a pretty satisfying pay-off. I'm glad Argento concluded the Three Mothers trilogy; whilst it might not have been the film we expected - or wanted - it still delivers, and rounds out the mythology without sullying the legacy of Suspiria and Inferno.