IMDb RATING
5.6/10
4.8K
YOUR RATING
A mental patient embarks on a murder spree upon escaping from an institution.A mental patient embarks on a murder spree upon escaping from an institution.A mental patient embarks on a murder spree upon escaping from an institution.
John L. Watkins
- Man with Cigar
- (as John Watkins)
Bill Milling
- Paul Williamson
- (as William Milling)
William Kirksey
- George's Father
- (as William S. Kirksey)
Candese Marchese
- Candy, the Jogger
- (as Candy Marchese)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
This is one of the most prominent films on the legendary video nasty list. For those who do not know, this was a list of videos that were considered obscenely violent by the establishment in early 80's Britain. Nightmares in a Damaged Brain was one of the first to be tagged as problematic and it's distributor even served six months in prison for releasing the thing. The question now I suppose is how does it shape up today? Well, on the one hand, it isn't at all hard to understand how it made the list in the first place. On the other hand, it still works pretty well as a sleazy grind-house slasher movie.
The film in a nutshell is about a troubled man who is released from an asylum. Too early it seems, as he pretty much immediately starts committing brutal murders.
The film's primary notoriety I am guessing comes from the very mean-spirited violence. There isn't an awful lot of it but when it does happen it's very gory and brutal. Particularly nasty is a knife attack on a woman in her home, while the carnage inflicted by the little boy near the end is pretty intense. The film also has some scenes in New York where the psycho visits sex shows and starts to lose his fragile mind - these sequences resemble an exploitation version of Taxi Driver. So the film is essentially well served on the violence and sleaze fronts. The biggest problem is that it drags in the middle section. In this part the story relocates to follow the goings on of a family, one which our psychopath seems to be stalking for some reason. The pacing takes a dive here when we focus on these none too interesting characters. However, the aforementioned parts that bookend the family drama are certainly not boring.
Nightmares in a Damaged Brain is ultimately one of the better video nasties. Unlike many on the list it's actually pretty nasty at times. And that is kind of what you want really.
The film in a nutshell is about a troubled man who is released from an asylum. Too early it seems, as he pretty much immediately starts committing brutal murders.
The film's primary notoriety I am guessing comes from the very mean-spirited violence. There isn't an awful lot of it but when it does happen it's very gory and brutal. Particularly nasty is a knife attack on a woman in her home, while the carnage inflicted by the little boy near the end is pretty intense. The film also has some scenes in New York where the psycho visits sex shows and starts to lose his fragile mind - these sequences resemble an exploitation version of Taxi Driver. So the film is essentially well served on the violence and sleaze fronts. The biggest problem is that it drags in the middle section. In this part the story relocates to follow the goings on of a family, one which our psychopath seems to be stalking for some reason. The pacing takes a dive here when we focus on these none too interesting characters. However, the aforementioned parts that bookend the family drama are certainly not boring.
Nightmares in a Damaged Brain is ultimately one of the better video nasties. Unlike many on the list it's actually pretty nasty at times. And that is kind of what you want really.
Caught this at an Arizona drive-in, back about 1983. It truly bothered some of my friends, but we all thought it was better than the co-feature, "Happy Birthday To Me". I hunted for quite a while looking for this, and finally found it at a Pawn shop in St. Paul, on VHS. Guess some folks have also been looking, and it is on DVD as "Nightmares In A Damaged Brain". But the disc runs about 94 minutes, and is missing some gory highlights, as well as a few touches of plot. the one you want was just "Nightmare", and runs about 98 minutes. the version you want came from 21st Century releasing, and is worth the hunt, if this is your sort of thriller. I wish everyone good luck, but I'm not giving mine up.
Firstly make sure you see the UNCUT version. There are clearly to many reviews on here from people who have been watching the cut version without realising it, then giving the film a bad review because all the shock gore is missing.
Because the cut version removes most of the shocking scenes and bloody effects it really has damaged the reputation of the uncut original.
I have watched almost ever horror film worth effort from the 1980's, and I can safely say that Nightmare ranks close to the top of the list.
Atmospheric, quality performances, original script, nicely shot and the scenes of horror are at the top of there game and brutal. There are so many horror films from the 1980's that people talk about because they were the most mainstream, but real fans of horror will know about films like nightmare.
Its an all round quality production and its no nonsense horror, unlike many films from the 80's where you laugh because of the bad dialogue, shoddy acting, poor effects or talentless script. Nightmare really delivers horror in a way other movies fail to do.
Parts of the movie can seem a little slow, but if you hang in there you get the rewards. Unlike other horror of that period it has aged well in comparison. After watching I sat back satisfied and thought to myself "that's what a real horror movie should look like"
Because the cut version removes most of the shocking scenes and bloody effects it really has damaged the reputation of the uncut original.
I have watched almost ever horror film worth effort from the 1980's, and I can safely say that Nightmare ranks close to the top of the list.
Atmospheric, quality performances, original script, nicely shot and the scenes of horror are at the top of there game and brutal. There are so many horror films from the 1980's that people talk about because they were the most mainstream, but real fans of horror will know about films like nightmare.
Its an all round quality production and its no nonsense horror, unlike many films from the 80's where you laugh because of the bad dialogue, shoddy acting, poor effects or talentless script. Nightmare really delivers horror in a way other movies fail to do.
Parts of the movie can seem a little slow, but if you hang in there you get the rewards. Unlike other horror of that period it has aged well in comparison. After watching I sat back satisfied and thought to myself "that's what a real horror movie should look like"
The 1981 splatter film NIGHTMARE hearkens back to a long-passed time in American horror cinema when "slasher" flicks were not only excessively gory, but also deeply disturbing in their underlying themes. These films not only outraged elitist film critics and general audiences, but also worried many horror film enthusiasts who felt that such films had "gone too far" in their uncompromising brutality. While a few of these films, most notably William Lustig's masterful MANIAC (1980), have attained cult status and been rereleased to DVD and VHS, most of these films have fallen out of print and into obscurity. Unfortunately, this is the case with NIGHTMARE, one of the better examples of the visceral, uncompromising horror films of the late 1970s and early 1980s.
Admittedly, this film does not start off very well. The first 30 minutes or so are pretty sloppy and hard to follow, largely because of choppy editing. However, once the film's story gets on track, what follows is a truly disturbing and horrific splatter film. Director Romano Scavolini, obviously working with a very low budget, nevertheless delivers some genuine suspense and adds touches of style (though he can't touch Dario Argento). The acting by the cast of unknowns is also surprisingly good. While the music during the opening and closing credits is pretty lousy, the score during the rest of the film is terrific, effectively creating an atmosphere of dread and fear. Of course, there's also the unforgettable gore effects by Tom Savini, displayed most spectacularly at the film's finale.
It goes without question that NIGHTMARE is definitely not for all tastes. Non-horror fans should stay far, far away. Additionally, I must note that more than any film I have ever seen, this film should not be viewed by children or impressionable young adults. However, hardcore fans of horror should definitely give this example of a bygone era a look. Watch this with some teeny-bopper flick like I STILL KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER and see which film leaves a longer lasting impression.
**1/2 out of ****
Admittedly, this film does not start off very well. The first 30 minutes or so are pretty sloppy and hard to follow, largely because of choppy editing. However, once the film's story gets on track, what follows is a truly disturbing and horrific splatter film. Director Romano Scavolini, obviously working with a very low budget, nevertheless delivers some genuine suspense and adds touches of style (though he can't touch Dario Argento). The acting by the cast of unknowns is also surprisingly good. While the music during the opening and closing credits is pretty lousy, the score during the rest of the film is terrific, effectively creating an atmosphere of dread and fear. Of course, there's also the unforgettable gore effects by Tom Savini, displayed most spectacularly at the film's finale.
It goes without question that NIGHTMARE is definitely not for all tastes. Non-horror fans should stay far, far away. Additionally, I must note that more than any film I have ever seen, this film should not be viewed by children or impressionable young adults. However, hardcore fans of horror should definitely give this example of a bygone era a look. Watch this with some teeny-bopper flick like I STILL KNOW WHAT YOU DID LAST SUMMER and see which film leaves a longer lasting impression.
**1/2 out of ****
OK i'm a little rusty right now when it comes to reviews as I haven't written one in years.
I won't bother explaining the plot, courtesy of the IMDb plot profile and other users you should be able to get a rough idea about it yourself.
So lets get down to the nitty gritty. Nightmare(s) (in a damaged brain) is kind of like the horror film you watch through the eyes of a child. Remember when you were a kid and horrors weren't so much entertaining as they were (mildly) traumatising? That would give you sleepless nights for quite some time? Well nightmare is one of those films that can have that effect on you AS AN ADULT.
Imagine the original 'texas chain saw massacre' but a lot more psychological and involving children, and A lot more gore, and you get the rough idea of what this film is all about.
Now I'm a big fan of horror, I can sit through (almost) anything but I've seen this film one and a half times (the uncut version) and have had it for quite some time. And thats NOT because the film is bad, its cause its so frigging' creepy. First time was a curiosity as I'd heard so much about it and was desperate to see why it had been banned, the second (half) time was because I hadn't seen it in a while and fancied giving it a second go. I couldn't do it! It really is one of those type of horrors thats hard to sit through, its tone is so sinister and you feel almost perverted and sick and evil for just watching it, even though there are no real animal killings or anything like cannibal holocaust/ferox and it's only a movie and nothing more.
Anyways, if you like genuine, creepy, under the skin horror then this one is for you. If, however, your not a fan of the whole 'grind-house' scene, don't like films with low production values and risible acting and prefer your horror to be modern, over produced and polished, then avoid this one.
In either case its very underrated as being 'one of the scariest horror films of all time'.
I won't bother explaining the plot, courtesy of the IMDb plot profile and other users you should be able to get a rough idea about it yourself.
So lets get down to the nitty gritty. Nightmare(s) (in a damaged brain) is kind of like the horror film you watch through the eyes of a child. Remember when you were a kid and horrors weren't so much entertaining as they were (mildly) traumatising? That would give you sleepless nights for quite some time? Well nightmare is one of those films that can have that effect on you AS AN ADULT.
Imagine the original 'texas chain saw massacre' but a lot more psychological and involving children, and A lot more gore, and you get the rough idea of what this film is all about.
Now I'm a big fan of horror, I can sit through (almost) anything but I've seen this film one and a half times (the uncut version) and have had it for quite some time. And thats NOT because the film is bad, its cause its so frigging' creepy. First time was a curiosity as I'd heard so much about it and was desperate to see why it had been banned, the second (half) time was because I hadn't seen it in a while and fancied giving it a second go. I couldn't do it! It really is one of those type of horrors thats hard to sit through, its tone is so sinister and you feel almost perverted and sick and evil for just watching it, even though there are no real animal killings or anything like cannibal holocaust/ferox and it's only a movie and nothing more.
Anyways, if you like genuine, creepy, under the skin horror then this one is for you. If, however, your not a fan of the whole 'grind-house' scene, don't like films with low production values and risible acting and prefer your horror to be modern, over produced and polished, then avoid this one.
In either case its very underrated as being 'one of the scariest horror films of all time'.
Did you know
- TriviaThe film's original UK distributor was sent to prison for releasing an unapproved version.
- GoofsAccording to his patient record displayed on the computer screen, George suffers from "schizophernia" (spelling error).
- Quotes
Man with Cigar: SORRY? You lose a dangerously psychotic patient from a secret experimental drug program, and all you can say is "I'm sorry"?
- Alternate versionsThe original UK cinema version was heavily cut by the BBFC with edits made to closeups of throat slitting and repeated stabs during the telephone murder, the pick axe killing, and axe blows (including blood frothing from a man's head) during the climactic flashback. The film was then listed and banned as an official video nasty, and a successful prosecution was brought against the distributing company World of Video 2000 in 1984 for releasing an unauthorized video version (which was 1 min longer than the cut cinema print). The film was finally granted a video certificate in 2002 though the print submitted was an edited U.S version, which restores the ice pick murder and around 1 minute of dialogue scenes but still has edits to the throat slashing/stabbing scene and some brief cuts to the climactic flashback nightmare murder. Finally in 2015 was the uncut version given an 18 rating from BBFC.
- ConnectionsFeatured in Terror Tape (1985)
- SoundtracksNecessary Evil
Sung by Those Northern Women
Music and Lyrics by Jack Eric Williams
Details
- Release date
- Countries of origin
- Language
- Also known as
- Baño de sangre
- Filming locations
- Merritt Island, Florida, USA(interior)
- Production company
- See more company credits at IMDbPro
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was Cauchemars à Daytona Beach (1981) officially released in India in English?
Answer