La Terreur des morts-vivants

There's not much to like about Norman J. Warren's work…. 'Inseminoid' (a.ka Horror Planet) was like the lamest Alien rip-off ever made and 'Satan's Slave' was a dreadfully tedious vehicle about a devil-worshiping cult (it starred horror maestro Michael Gough, but still…). To think those two disappointment almost held me from watching this 'Terror'! This film is Warren's finest achievement! A modestly produced, but blood-soaked and nasty horror film that'll keep you entertained for a good 80 minutes. The plot of 'Terror' is standard shlock, handling about a film producer who inadvertently awakened the spirit of an ancestral witch while shooting a film about his own family's history. Things start to go horribly wrong the film premieres in the old family mansion and the young niece gets possessed with the witch's soul. The film doesn't contain the slightest bit of continuity and numerous murders are completely random. Not one horror lover will complain about this, though, since every single slashing is darn gruesome and presented with the nastiest make-up effects possible. There are a few (beautiful) young girls stabbed to death and pinned to a tree, a film crew member is crushed by the set pieces, a cop is road-killed by his own car and there are multiple neat close-ups of slit throats and severed corpses! Every killing is a horror feast and – sometimes – that's all there is needed to satisfy fans of the genre. At some points, Warren even succeeds in creating tension through atmospheric camera-work! How about that? The sequence where the blond girl is chased through the woods almost feels like 'The Blair Witch Project' 20 years ahead of its time! Although the film doesn't feature an actual climax (everybody dies…period!) or no depth in general, it's still receives warm recommendation thanks to the bright dialogue, stunning camera-work and loads of fun it delivers.

When Norman J.Warren (auteur of such shrill, purposely gruesome films as Inseminoid) and exploitation stalwart David McGillivray got together in the late seventies to create this low-budget shocker, the end result could only be a solid winner, and TERROR delivers the goods. It's not for all tastes, but the effective atmosphere (Warren had obviously seen a few Dario Argento films, which helps) and the well-staged scenes of death and supernatural mayhem in the last half of the film are worth the price of admission alone. It's certainly head and shoulders above the 'typical' British horror films of the day - such as Alan Birkinshaw's atrocious KILLER'S MOON and THE LEGACY, a tedious schlock-fest in which Who vocalist Roger Daltrey dies during a trachaeotomy to remove a fishbone he never ate(!) - and the widescreen photography, coupled with appropriately garish colours courtesy of (one assumes) outmoded film stock, looks superb. There's also a neat cameo from Milton Reid, one of those "I know his face, but what's his name?" actors if ever there was one, and a decapitation set-piece that curiously plays like a low-budget homage to David Warner's grisly death in THE OMEN, whilst pointing the way forward to the lift-shaft carnage in that film's lackluster sequel. This is a solid-gold classic example of the kind of film that would never get made nowadays, anywhere, and will undoubtedly bring back fond memories of late-night horror double features down at the local fleapit for British viewers of a certain age.

I'm a sucker for "Alien" ripoffs, so of course Norman J. Warren's cheesy 1980 homage, "Inseminoid" (a.k.a. Horror Planet), is a fave of mine.

Considering the relatively high production values of that flick, I thought I'd give the rest of his early horror movies a try. I obtained the Anchor Bay UK (R2) coffin boxset, which contains "Terror" (1978), as well as two previous horror flicks lensed by Warren ("Satan's Slave" from 1976 and "Prey" from 1977).

To give proper perspective to "Terror," I think it helps to compare it to Warren's earlier horror films in a chronological fashion.

But in case you don't feel like reading this entire post, here's the upshot: Norman J. Warren's straight-up horror films spiral downward in quality as time goes on; since "Terror" is one of his later films, it stinks the most. Sorry, but the stench cannot be covered up.

Without a doubt, Norman J. Warren started on a high note. His first full-length horror feature, "Satan's Slave" (1976), regardless of the absurd title, is a real gem of mid-70's horror (woman meets her evil uncle for the first time when her parents die in a car crash; uncle decides to use his stranded niece in a ritual to reincarnate an ancient witch). Maybe I was in a particularly receptive state when I popped it in, but it occurred to me that "Satan's Slave" was a real independent 70's gem with some poetic photography and some solid grue. It felt like "Let's Scare Jessica to Death" or even the lesser "The Legacy" at times. The film is caught somewhere between the then-dying Hammer Gothic style and the rise of contemporary horror films. Its carefully crafted and moody jazz-ensemble music, and its isolated, wintry English country manor setting make it a real fun time. They don't make them like this anymore. (And I thought I had perused every worthwhile 70's horror movie ever made. I was very grateful to be wrong.)

Then came "Prey" (a.k.a. Alien Prey, 1977). Shot in a week or two and with little money, the film has an interesting premise (alien with Wolfman Jack fangs crashes on an English country estate; he is here to scout out whether or not humans are edible). It effectively uses some claustrophobic settings, and the plot takes some well-timed twists. But it doesn't begin to stand up to the moodiness, and especially sympathy for the characters, that "Satan's Slave" generates. "Prey" is hampered by only having three players. The conversations seem to go round and round confusingly amongst the two lesbians and the disguised alien, and the tension is very on-again off-again. The film is inconsistent; it drags terribly in places; the photography seems rushed or crudely framed. And there's the infamous slo-mo drowning scene in the dirty pond--that goes on and on and on...

Then came "Terror" (1978), the absolute worst of the lot. The film (witch lays an ancient curse on a family which comes to pass as we watch) is apparently an homage to Argento's "Suspiria" (though I'd never, never be able to tell). Trust me: I live for confusing horror movies pasted together with hoary clichés, but this "film-like product" lacks basic structure. The characters are so thin that they seem to disappear when they turn sideways. I couldn't even remember their names, which is never a good sign. Scenes seem strung together at random; telegraphed red herrings abound. Nudity just thrown in...because. There is a "film within a film" motif used to some effect, but we've seen this done much better by others. The film is populated by characters we don't care about because we don't know them in the most rudimentary ways. I had no problem going to the fridge during this one.

It is interesting (indeed, fascinating) to juxtapose a gem like "Satan's Slave" against Warren's later "Terror" (which actually had a bigger budget; by that time, Warren had earned a bit of a name for himself too, but apparently that had little effect on quality). Take my word for it: "Terror" is by far the weaker film, thinner, less interesting, less nostalgic-feeling, less moody, less filling. It is, without question, the lowest point in the UK boxset.

OK, now that I've fulfilled my IMDb obligation, I can go pop the next DVD of the boxset into my player: A widescreen version of "Inseminoid!"

I'm easily pleased, a late night horror film doesn't have to make a lot of sense to keep me watching but Terror(1979) was a film I genuinely struggled to watch to the end. It opens with a home made horror film being screened and its makers tittering over it. What follows is no better and certainly no more convincing. Excruciating acting abounds as an ancient curse returns..yawn. It sums up everything that is truly awful about 70s horror films. The women in it are 'naice' girls who have clearly had little experience acting and emote their every line and show uncertainty by starting to talk, pausing and then starting again. The awful bonhomie and hipness of the male characters is equally awful. It really does make little sense either. I especially liked the part where the girl returns home and is seen washing copious amounts of blood from her hands but her flatmate, who she barely knows, doesn't think to mention this to the police. There's clearly a rational explanation of course. Another outstanding part is when a woman is chased through the woods by a man with a knife. She takes refuge in a shed which he briefly attacks. Less than a minute later she decides it is probably safe to go outside (as you would of course) and is stabbed to death in perhaps the least enthusiastic attacking scene ever put to film. In short there isn't even any comedy value to be gained from this as a bad movie, it is just dire and is one of the least interesting films I have ever seen.

A witch's curse causes bad things to happen to all the people involved in the production of a horror movie and the witch herself might have possessed one of its stars.

Clearly inspired by the work of Dario Argento, Terror is one of those movies where it's best to leave logic at the door and enjoy the gory set pieces and colorful lighting. It starts off slow and even frustrating since there's not a lot of plot or character development to latch on to, but something happens midway through where, if you just turn off your brain and go along for the ride, you'll have a good time.