Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss

"Castle Freak" - some thoughts

0 views
Skip to first unread message

The Rattler

unread,
Jun 8, 2001, 6:04:32 PM6/8/01
to
So I got "Castle Freak" in the post today and I've just finished watching
it. In case any of you were interested after my recent question about it,
I'd go with the recently polled alt.horror consensus in that it's "good
but not great". It's a neat little movie and surprisingly dark in tone
but it's budget lets it down and there's just too many flaws to let it
reach it's full potential.

What I did enjoy is that, and this is rarer than you may think these
days, it was just a HORROR film, in the 'classic' format, no ideas above
it's station and no attempts to be arty-farty, quirky, off-the-wall or
some clever metaphor for something else. In fact, my guess was that
Gordon's intention was to pay homage to the classic horror format with
this movie in which case he very nearly succeeds. The plot, while
following a good amount of genre 'conventions' and essentially just a
nifty variation on the good ol' "monster in the cellar" chesnut, is quite
well-thought-out and the movie's fast-paced enough to hold your interest.
What I really liked was the constant undercurrent of tragedy running
through it, in the tradition of the greats (ala "Frankenstein"), the
'creature', although sadistic and deplorable, was almost pitiable at
times, thanks largely to a superb, oddly human performance by Jonathan
Fuller. Also Jeffrey Combs (as ever) was fantastic I thought as the
tortured Father left destroyed by guilt for the tragic accident that cost
him his marriage and his son. The fact that the family bewitched by the
cellar creature *weren't* all "Full House" or "Family Ties" style sickly-
sweet was a refreshing change and one that added a sort of realism which
aided the film's effectiveness. Quickly going back to acting
performances, I thought the whole cast did a pretty good job -
considering the production values were so poor, you'd expect crap
performances but as well as the aforementioned two, the girl who played
Combs' blind daughter did an absolutely cracking job of portraying *very*
convincing terror and Barbara Crampton was, as usual, very good too
although disappointingly fully clothed throughout the duration. I still
say there should be a law against clothes enforced on Barbara Crampton
but I doubt I'd get it passed by government somehow...

I think what really let it down the most was the failure to exploit it's
own spooky atmosphere to the maximum potential. The script (although
possessing a couple of glaring lines of unforgivably trite dialogue) was
of a fairly high standard but the total lack of visual flair didn't do it
justice. Given the whole film was filmed in a castle and the castle
itself was quite breathtaking, there was plenty of scope for some eerie
visuals but sadly the photography was overwhelmingly pedestrian
throughout the whole flick and such aesthetic blandness managed to deaden
a lot of scenes which could have been nerve-shredding in the right hands.
If this had been a Hammer film, while Hammer were at their peak, say, it
would've been absolutely masterly, I reckon. That said, there are a
couple of moments where Gordon's gift for the genuinely macabre shines
through and your flesh creeps. The sight of the creature dressed only in
a bedsheet running around empty hallways with it's balls dangling out was
a strangely powerful image (that for some reason invoked memories of
Borowcyzk's "Bloodbath of Dr Jeckyll") and the anger in Fuller's
performance as he attacked his victims made the violence very unpleasant
viewing indeed, even though the actual onscreen gore was all trimmed as I
picked up the 18 rated UK release.

You know, even if I hadn't been warned here on alt.horror of the cuts,
I'd've noticed, they were *VERY*VERY* badly done and a prime example of
how crassly the BBFC can butcher the works of filmmakers without any care
or attention to detail. The worst example of this is (trying to avoid
spoilers here) where a group of characters discover some of the
creature's handiwork and the camera quite obviously keeps cutting between
the corpses and the group of people talking. The BBFC, deeming that we're
unfit to see the remains of these bodies, attempts to keep the camera
just on the people by cutting out whole chunks of dialogue mid-sentence
(even mid-word!) that occur while the camera is on the bodies, thus
rendering the scene (an important one at that) totally incoherant. Nice
work, boys. I know it's old hat, but it'll still never cease to amaze me
how insulting to the viewer's intelligence censorship can be sometimes.
I'm not really one of these obsessive ralliers on the subject nor do I
mind *TOO* much (except in principle) if some overtly graphic gore is
trimmed from my movie but when entire lines of dialogue are reduced to
choppy, illegible mumbles in the name of protecting my delicate eyes, I
have to admit I find it offensive.

But ranting aside, "Castle Freak" is a lovingly made movie and it's a
shame that the production values prevented it from being a classic. It
playfully uses a welter of horror cliches that would usually fall flat on
their faces (like a raging thunderstorm in the final dramatic showdown
scene or a fair few uses of the ol' "hand on the shoulder from out of the
dark" trick) to create a totally traditional, occasionally creepy and, at
times, an unnervingly mean-spirited horror movie that's original without
being smart-arsed and a decent enough way to while away 90 minutes or so.

--
"Ramalamalama Kenickie Kenickie!
Ramalamalama Kenickie Kenickie!"
**** Rattl...@hotmail.com

Kimberly

unread,
Jun 8, 2001, 8:33:52 PM6/8/01
to
No sir... I didn't like this one... in fact it gets a 2 letter review... PU
----------------------------------------------
"Some people never go crazy. What truly horrible lives they must lead"-Charles
Bukowski

The Rattler

unread,
Jun 8, 2001, 8:43:00 PM6/8/01
to
In article <20010608203352...@ng-cf1.aol.com>,
blue...@aol.comBiteMe says...

> No sir... I didn't like this one... in fact it gets a 2 letter review... PU

Elaborate? :) 1 line in response to 87 of them just isn't fair! ;)

Kimberly

unread,
Jun 8, 2001, 9:57:05 PM6/8/01
to
>From: rattl...@hotmail.com

>Elaborate? :) 1 line in response to 87 of them just isn't fair! ;)

Elaborate? Hmmm... how about I thought it REALLY sucked?

Neil Sarver

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 1:11:22 AM6/9/01
to
Kimberly wrote:
> No sir... I didn't like this one... in fact it gets a 2 letter review... PU

Well, there's an opinion that doesn't deserve to be dignified or
respected.

Sheesh!

--
Neil
--
The Bleeding Tree
http://www.geocities.com/Bleeding_Tree/
--
"I was a good filmmaker before I sold out."
-- Penelope Spheeris

Kimberly

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 2:19:05 AM6/9/01
to
>From: Neil Sarver

>Well, there's an opinion that doesn't deserve to be dignified or
>respected.
>
>Sheesh!

And your point would be.............. ?

The Rattler

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 4:50:45 AM6/9/01
to
In article <20010608215705...@ng-ma1.aol.com>,
blue...@aol.comBiteMe says...

> >Elaborate? :) 1 line in response to 87 of them just isn't fair! ;)
>
> Elaborate? Hmmm... how about I thought it REALLY sucked?

What didn't you like about it? I admit that the production values and the
visuals left a lot to be desired but it wasn't a bad film by any stretch
IMHO. Given that it was on Full Moon, I think it stands head and
shoulders above it's peers like "Retro Puppet Master"!

Kimberly

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 5:56:46 AM6/9/01
to
>From: rattl...@hotmail.com (The Rattler)

>What didn't you like about it? I admit that the production values and the
>visuals left a lot to be desired but it wasn't a bad film by any stretch
>IMHO. Given that it was on Full Moon, I think it stands head and
>shoulders above it's peers like "Retro Puppet Master"!


Ok... now bear with me seeing as it's been a few years since I've seen it and
have never bothered to give it another go since...I didn't like the story... I
didn't like the acting... I wanted to like it... but didn't. I didn't think it
lived up to the hype I had heard about it... I've seen alot better... then
again I've also seen alot worse. I just found the movie to be very boring and
over rated :)

Walter Lane

unread,
Jun 9, 2001, 6:36:43 AM6/9/01
to
It was an awful movie. I was embarrassed for Jeffrey Combs.

--
If you liked LEFT BEHIND,
look over FEARMONGER
@ http://www.horroresq.com

"The Rattler" <rattl...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.158b5c496...@news.demon.co.uk...

KillCity

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 1:06:41 AM6/10/01
to
> prevented it from being a classic. It
>playfully uses a welter of horror cliches that would usually fall flat on
>their faces (like a raging thunderstorm in the final dramatic showdown
>scene or a fair few uses of the ol' "hand on the shoulder from out of the
>dark" trick) to create a totally traditional, occasionally creepy and, at
>times, an unnervingly mean-spirited horror movie that's original without
>being smart-arsed and a decent enough way to while away 90 minutes or so.

AMEN TO THAT!
I really enjoyed Castle Freak, it's a modest comeback film for Gordon. I've
also heard that PIT AND THE PENDULUM and FORTRESS are very worthwhile movies as
well....hope to catch them soon.
Gene
"Schools are for fish."
Rick Strange

"The only reason I'm in Hollywood
is I lack the moral courage to
turn down the money."
-Marlon Brando


KillCity

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 1:11:21 AM6/10/01
to
One more thing: Castle Freak is indeed a refreshing alternative to, even a
rebellion against, "smart ass" horror crapola like SCREAM, the new films
Amorros Perros (sp?), Memento, and Blow are welcomed denials of the cartoon
slick, hip, and cloyingly smartass Tarantino-infected wave of indie crime
films.
Oh yeah: I just heard another rumour about OFF SEASON being optioned again.
Any confirmations?

blowup

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 6:15:10 AM6/10/01
to
I also enjoyed it . The freak was freaky, the castle creepy, and Combs was
terrif, way better than his Frighteners paycheck role..

dave

"KillCity" <killc...@aol.compton> wrote in message
news:20010610011121...@ng-mg1.aol.com...

bruce h

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 1:12:09 PM6/10/01
to
>the new films
>Amorros Perros (sp?), Memento,

haven't seen Amorros Perros yet but my semi-local arthouse is playing it, is it
worth checking out. caught Momento a few weeks back and was blown away, glad to
see i'm not the only one on here that bothered to go see it. great stuff
bruce h
______________________________________
"All these guys died with their cocks bitten off."
"Could be a small animal"
- Lady Terminator

Burgle.Net: reviews + tapes for sale
Updated Version Coming Soon!
George Eastman Tribute Page coming pre-2005!

KillCity

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 7:11:27 PM6/10/01
to
Oops, my post was misworded. What I meant was (for anyone who has yet to
killfile me and needed a clarification...)

>One more thing: Castle Freak is indeed a refreshing alternative to, even a

>rebellion against, "smart ass" horror crapola like Scream. Similarly, the new


films Amorros Perros (sp?), Memento, and Blow are welcomed denials of the
cartoon slick, hip, and cloyingly smartass Tarantino-infected wave of indie
crime
>films.

By the way, I am fucking sick of Quentin Tarantino.

KillCity

unread,
Jun 10, 2001, 7:20:17 PM6/10/01
to
>haven't seen Amorros Perros yet but my semi-local arthouse is playing it, is
>it
>worth checking out. caught Momento a few weeks back and was blown away, glad
>to
>see i'm not the only one on here that bothered to go see it. great stuff
> bruce h

Memento was fucking amazing, I loved every brilliant frame of it. Amorros is a
film I got an advance screener of and haven't finished it yet, but pretty hyper
violent and brutal, with many authentic dogfight scenes, which makes the film
off limits to dog lovers. Me, I hate and abhor the canine species,
(bloodthirsty, groveling, and emotionally shallow shitters that they are) so I
didn't mind that much, but still found it slightly offensive. If you're gonna
kill something for art, kill a politician, lawyer, or Young Republican, and
leave the animals alone.
Someone (one of the latest trollies I think) posted something about the bird
killed in OPERA recently....that bird was obviously fake, wasn't it? I haven't
screened OPERA since 1991.
Gene

Neil Sarver

unread,
Jun 11, 2001, 1:51:54 AM6/11/01
to
KillCity wrote:
> I really enjoyed Castle Freak, it's a modest comeback film for Gordon. I've
> also heard that PIT AND THE PENDULUM and FORTRESS are very worthwhile movies as
> well....hope to catch them soon.

THE PIT & THE PENDULUM was alright. It certainly had moments, but I was
a little disappointed.

FORTESS was definitely a good one. I enjoyed it quite well on its own
level.

gareth young

unread,
Jun 11, 2001, 1:01:55 PM6/11/01
to

"KillCity" <killc...@aol.compton> wrote in message
news:20010610192017...@ng-fg1.aol.com...

> >haven't seen Amorros Perros yet but my semi-local arthouse is playing it,
is
> >it
> >worth checking out. caught Momento a few weeks back and was blown away,
glad
> >to
> >see i'm not the only one on here that bothered to go see it. great stuff
> > bruce h
>
> Memento was fucking amazing, I loved every brilliant frame of it. Amorros
is a
> film I got an advance screener of and haven't finished it yet, but pretty
hyper
> violent and brutal, with many authentic dogfight scenes, which makes the
film
> off limits to dog lovers.

not exactly.
here in the uk there's actually a law against animal cruelty in films
regardless of context-the lizard scene in deep red for example.
amorros however has been released uncut due to none of the cruelty being
real despite appearing so-deodata take note!


--
Gareth.
quote of the day.....
'your'e so disgusting,you say he is sex lupines and sweep him away'

bruce h

unread,
Jun 11, 2001, 5:39:16 PM6/11/01
to
>FORTESS was definitely a good one. I enjoyed it quite well on its own
>level.

i enjoyed it a lot as well, it's a damn shame no one can release it with it's
gore intact (it's very noticably trimmed in several spots).

0 new messages