TALES FROM THE DARKSIDE: THE MOVIE
A review in the public domain
by The Phantom
(baumgart@esquire.dpw.com)
The Phantom has always been an avid admirer of Steven King and George Romero, so when CREEPSHOW was released in 1982, the Phantom was first in line to see it. Although it does not rank as one of the best (or even one of the better) horror films of all time, it did have a certain unique style and charm, and it combined just the right amounts of humor, camp, gross-outs and scares to keep its audience entertained throughout its five short "tales of terror."
CREEPSHOW was also the first horror film in a long while to present short "ghost stories" rather than one full-length tale. Since then, however, there have been several films that have attempted CREEPSHOW's unique style; some, like TWILIGHT ZONE -- THE MOVIE and CREEPSHOW 2, succeeded in part; others, like NIGHTMARES and CAT'S EYE, failed utterly and have since been relegated to positions of honor (right behind the Big Gulp displays) in 7-11s across the country.
The Phantom has also been an on again, off again admirer of the television show "Tales From the Darkside" (the shows never seemed consistently good enough to watch on a regular basis, and the enlightened station managers of the shadowy independent television stations on which "Tales" is broadcast tend to hide the show on sunny weekend afternoons and late on weekday nights between thirty-minute hair replacement system commercials and six-hour-long "No Money Down" scams), so it was with high hopes that the Phantom went to see TALES FROM THE DARKSIDE: THE MOVIE. (The Phantom apologizes profusely for that last sentence, and invites his phans to take a moment to catch their breath before going on to the next.) After all, the best episodes on "Tales" are quite good -- at least as good as any of the classic Twilight Zone episodes -- and the majority are frequently innovative and clever.
Besides, the Phantom is also a sucker for anything Romero does, and has been ever since NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD. Since he and King did such a good job with CREEPSHOW, it stands to reason that TALES would be a worthy sequel.
But alas, the ads for TALES tell tales themselves. The film is promoted as being "from" Romero and King, but in fact only one of the three tales is "from" them. And that one tale ("Cat From Hell") isn't even directed by Romero; instead he and King co-wrote it. (The Phantom is not, of course, disappointed that King didn't direct any or all of the film; ever since MAXIMUM OVERDRIVE the Phantom has been awakening with cold sweats over the prospect that King might once again be allowed to step behind a camera and inflict another of his cinematic visions upon his adoring and naive public.)
The tip-off should have been the credit given to Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, who even when alive had little experience writing or directing horror films. Now that Sir Arthur is no longer with us, his being listed as one of the "from"s should have sounded warning bells of fraudulent advertising at least, and tedious and predictable horror "tales" at worst.
But tedious and predictable do not do TALES justice. This is a horror film for people who do not like surprises, or perhaps people who are always 20 minutes behind Angela Lansbury each Sunday evening. As the film plodded from one "chilling" tale to the next, the Phantom found himself wondering whether it were still possible to make a horror film that was neither ridiculous (like our friends THE FIRST POWER and THE GUARDIAN) nor tedious. And he nearly fainted dead away in disbelief when the first tale turned out to be about a mummy that -- no, the Phantom won't give away the chilling surprise. Oh, all right, the mummy ACTUALLY COMES TO LIFE AND KILLS PEOPLE! EEEK! The Phantom was so scared he nearly dropped his popcorn. Scarier still is the thought that even Sir Arthur (who unfortunately is given "Inspired by a story by" credit) is not as old as this threadbare tale. If only Bud and Lou were still alive....
One would think that the director, John Harrison (who directed the entire film), would have learned from the horrifyingly bad "Cigar Store Indian" tale in CREEPSHOW 2; dead things and/or inanimate objects coming to life went out with Karloff and Lugosi, and in fact it's been nearly 60 years since someone made a good horror film that featured a mummy. Hammer Films knew how to do it then, but alas, neither Sir Arthur nor John Harrison seem to know how to do it now. Sir Arthur, at least, has the excuse of being otherwise occupied decomposing at the moment, so we can forgive him; but Michael McDowell (who also worked on BEETLEJUICE) is still among the living and can therefore still be held responsible for his script.
Of the two tales that follow, only "Cat From Hell" is interesting, and then only because of Buster Poindexter's outrageous performance as a feline hit man. The final tale, "Lover's Vow," features some very nice creature effects (done by FX wizard Dick Smith), but as its plot line is more transparent than the film stock on which it develops, the Phantom will refrain from summarizing it here for fear that it might bubble and blacken under the bright light of criticism.
The film would be a near-total letdown if it were not for the "wrapper" segments that feature a perfectly cast and perfectly unflappable Deborah Harry as a slightly deranged housewife planning a dinner party. Her performance in TALES is nearly as entertaining as were the comic book segues in CREEPSHOW, and she gives us all something to stick around for as each tale slowly drowns under the weight of an impossible load of exposition.
That exposition is the central problem with TALES FROM THE DARKSIDE (well, that and the fact that "darkside" has been confounding the Phantom's spell checker all evening); if ghost stories told around a campfire were told like this, all the campers would be fast asleep before the teller could even get to the first cliche. (By the way, for those phans who may avoid this film even after it supplants the other 24-hour favorites behind the Big Gulp display, the Phantom wishes to point out that yes, the mummy tale does indeed contain the celebrated "closeup of mummy's hand as it emerges from coffin" scene. Happy 60th birthday, Mr. Scene! How we've enjoyed you through the years!)
In fact, the Phantom now understands at least one reason why CREEPSHOW was so much fun: each of its tales was short, sweet, and to the point. Romero has always understood that horror films are different from other kinds of films in that they exist solely to scare their audiences, not to engross them with complex character relationships and witty repartee (not that TALES could be said to boast either of these).
So perhaps Romero could have saved TALES, but perhaps not. There seems to have been so little effort put into this film that its title could be more appropriately TALES FROM THE DIM SIDE; the film, which like the television show on which it is loosely based, is a Laurel production -- so Romero must have had more to do with it than he's letting on -- but sadly, TALES FROM THE DARKSIDE is a film that will garner no one's laurels.
Fortunately, there is an alternative for those phans who decide not to subject themselves to the small-screen entertainment of TALES FROM THE DARK SIDE: a small, odd, but very effective horror film now in limited release called BRAIN DEAD. The Phantom saw BRAIN DEAD on a "Times Square double-bill" with TALES (that is, he saw TALES first then ran across Broadway in a desperate search for something that even remotely resembled a horror film), and he was very glad he did. He will have a full review of it next week (along with a review of Mark Lester's CLASS OF 1999), but for those phans who have an opportunity to see it, the Phantom heartly recommends BRAIN DEAD. Coincidentally, BRAIN DEAD was written by Charles Beaumont, one of the original writers for "The Twilight Zone," and it heartened the Phantom to see a horror film that was well-written, intelligent, and contained no mummies.
Or evil trees. Or stunt nuns.
: The Phantom
: baumgart@esquire.dpw.com
: {cmcl2,uunet}!esquire!baumgart
.
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews