Linbeymusol Wonderful character development!

Interesteg What makes it different from others?

Cleveronix A different way of telling a story

RipDelight This is a tender, generous movie that likes its characters and presents them as real people, full of flaws and strengths.

thelastblogontheleft OH MAN, this movie was something. I'll preface this by saying that Nate actually chose this one. Considering how many horror movies I make him watch in the month of October (okay, who am I kidding, it never really ends), it seems only fair to let him choose which one we watch once in a while. If you pair a ridiculous and loosely sci-fi plot with the cinematic style of the 70s, Nate is going to be on board, so we dove right into The Dark, and… it was an adventure.Apparently Tobe Hooper was originally hired to direct this — he's actually listed as an uncredited director on IMDb — and it pains me to think of how much cooler it could have possibly been. When he signed on, the storyline was quite a bit different… but then he fell behind schedule and the producers fired him and brought on John "Bud" Cardos, who had previously done quite a bit of acting and working as a stuntman in addition to directing a few other feature films. The plot was changed pretty significantly towards the end of the shoot — in an effort to cash in on the recent success of Alien — and I think the entire film suffered as a result.There really isn't much more to the plot than there's a mysterious killer prowling the streets of Los Angeles and everyone is trying to either avoid getting killed or catch the killer or both.** SPOILERS! **So I actually loved the opening scene of this film. The initial crawl, actually, was awesome, too… but I wasn't prepared for how little any of that would really come into play (aside from the fact that they just wanted to cover their asses so they could show a vaguely otherwordly creature instead of just a dude killing people). The music was all whispers and chaotic piano punctuated with the clicking of heels on pavement… the lighting was so dark and contrasted that you could only see the occasional glimpse of blonde hair in a beam of light or shoes whisking along the ground… it was great.The creature itself — I'm not even sure what to refer to him as, or even that it IS for sure a "him", though they referred to it as The Mangler in the movie — is not much more than a less hairy werewolf in jeans. But wait, it can shoot lasers out of its eyes! Lasers that often don't seem like they're even coming from its eyes OR hitting its targets, but dammit, they are somehow still super effective! It growls and snarls a lot and it has superhuman strength (but don't they all?) but it limps along clumsily when it chases people. Ah, logic.The cops, Detective Mooney (Richard Jaeckel) and his donut-eating companion, Detective Jack Bresler (Biff Elliot), are awful. Like they literally do nothing but scowl and pick fights with random people until the end, when Mooney is ONLY in the right place at the right time because he's obsessed with Roy Warner (William Devane), a man he had once helped get put into prison.But it had some highlights, too. I loved the entire scene with "Sherm" (Keenan Wynn) and Zoe (Cathy Lee Crosby) in the parking garage, from him hilariously scaring her (twice) to his fevered sprinting from what he imagines may be the killer. At one point, Zoe asks him "you aren't afraid of the dark, are you?" and he responds with, "No, I'm afraid of what's in it". Awesome. I also loved seeing Casey Kasem as the police pathologist (I only wish he had played a more central role).It has all of the usual oversights of a crappy sci-fi B-movie. The effects are pretty terrible. The creature — The Mangler, the alien, the werewolf, whatever it is — has absolutely no backstory, explanation, or motive. Two characters watch The Mangler break through a wall of concrete blocks WITH ITS BARE HANDS and then not a minute later think they can hold it back with a locked wooden door. There are all kinds of mentions of The Mangler beheading and eviscerating its victims… but any time we see someone get killed, his laser eyes seem to just explode them. WHICH IS IT, WRITERS? Also, the thing is seemingly unaffected by countless bullets being fired at it, but ends up literally just going POOF! and exploding when touched by fire. Okay?Also, the very last scene shows a blind man — one who had been shown repeatedly throughout the film but never referenced directly — as a voice-over tells us that "only those who walk forever in darkness will have nothing to fear in the dark" and like DAMN that would be kind of a cool line if the movie itself wasn't such a disjointed mess. Come on, Tobe, come back around and do this thing for real.But despite all of that — every single bit — I STILL ENJOYED THIS MOVIE. This is the formula that can never be pinned down, friends. A movie can have everything it possibly should to be a quality movie and can be hated… and a movie can be a hot mess of bad effects and stale acting and a plot that is barely hanging together by some weak threads and it can be super fun. This firmly falls into the latter category. So, ya know, go give it a watch.

edeighton This movie was TERRIBLE! But, I did some research to figure out how such a piece of garbage makes it to theaters.1.) Dick Clark from American Bandstand wanted to produce a horror movie so he bought a script/novelization about a zombie confederate soldier killing people on the streets of 1979 Los Angeles. That is why much of the dialogue in the film references a "zombie mangler" 2.) Tobe Hooper (Texas Chainsaw Massacre) is brought on as a high paid director paid largely in advance. Tobe Hooper changes the script so that the killer is now a deformed mentally sick kid who was locked in his parents attic for 20 years and then escapes into the streets of 1979 Los Angeles. But many references to the killer being a zombie remain in the script.3.) Tobe Hooper shoots the film for a little over a day and then quits (remaining paid) over irreconcilable differences with producer Dick Clark about how the movie should look. Hooper's film is not used at all in what was released to theaters. But Hooper's paycheck drastically reduced what money remained in the budget for this film.4.) John "Bud" Cardos is hired to finish the vast majority of the film (the entire film). Cardos is a far less talented director than Hooper and the script is in shambles.5.) After the film is finished being shot, it is test screened. The test screens reveal that people hate this movie.6.) With the popularity of Star Wars (1977), Dick Clark decided that he would rather have a movie about aliens instead of a horror movie.7.) They re-shoot a Star Wars-like opening crawl and a closing crawl which explains that the whole movie was really about aliens despite clear references in the movie to zombies and manglers. Test screeners still hate the movie.8.) They re-edit a few scenes and super impose Star Wars-like laser beams shooting out of the killer's eyes and add Death Star-like explosions to the victims that originally had their heads ripped off.9.) Test screen audiences still hate the movie. They re-shoot portions of the end scene so that now some of the police shooting at the Zombie get blown up by laser beams.10.) Rather than test screen the film any further, they release this piece of garbage into theaters in California and Seattle and it is a dismal failure. It gets limited release into some drive ins in the mid-west and then some limited release onto video.*Did anyone else notice cameos by the D.J. Casey Caseem and by the black actor who played Tubbs on Miami Vice? * Best Quote of the movie - "That's because half the male population of Los Angeles is staying up late and watching the news trying to figure out how to get into your Paaaaaaants!"

Leofwine_draca For the most part a middling, under-developed crime thriller, THE DARK is a really disappointing film with a great premise. I mean, the idea of a decapitating alien killer stalking L.A. sounds like the perfect opportunity for lots of excitement, scares, cheesy special effects and gore. Well, we get the cheesy special effects all right (albeit briefly) but sadly none of those other things. THE DARK is happy to wade along through cliché-land, shafting genre fans by relying on boring police procedural work while the alien himself is relegated to the background, making almost a cameo appearance and getting very little screen time. I mean, if I wanted drama, romance and human intrigue, I'd watch a soap, not a dark thriller such as this! This is a very odd film with a disjointed feel. I mean, it's firmly rooted in depressing reality until this ugly alien with laser eyes suddenly shows up. The alien is like some monster from STAR TREK or something and totally out of place. The investigation into the murders is intercut with some brief clips of people being zapped and exploded by the alien, which just isn't fair. The makeup itself is pretty good but the alien looks more like a Neanderthal than an extraterrestrial. And don't get me started on those laser eyes!The acting here is pretty stolid and unremarkable, especially the usually reliable William Devane. Then again he is given absolutely nothing to do other than look brooding - and with his dark glasses and long hair, he looks rather silly. Cathy Lee Crosby is an irritating blonde reporter who deserves to die and expresses no charisma, while Keenan Wynn is wasted in a role which has no purpose. The policemen investigating the case also have no personalities, so everybody here is pretty interchangeable. When a policeman dies at the end of the film, we're obviously supposed to think "that's so sad" but the more realistic response is "we're supposed to care?". A mad clairvoyant character is also extremely grating and sadly she doesn't get her skull torn off.Where this film does succeed is in the sudden, unexpected action-packed finale, which is everything a monster movie could wish to be. The alien takes on an entire police force, with bodies flying everywhere and all manner of chaos and destruction. It's excellent. If only the rest of the film could have been as exciting as this. Gorehounds need not apply either, as there are exactly three seconds of gore in this film (admittedly a very good bit of a decapitated corpse stumbling over). In the end, if you're looking for an "alien killer stalks L.A." type film, then PREDATOR 2 would be a safer and far more enjoyable bet.

peterpants66 A monster that strangely resembles a wild cat with a varsity jacket is roaming the city, loose, and tearing stuff up. The local detective is a wise guy from the old school that solves crimes by eating donuts and abusing his ex-wife. This movie is really cool for the segments with the killer, but those segments compiled are probably three minutes. The cop talk is amazing, a real throwback to the late seventies movie making ham machine. Plenty of nice old textures, carpeted apartments and bra-less wonders at play. The real theme of the movie was initially a zombie feature, although the test audience saw otherwise and the film quickly switched gears into this weirdo product. It's slightly like "Split Second" or "C.H.U.D." in the way the bad guy is hardly seen. This works out to an ending filled with plenty of eye beams, fire, explosions, and cops flying through the air like plates. This movie plays out very routinely, with the hunt and the drama. So check it out and don't adjust your televisions brightness, this flick really is a friggen dark one.