Nightbreed (1990) Reviews

• Intrigue, mystery and monstrosity.

  Ahnion2002-07-13

  It is interesting to see what people think of this movie, since it is, in fact, quite unique (though it bears some of the trademarks of Clive Barker's writing). Even though it might seem a bit cynical to say so, the movie is just intricate enough to deflect those that need standard Hollywood plot hooks, and layered, so that if you expect to be fed, you will see a normal monster flick with lots of monsters and a disjointed plot. Those who need a linear, specific and untangled plot line will hate this movie, because the story lies, like in the novella, partially between the lines, or in this case, partially off screen, in comments and the imagination. Another possible hang-up is the ending, of which I can say, without spoiling it, that it is not entirely good and not entirely bad. It is, in fact, not very defined at all, which I know sends some people into raging tantrums about that they didn't get to know what happened, but to me, and to many others, I'm sure, just adds another dimension to the story - the dimension of speculation, and, in addition, the point that great disruption has a tendency to cause ripples that extend quite far. There is definitely moral here, but of a rather different kind than the standard Hollywood in-your-face-at-the-end-of-the-movie sort of display. Summing that moral up is simple, even though it is not quite that simply displayed; prejudice and the human tendency to hate the different. I love this movie, even though, as many of the reviewers have noted, the expressions of the actors (with the exception of David Cronenberg, who does a wonderful appearance) are rather tacky. I'm not sure they are entirely to blame for their rickety appearance and lack of depth, though, seeing that these are common problems in converting literature to screenplay. All in all, this is a great movie, provided that you do not expect it to be a standard horror movie.

• Not a horror movie: A monster movie, with affection.

  erichvm2000-07-15

  What's fun about Barker's Nightbreed is that it's the story of a human on a rampage, a deadly threat to monsters everywhere. In this one, the monsters (the night breed of the title) are the "good" guys. It shares its sense of celebrating the different, the twisted, and the dark with the first Addams Family movie, and much of Tim Burton's work. It also has the goriness that one expects from a piece by Barker. Especially fun is the performance by Cronenberg as the truly evil human doctor who is bent on destroying the Nightbreed. As happens in most classic monster movies, the villagers surround the monsters' castle with torches and pitchforks. Only this time, the modern setting replaces the castle with an old mausoleum and the rustic "weapons" with guns and bombs. And this time the sympathy you felt when you saw Frankenstein's monster burned in the windmill is the very center of the movie. This isn't a masterpiece, and even Barker has done more interesting, and certainly more chilling, work. But it's pure fun, it looks great, and remains light without mocking itself. Worth a look!

• Sliced and diced by the studio, directors cut to come?

  chrysalis_writter2005-08-05

  I was peeved that the best make-up academy award went to Dick Tracy, a horrible film with horrible make-up. The Nightbreed (based on the better titled "Cabal" novella) look terrific, the acting is excellent and David Chroneburg makes for a truly creepy and terrific antagonist. The plot focus's on Aaron Boone, who has recurring nightmares about a society of monsters living under a cemetery. Is he making it up or are they real and calling to him? His Pyschologist (Chroneburg) convinces him he's a murderer, a slayer of families. Troubled and suicidal, Boone seeks refuge in Midian but the monsters don't want him at first. He is also tracked by his girlfriend, Lori who refuses to give up on him even after he dies and comes back cold and monstrous. But Decker isn't about to let Boone continue on. He raises the locals on an all out assault on Midian, like a holy war in gods name led by the devil. Barkers themes of misunderstood monsters may come from his experiences as a homosexual male, but they are always strong and honest. Nightbreed turns the genre on it's head. The monsters are just trying to survive and want to be left alone, but man is hunting them. A 20+ minute longer cut was originally submitted by Barker, but the studio chopped it into this fractured masterpiece. Barker is hard at work trying to locate the missing footage for a directors cut release. Until then, this version will have to do.

• It's Shangra-La on Dope. I love it!

  Human_Remains2007-08-14

  Don't ask me why I love this movie so much...Maybe it came at a time in my life I desperately wanted to fit in, maybe it is the amazing monster effects, maybe because I enjoyed the novel "Cabal", but It's probably because I LOVE Clive Barker. I think it's fair to warn you the movie and the novel have no true resolve and like me you'll probably have a WTF moment at the end. At least two sequels were planned but never came about due to the fact the movie flopped for a few reasons. The studio made drastic cuts to the film cutting a good 30 or so minutes out of it and they did a HORRIBLE job promoting it. The adverts made it look like just another cheap slasher showing mainly the "Button face/Mask" Decker character. This is a movie about the monsters! About fantasy! About a place called Midian! It's a story where the monsters are the good guys. There is truly nothing else out there like it! It's not a movie for everybody I suppose but it stands as one of Clive's many great works. Sit back and be prepared to be taken to Midian - where the monsters are.

• Absolutely Fascinating

  PatrickH-21999-08-26

  Fascinating is an excellent word to describe NIGHTBREED: it doesn't necessarily mean it is good or bad, just interesting. Indeed, Im still not sure whether or not this film is good or bad. On the credits side, the sets, costumes, make-up, special effects, even the matte paintings are gorgeous, grotesque, perfect for what is required. I was amazed that such fantastic production values could be found in a movie that on the surface seems so schlocky. There is such a wealth of imagination here that one can hardly take time out to think about the flaws. I was so amazed by the knock-out apocalyptic finale that I could barely think about how silly the context is (a bunch of redneck Canadians blow-torching a cemetary.) he film's biggest flaw is it's sheer magnitude- there are SO many characters, plots, subtexts, overlays, and so on, that no really coherent or involving center emerges. It can be interpreted as: a story about how love conquers the supernatural (a la Dead Again), a Silence-of-the-lambs-like psychodrama about a serial killer; a dreamy horror flick reminiscent of Nightmare on Elm Street and especially Little Monsters; a Gilliam-inspired fantasy (the teeming underworld city is strongly reminiscent of Brazil and the Fortress of Ultimate Darkness in Time Bandits, while other parts are reminiscent of The Adventures of Baron Munchausen); a symbolic tale of racial tolerance; and on and on. So much happens, so many characters are involved, so many subtexts present themselves, its hard to know what is going on at all. Still, one really does have to see the film to believe it. The underworld city is stunning, its atmosphere created perfectly by both the production design and a series of bizarre tableaux of its residents. It is a mark of Barker's screenwriting talent (so often evident in his other films if you can look beneath the shlock) that all the characters, even monsters seen only briefly, ring true in some strange way. The many stories are actually touching. Also, the ending is cleverly conceived; it doesnt go out of its way to leave the door open for a sequel, rather the open door is integral to the plot. I would love to see a follow-up just to know how Barker carries through the mythical aspects he introduces in this film's last part. Perhaps the film could have been more focused, with fewer subsidiary characters; perhaps the completely inappropriate (but obviously intentional) humor could have been dropped; perhaps the entire serial-killer sub-plot could have been excised completely. In any case, this film is a knock-out.