This page has been robot translated, sorry for typos if any. Original content here.

The best horror, the best horror films, horror movies

  • Fourth view
  • Paranormal activity
  • From the outside
  • Pornocracy
  • Pulse
  • Mirrors
  • Load 200
  • The hills have eyes
  • Vomiting Dolls Slaughter
  • Saw
  • Wrong turn
  • Death Conveyor (Detachment 731)
  • House of Wax
  • Paranormal activity
  • Puppeteer
  • 13 ghosts
  • Collector
  • Cigarette burn
  • Exiled by the devil
  • Midnight Express
  • Reportage
  • Operation Dead Snow
  • Something
  • Martyrs
  • 7 days
  • Girl next door
  • The hills have eyes
  • Irreversibility
  • Hostel
  • Train of fear
  • Five bottles of vodka
  • Unborn
  • Fourth view
  • Green elephant
  • Martyrs
  • 7 days
  • Girl next door
  • The hills have eyes
  • Irreversibility
  • Hostel
  • Train of fear
  • Five bottles of vodka
  • unborn
  • fourth view
  • Green elephant




Пятница 13-ое / Friday the 13th (1980)

Friday the 13th (1980)

Director: Sean S. Cunningham Cast: Betsy Palmer, Adrienne King, Jeannine Taylor

We can say that the series "Friday the 13th" is one of the most successful and long-lived series of films. In addition, this series had a huge impact on the genre of slashers, and Jason's hockey mask has become a real symbol. Needless to say, in the entire series the acting game tends to zero (as in many slashers in general), but this does not spoil the films, because the matter is not in the game. The first eight parts were made by Paramount, and then sold all the rights to New Line Cinema, which is now making its second contribution to the series.
Released two years after the triumphant screening of "Halloween", this film, being a real ideological continuation of the brainchild of John Carpenter. And along with him and "Nightmare on Elm Street" became the progenitor of a truly cult series.
The working title of the film was "Long Night at Camp Blood", which more accurately describes what is happening in the film. Needless to say, this one and a half hour film does not seem any special to the modern viewer. Unless it is made better than a huge mass of slasher-imitators. After all, the fact of the matter is that imitators! And although taking a closer look, it is clear that the plots of Friday and the masses of subsequent films are almost the same, there is one significant difference - all followers have not been able to copy the atmosphere that was created in Friday.
This film created a peculiar tone that made the audience feel as if the maniac also wanted to cut them. But back to the plot created by screenwriter Victor Miller. The film opens a scene in which a mysterious killer kills a couple who have secluded themselves in the attic. Then the film is carried forward 11 years - nowadays. True, to call these days ours is somehow a little unfair - it would be more correct to say at the end of the 70s. Opened a summer camp near Crystal Lake. And a group of guys come there in advance in order to prepare it for the opening and accept the resting children. Annie also gathered there (Robbie Morgan / Robbi Morgan). Along the way, she got to the town closest to the camp and met in him a strange old man on a bicycle - Crazy Ralph (Walt Gorney), who warned her with his ominous hoarse voice that they would all die! By the way, Ralph and his warnings are pretty nice made - this is one of the most memorable scenes in the film. And, as it turned out, his words were prophetic. Annie didn’t even reach the camp.
And in the camp near the lake, boys and girls began to gather. And the usual camp life began - cutting, cooking and fun. Only here, someone not very friendly is watching all this (if so you can christen a maniac who is eager to cut your throat). In the first half of the film, the atmosphere gradually builds up, gradually increasing the frequency and proximity of this unkind observation. And then the massacre begins - an unknown maniac begins to wet one by one (occasionally in two) without any pity for everyone who came to the camp. Moreover, for each of them, he chooses the most suitable moment and ingenious way. The special effects made by Tom Savini, who will later become a very significant personality in the horrible movie, at that time look simply phenomenal. And now, looking at them, you don’t feel any discomfort (as sometimes happens when viewing old special effects). Everything looks very nice.
In total, 10 people will be killed in the film. And what is most interesting - it does not matter who the killer is. The filmmakers found a unique intermediate form of the killer. All slashers are characterized by two types of killers - the immortal monster and "this is one of us", which turns the genre into either ruble or ruble with a riddle. Here there is an intermediate option - at first there seems to be a riddle - who the murderer is not known is a man, but his face is not shown. But this turns out to be a man from the outside, and more specifically Mrs. Vouris. From the moment of her first appearance on the screen until the moment when it is revealed that all the murders of her hands, it takes only a minute or two. So the identity of the killer is not a matter of principle. I saw only one more movie with a similar choice of the killer - Last Exam.
It turns out that Mrs. Wuris (played by Betsy Palmer / Betsy Palmer) takes revenge - eleven years ago, her son Jason was resting by this lake and drowned due to the negligence of those watching. And her roof fell off, so she kills all the inhabitants of the ill-fated camp. And the only surviving girl Alice (Adrienne King) begins to frantically run away from the maniac, from time to time sending her to knockdown and constantly not finishing. And Mrs. Vouris persistently hunts for her last victim, and in the end, as expected, the battle loses. After that, Alice gets into the boat, emerges in the middle of the lake and falls into oblivion. When she wakes up in the morning and sees the police ashore, this same Jason unexpectedly drags her into the water. My father, while watching the horrible ones, says, “Now Jason’s boy will crawl out”, and is usually right - his notorious “Jason’s boy” has become a household name for all kinds of maniacs and other creatures that suddenly pop up around the corner. And although I seem to have opened the plot of the film to the very end, I don’t think that this can ruin the viewing for those who have not yet seen it. After all, the high of the film is not in the intrigue, which actually is not there, but in the tension, in the atmosphere, in the murders, in the sounds of "hhhhhhhhhhhhhh", which became the brand name of the entire series.
Another thing worth mentioning is the financial side of things. The budget of the film amounted to 700 thousand dollars (this is certainly not the current seven hundred thousand, but also not too much). And at the box office, the film earned 37 and a half million dollars. Such success simply obliged to create a sequel, especially since the plot of the film allowed it. A short dialogue at the end of Alice’s movie: “Is the boy dead too?”, Policeman: “What kind of boy?”, Alice “Boy ... Jason.” Such a dialogue did not just hint, he simply yelled that there would be a sequel, the protagonist of which would be Jason. And those who expected were not mistaken. True, I do not think that they could imagine that twenty years later the tenth episode of the film will be created and Jason will never die. In the video box office, the film also raised more than $ 17 million.
What in conclusion can be said about the entire series? This is a real classic slasher. The first 8 parts of the series fully follow the canons of the genre. They are quite monotonous, so only fans should watch them - it will only annoy everyone else.

Техасская резня бензопилой / The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

The Texas Chainsaw Massacre (1974)

Director: Tobe Hooper Cast: Marilyn Burns, Allen Danziger, Paul A. Partain

A group of teenagers in a van travels to relax in an old country house. This house belongs to the father of the main character - Sally (Marilyn Burns). In addition to her boyfriend, Jerry (Allen Danziger) and another friendly couple, Brother Paul A. Partain, who is chained in a wheelchair, goes with them. Almost from the very beginning, the trip turns out to be strange. At the gas station, the old man advises them not to go there, and then they pick up the voting guy (Edwin Neal). A guy with a moronic face is not just a nerd, but also very dangerous. In the beginning, he tried to sell them the left photograph, which he made with his camera, and then, having borrowed his knife from Franklin, he cuts his palm, and at the same time laughs insanely. Then he becomes even more aggressive and begins to attack those who drive him. After he is finally thrown out of the van, the psychopath smears the door with his blood.
The old house, in which the young hippies decided to relax, also does not inspire much confidence - it is so dilapidated that it seems as if it would collapse under their weight. It is located within the depths of a rural road, so that no neighbors can be seen, and a wasp hive settled under the ceiling. But this is not very upsetting youth, and Kirk (William Vail) together with Pam (Teri McMinn) decide to go for a swim. Franklin recalls that if you go along the path, you will definitely go to the rivulet. That's just Franklin himself was not in his grandfather's house for a long time - a small rivulet has long dried up. After a little walk, the couple stumbles upon a certain house where they decide to borrow some gasoline. The house is weird, because a canopy was built near it, under which there are old, clearly abandoned cars. And inside the house looks no less strange. Then they stumble upon Kojemordogo psychopath (in the first part of it played Gunnar Hansen / Gunnar Hansen), which pretty quickly deals with them. Actually, this happens so unexpectedly that when Kirk was killed, I did not really understand what happened. It seems to me that this is the most unexpected murder in the cinema that I have ever seen. There was no preparation, escalation of tension, nothing!
Then, one by one, all adolescents fall into the hands of Kozhemordoy and his psychopathic family. We are faced with the whole picture of their madness - just what the decor of their home is worth. In general, "The Texas Chainsaw Massacre" is a very strange film, it is completely different from ordinary films. Some realism blows from him. At one time, it was a phenomenon similar to “Blair Witches” - it was stated that it was set on the basis of real events (it was really inspired by the acts of Ed Gain, but this maniac became the basis for many films, and the Texas massacre even didn’t look like retelling of Heine's life). And this very sense of reality gave this legend credibility.
The film is very uneven, its action is not clearly measured out to the minute, as in modern paintings, but fragmentary. The beginning seems delayed, then pieces of inaction are replaced by rapid events, and this pace, which confuses the viewer, enhances the feeling of realism. And at the same time from the film a mile away carries insanity. And this is not only the madness of the cannibalistic family, it is the madness of everything that happens, the whole film. When you watch it, you begin to doubt the mental poise of its creator. The perverted moral of the cannibals, their schizoid behavior, gives the action a special connotation. The script, written by Tob Hooper and Kim Henkel (Kim Henkel), probably would not have become so scary and impressive, if not for the completely schizoid directing of Tob Hooper himself.
We should also say about the environment. Everything happens in the Texas outback - scorched dusty earth, grass often the same gray-yellow color, rare trees and clinging shrubs with rare leaves. Wooden houses whose boards creak constantly while walking. Well, the cannibal house is a kind of masterpiece! It is filled with bones and pieces of skin, hair and scraps of clothing. All this is simply dumped abundantly on the floor, bones are covered with cabinets, hanging from the ceiling on strings, it is everywhere. What I liked most was a bench made of human bones. And of course, the screech of a chainsaw! It becomes a symbol of the atmosphere of the film.
At some point, the main character begins to yell, and no longer shuts up - she yells constantly, heartily and even selflessly. At some point, these screams began to make me nervous. And the scene where a feeble grandfather with the help of caring grandchildren tries to hammer the skull of a girl with a hammer made me laugh. I can say that the film is inherent in a completely perverted logic and strangeness of the plot. It makes a very unusual impression. Despite the fact that this is a real low budget (140 thousand dollars), the film brought a very substantial profit (30 million) and no doubt earned the name of the cult. But the most interesting thing is that the film is very bloodless. You will not see how the victim is cut before your eyes, you will not be shown agony and rivers of blood. You will only be hinted at them - a trickle of blood will occasionally appear in the frame, the chainsaw will screech and the victim will scream heart-rendingly. TRB is quite cruel, but unlike Lucio Fulci, you are not poked with your nose into an agonizing body, everything is done more skillfully, and I would even say more impressively - there is nothing more terrible than the human imagination.
I definitely recommend it to everyone. We have this rarely seen thing, but if it falls into your hands, then it is definitely worth a look. You may not like it very much, but the strong and unusual sensations of watching you are definitely guaranteed. The immortal horror classic is worth the time.
Special opinion: One of the modern icons of horror is, of course, the image of a muscular psycho in a rough mask of human skin and with a chainsaw in his hands. This film largely determined the image of the horror movie of the seventies. And it began as a cheap authoring project by Tob Hooper, a professor at the University of Texas. And one must ... Despite the obvious rudeness of the film, the viewing of which is no more pleasant than postcards from the slaughterhouse, it is an officially recognized (!) Masterpiece of art. A copy of this tape was acquired by the New York Gallery of Modern Art. The prototypes of the film, clearly inspired by serial killer and necrophile Ed Gaine, look gray unintelligible figures and, nevertheless, the film has a feeling of a real shift. The gloomy song of criminal schizophrenia to the melody of the included chainsaw sounds pretty scary and realistic. But this film, in spite of many of its advantages, is unlikely to be able to become a favorite favorite of anyone's video library.

Кошмар на улице Вязов / A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984)

A Nightmare On Elm Street (1984)

Director: Wes Craven Cast: John Saxon, Heather Langenkamp, ​​Ronee Blakley, Robert Englund, Jonny Depp

The background of the film: in a typical small American town, in the boiler room on Elm Street, the maniac killer Freddy Krueger was once burned. During his life, Freddie killed the small children of this town and once their parents, having caught the villain, did not give him to the police, but simply arranged for such a lynching. Naturally, burning alive, such a colorful maniac like Freddie simply could not help but rise again. But he didn’t rise again corny, like hundreds of maniacs from other horror films, more precisely, he didn’t quite resurrect ...
With the first shots of the film, we fall into Tina Gray's nightmare (played by Amanda Wiss). For some reason, Tina in her dreams falls into this unfortunate boiler room, in which Kruger was burnt several years ago. A scary man with knives on his fingers and a burnt face chases after her. As she suspects, this is Fred Krueger (in his role, Robert Englund). At the end of the dream, Freddy almost overtakes Tina, but she manages to dodge, but Freddy leaves four traces of her “fingers” on her nightgown. Waking up in a heart-rending cry, Tina discovers that it was not a dream, since the shirt was really cut.
Tina talks about her nightmare to friends - Nancy (Heather Langenkamp) and Glenn (Johnny Depp). But, of course, no one believes her: everyone believes that this is just a nightmare and in the end everything will pass. However, after discussing Tina’s sleep together, Nancy recalls that she also dreamed about this “guy in a dirty sweater with big iron nails”. Since Tina’s mother, of course, left somewhere, the whole company decides to spend the night with her. But it was on this very night, as you might guess, that Uncle Freddy did kill her. And it’s not just a blunder, but a stomach rips open to her and spreads guts on the ceiling. Everyone was in the house, but no one saw anyone else, so the suspicion of the murder of Tina falls on her boyfriend Rod Lane, who was next to her that night and saw how she died. Rod is imprisoned and, during interrogation by the police, tries to explain that it’s not him, but, of course, no one believes him. However, Freddy has his own point of view on this matter - in a couple of days he kills Rod in the night right in the cell. After the incident, Nancy and Glenn already know exactly who is to blame for these killings. Moreover, Nancy begins to suffer from hallucinations associated with Freddy. Nancy's father, police lieutenant Thompson (John Saxon), tries to help his daughter, but thinks that it is not Freddie who is to blame, but a mental disorder associated with the loss of two friends ...
The plot can be retold indefinitely, but I believe that there is no particular need for this - almost everyone saw the film, and those who have not seen it will be much more interesting to find out how it ended from the picture itself. Advantages of the director Wes Craevin (to whom this film also became a ticket to the world of big cinema - before that he shot only low-budget horror films, from which one can distinguish only the 1978 film “Hills Have Eyes”) over fellow directors of other films. Firstly, there is intrigue in the plot throughout the film: is Freddie materializing in the real world, using the consciousness of innocent teenagers for this, or is it really nothing more than a dream? Secondly, the make-up and costume of Kruger, perfectly made for those times. Thirdly, great music that sounds in the film. The script for the film was also written by Cravein - an honor and praise to him for this. The director does not show a stupid massacre, as often happens in the movies of our genre, but a meaningful plot. The film earned about 26 million dollars at the box office, which at that time was a very good amount, especially for a horror film.
Separately, it should be said about the excellent selection of actors involved in the tape. Participation in the film stars (though by that time already rolled) of American cinema John Saxon, who starred in 1973 in the super film with Bruce Lee's "Enter the Dragon" ("The Dragon enters the fray"), which is still called the best a film about kung fu and in a number of popular action films and science fiction films of the time, it speaks exclusively about respect for the project on the part of the producers and the actors themselves. The second star is definitely Johnny Depp - the famous cinema "Don Giovanni". True, here we are making a discount on the fact that this is his film debut. Yes, it was “Nightmare on Elm Street” that was the first film in which this wonderful actor starred. The first pancake did not come out lumpy: the death of the hero Johnny (and his Freddy just classically tore it into meat, scattering guts all over the house and sprinkling everything with blood) is definitely the most impressive in this film. Well, the third actor who opened the film is, of course, Robert Englund, who played the role of Krueger. True, this in some way played a cruel joke with him, since for a long time he had the label Freddy Krueger on him, because of which he was invited and invited to appear exclusively in similar films. The most egregious example is the role of the Phantom of the Opera in the film of the same name. Subsequently, this actor played in the film “Lord of Desires”, and for the first time in many years, not a murderer, but a victim, as well as in “City Legend”, where his character also had a hard time.
However, Craevin's small weakness at the end of the film spawned the start of the series. The director could not resist showing in the finale of a spectacular murder, which cast doubt on the fact that Freddy does not exist, which seems to have proved to Nancy at the end of the picture. Without a doubt, there are positive features in this - otherwise you and I limited ourselves to only one film, instead of a whole fascinating series. But, in truth, not one of the sequels was able to recreate the atmosphere of the first part, which, however, does not make them less valuable to us.
Special opinion: "This film amazes me first of all with its plan, because when it was done, it was most likely the only one of such a plan, because the main character is not just a schizophrenic maniac, but a completely understanding subject with a seared face who takes revenge on the children of those who killed it’s not just a knife or an ax, but rather unusual for horror films. Wes Cravin did a good job writing a great script. When I first saw The Nightmare, to be honest, it scared me, because then there was time when on tv on they only showed porn about happy communism and the Perestroika Searchlight program, only the most advanced people had video cards and not many at that time managed to see anything worthwhile. The Nightmare on Elm Street has not lost its relevance even now: not so a long time ago, one of the television companies suddenly decided: NO TO THE FUNNY translator and therefore duplicated this masterpiece in Ukrainian. It was a shock. What are the phrases such as "Fuck me at Vuyaziv vulytsi" or "Tell me to send you Freddy". Most of all I liked how, at first, in my opinion, Tina, having secluded herself with a guy, was smeared on the ceiling in the bedroom and he (the guy) stood and looked at all this and screamed loudly, shouting the hiss of a hackneyed tape. It was also a cool kill when Glenn watched TV while lying on the bed - Freddy killed him by releasing his guts on the ceiling, and that was cool. After all, no one had done this before him. In general, looking at this masterpiece of world nightmare, you will not regret it. "

Дагон / Dagon (2002)

Dagon / Dagon (2002)

Director: Stuart Gordon Cast: Ezra Godden, Francisco

Young couple Paul (Ezra Godden / Ezra Godden) and Barbara (Rachel Merono / Raquel Merono) travel on the yacht of their friends Howard (Brendan Price) and Vicki (Birgit Bofarull) off the coast of Spain. Paul himself also seems to be from somewhere in Spain, but his mother took him away as a child, so he is especially interested in traveling to the country of his ancestors. But here two terrible things happen - firstly, a storm begins, and secondly, a yacht flies on an underwater reef and gives a leak. In addition, Vicki's foot was pinched during the collision and she could not leave the yacht. Paul and Barbara in an inflatable boat get to the nearest village, but the fishing village itself is completely empty. Rain has already begun and a young couple is running between empty houses along steep stone paths in search of help. In the end, they hear some strange singing that leads them to a certain Church of Dagon, where the priest provides them with help. Barbara stays on the beach, and John hurries to friends ...
But those are no longer on board, and the water that has accumulated in the cabin is filled with blood. Things are getting worse with Paul after he returns to the village, his wife disappears, he settles in an extremely unsightly hotel. And soon the truth becomes clear - all the inhabitants of the city are strange monsters who came to his liking. Then comes running around - Paul is struggling to hide from those who are pushing from all sides, but not very agile creatures. During his chaotic wanderings, he reveals several unpleasant secrets of the town, and from the last normal person in the town he learns his sinister story. The outcast himself remains alive only because it is not dangerous for the local inhabitants, and they rejected him for a long time because he was an alcoholic. So much for the harm of drinking! Now Paul is running around and looking for his wife, whom he wants to save. Will he succeed? Watch the movie and find out.
The Dagon script was written more than 15 years ago, and of course for Jeffy Combs. However, all this time it was not possible to break it with the producers. They told Gordon "replace your fishmen with vampires or werewolves, and then please." However, Gordon did not agree, because then all lovecraft film will completely disappear. And finally it became possible to make a film, but Jeffy Combs was no longer suitable for this role - a younger actor was needed, and then Ezra Godden was elected to the main role. The plot was based on two stories of Lovecraft - "Dagon", which gave him the name and "Morok over Insmouth." Only his action was transferred from New England to Spain for purely commercial reasons - the film was shot in Spain and with Spanish money. So in principle, it is considered Spanish. But somehow my language doesn’t dare to call it that - after all, it was shot with the money of the production company Barayan Yuzna, Gordon and Godden themselves are not Spaniards, and the film was shot in English, only with a fleeting use of Spanish and Galician languages. The village in which the film was shot, according to Gordon, and actually looks like in the film, they added almost nothing.
The film's greatest strength is its great atmosphere. She just conquered me. The film is just super, if only because of her. This incredibly gloomy village instantly charmed me, and at night, with constant rain ... It's just something incredible. I have not seen such a powerful Lavkravt spirit in any film. Old houses and narrow steep streets, an ancient and ominous church, hellish creatures barely on their heels who want to kill you - these are the main components of this film. I am in love with this town. In general, the work of the designer is at the highest level - everything is exactly as it should, everything serves to create the corresponding mood, nothing discords with the environment. And the skin of Howard at the right time tells the main character - everything will definitely end badly, you need to run as hard as you can! And the contrast of the yellow American windbreakers with the Spanish ominous surroundings is more than symbolic.
Action also fails. Almost all the time, something happens on the screen. And although without giving details it can not be described otherwise than running around the city, it does not bother. Firstly, it is diverse, there are a lot of completely different episodes, the director constantly throws us some peculiarity, a specific little thing. He always finds how to frighten the viewer and keep him in suspense. Maybe some of this constant running around just seems superfluous, but she really pleased me, throughout the film I was in a state close to euphoria, for a long time I did not get SUCH pleasure from the film. I’m not afraid to call it a masterpiece. He certainly deserves the title of the Lovecraftian film itself. In short, Gordon created two great, great films - "Re-animator" and "Dagon."
Not without graphic cruelty - the detailed scene of peeling the skin from the face of a living person is unlikely to leave anyone indifferent. It even seemed to me superfluous. I am not against violence, not at all - all the other very tough moments seem very appropriate to me, but here they went too far with cruelty, she just doesn’t get in touch with the rest of the film. One gets the impression that the scene was pushed just for the sake of it. Here is the scene of Barbara’s death - it's super, she’s just perfect. And hardly anyone would call her humane and soft.
It’s even amazing to me how to make such a great film with a budget not reaching $ 5 million. Sometimes the film’s special effects are scolded and its makeup, but I noticed obvious artifice only once, and I didn’t notice any flaws in the makeup of the monsters - although I’m not a specialist, and I didn’t specifically look. But from the point of view of the layman, everything was just fine. So in my opinion, “Dagon” is a great atmospheric horror that every fan of the genre should watch.
Special opinion: The new film by Gordon-Yuzna, as it seems to me, will cause double feelings among many. Those who are waiting for the usual bloody mess in the spirit of "Resuscitator" or "Outside" may be disappointed. There are not many naturalistic scenes in this film. The most memorable is the stripping of the skin from a living person. But this does not mean that the film is bad, on the contrary. According to Lovecraft’s tales of the sea deity Dagon, the main emphasis is on the atmosphere and recreation of the mysterious Spanish town of Imboki, and I must say, the authors succeeded in this. All these deserted alleys hidden by a veil of rain, a blue-gray color scheme and strange silhouettes that come out after dark is just something. The viewer is almost transported into this world inhabited by eerie creatures who have retreated from God for the sake of the gifts of Dagon. A very good acting game by Ezra Godden and the late Francisco Rabal, wonderful atmosphere, plot - all at a high level. The film has its minuses, but they are very relative. Say, some fans of the old style may be disappointed with computer effects, which are often used in the film - however, they are all of fairly high quality and do not spoil the impression of the picture. The main thing is that the creators managed to very accurately convey the atmosphere of the Lovecraft world, to let the viewer literally touch it ... Definitely, this film is one of the writer’s best adaptations.

Извне / From Beyond (1986)

From Beyond (1986)

Director: Stuart Gordon Cast: Jeffrey Combs, Barbara Crampton, Ken Foree

During a mysterious and creepy experiment, something went awry and Dr. Ted Sorel's assistant Crawford Tillingast (Gordon's favorite actor Jeffrey Combs) is suspected of killing his mentor. Something strange happened to the corpse of the doctor himself, but Tillingast seems to be crazy. He claims that Dr. Pretorius created a certain resonator that stimulates some kind of gland (which one has forgotten), which opens a new feeling in a person and he begins to see a different world. It seems that Pretorius himself was also devoured by creatures that came from a parallel universe. To test the version of Tillingast’s slightly moved mansion, Dr. Catherine McMixel (Barbara Crampton), who was very interested in the stories of Crawford and Leroy Brown (Ken Forey, more familiar to us from the movie “Dawn of the Dead” / Ken Foree), acting as a guard, goes to the doctor’s hefty mansion.
A strange group resides in an old and purely Lovecraftian mansion, the haven of the perished insane doctor. In the laboratory they find the resonator itself, which Tillingast shot before fleeing headlong. Soon, the hellish apparatus started working again and the skeptics Katherine and Leroy had to make sure that Tillingast was right - strange translucent pink essences appeared in the air, which react to movement and may well come into contact with people undergoing resonance (the first contact appeared as a bite). However, it turns out that not only small strange creatures live on the other side, but also the changed Dr. Pretorius, whose dreams of power and domination can finally become a reality. Having turned into an otherworldly creature, he acquired unusual properties, and now he only needs a constant exit to this world. And the resonator created by him can become such an output. Therefore, the doctor in every way tries to leave the resonator on, and those who come to turn it off.
Lovecraft’s original story is very small, and all the characters except Pretorius and Tillingast, as well as most of the plot, were invented by Gordon himself. The result was a very entertaining movie with a Lovecraftian darling. “Outside” is definitely a trash movie, the smallness of the budget is very obvious, and the impression remains that it was shot either before the Re-animator (which is not true), or with a much smaller budget. In any case, it’s very nice to watch, the spinning plot and for its time quite decent special effects drag out, you are immersed in a terrible and unusual tale. There are a lot of cool scenes, I especially liked the beginning of the film (tunes in a certain wave), the return to the Pretorius mansion (nevertheless, this mansion looks just fine, but it’s good for horrible people) and the attack of small devouring critters. The fight with cables in the basement looked rather comical, but these are trifles, they do not spoil the general impression. “From the outside” is definitely worth a look, but do not expect any blockbuster or something unique. This movie is for fans of the genre, and I think that they will appreciate it deservedly.
Special opinion: “From the outside” was one of the first horror films I saw, so I have very warm feelings for this picture (in a pirate box, this film was also called “From the Other World”). During the first viewing, he literally amazed and shocked me, who was not particularly familiar with the genre's pearls, great makeup, naturalistic gore-effects and exciting action. After reviewing it for the second time about six months ago, I was not particularly disappointed, although, of course, some of the details no longer impressed me as much as in childhood. But the atmosphere and special effects (for the most part performed at a very high level, with the exception of a couple of flaws) are still impressive. The film was shot based on Lovecraft's story, but, like in most of its adaptations, in this case the story of Dr. Pretorius is shown in a more “modernized” version. It should be noted that this is one of the best adaptations of the classic, as well as one of the best films of the creative tandem of Gordon-Yuzn. Everything that we love in their best works is present here - a dynamic plot, naturalistic effects like brain exhaustion and all kinds of transformations of the human body, diluted with some black humor, and irreplaceable Jeffrey Combs. In a word, “Outside” is strongly recommended to all fans of Lovecraft and fans of Stuart Gordon and Brian Yuzna. It can be contraindicated only to persons who do not digest horror in any form.

Восставший из Ада / Hellraiser (1987)

Hellraiser / Hellraiser (1987)

Director: Clive Barker Cast: Andrew Robinson, Clare Higgins, Ashley Laurence

Clive Barker burst into the world of horrors in 1984, releasing a book of Blood in six volumes, which simply astounded the horror-reading audience. This Briton, who turns forty-nine this year, firmly staked out his place in the horror hall of fame. Stephen King said that "Clay Barker is the future of horror." He has already released 12 novels, mainly in the style of dark fantasy. The Russian reader can also get acquainted with his work, for example, his novel "Imajica" was released, though I don’t like his translation. You can also read his other works, for example, the story “Fear” and the story / novel (as you like more) of 1986 “The Hellbound Heart”, which became the literary basis of the first film of the series.
I don’t know whose initiative it was, but Cleve Barker himself wrote the script for his own work, and even became the director of the film. Thus, you can see firsthand what the writer wanted to say, creating a work. It is not for nothing that the film is called "Clive Barker´s Hellraiser" - this is 100% creation of Barker alone. And he created a great picture. And many simply call this thing a masterpiece, a triumph in horrors.
Frank, in search of forbidden pleasures, buys a mysterious cube, which is a kind of puzzle, and at the same time, and the door that opens the way to hell. Although strictly speaking, this is another dimension in which strange and terrible creatures live, which the Senobits call (although I also hear how they are called coenobites and xenbits). But there is practically no special difference between this dimension and hell in the human understanding. And Frank, played by Sean Chapman (Sean Chapman) there and gets. Chapman plays the normal Frank; Frank the monster plays Oliver Smith.
Soon after, the married couple moves into a house that has been abandoned for a long time, because the husband, Larry (played by Andrew Robinson), did not agree with Frank's offer and did not sell it after the death of their mother. During the transportation of things Larry greatly scratches his palm and blood spilled on the floor allows Frank to escape from hell and partially recover. However, only partially - a reborn monster cannot walk and most of his body is still in hell. It also turns out that the wife of Larry Julia (Clare Higgins / Clare Higgins) is the mistress of her brother-in-law (i.e. husband's brother) Frank. And she’s a very passionate and devoted lover, since she, having seen this monster on the floor of the room, does not run away and reveals his secret, but on the contrary, agrees to help him.
And in order to finally recover, he needs human blood, so Julia must seduce men in bars and bring them into the house, and Fran at their expense will get stronger and restore the body. However, Christy, Larry's daughter from her first marriage, intervenes in this (Ashley Laurence).
But the real heroes were precisely the Senobits. Their role in the film is secondary, they appear only a few times and only at the very end for a significant period of time. But it was their existence that gave impetus to the creation of subsequent series, in which the duration of the stay on the screen and the number of actions performed by the Senobits will all increase. Particularly spectacular is their leader - Pinhead (speaking Nailhead or Pinhead is pretty silly in my opinion), whose head is studded with nails. Even if you have not seen any of the films in the series, you must have seen this head with bulging studs. His role in all films was played by Doug Bradley (Doug Bradley).
Needless to say, this film stands out quite strongly from the general mass with its original plot, which revealed something truly new to us. The acting team is also well-chosen - everyone plays decently enough to make the viewer believe in what is happening on the screen. The film is not in vain considered a classic. If you have not seen him, then you should take it in practice. Of course, some special effects look rather wretched (especially at the end - with the disappearance of Senobits), but this should not especially spoil the pleasure.

Зловещие мертвецы / The Evil Dead (1982)

The Evil Dead (1982)

Director: Sam Raimi Cast: Bruce Campbell, Ellen Sandweiss, Hal Delrich

Five friends rented a house for a vacation in some wilderness (both cheap and interesting), but the wilderness turns out to be quite impassable - a very flimsy bridge, a long abandoned and not friendly house should have suggested that it is better to leave here. The autumn forest surrounding them, which was just perfectly shot, and the music that sounds against the background, create a very powerful horrible atmosphere. Already at the place they are waited by the spirits roaming the forest, but so far they are only observers. Shelley (Theresa Tilly), drawing an antique clock that hangs on the wall, is exposed for a moment under the influence of growing spirits, and sketches something that looks like a strange evil face. When the whole company is already gathering at the table, the hatch opens into the basement by itself. Scotty (Hal Delrich) and Ash (Bruce Campbell) come down, the basement is not small, in his back room they find an unusual and clearly evil book, as well as a tape recorder. The tape, made by the scientist who lived here, tells about the Book of the Dead and that the spirits she provoked moved into the explorer's wife, and the only way to stop the new creature is to dismember it.
Instead of thinking and behaving more carefully, those who arrived make some fatal mistakes - Shelley, having unclearly seen something strange, goes to the forest, where she is raped by this same forest (the rape scene in some countries was cut out), thus settling in her the body of one of the spirits. And the second mistake is listening to the film, on which the scientist reads an ancient spell that awakens the evil spirits, eager to get human bodies. Demons that captured a person transform his body, and begin to attack others. They simply won’t be able to escape - the bridge over which they arrived finally fell apart. So now the guys have to fight with the fiends of hell, which in turn capture them themselves, until there is only one Ash who is forced to kill and dismember his friends, sister, girl. Blood flows like water, creatures who do not want to die all push on.
The film makes a very interesting impression. Firstly, it is immediately noticeable that this is an absolute low budget - in addition to the five main characters, only two people literally appeared in films - idiots standing on the sidelines who waved a passing hand. The film was shot in November-December 1980 and its entire budget amounted to 150 thousand dollars. The absolute thrashing of The Evil Dead is visible from the first to the last minute, but this does not mean at all that the film is getting worse because of this, it rather adds color to it. Because of this peculiar style, we forgive him for minor flaws and illogicalities - in the end, they expect this from a film of this type, I think that most of the small overlays do not notice at all (for example, the moment when Ash buries Linda - he just finishes filling the grave, and at her head a crudely made cross has already been placed, etc.).
Perhaps this cheapness gives the film realism, gives a little documentary. The same gorgeous special effects, like constantly gushing blood (or even a beating fountain), in an ordinary, standard film would probably have caused a smile, but here the whole surroundings, all the action gives the rivers of blood naturalness and they seem normal and correct. The changed zombified people look very healthy (it seems to me that Lamberto Bava drew inspiration from them, creating "Demons", very similar characters). Continuous action will not let you get bored, but all this does not contradict the atmosphere of the film. And she was able to realize it just amazing. Although frightening moments seem to be very simple - sometimes it’s completely clear that it is here that the hands of a corpse and the like should pop out, but these tricks still remain impressive. The camera work is very original and not traditional, which also greatly affects the specifics of the film. Briefly, this film can be described with the words "brilliant trash."
“The Evil Dead” is one of those cases when the amazing author’s intention of the director and screenwriter in one person (in this case, Sam Raimi) with a small budget turns into an amazing film and becomes a classic of the genre (in general, if you look closely, almost all the horror directors started that way). The difference is that in Raimi thrashing is raised to the power, it is deliberate. Acting is also at an appropriate level. The main character, Ash (who also became a cult figure, one of the idols), most of the film resembles a frightened fool, and only at the end, when he remains alone, he begins to seriously fight for his life. It took Raimi more than a year to make the film a rental, but when he succeeded, the film raised almost $ 2.5 million, and still continues to make a profit.
The most important quality of "Evil Dead" is the ability to scare. The film is truly scary and fascinates with its gloom and bloody bacchanalia. Heroes are clumsy and primitive, but somehow imperceptibly you begin to perceive them as living people. And I don’t even say about the camera flying around the earth with a strange sound, which in general has become the trademark of the entire series - I think none of those who watched the film will forget it. The film is simple and not intricate, as well as many brilliant things. Perhaps it will seem strange and will cut eyes to people that are accustomed to modern polished Hollywood paintings, but I think that even he should impress them. This is one of those films that does not leave you indifferent, clings and scares. If for some reason you have not seen him (for example, for a long time I could not find it), then know that it is definitely worth seeing. And better watch it at night, when you do not hurt to enjoy the pristine horror.

Проект Ведьма из Блэр: Курсовая с того света / The Blair Witch Project (1999)

The Blair Witch Project: Coursework from the Other World / The Blair Witch Project (1999)

Directors: Daniel Myrick and Eduardo Sanchez Cast: Heather Donahue, Joshua Leonard, Michael Williams

This movie is just a phenomenon! Through an experimental movie made with virtually no budget, without professional actors and special effects, the instant is gaining mainstream! The film instantly makes a splash and simultaneously spits in the face of the so-called majors (large film companies that respond very clearly to the slightest change in the market). It turns out that their special effects are not necessary at all and the film can do perfectly well without them!
Three filmmaking students decide to make a documentary on the search for the legendary Blair Witch as a test. And in October 1994, they came to Burkittesville, Maryland, to collect documentary material. First they roam the town and ask the locals what they know about the local legend. And in the end they go into the forest to photograph the searches themselves. And disappear. A year later, they discover a film captured by them during the process of fermentation in the forest. And since they took a movie camera and a hand-held video camera with them, there are two perspectives, respectively. The kind of shooting varies a bit.
However, the fact of the discovery of the film is already accompanied by mystical events. Starting with the fact that the films were eaten up during the archaeological excavations at a rather great depth and the layer of land above them was not disturbed. So it is completely incomprehensible how the films could be in such a place. And the content of the films terrified archaeologists. And for a long time they were kept in the police and the FBI, trying to uncover the truth. In the end, the films were returned to the public. And two people (film directors) edited from both films what we saw in movie theaters or on video tapes. They (Daniel Mirik and Eduardo Sanchez) are also screenwriters of the film.
That is the legend. And the legend was promoted very well, nothing to say. She practically created a mystical halo around the entire film. And given the unhealthy interest and special love of Americans for films on "real events", the trick with an "absolutely reliable film" was a win-win. Haxan Films, Inc. Movie Maker everything was calculated very accurately and was knocked out of pawns and queens in one move - there was a transformation from a small company into a world-famous major. True, this transformation may turn out to be short-term, it depends on the company itself.
However, the revolution of the film is not at all in promotion and legend, but in the shooting method. The actors play themselves - Heather Donahue, the head and ideologist of the project, and her two buddies Joshua Leonard, who are called Josh and Michael Williams, are their real names. In addition to the three main characters, the film also shot "residents of the town", who are also not professional actors. In total, ten actors are involved in the film, seven of which appear briefly only at the beginning of the film. No less unusual for the modern viewer is the way of shooting - the cameras really carry on their hands, they swing and twitch, thereby confirming the reality of what is happening. Thus, the three main characters / actors are also the operators of the film.
However, this Spartan simplicity of the film and the complete absence of special effects is compensated by the beautifully created atmosphere of the film. Fear is gradually pumped up and captures the viewer in their snares. Sitting at the screen begins to really empathize with the children roaming the forest and all their misadventures are perceived much more than the usual cinema action. The very atmosphere of fear and mystery is gradually being pumped up and from time to time abruptly erupts on the screens (for example, in the episode with a beating around the tent and running around the forest at night). And if at first the wandering of the heroes through the forest seems unnecessarily prolonged, then then you completely forget about it and get involved in what is happening.
And again, there are differences in the length of the film in the USA, it lasts 86 minutes, while in the United Kingdom it is only 80. I have always been unclear about this policy of "different" versions (which everyone uses all the time). Well, why cut out some six minutes, especially since this cut out most likely affected ordinary walking in the forest!
In addition, Russian viewers lost a rather interesting thing: the television commercial Curse of the Blair of the Witch. At least he was not shown on any of the central channels, so the vast majority most likely did not see him. This film (Curse of the Blair Witch) is a documentary-styled advertisement. It is in it that tells about the history of the "discovery" of films, shows the places of "real" archaeological work, more fully and in detail tells about the most "witch" legend. This promotional film in English-speaking countries was shown on the Sci-Fi channel. The show usually takes place several days before the start of the movie rental. See such an agitation is quite interesting. She is completely sustained in the documentary style inherent in the Discovery Channel - cutting from video materials, narrative behind the scenes, interviews with “witnesses” and “experts”. Moreover, everything is done quite professionally. My 14-year-old nephew, watching a movie advertisement for a while (until he was reasoned), poked out in all seriousness, "Is this true? Was it really so?" So we can say that he was and quite effective.
The budget of the film was only 35 thousand dollars. For a movie, it's not even a budget. This fact also killed film producers - these 35 thousand are considered the most profitable investment in cinema in the history of his (cinema) existence. True, money was also needed to promote the film - the cost of advertising exceeded two million dollars (which is not so much for American advertising either). However, the return was simply phenomenal! Even considering that the rental in the United States began almost twice: the first time on July 18 on only 27 screens throughout the country. Such a discovery is inherent in low-budget. And then in the first week of rental the film raised more than one and a half million dollars! By the end of the second week, fees exceeded 5 million. And on the third, the second rental opening took place - already on a national scale, on the 1101 screen. And by November, the film had earned over 140 million. The UK experienced a similar scenario - at first only 36 screens and 750 thousand pounds a week. And in the end, more than 14 million pounds of fees. Financial success is more than obvious!
An interesting fact (although not a fact at all, but rather an observation, from which it is difficult to draw conclusions because of a small sample of respondents): those who watched The Witch on the tape liked the film more than those who saw it in the movies. Maybe it's just an accident, or maybe not. In any case, the overwhelming majority of my friends, even quite cool in their attitude to horrors in general, made a strong impression on the film. Someone on the Internet said that the film did not impress only those who did not allow themselves to capture the atmosphere of the film. After all, the film actually stands on the atmosphere - a little dynamic action helps establish "feelings", mood.
With how many people did not communicate - a witch is either very fond of, or responds extremely negatively. All because of wrong accents. It is very simple to judge whether a person has UNDERSTAND the witch by how important it is for him to know the invention of all this or not. After all, many do not see the main thing ... For me, the documentary degree of this film does not matter.
Despite the ambiguity of the film, "The Witch" is a unique phenomenon, and without any hesitation I strongly advise everyone who has not yet seen it not to be lazy and take a cassette. An unforgettable experience is guaranteed. And even if you don’t like the movie, then you will already forget it - at least because of its features.
Special opinion: “I would also advise you to watch a movie not in a movie, but in a video. Then it’s better to feel the atmosphere of horror. Filming, its quality is sometimes“ foolish ”- then the camera is kept crooked, then the image jumps ... On the other hand, try keep it even when running through the forest, scared to death! This gives credibility to what is happening. Like the so-called "documentary" materials, interviews. Sometimes it seems that you are watching a real documentary. There were rumors that it was shot like this: young people from crowded about a theater school they sent to the forest, they gave cameras, a tent, etc. In addition, they were removed from the outside, but so that they didn’t know it. Every morning they found instructions like: do not trust this, or - something will happen today ... That is, the roles were not rehearsed in advance. As to the fact that the first part is really a phenomenon - I agree. Maybe many people are used to beautiful special effects, make-up, scenery. So this film may not like it. In my opinion, this is dedicated to just such people who watch horror movies not in noisy companies with beer and chips and, and sliding the curtains, preferably alone at home, in silence and darkness. I watched it in the movies, so half the buzz was lost. This movie can really boost adrenaline. "I would like to see him with anyone - neither be in the country, in the forest."

Фантазм / Phantasm (1979)

Phantasm / Phantasm (1979)

Director: Don Coscarelli Cast: A. Michael Baldwin, Bill Thornbury, Reggie Bannister

This film of twenty-two years ago and now looks just great. The story begins with a guy named Tommy (his episodic role was played by Bill Cone) is killed by a strange girl who carried him to the cemetery. It turns out that Tommy was a close friend of Jody (Bill Thornbury / Bill Thornbury) and Reggie (Reggie Bannister / Reggie Bannister). Jody and his younger brother Mike (A. Michael Baldwin / A. Michael Baldwin) lost their parents and now live alone. Jody, fearing for Michael, not yet recovering from the death of his parents, decides not to take his brother to a friend’s funeral. However, the boy himself thinks differently - he himself comes to the cemetery. But after the funeral, he lingers a little and witnesses an unusual scene - the owner of the funeral home, Verzila (The Tall Man - The Tall Man), who plays (and will always play) Angus Scrimm (this role will be the pinnacle of his career), so behold, Verzila, instead of lowering the coffin with Tommy into the grave, picks it up, lays it back in the hearse and leaves. And Michael himself begins to be pursued by strange shorties dressed in the robes of Capuchin monks.
Having heard about these strange events, Michael begins to find out what really happens in the gloomy house at the cemetery, which is both the Morningside funeral home, and the cemetery for those buried in bins (behind tiles in the walls), and Verzila's dwelling. There, he sees more clearly the little gnomes / dwarves, who are the helpers of the ominous Verzila, and also meets with flying balls, which will become the branded weapons of the entire series. After this terrible adventure, Michael draws his brother Jody and his friend Reggie into this business. Most of the film consists of exploring Morningside and discovering strange things that cannot be explained by logic. It turns out that Verzila steals stupid and turns them into those same evil dwarfs that look like miniature monks. Why and how he does it, I think it’s better not to talk - after all, some might not see the movie.
The most interesting thing in this film is that it is a classic low-budget, but at the same time it has completely no disadvantages inherent in low-budget films. Don Coskarelia was not only a screenwriter and director, but also a producer, cameraman and editor. Most of the team is his relatives and friends, for example, his mother was responsible for the design and manufacture of costumes, as well as for makeup. However, the special effects that are present in the film, and now look great. They are not out of date. And the acting here is also not at all like low-budget antics.
You can talk about the advantages of the film for a long time. This is an acting game, and special effects. This also includes the magnificent script of the film, which slowly opens the curtain of secrecy and does not let the viewer get bored. Immediately and cameraman work, performing its task - to convey the idea of ​​the author. Well and most importantly - the design of the film, which is simply magnificent. The funeral home is beautiful - that’s exactly what the den of Evil should look like. And about the numerous shootings of cemeteries, tombstones, a dark road and so on, there’s nothing to say - all this was done expertly. And most importantly - what is the point and the whole beauty of the film is the atmosphere. It seems to me that nowhere else has anyone managed to create such an atmospheric dark and gloomy film. I have never seen such a density of sensations - the film is simply addictive, and it does not make the plot, namely the feeling of mystery, danger and fear, which thicken and become almost tangible with bare hands. And special effects are used to the place and never become an end in themselves (as it often happens now).
Some people may not like the movie due to the fact that it seems to be incomprehensible. True, he is quite surreal. This is manifested more likely not in separate scenes, but in the general plot, or rather in the connection between its Parts. However, in my opinion, this gives a particular charm to the film, adds to its unusualness and peculiar interest. Moreover, this surrealism made is quite masterful. After all, because there is no boundary between reality and delirium. And surrealism only enhances the atmosphere of fear.
Fantasy is a great movie that every horror fan must watch. This is an immortal masterpiece to which I without a doubt put the top five. If you have not seen him - then do not be lazy, find him and you will not regret it!
Special opinion: “I certainly liked the first part of Fantasy. It cannot be said that I was in awe of her, but still the film is solid and, importantly, very atmospheric. I watched it a long time ago, before the fight against piracy when one or another masterpiece could suddenly be shown on semi-legal channels.The most interesting thing is that before watching this film I did not know about his cult among the horror fans and therefore, in my opinion, I was able to evaluate it very objectively. the film is deeply respected - in to At the end of the 70s and the beginning of the 80s, such masterpieces as “Halloween”, “Friday, 13th” and, finally, “Fantasy” appeared. All of them later became series, thanks to countless sequels and gained the status of “cult” horror. “Fantasy” differs from the first two films in its surrealism - in some fragments of the film, I admit, I felt even a bit too much. In any case, the first part of “Fantasy” is brilliant - the film is not an imitation of anything and the director Don Cascarelli develops his story very excitingly and dynamically. Unfortunately, I could not find this movie on tape and watch it again in order to delve deeper into its essence. To watch this film, I would recommend creating a suitable atmosphere, namely - wait for the dark and watch it alone in an empty room. Then you are guaranteed pleasure! "

Звонок / Ring (1998)

Ring / Ring (1998)

Director: Nakata Hideo Cast: Nanako Matsushima, Hiroyuki Sanada, Miki Nakatani

In the beginning, I even thought, maybe it is worth giving a name in the original language? But he quickly rejected this idea, it is unlikely that any of the subscribers will correctly display them, and if someone reads, it will be a maximum of a couple of people, and the rest will remain perplexed. So in the original the name of the film is three katakan characters that are read by r-n-gu. This is the Japanese spelling of the English word ring, which I decided to put in the name. Hence the confusion with the Russian translation - ring has several meanings. One of them is a ring, that’s exactly how the film was translated by the one who voiced it. But it seems to me that the meaning here is more suitable for another meaning of the word - a call.
The film begins with Tomoko Oishi (Yuko Takeuchi / Yuko Takeuchi) sitting at home with his girlfriend and scaring each other with a terrible legend that has recently become popular. She talks about how a teenager who recorded the wrong channel recorded a terrible message on which a woman looks at him and says, “You will die in a week.” And when he looked at him, a phone rang, and someone told him, "You saw it." A week later, the teenager died. However, the legend doesn’t really amuse Tomoko - it turns out that a week ago she also looked at a strange tape with friends, and then someone called them right away (though she said nothing). And the reality becomes reality - Tomoko soon dies.
Reporter Asakawa Reiko (Matsushima Nanako / Matsushima Nanako) explores the latest urban legend about the deadly video cassette, but as usual with urban legends, apart from the stories of teenagers who were told by acquaintances who saw a person who was present during the implementation of the myth, they can’t find it. Until she finds out that her niece Tomoko, who recently died under mysterious circumstances, is just one of the victims of this myth. The investigation shows that together with the girl, three more of her friends died at exactly the same time. And their death was completely identical - they died of fear, and their faces were twisted into a grin of horror. Asakawa discovers that the four were relaxing a week ago in a rented house in Izu Prefecture. Moreover, in the picture on which they stand against the background of the house, the image of their faces is distorted - rather terrible faces are visible instead.
Asakawa travels to Izu Prefecture and finds the house rented by the deceased four. By chance, she notices the owner of the complex on an unwritten cassette (or rather something strange attracts her attention). Already in the very house where the dead teenagers were, she puts the cassette in the vidyak and starts it. A strange, completely incoherent and schizoid movie player is played, for two minutes, after which it ends, and a bell rings in the house. Thus, Asakawa remains to live only a week.
Asakawa turns to her ex-husband Takayama Ryuichi for help (actually his name is Ryuji, but on the cassette he turned into Ryuichi, that's why I will call him) (Hiroyuki Sanada). Together they begin an investigation, during which they find out what a strange mix of shots on the cassette, causing a terrible death, means. And they seem to succeed ...
The film is really good. This is one of the best horror movies I've seen lately. Firstly, it is interesting and unusual, if only because of its origin - the Japanese view of horrors in itself is curious. And the action unfolding in Japan is already entertaining in itself, and creates an atmosphere different from the films to which we are already accustomed. And all these "Japaneseisms" look very good, they give the film a special color, a specific atmosphere of mysticism and mystery of the alien, which surrounds the East in our minds. The East is a delicate matter, and the "Call" only confirms this once again. In this regard, some of the statements of the Americans who saw the film aroused in me simply anger. Quite often, you can read something like “if it weren’t for the Japanese situation,” or “you can imagine that this story happened in the South (USA),” or something similar. Yet how much they are not able to accept someone else's culture, how much they are stagnant in their stupid and blind patriotism.
In the USA, this film was watched only by inveterate horror fans who are not afraid of subtitles, since there is no duplicated version of the film. Fortunately, this process is much simpler for us - there are no special requirements for dubbing, and it would be wrong to call our dubbing dubbing - a man reading a text is not dubbing.