RELATED: The Scary Sparseness and Silence of ‘The Thing’
Investigations reveal it to be the corporeal embodiment of Satan, and soon after it begins possessing members of the group after it begins to escape from its confinement. The priest hopes they will be able to provide answers to the strange cylinder of green liquid that he has found in the basement. The head priest has died in mysterious circumstances, and his replacement (an unnamed priest played by the always watchable Donald Pleasence) invites physicist Howard Birack ( Victor Wong) and a small group of his students to join him in the monastery. The plot of Prince of Darkness centers around a Los Angeles monastery owned by the mysterious Brotherhood of Sleep, an ancient sect that communicates through dreams. More Apocalyptic Than Any Other Apocalypse Trilogy Film The Apocalypse Trilogy has never been more accurately named than here. It manages to make The Thing look tame, and that’s not something just any film can accomplish. This is a film dripping with atmosphere, with the shadow of impending doom lingering over every second like the grim reaper hiding just out of frame. To some extent this is understandable - it doesn’t have the strong characters of The Thing or the creativity of In the Mouth of Madness, but what Prince of Darkness does have is a feeling of sheer, unrelenting dread. It’s widely considered the weakest film in the trilogy, and often ranks toward the bottom of Carpenter’s filmography. It’s a brilliant premise, but judging by reviews both past and present, Prince of Darkness failed to reach the highs of its companions. They also take place primarily in a single location, creating a microcosm of terror that will destroy the world should it escape. Lovecraft, and see their unfortunate casts of characters being confronted by beings beyond our comprehension, forcing an examination into humanity’s place in a vast and uncaring universe. All three draw heavily from the works of H.
Lovecraftian god title generator series#
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for another of his films based around the inscrutable world of cosmic horror, one that explores many of the same concepts as The Thing while pushing them in new and (whisper it) better directions - none other than his 1987 supernatural masterpiece, Prince of Darkness.Īlthough unrelated to its predecessor in terms of plot, Carpenter considers Prince of Darkness to be the second entry in his self-dubbed Apocalypse Trilogy, a series that would end with 1994’s cult classic In the Mouth of Madness. and Blade Runner that both released in the same window being two reasons), but its subsequent acclaim has led to most of its early critics falling mysteriously silent. Quite why the film received such a backlash remains unclear (competition from E.T. The Thing is the most infamous example, a film that is now considered a landmark of the genre but was initially met with a level of vitriol that is almost unimaginable (with terms like “instant junk” and the “quintessential moron movie” being thrown around like confetti). While his title as the master of horror is now undisputed, there was a time when his films were largely derided by critics, only being re-evaluated following successful runs on home video and the midnight circuit.
One of the most tragic facts about cinema is that John Carpenter is only being recognized as one of horror’s greatest directors decades after he should have been.
0 kommentar(er)
