Terror (1979)

I love this movie so much

To me, this movie is perfection.

Beautiful, moving film.

It is a whirlwind of delight --- attractive actors, stunning couture, spectacular sets and outrageous parties. It's a feast for the eyes. But what really makes this dramedy work is the acting.

"Terror" by Norman J. Warren is a film full of surprises. It starts in the 17th century with the persecution of a witch - she tries to escape but is caught and burnt at the stake. While she was burning, some people died. One death looked like an accident caused by carelessness, but the others had clearly been caused by supernatural forces. This is the beginning of the dying spree, and three centuries later… Three centuries later, the killings will come with double force. Many people are killed. Is it the witch or a human agent? The clues seem to point to one character in particular, but some killings are so "fantastic" that we are led to think about a supernatural agent.Anyway, I was not concerned about the plot. The film is quite inventive, and in some ways almost resembles a giallo. The preliminaries of each murder are stylish and dynamic; there are many pretty girls in the film (sure thing, Norman has really a good taste in what refers to feminine beauty), and the soundtrack is inspired and helps to enhance the film. In short, fast cameras, a good soundtrack and a bizarre and interesting way of telling the story. But one thing the film lacks – Nudity. We only once see a woman performing a show almost naked. She's ugly. And there were so many pretty girls in this film, and not even one of them… Anyway, even so, I think that "Terror" is an enjoyable film, one can say that Norman J. Warren has a very personal way of making films. Whatever you say about his films you can't deny his creativity. I've only seen three of Norman J. Warren's films – This one called "Terror", "Inseminoid" and "Prey", and all of them share this common trait – they are bizarre and addictive, so if you're looking for something different in films, check out his films.

Norman J. Warren is a director I only discovered in recent years. After having seen his "Satan's Slave", I was so enthusiastic (can't even fully explain why exactly), that I went on a quest to see the man's other efforts. That's when I discovered I had already seen "Inseminoid" about 5 years earlier (and liked it). I even re-watched that one, to bring things into perspective with his other horror films. And now, I can safely say I'm a fan of the man. Sure, all of his films are imperfect in more than one way. At more than one point, they'll always get a little goofy. But the man never fails to entertain me. And in his own, unique & British low-budget way, he always delivers. One thing I like a lot about his movies, is that his special effects are (almost) always on-set practical realizations. And not only he tries a lot of them, he also tries to push them to the max with the limited means he has. In "Terror", for example, he levitates a whole frickin' car to the level of tree-tops, and then lets it crash into the ground. Never mind that you know how it's done. It's just too much fun to see it happen. And the same goes for the various make-up effects. They're not on par with what, let's say, Tom Savini was doing at the time, but they're always gross & fun. And you can always count on a bit of random nudity in his flicks. As for his stories... well, they rattle and shake altogether, often not making too much sense, but damned be me if I ever was not entertained by any of them. In short: I think Norman J. Warren is a long forgotten director any true horror geek should check out at one point, sooner or later. "Terror" pretty much is a witch movie with slasher overtones, and an entertaining one while at it. Just for fun, I'll give a rundown of the films I watched already from his filmography and slap 'em with a rating:"Satan's Slave" (1976) - 7/10"Inseminoid" (1981) - 6/10"Terror" (1978) - 6/10"Prey" (1978) 5/10"Bloody New Year" (1987) - 4/10 (even a flunked Norman J. Warren movie doesn't mean it wasn't a fun watch)

In the case of most independent movies we should always remain aware of the restrictions that a low budget creates. In the case of 'Terror', the main restriction involves lack of acting talent. Other than a couple of 'Doctor Who' regulars (Michael Craze & William Russell) and future 'Blake's 7' & 'Dempsey & Makepeace' star Glynis Barber, this is a film full of performers coming from nowhere and travelling towards similar territory. Oh, I forgot about Peter Mayhew, but then we're used to seeing him as a giant walking carpet in the 'Star Wars' series! Here is a rare opportunity to see the man behind the Chewbacca mask. HOWEVER, the lack of quality actors is the only drawback in a film that manages to be creepy, gory and visually stunning, marking it as one of the last great British horror films. Norman J. Warren was a director with flair and imagination and we can't blame him if he was shackled by low budgets. Here he offers an impressive homage to European shockmeister Dario Argento and the whole point of the film is that a malevolent evil force swoops randomly, creating tense moments and leaving the viewer unsettled. Some of the greatest moments in 'Terror' focus on the unexpected - and in original ways; sometimes the expected shock arrives, sometimes an innocent occurrence creates just as dramatic a twist. In closing, I would comment that too many people seem hypnotised by big budget flashiness. Sure, that kind of film has its place in cinema, but I wouldn't miss the quirkiness and unpredictability of a good low-budget film and this film is one of the best. Nice one, Norman!

Terror starts in a large Country house somewhere just outside London that belongs to a film producer named James Garrick (John Nolan) where he happens to holding the premiere of his latest film to his close friends & colleagues, a horror film based on the long told legend of a Witch that was burnt at the stake by his ancestors & vowed revenge on all the Garrick's descendant's of which John & Ann Garrick (Carolyn Courage) are the last. Once the film has finished one of John's annoying friends Gary (Michael Craze) then tries to impress everyone with a party-trick, he appears to hypnotise an actress named Carol Tucker (Glynis Barber) but none believes it's for real & make him try to do the same to Ann. Much to everyones surprise he seems to succeed & Ann is put into a trance where she stands up, walks over to a sword hanging above the fireplace & attempts to kill James before snapping out of it. A short time later Carol is found brutally murdered. Things quickly become worse as almost everyone who associates with either James or Ann ends up dead. James is convinced that the Witch has come back to fulfil her curse & kill the last of the Garrick's... him!This British production was directed by Norman J. Warren & I have to admit that I rather liked it. The script by David McGillivray who also pops up in a cameo as a TV reporter, isn't perfect but I thought it was lots of fun in a bad 70's low budget exploitation sort of way. Terror opens with a really cool film-within-a-film moment that I certainly wasn't expecting, it then gallops along from one gory murder to another with a bit of padding between consisting of some wonderfully cheesy, bad, funny & downright entertaining dialogue that seem to have everyone endlessly saying 'bloody' & 'luv' as many times as they can in the same conversation in a Cockney accent, great stuff & they really don't make 'em like this anymore! Add to this a really funny soft-core porno shoot that has some priceless dialogue of it's own, a murder mystery, a strip show, hideously dated 70's cars & clothes, a strange bloke named Phil the Greek (Chuck Julian) & an over-the-top climax full of pointless supernatural goings-on! I just thought Terror worked as a whole, a film that is maybe better than the sum of it's parts, I had a great time watching it & as far as I'm concerned that's all that matters. On the negative side when the climax arrives the killers identity is bland & to be honest I'm not sure why the filmmakers decided to hide it in the first place & going by the film's logic & ancient curse why are people unconnected with the Garrick's killed like Phil the Greek?Director Warren does a fairly effective job, he creates some decent set-pieces like when Carol is chased into the dark wooden shed full of sharp dangerous looking tools but there are some not so effective ones like the silly bit when a car starts to levitate & float. He keeps things moving along at a reasonable pace manages to deliver some good atmosphere & did you notice the UK quad poster for one of his earlier exploitation films Satan's Slave (1976) that makes a prominent appearance in the background of several shots? The murders in Terror are quite brutal & gory, just the way I like them. Someone is stabbed & has a knife stuck through their throat, someone has their throat cut with wire, is impaled & then ends up in pieces in the back of a rubbish truck, someone has a broken plane of glass slice their throat open & generally speaking there was plenty of the red stuff being thrown around to keep me satisfied at least.Technically Terror is a pretty solid production, flying cars apart. The cinematography is nice enough, the locations, special effects & production design are all good while Terror is a competently made film throughout. The acting was OK & I really liked watching a horror film populated by adults rather than annoying American teenagers for a change.Overall I actually liked Terror a fair bit, it moves along at a nice pace, is gory, has a certain British eccentricity about it & it's good trashy exploitative fun throughout. I definitely recommend Terror, to horror fans in particular. They just don't, won't or can't make 'em like this anymore!