I, Madman (1989)

Absolutely Fantastic

If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

There are better movies of two hours length. I loved the actress'performance.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

The trailer made this flick look like fun - it seemed like I had stumbled on some forgotten 80s horror gem - but what a piece of crap it turned out to be! It sucks on so many levels, that while watching the movie, I was already looking forward to reading a couple of funny reviews on IMDb completely trashing it. However, even this turned out to be too much to ask.Who was the intended audience? The arty farty crowd will probably find it too stupid, while the average horror fans will be bored out of their minds by the pretentious arty crap and the complete lack of nudity and real gore. Perhaps it was for lonely women, who may identify with the annoying bookworm girl? Twilight for housewives? The script is very, very dumb, yet it seems to takes itself quite seriously... infuriating! This was made in 1989, before the advent of hipsters, but it pisses me off in a way that only hipsters tend to. Perhaps they will like this flick then. It has this kind of "ironic" half arsed pussy vibe over it, and for sure they will love the stop motion clay crap that shows up in the final scene to magically save the helpless bookworm girl and her pussy ass boyfriend. That's right, the flick ends with a shot of the stupid girl staring satisfied and romantically out of the window that the villain and the clay stop motion crap just crashed out of minutes before she was about to be killed.

"I, Madman," is a lower budget horror film that plays with the idea that reading can draw monsters into the real world. The story attempts to blend a dark and horrific tale with the sleazy conventions found in pulp novels. While the goal definitely has potential, the execution is lacking. IM is bogged down by slow pacing and an unfulfilling development of the main antagonist. The failings are very unfortunate because this film had the potential to be scary, innovative, and engaging.The premise of the film is not really new. The plot is based on the idea that reading and interacting with a text has the ability to make the subject of the text a reality. Essentially, this is a theme explored by European mystics over the centuries. This film tried to take a "magical" assumption and apply it to the horror movie genre. In the past, this idea has usually been used in demonic film, for example, "The Evil Dead." The ingenuity here is contextualizing magic in the more mundane. The magical books are not esoteric religious. Rather, they are pulp novels written by a demented mystic and alchemist. The situating of dark magic within a mass produced yet poorly distributed article of mass consumption is creepy. The problem is that this part of the story is left mostly untold. The film seems to rush through any background setting so as to allow more shots of dimly lit corridors and shadows. Needless to say, the lack of development hurts the film far more than the "spooky" scenes lead to enjoyable mood. A second shortcoming is the story's reliance on characters to act stupidly when confronted with desperate situations. The assumption that humans react with less thought when pressured is valid. The assumption that humans become incoherent stupid messes when pressured is spurious. The film makers advance the story a great deal by relying on stupid characters as a plot device. This second assumption causes the film to overly distance itself from reality. In essence, the film lures people in with questions about horrifying occult evil placed in plain sight and then never answers those questions in a plausible way.On the whole, this is a devilishly fun idea involving off beat and unique antagonists. The film falters due to slow pacing, lack of background, and stupid by definition protagonists. The degree of negative criticism found here is unfortunate. IM really did have the potential to be a fresh take on some tried and true genre motifs. The lack of thought by the film makers led to a movie that is barely mediocre. With the current vogue of remaking films, IM would benefit from fresh eyes and a better thought out story line. However, the possibility of this film ever getting such a chance is vanishingly small.On a personal note, I loved this film as a kid. Watching it again provided that warm and fuzzy feeling typical of nostalgia. It also informed me that, as a child, I had some very lax criteria for evaluating movies. Should you choose to see this film, it makes a pleasant prequel to a nap after a large greasy meal. 5.5 stars out of 10.

The setup here is a typical fold. An actress has a day job in a book store. She reads horror books and imagines herself in them. One day, she comes across an author who, when writing, had the story and real life merge. In reading the books, they "come alive."Her actor and book friends (plus a pianist) are murdered to provide parts of the writers face. This is such a clever idea that it attracted me to dig out this old project. The writer even understood the redhead thing: the first murder is to get the red hair of an actress we see playing Desdemona. Natch, the boyfriend is a police detective assigned to the case.What we see is simply turning the crank, but when do poor production values bother kids? The idea is the thing. It isn't a folded gialli, instead a dim reference. But its better at root than "Stay Alive," a similarly folded kiddiething with which I saw this.Ted's Evaluation -- 2 of 3: Has some interesting elements.

I, Madman starts in a hotel during the 50's. A guest named Dr. Kessler (special make-up effects man Randall William Cook) leaves the building as the front desk clerk (Raf Nazario as Rafael Nazario) receives a phone call from the room next to Dr. Kessler's complaining about animal noises, the manager (Bob Frank) goes to investigate & is attacked by a monstrous half man, half jackal creature which Dr. Kessler had created. Virginia Clayton (Jenny Wright) stops reading her horror novel entitled 'Much of Madness, More of Sin' by Malcolm Brand at this point. Virginia works in a used bookstore & enjoys reading, recently she has discovered Much of Madness, More of Sin & has been engrossed. The next day at work Virginia tries to find the other novel by the same author called 'I, Madman'. Virginia has no luck but when she returns home she finds a copy waiting for her outside her apartment door, she starts to read as the book once again features Dr. Kessler who is madly in love with an actress named Anna Templar (Jenny Wright again) who doesn't return the sentiment saying that he is ugly. As an offering to Anna, Dr. Kessler slices off his facial features with a scalpel & starts to collect various bits 'n' pieces from unwilling donors that he grafts on his own face. Of course this is all fiction & the book goes on to describe him brutally murdering a woman & scalping her. The next day Virginia sees a report in a local newspaper which tells of the murder of an actress & one of Virginia's friends named Colette Berkowitz (Michelle Jordan), after this event & a face to face meeting with Kessler before he kills & slices the ears off a pianist (Bruce Wagner) who lives near her, Virginia is convinced that the character of Dr. Kessler is responsible & comes to life when she reads I, Madman. Virginia's boyfriend Detecitve Richard Channing (Clayton Rohner) is on the case but has a hard time believing Virginia's story about character's from a horror novel coming to life & committing murder's, as the murder's of people connected with Virginia continue in the same vein as I, Madman she realises that the novel ends with Anna, whom she think's she is in reality, having her heart cut out by the deranged Kessler...Directed by Tibor Takacs I was pleasantly surprised by just how good I, Madman was, I'd never previously heard of it but I think I've uncovered a bit of a hidden gem. The script by David Chaskin has a lot more depth than you might expect & offers a little more originality than most. At heart I, Madman is a slasher but it tries to do something different with the premise & tries to stay away from the clichés which was both refreshing & something I wasn't expecting. It does a nice job of blurring the lines between the fantasy world of the novels & the reality in which Virginia lives. How a character from a novel can suddenly become real isn't explained that well but the story felt solid still & it didn't really matter to me that much as I, Madman just seemed work. The killer's motives are actually quite good & have at least some thought put into them, his connection with Virginia & why he focuses his attentions on her is also believable & not just coincidental like her being in the wrong place at the wrong time, there's a method to all the madness in I, Madman. It takes a while to get going but I never found it boring or felt my interest was waining, the characters are pretty strong & enough happens to satisfy & entertain. There isn't much blood or gore but what's here is effective & quite brutal looking as Kessler runs around killing people with his straight razor, there's a scalping, someone has his ears sliced off, someone's lips are cut off too & a gruesome scene where Dr. Kessler reveals his face early on minus his nose, ears & lips. There is a monster in I, Madman as well brought to life with stop-motion animation which looks impressive considering the budget, I believe the people involved in making I, Madman had enthusiasm & cared about the finished product which goes a long way. Technically the film is very good & well made, director Takacs manages to create some really good sequences especially the ominous moodily lit & shot murder set-pieces which are more effective than they have any right to be. The acting is very strong throughout which also helps give I, Madman a certain credibility that other cheap horror/slashers simply don't have. Overall I didn't think I would but I actually rather liked I, Madman, don't like that title though. A bit of a sleeper & I highly recommend I, Madman to horror fans, as for everyone else I still think it's a worthwhile film & definitely worth watching.