Silent Night, Bloody Night (1972)

Surprisingly incoherent and boring

Powerful

A lot of fun.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

"Silent Night, Bloody Night" is a frustrating film. It manages to set a great mood--chilling and brutal. Yet, it then seems to lose so much momentum late in the film--and left me feeling totally uninterested.When the film begins, you learn that a rich guy died 20 years ago under mysterious circumstances. In the meantime, his home has sat abandoned until recently when his son declares that he's going to sell the place. Soon after his attorney arrives in town to finalize the deal, folks start getting hacked to pieces (the first few are amazingly realistic). All this worked well. However, to explain who it was and how it was, the film had a HUGE and awkward flashback sequence that seemed to take up the last third of the movie!! Surely all this could have been done in a much more straight forward and less sloppy manner. And, as a result the film left me wondering if perhaps a re-write might have resulted in this becoming a much more popular and worthy movie. As it is, I'd only recommend it to die-hard horror fans or folks wanting to see a young Mary Waronov in a major role.

East coast manor, once used by its owner as an asylum before his mysterious death by fire, is about to be sold during the Christmas holiday by the grandson of the deceased; someone on the grounds, armed with an ax, doesn't like that idea. Demented horror outing with some interesting visual ideas, some brutal killings, a chilly, shuddery ambiance, scary music and creaking doors--but no talent behind the camera for narrative or character motivation. Director Theodore Gershuny, working from a screenplay by Ira Teller and Jeffrey Konvitz (the same Konvitz who later wrote "The Sentinel"), uses subjective camera-tracking (innovative for the genre at the time) and sepia-toned flashbacks to create a skin-crawling mood. This works for a while until the poorly-formed 'plot' comes to the fore, and the viewer soon realizes the hat-tricks by Gershuny were just window-dressing and that the finale isn't going to live up to expectations. *1/2 from ****

I love discovering new-to-me American horror flicks of the 1970s. These independent, backwoods-shot productions usually showcase some then-startling gore effects, as well as creepy atmosphere and a sense of gritty realism usually absent from the slicker Hollywood productions. SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT fits the bill as an all-but-forgotten movie from this era, but sadly it turns out to be anything but a gem. Saying that, this early slasher flick even manages to pre-date Black Christmas by a year, and HALLOWEEN fans will find much of interest in the p.o.v. killer shots and the eerie atmosphere that highlight this unusual little movie. The film was obviously made on the cheap, and in many places things are far too dark to see what's going on. Despite the best intentions of the filmmakers, this film's a chore to sit through. The story is slow beyond belief and the narrative stilted and mishandled; the editing of various scenes is done in such a way to make even the simplest shots confusing to the viewer. In essence, it's about a creepy old abandoned house that may be home to a murderous lunatic, plus some back story about an old asylum. The plot itself is fairly simple and uneventful, at least until the final denouement which has a classic twist of an ending. As is usual for most '70s horror flicks, there's a little gruesomeness, including a double axe murder and a broken bottle in the face, but nothing too off-putting for seasoned buffs who like their horror of the older, more classic variety. One of the most positive aspects of the film lies in director Theodore Gershuny's work – there are some genuinely inventive moments, enhanced by weird camera angles, and an excellent flashback sequence involving inmates taking over the asylum in which things get really spooky and eerie.The story is cheaply acted by a bunch of no-name or cult stars such as Warhol favourite Mary Woronov. Guest star Patrick O'Neal doesn't hang around for long, while John Carradine doesn't say a word! Leading actor James Patterson was dying of cancer while the film was being made, adding a further level of grubbiness to the thing. SILENT NIGHT, BLOODY NIGHT is a very obscure movie, and it's easy to see why; low budget, quite similar to dozens of others, and with no big names to market it. Despite these factors it works in places and provides a fair few chills during the short running time.

I enjoyed this and did not guess the killer. That is always a good thing. The film obviously was made on a very, very slim budget, the night scenes are almost impossible to see. In a film like this, that can be good and bad. There was potential here for a real old fashioned early 1970's Gothic thriller. It has its moments, and you can see the potential is there. The director had some good ideas, and several scenes are memorable. But the cheap budget does hurt. The performances by Mary Woronov and James Patterson are perfect for this kind of film. Patterson always intrigued me, you cannot really find anything about this very interesting actor who died very young. I know he won a Tony award, did a lot of stage work, appeared in two interesting Mission Impossible episodes, and died either while filming this movie, or shortly afterward. He was only 40 and apparently had terminal cancer. He reminds me a an early version of Robert Davi in appearance, and could have had a good career as a character actor had he lived. I wish we could find out more about him. The film does mislead somewhat in listing Patrick O'Neal and John Carradine as stars. I am not sure what Carradine is even doing in the film, and O'Neal is not in it for very long. All in all, though, I enjoyed this film.