Kelly WandPrince of Darkness
August 16th 2006 06:55
Dumb? Well, Carpenter wrote this under the name of Martin Quartermass in reference to a series of nineteen fifties British Sci-fi Horror flicks. Harking back to an era when men in rubber monster suits could be explained by a dose of radiation, Carpenter doesn’t demand you suspend your disbelief. He demands you leave it in the car outside.
Let me give you a plot outline. The Catholic Church has been keeping the devil in a bottle and generally lying about the truth of creation. There is some reference to Jesus being a spaceman and I think we’re supposed to believe he stuck the cork in. All the details are skipped over fairly quickly lest we expose them for the bullshit they are. The devil wakes up and wants out of the bottle (which I suppose is justifiable motivation because that bottle is looking pretty grubby after all these Millennia). Surprisingly, the devil has been locked in a bottle that can only be opened from the inside. He wants to possess someone who will reach into a mirror and pull his Dad out so reality can end. As you do in such circumstances, the Church calls in a bunch of physicists (including cannon fodder student assistants) to prove that the devil is real. You see, all you have to do is say it out loud and the whole thing disintegrates into the kind of stupidity that no amount of talk regarding tachyon transmissions can save.
Donald Pleasance and Victor Wong over act their little cotton socks off. Hero Jameson Parker has all the presence (not to mention acting skills) of a particularly rotten lump of second hand lumber. Alice Cooper is wheeled out and told to look like a scary vagrant. It is not a role that stretches him.
So why do I love this film? Why do I clutch this plastic box to my breast with a child like sense of treasure found. I’m not going to hand you any of that nonsense about camp classics because it doesn’t apply. Despite poor plotting and woeful acting, Prince of Darkness succeeds in being creepy. As soon as the screen goes dark and Carpenter’s creepy synthesiser score kicks in, you know that you are in for some kind of ride to creepsville.
And now a history lesson. Carpenter’s debut feature was “Dark Star”; a tale of hippies floating around space and blowing shit up. They have captured an alien that looks remarkably like a painted beach ball with feet and one of their bombs is having an existential crisis. Responsible critics of the time lined up to place it atop there worst film lists whilst the deranged and the drugged dropped acid and queued for midnight screenings. Despite its obvious directorial flourishes, no one was predicting big things for Carpenter.
Still, the thing had found an audience – no matter how odd – and thus the microscopic budget was raised for “Assault on Precinct 13”. When Howard Hawks made Rio Bravo, he liked the plot so much that he used it two more times. Carpenter figured he might as well borrow the themes too except he set his film in the gang lands of East LA. American audiences reacted with complete indifference. Across the Atlantic, however, a rogue screening at the London Film Festival had the critics there screaming superlatives and bandying words like Auteur and Genius. (All those things that a director secretly dreams of hearing).
With the exception of Pan Glide, most of Carpenter’s most obvious stylistic flourishes were already in place. By the opening shot of his next film, that was there too. The word from Europe had secured him another shot. Fortunately, the film he chose to make was “Halloween” and, not only did it secure an absurd amount of critical praise, it did box office. Carpenter could now put his name above title on the Marquee and it actually meant something.
“The Fog” came next. At the time, serious critics – who despise genre films at the best of times – had little time for it. Audiences just didn’t want to see pirate ghost stories either. The film, however, like many Carpenter movies, just keeps looking better over the years. “Escape from New York” followed. The initial box office wasn’t huge but any film that inspires a thousand pale imitations has got to have something going for it. I remember going to see it five times on its initial run.
Then Carpenter produced his masterpiece, “The Thing”. Using the kind of big budget that only the biggest studios can throw at a project, the man excelled. Great photography, amazing effects, brilliant Ennio Morricone soundtrack and a fantastic cast giving note perfect performances. Audiences hated it with a vengeance. They stayed away in droves and kept their friends with them. Over the years, thanks largely to the rise of home videos and DVDs, its reputation has grown but, at the time, it seriously looked like a career killer.
Playing safe, he fell back on a Stephen King project; “Christine”. It isn’t bad but it isn’t fabulous either. It certainly rates highly in the King adaptation stakes (but that isn’t saying much given the competition). Back in the studio’s good graces he followed up with “Starman”. For Carpenter, it was a risky film, pushing the science fiction genre out into the realms of romance, this was a film that required characterisation and performance. It is a brilliant film and it did well at the box office. Unfortunately, as is often the case, it was over shadowed by another film about a friendly alien visitor trying to get home. Carpenter’s film was more Capra than Spielberg and is definitely worth a rental – particularly if you are having a quite night in with someone you hope is not going home.
These days, it is hard to believe a Supernatural Kung Fu sword and sorcery epic would be looked at as something abnormal. The world has since seen Hong Kong cinema and they have got a taste for it. When Carpenter made “Big Trouble in Little China”, the general response was that the man had gone insane. Subversively casting white “hero” Kurt Russell as bumbling idiot side kick didn’t help matters much either. It wasn’t the first time that Carpenter found the doors slamming in face. Tired of big studio politics, there was a moment where it looked like it would be the last.
“Prince of Darkness” was his back to basics flick. As soon as his creepy trade mark synth score ticks in the wonderful tingle of excitement runs up your spine. The effects are all low budget in the camera but they work brilliantly. The frame drips with fear. The absurdity of the story line soon vanishes in this air of menace. As the forces of evil gather, all cinematic sins are forgiven.
Finally, here is another film that has improved with time. This was about the fourth time I’ve seen it and each viewing has improved my enjoyment. Have a night in. Turn of the lights and cuddle up with someone who likes to be scared. It works for me.
| 77 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
Comment by Sisi
But snaps for another great post!!
Comment by Bob Short
There are certain film reviewers who I have learnt that if they hate a film, I'm gonna love it. When David Stratten at the movie show gave "The Devil's Rejects" a record breaking no star review, I was queuing at the cinema first thing next morning! I was not disappointed.