Prince of Darkness
1987 Directed by John Carpenter
Synopsis
A research team finds a mysterious cylinder in a deserted church. If opened, it could mean the end of the world.
Cast
Genres
Popular reviews
More-
Whenever I hear the synth-heavy compositions of Carpenter it always feels like meeting an old friend. One you, more often than not, get along with really well.
Prince of Darkness is an odd beast of a horror film and, after this rewatch with a gap of some 15 years preceding it, one I can easily rank among Carpenter's best. This film's scope is a lot bigger than I'm used to from him and it actually has a very clever script, deftly touching upon some quasi philosophical issues without getting heavy handed or making an ass out of itself.
In a film that expertly uses the tropes of both the slasher and the zombie genre, Carpenter pits science versus religion, but…
-
Anytime is a good time for a John Carpenter film.
-
Film 15 of Steve Grzesiak's Worldwide Month of Scary Bastard Films
Hey, guys. Remember when I said I was going to watch only one horror film from each country and that I would only watch all new stuff?
"That's right, Steve, you did!"
I lied.
"ARRRRRRRRRGH!" *splat*
Well, I've had trouble fitting stuff in and plus I thought it would be cool to end the month revisiting a couple of my all time favourites and seeing if they still stood up. There have been a lot of great reviews flying round for Prince Of Darkness recently, so I couldn't help myself, really. I'm REALLY glad that I made that decision because I think this viewing may have made it my…
-
" You will not be saved by the Holy Ghost. You will not be saved by the god Plutonium. In fact, YOU WILL NOT BE SAVED!"
-
In many respects, this is ingenious stuff. The imagery is consistently surreal (Cocteau and Dali are given explicit nods), the concept is both original and cerebral, it features one of Carpenter's best scores, and the use of anamorphic lenses renders a large number of compositions almost subconsciously unsettling. Unfortunately, after a brilliant set up, the film flounders. It not only runs out of imagination, trading both physics and metaphysics for zombie action, but even as a Carpenter-style drama of a confined group under siege, it pales in comparison to The Thing, Assault on Precinct 13 or Ghosts of Mars. Still, I've seen this more times than I care to admit, and can't imagine that I won't see it repeatedly in the future.
64/100
-
John Carpenter's forgotten masterpiece?
Okay, maybe 'masterpiece' is perhaps slightly overstating its merits - after all, Prince Of Darkness has a fair few rough edges, one or two questionable performances and a slightly daft semi-central premise that would stop it from perhaps ever seriously being considered as such.
But for me, as someone who can even find some good in Carpenter's clunkers (except Village Of The Damned, obviously), this deserves to be considered as one his very best films, just below titles like Halloween, The Thing and Assault On Precinct 13 which are normally considered in such discussions as his best.
He creates an unnerving atmosphere right from the very opening scene - an atmosphere that threatens to be derailed…
Recent reviews
More-
In many respects, this is ingenious stuff. The imagery is consistently surreal (Cocteau and Dali are given explicit nods), the concept is both original and cerebral, it features one of Carpenter's best scores, and the use of anamorphic lenses renders a large number of compositions almost subconsciously unsettling. Unfortunately, after a brilliant set up, the film flounders. It not only runs out of imagination, trading both physics and metaphysics for zombie action, but even as a Carpenter-style drama of a confined group under siege, it pales in comparison to The Thing, Assault on Precinct 13 or Ghosts of Mars. Still, I've seen this more times than I care to admit, and can't imagine that I won't see it repeatedly in the future.
64/100
-
Me gusta mucho Carpenter pero el resultado final de esta no me gustó del todo. De hecho, me atrevería a decir que Vampires me gustó más, y eso que me agradan bastante la temática apocalíptica y de dimensiones paralelas; como ejemplo puedo poner también a In the Mouth of Madness.
Quizá me falta comprender mejor la obra de Carpenter o qué sé yo, pero sentí que a pesar de la buena musicalización, el ritmo está un poco raro. Y los personajes, no empecemos con los personajes. Se me hacía muy extraño como reaccionaban los tipos que estaban en la casa... pasaban cosas raras y ellos como si nada. ¿Me voy al callejón oscuro? ¡Por qué no! Muy acartonados en general.
Lo interesante eran las teorías sobre el bien y el mal, secretos de la iglesia, la existencia simultánea de las fuerzas que rigen nuestro mundo. Buenas ideas; no muy buena ejecución.
-
john carpenter is mai dawg
-
Very standard horror flick which is disappointing when under the helm of John Carpenter. The pacing is all wrong in this film and none of the characters are competently developed.
-
Carpenter taps into an elementary, almost primal dread as he casually explores religion and metaphysics in the midst of glorious urban blight. He edits you into a comfortable lull and then begins to turn up the heat as the score thumps away at your soul. Jameson Parker must be his least interesting "leading man" ever )not the Carpenter has much use for conventional leading men) but Pleasance, Wong and Dun more than make up the slack. I was unfamiliar with Lisa Blount but she imbues her character with tremendous vitality and evokes a great deal of sympathy. I had thought that Carpenter was responsible for two horror masterpieces, but it may well be three.
-
creative
-
Oh John Carpenter. What odd movies you make.
Like so many of his films, this movie is an interesting mix of humor and camp. Sometimes he manages to pull that mix off better than he does here, although I tend to think his most successful movies trend strongly either one way or the other (Big Trouble in Little China went with the camp, Halloween went with the horror). Camp and horror are an uneasy mix, and while there were moments in this film that I found rather unsettling, they were invariably followed up by something that just looked dumb or silly.
Part of the problem is the cast, many of which are just not good. Dennis Dun's line readings worked…
-
Carpenter's horror is heavy on the ominous atmosphere. Love his reliance on mid angle shots, emphasizing characters relationships with one another and their surroundings. Less reliant on gore (although not devoid of it) than tone. Probably one too many explanatory conversations, but a solid horror film.
-
A curiously parapsychological film that tries to ask scientific questions about a supernatural concept and almost does so successfully. Along the way it kind of loses its own mind and gets caught up in absurdity.
Then it becomes a zombie movie.
But none of these are the point. The point is that this film is entertaining, satisfying, and not bad at all despite my concerns to the contrary.
Plot's okay. soundtrack is this weird synthetic pulsating noise that should have been MUCH more irritating. The acting was solid. The direction was not terribly artsy, instead working more towards the goals of the film as a horror piece.
I find myself comparing this stylistically and conceptually to In The Mouth of Madness, which is a pretty apt comparison. I'll leave that discussion for another time, though.