Red-Barracuda George A. Romero changed modern horror with his debut feature, Night of the Living Dead. He has now become synonymous with the zombie sub-genre but he also directed other very interesting films of different types. Perhaps his best of these is Martin, shot on grainy 16mm, its very low budget and low-key yet very intense in places. Like David Cronenberg's later film Rabid (1977) it takes the vampire film and revises it, albeit in a very different way. A shy teenager called Martin moves to a dilapidated Pittsburgh suburb to stay with his uncle Cuda who is convinced he is a vampire, tracing his curse back to their Eastern European descent. Martin also believes himself to be a vampire but not of the traditional supernatural type. He habitually attacks and drugs young women only to then slash them and drink their blood.Like other Romero films, this is another horror film which is far better written and acted as is usual for such low budget fare. It works on a few different levels and combines the psychological drama with vampire film and serial killer flick. The result is impressively original. The characters are far from one dimensional. Martin is played very sympathetically by John Amplas, yet we know he murders young women; Cuda is overbearing and bullish, at the same time his harsh attitude towards Martin is hardly entirely wrong. So right away, we in the audience are not given the usual clear cut characters to root for or dislike. Amplas is really very good and on the strength of this he should have had a great acting career, while Lincoln Maazel is also very strong as Cuda. The remainder of the cast are also impressive and put in naturalistic performances, including Romero himself as a priest.Whether or not Martin is really a vampire remains essentially ambiguous and it is left to the viewer to decide. The black and white sequences could be fantasy or they could be a distant moment from the vampire Martin's past. My guess is the former but it can be read in different ways. What is for sure though is that the iconography of the vampire film is modernised considerably. Rather than fangs and cloaks its razor blades and hypodermic needles. Not only this but Martin's vampiric urges seem to stem from a dysfunctional sexuality, unlike the libidinous actions of Dracula. He becomes an anonymous local celebrity when he becomes a regular caller on a night-time radio talk show, even here he is not taken seriously but it proves to be the only place where he can express his inner thoughts. Martin's attacks are almost a substitute for his impotency. The confrontational and disturbing opening sequence on a train illustrates the films decidedly modernist approach to this material. A second extended house invasion scene is even more unusual in its dynamics. The film ultimately ends with a final moment of visceral horror which is sudden, shocking and darkly ironic. Martin is a real triumph from Romero and one of the smarter horror films out there.

BA_Harrison Believing himself to be an 84-year-old vampire, Martin (John Amplas) kills to feed his thirst for blood, using a syringe to drug his victims and a razor blade to slice open their wrists. Will moving in with his elderly cousin and his granddaughter be his salvation or his downfall?George Romero is best known as the zombie guy, his non-living dead films receiving nowhere near as much attention as his celebrated 'of the Dead' series. It's a shame, because his work outside of the zombie genre contains several gems of the macabre that are just as worthy of attention as those featuring grisly gut-munching ghouls that have returned from the grave.Romero's 1976 'vampire' movie Martin, for example, takes an intelligent, innovative, and admirably ambiguous approach to its subject matter, yet still delivers enough genuine horror, shocks and bloodiness to appease those looking for more basic thrills.Martin's carefully planned assaults on his victims are brilliantly staged exercises in tension and fear, yet they make the viewer continually assess and question what they have seen. Is Martin really 'Nosferatu', his condition the result of a terrible family curse, or have his deranged relatives from 'the old country' warped his mind with their superstitious clap-trap?Romero never lets on either way, thereby making his film's shocking, bloody conclusion all the more powerful. Clever stuff indeed.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU That was the time before profiling and before scientific police, and even before the plague known as AIDS. Romero in his young age had to play the priest in this film of his, be the screenplay writer and the director. He had to do what so many others had done and have his own true, real Nosferatu or vampire or Count Dracula film. And here it is. Though it is shown as an old superstition from the old continent that has moved to the new continent, there is no rejuvenation, no renaissance, no second life to the myth and the end is to be expected and not to be in any way suspected or doubted. Then the film loses all its power because there is no escape for the poor Martin and no way out for the whole story that is self contained and locked up in a dying if not dead myth. Now does the technique used by Romero give a second life to that myth? Certainly not. A syringe does not frighten anyone. Some thick red blood does not disgust anyone. So it is flat and there is no way to find any depth in this cheap film.Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, University Paris Dauphine, University Paris 1 Pantheon Sorbonne & University Versailles Saint Quentin en Yvelines

Michael_Elliott Martin (1977) *** (out of 4) Some would call George Romero the greatest American horror director while others would label him a disappointment who got lucky with Night of the Living Dead and Dawn of the Dead. No matter which side of the fence you're on the one thing I've always admired is that Romero always stuck to his guns and did things he own way. Between the first two Dead movies Romero had a string of disappointments, which included the rarely seen There's Always Vanilla as well as The Crazies and Season of the Witch. The year before Dawn was released the director did for vampires what he did for zombies and that film is the now cult shocker Martin.Martin (John Amplas) boards a train headed for Pittsburgh where he is going to be living with his Uncle who plans on saving his soul before killing him. While on the train we learn why Martin is to be killed. That night he sneaks into the room of a young lady, drugs her to sleep and then slices her wrist open in order to drink her blood. Martin is not only a troubled young man but he also believes that he is a vampire but without the fangs, he must resort to other ways of seeking blood.Martin is a film I first saw nearly ten years ago and I really didn't care too much for it. Over the years I was somewhat shocked to see that many consider this the best horror film of the decade so I was looking forward to this second viewing. While I found the film slightly better this time around there were still many problems I had with the film.Anyone slightly familiar with this film will know about the legendary 2 ½ hour cut of the film, which was cut down for theatrical release and has gone missing since then.I'm not exactly sure what was in this longer version but I think viewing it that way would be the only way to get the full impact that the director was going for. Martin contains some brilliant moments but it's quite clear that a lot's missing here and that keeps the film from being a total achievement. What's most interesting is Romero updating the vampire myths including killing off everything we've learned from previous films. Martin has no fangs, no beautiful women and the sunlight really doesn't bother him.The film moves at a snails pace but that's not to say this is a boring film. The slow pace, like that in Dawn of the Dead, helps tell the story and lets us get to know Martin, his actions and those around him. It's very interesting getting to know this troubled kid and how those around him react towards him. Some feel sympathy while others feel horror.Romero takes his time in telling the story, which again, it would be important to see the longer version. Even in this 95-minute version, we get enough clues to keep us mildly entertained throughout.The most fascinating moments are the actual stalk and murder scenes that Martin goes out on. The idea of a vampire having no fangs and having to resort to cutting wrists for blood works perfectly and adds all sorts of needed suspense. There's a wonderful sequence where Martin breaks in on a victim only to be confronted by someone else. I won't ruin the scene for everyone but Romero has a wonderful time playing the audience as well as the characters on screen. Another wonderful thing about the film is its atmosphere, which is able to make this appear like a classic Gothic tale. The atmosphere is thick throughout and really helps the pacing.The problem with Martin however is that there is clearly stuff missing and the story here really isn't fully explored, in this version at least. Towards the end of the film Martin begins to have a sexual affair with a woman and this here is sadly all too brief. I'm going to guess this is expanded in the longer version and I'm sure it is a very important moment so that the ending makes a bit more sense. Even the nutty Uncle is never fully brought to life and his beliefs in the subject are never really understood. There are other small characters that pop in that are never fully addressed.This 95-minute version of Martin is fun to watch due to various brilliant moments but in the end I can't help but feel we're watching a bastardized version of a better movie. The producer's needed a hit, they cut the film and sadly it appears the longer version is lost but as it stands, this longer version is perhaps one of the most important films that needs to be found. Martin works well but I suspect this longer version might very well be one of the greatest horror films ever made.