Michael_Elliott Nightbreed (1990) ** (out of 4)Aaron Boone (Craig Sheffer) is a troubled man whose doctor (David Cronenberg) has convinced him that he could be a masked serial killer. Soon Boone is shot dead due to the doctor's lying but his body and soul are then transferred to Midian, a place where monsters are the good guys.NIGHTBREED was the first movie I ever watched in a theater by myself. I still remember the experience quite well and I always remembered that I wasn't too fond of the picture. It was several years later before I learned that director Clive Barker had all sorts of issues with the studio and that the version released was cut beyond his control. I never bothered to revisit the movie until the Director's Cut was eventually released and that's what I will be reviewing here.Did the Director's Cut help things for me? Not really. I must say that I can honestly understand why people love this film but to me it just doesn't work for a number of reasons. For starters, even with the longer running time and the more detail to plot, I still can't really make heads or tails out of what's going on. Yes, this is a movie where the monsters are good guys and the humans are the bad guys. There are countless elements thrown together here and there's a mythological idea flowing throughout. I get all of that. I really do but do we really need two hours of this? I can understand what Barker was going for but I think his direction here just doesn't pull everything off.I say that and it's really disappointing because there's some great stuff here. The serial killer and his mask is downright creepy and there are some really effective scenes with him. I thought an entire movie based on this character would have been terrific but the problem is having Cronenberg play the doctor. He's okay in small parts but he certainly can't build anything major to this character and it's really too bad. I thought Sheffer was good enough for the part and the supporting players are good. The main thing here are the special effects. In particular the make-up effects, which are downright terrific. The various monster creations aren't as memorable as those seen in HELLRAISER but these are still very creative.NIGHTBREED isn't an awful film by any stretch of the imagination but there's no question that it's a disappointment. All of the elements are here for something special but I think the film, both versions in fact, fall a bit short.

TheRedDeath30 I had seen NIGHTBREED at the time of its' release and never thought much of it. I recently finished a second viewing of the "Director's Cut" of Clive Barker's 1990 film and I find that my impressions of this movie have not changed much over the years. This is a movie that you want to love. It's Clive Barker. It has cool monster ideas and an attempt at a deep mythology. It has a creepy serial killer. It's like a checklist of horror geek wishes, but somewhere along the way it all goes wrong and the movie ends up falling flat and feeling, at times, like a bad BBC production. Clive Barker is an enigma to me. I would consider HELLRAISER to be one of my favorite horror films of all time. The horror genre is littered with the corpses, though, of directors who never matched their debut film and Barker seems to be one of those. I have found that none of his movies after after really grabbed me as being much more than average. In general movies like this tend to be great ideas with poor execution. That is true of this movie to a great degree. A self-admitted attempt at a "dark horror STAR WARS" the movie attempts to create a dense mythology full of different races and unique creations. While I have not read the novella, I would assume this idea works much better when left to imagination. It would even work great as a comic book. Barker just does not seem to have the directorial chops, though, to bring this vision to a cohesive visual experience. Even in director's cut, the movie is choppy and uneven and never creates any true sense of direction.I appreciate the attempts to bring a slew of practical effects makeup monsters to the screen. I, also, recognize the age of the movie, but some of these designs look much better than others. I guess you could say that was true of the Cenobites, as well, but I digress. For every cool Porcupine quill shooting femme fatale, there is a horrid, moon-faced oddity that looks like it would have belonged in a bad fast food commercial. We see better makeups each week on FACE/OFF than some of these creations.Another knock is the casting choices. The lead actor is not especially engaging, in my opinion. He has the requisite good looks and this would, certainly, not be the fist horror film to cast a bland attractive guy as the lead. The most egregious choice is the casting of Cronenberg as Dekker. This needed to be the anchor character at the core of this film and could have been a terrifying killer in the hands of a more adept actor, but Cronenberg comes off like every other director with "actor envy" and shows why he's better off behind the screen. He's completely flat and never hints at any true sense of malevolence. My last complaint is the odd sense of humor that seethes beneath the surface, but comes out bubbling in the finale. It's a cartoonish sense of tempering the horror with comedy and feels like bad British humor, which is essentially what it is, in the end. I have read several of Barker's works and like every one of them. The man is a wizard of ideas, with a rich imagination that is capable of conjuring vivid landscapes and rich characterizations. Unfortunately, he's shown a struggle to bring those ideas successfully to the screen and this movie is no exception.

crownofsprats First off, if you aren't watching the director's cut, cease and desist immediately! I can't imagine this being anything short of a crappy, incoherent mess with a half an hour of footage missing. So get it some way or another - it's on Netflix now, hope it stays...This had all the makings of a cult classic. I guess it is one. Perhaps it came out a few years too early, and didn't hit on the goth fad upswing. Otherwise, the studios might not have butchered this into a mediocre turd and - who knows? - maybe actually spent some effort on marketing and distribution. Seriously: angst-ridden adolescent has friction with his psychiatrist and dreams of a freak- filled graveyard city called Midian (more like a town, actually) where all the ghouls, monsters, and other outcasts can come party without fear of the Norms. But of course, the world of squares and morning people is slowly encroaching, and only a very special chosen hero can save the day...it's written in the prophecies and all. How a studio couldn't market something like that is beyond me.But the thing is...Clive Barker is a novels guy first and foremost, and to cram a story of such epic proportions into a two hour film is a difficult task for even the most seasoned filmmakers. So even the director's cut feels loose and baggy at the seams. For instance - there seemed to be no real narrative purpose for the black detective from Calgary, other than to provide legitimacy for Dr. Dekker (played wonderfully by a very creepy Cronenberg). And the priest - what was his deal? I am sure the novel does a way better job of inflating them with shade and nuance, but they were pretty hollow here. Likewise, many scenes of dialogue felt off because of a phantom backstory seemingly glossed over - similar to the sheepish feeling one sometimes gets watching movies that expect everyone to already know certain characters and their personality traits. But the dialogue and minor narrative problems aren't what hold this back from true greatness. Maybe it's the Elfman soundtrack, or the morose look of the male lead, or maybe it's the moon-face guy dragging down the visual dignity of the entire Midian freak crew...heck, maybe it's just the early 90s production values - whatever it is, it injects an unshakable, lingering odor of silliness throughout the entire affair. The story is a dark epic, and requires an atmosphere of minimum silliness and maximum magic to properly suspend disbelief and carry itself on its own inertia. The moon-faced guy stands in the way, his stupid moon-face resembling a long-lost member of Metallica viewed through the prism of heavy hallucinogenics...That being said, if a magical freak city called Midian (or Clive Barker's name) appeals to any of your sensibilities in any way, you won't regret watching this. You may not come out 100% stoked, but you certainly won't be disappointed.

Mr_Ectoplasma Clive Barker's lost classic "Nightbreed" has had new life breathed into it after finally receiving a proper director's cut some twenty five years later— while the theatrical cut is still a fine film, the director's cut is far more cohesive in terms of content. The plot follows Aaron Boone, a man who has been tormented by dreams of a serial killer, and of a mysterious town called Midian, only to find out that his dreams are becoming reality, and the crimes are being pinned on him. In Midian, he uncovers an underground city beneath the cemetery that houses a plethora of misfit monsters.A potent blend of fantasy and horror (as Clive Barker is oft noted for), "Nightbreed" is a deserved cult classic that has withstood the test of time in spite of its marginal shortcomings. The film is not exceptionally acted or even exceptionally edited (and that goes for both cuts), but the film exceeds in thematic content, sympathetic characters, and astounding special effects. The creatures are appropriately grotesque yet still human enough that they stand relatable, and the painstaking amount of work that went into the prosthetics and effects department in general is impressive to say the least.Thematically, "Nightbreed" is unusual in that it, as Barker proclaims, shows the monsters as sympathetic characters; it refuses to uphold any sense of the status quo. It is a parable for misfits of virtually all minorities (though the film has a very strong undercurrent in regard to the gay community), and as a social parable wrapped in the embellishments of a fantasy horror epic, it is incredible. The cast holds their weight despite some moments of unbelievability, but as a gem of its time, the prospect of Oscar-worthy performances is not expected. Overall, "Nightbreed" is a great film for those who specifically enjoy fantasy horror; it is not a frightening film in any sense of the word, and while it is marginally thrilling at times, the greatest attraction here is the audience's immersion into the film's world it creates. It stands as Barker's greatest directorial achievement second to "Hellraiser" in my opinion. 9/10.