Personally I don't think horror fanatics are people without a sense of humor. We're merely just finicky about our humor and particularly skeptical when it comes to horror movies that simultaneously attempt to be comical. Horror-comedies customarily suck, and the Italian Giallo most certainly isn't a sub genre that lends itself for humorous situations, because basically these movies handle about vile and sadistic murders committed by perverted individuals with preposterous motives. The only directors that dared to insert jokes and goofy situational humor into their Gialli were acclaimed and experienced veterans, namely Dario Argento ("Four Flies on Grey Velvet") and Sergio Martino ("Suspected Death of a Minor"). Maurizio Pradeaux is fairly unknown in the Giallo industry and yet "Death Steps in the Dark"; his second Giallo effort after "Death Carries a Cane" (which I haven't seen yet), shamelessly blends the accustomed ingredients of the sub genre with downright absurd stereotypes and even sheer slapstick. By no means is this a terrible film, but it certainly ain't easy to convince people there actually is a compelling and thrilling whodunit premise hidden between all the ridicule dialogs and dumb blond jokes.
As said, the plot is rudimentary Giallo material. Six people sit together in one compartment on the Istanbul-Athens express, seemingly minding their own business, yet when the train comes out of a dark tunnel suddenly only five of them are still breathing. A young nervous woman has been murdered and a young photographer promptly becomes the main suspect because the victim got stabbed with his letter opener. Another train passenger witnessed something peculiar but, instead of alarming the police, he and his girlfriend prefer to blackmail the killer resulting in thank God a much higher body count. The police investigation moves too slow, and in order to clear his name Luciano flees and starts his own private search for the culprit, along with his extremely dim-witted Swedish girlfriend and a female amateur safe-cracker. Pradeaux clearly opted for exaggeratedly foolish comedy instead of tension-building and an atmosphere of disturbance. Perhaps because the Giallo was already old news in 1977 and he single-handedly wanted to introduce something different? Or maybe because he thinks laughter and thrills form a better combination than just thrills and more thrills? Fact remains that a lot (and I do mean a LOT) of potentially great suspense sequences are prematurely interrupted with dumb remarks and lame gags. Luckily our oddly ambitious director left the gory and bloodshed intact. "Death Steps in the Dark" contains quite a likable amount of vicious murders committed with a razor, so you can imagine the mess that makes.
As for the climax and revelation of the killer's identity: (warning! Here be major spoilers) nice try but you definitely don't need to be a Giallo-expert in order to predict the outcome. It's just a matter of basic elimination. There are five suspects with an equal chance of being the culprit. The script subsequently draws portraits and gives background information on four of them, yet one of them remains a mystery As if the writer is afraid to accidentally reveal too much about him/her. It's too simple, really. Some characters are just too dumb to commit murders, others behave so exaggeratedly suspicious they can't possibly be the killer and one constantly remains on the background. Then who's the killer?
As said, the plot is rudimentary Giallo material. Six people sit together in one compartment on the Istanbul-Athens express, seemingly minding their own business, yet when the train comes out of a dark tunnel suddenly only five of them are still breathing. A young nervous woman has been murdered and a young photographer promptly becomes the main suspect because the victim got stabbed with his letter opener. Another train passenger witnessed something peculiar but, instead of alarming the police, he and his girlfriend prefer to blackmail the killer resulting in thank God a much higher body count. The police investigation moves too slow, and in order to clear his name Luciano flees and starts his own private search for the culprit, along with his extremely dim-witted Swedish girlfriend and a female amateur safe-cracker. Pradeaux clearly opted for exaggeratedly foolish comedy instead of tension-building and an atmosphere of disturbance. Perhaps because the Giallo was already old news in 1977 and he single-handedly wanted to introduce something different? Or maybe because he thinks laughter and thrills form a better combination than just thrills and more thrills? Fact remains that a lot (and I do mean a LOT) of potentially great suspense sequences are prematurely interrupted with dumb remarks and lame gags. Luckily our oddly ambitious director left the gory and bloodshed intact. "Death Steps in the Dark" contains quite a likable amount of vicious murders committed with a razor, so you can imagine the mess that makes.
As for the climax and revelation of the killer's identity: (warning! Here be major spoilers) nice try but you definitely don't need to be a Giallo-expert in order to predict the outcome. It's just a matter of basic elimination. There are five suspects with an equal chance of being the culprit. The script subsequently draws portraits and gives background information on four of them, yet one of them remains a mystery As if the writer is afraid to accidentally reveal too much about him/her. It's too simple, really. Some characters are just too dumb to commit murders, others behave so exaggeratedly suspicious they can't possibly be the killer and one constantly remains on the background. Then who's the killer?