User Reviews

What the hell have I just seen? This is one utterly weird flick! Tobe Hooper, though generally regarded as a capable director, missed more than a few curves with this one. The plot is almost totally incomprehensible and incoherent. You'll practically go nuts trying to figure out this movie. But I must say it is strangely fascinating.

From what I could gather, this is the main storyline: The movie begins with Marquis de Sade (Robert Englund) being tortured and thrown away in a cell, where he swears revenge to a portrait of Madame Beaumont. Then, flash-forward to Alexandria, a desert city in 1993. Eugenie Matteson (Zoe Trilling) arrives to live with her archaeologist father. After a while she meets Paul Chevalier (Robert Englund), who is a descendant of de Sade and seems to believe that Eugenie is the re-incarnation of Madame Beaumont.

Looks like a basic plot line to you? Think again! The fun begins when Eugenie gets invited by the mysterious Sabina (who seems to have had a bondage-thing going with Eugenie's over-religious father) to enjoy the local nightlife. They do some drugs and by the looks of it, it's pretty strong stuff. Eugenie starts hallucinating and having nightmares through-out the entire movie. Those scenes are bizarre and often very atmospheric, though utterly pointless most of the time. But from that point on, the movie becomes fragmented, lacking any form of consistency.

Here are some things you can find in this movie, in no particular order: Drug-abuse, nudity, steamy hetero-sex, torture, a naked Egyptian dude riding a horse, decapitation, lesbian sex, a mermaid-worshiping cult (in the desert, mind you!), a lot of snakes, scales(!?!?), crucifixion, simulated fellatio by a woman with a snake (and a bunch of other things). I won't tell you how all these things fit into the plot, but you can imagine that it's bound to make no sense whatsoever. And the crazy thing is: I kinda liked it.

Robert Englund is pretty good as the eye-poking and occasionally poëtic phrases uttering sadist. Zoe Trilling is decent and definitely hot. The blood & make-up effects are scarce but good. The logic is way out there.

So this is a movie you'll either love or hate. There's nothing in between. I dig it anyway, even if I don't understand what Tobe Hooper was trying to prove with it. However, he seems to be back on the right track with the more than decent slasher-flick the TOOLBOX MURDERS (2003).

If you do decide to see NIGHTMARE (aka NIGHT TERRORS), I'll leave you with the following warning: Even though it might be tempting, I suggest you do NOT see this movie under the influence of drugs, because you might have the most disturbing trip of your life, leaving you fairly dis-orientated (either that or you'll laugh your ass off!). And if you like Zoe Trilling, check out her enjoyable performance in NIGHT OF THE DEMONS 2.

What would be a good reason for a horror-flick fan to pick up a horror-flick in the late 80's / mid 90's? Well, the flick starring Robert Englund was always one good reason. Even though Englund will forever be associated with the "A Nightmare on Elm Street"-franchise, the actor has starred in numerous other, no less memorable roles. One would be him playing the "Phantom of the Opera" in Dwight Little's gory remake, another, the depiction of the Marquise de Sade in "Living Nightmare".

This said, this performance remains the only reason to go anywhere near "Living Nightmare". The movie starts off rather promising, opening up with a monstrous, one-eyed de Sade, locked up in a Parisian madhouse and Fredd… pardon me, Englund being as creepy as ever. Then the storyline unexpectedly flips to the present and we get the story of an American college girl, who, while visiting her father in Egypt, falls into the thrall of a cult, led by Paul Chevaller (again, Freddy Englund), a descendant of the Marquise.

From there it just goes downhill. Englund as Paul Chevaller is trying to ham it up as good as he can, but it cannot rescue the film – we want to see Englund as a super-serial-killer, not a super-pervert. The story drags on and on, a very thin skeleton for a series of mildly erotic scenes, slight elements of s/m and non-existent gore. One constantly feels tempted to finger the 'fast forward'-button, racing forward to those scenes, that take place in the madhouse. Alas, those retro-scenes are few and far between, being only a fraction of the movie. Even the final scene is cheating, showing us (historically accurate) the Marquise, croaking pitifully in the insane asylum. Film over, two hours wasted.

The mid-90's marked a sharp decline for Tobe Hooper, having gone from directing cult classics like "Texas Chainsaw Massacre", "Salem's Lot" and "Poltergeist" (if you believe it), to directing straight-to-video dreck like "The Mangler" and, more recently, "The Toolbox Murder"; unfortunately, "Living Nightmare" was the film that started this decline.

So let's just call the movie for what it is: it's just simply lame. If you're interested in the works of Marquise de Sade, I'd recommend Pier Paolo Pasolinis "Salo, or the 120 Days of Sodom" – it's infinitely more of a living nightmare than "Living Nightmare" 2 points from 10

So yes, by adding Cannon Video and this late in their life movie, we can say that Tobe Hooper did four movies for Cannon. Written by Rom Globus - I'm unsure if he's related - and Daniel Matmor, this was produced by the revised Cannon team of Yoram Globus and Christopher Pearce along with Harry Alan Towers and Allan Greenblatt.

Robert Englund was signed early, thinking that this was a movie about Marquis de Sade based on his short stories, but then he'd be playing an evil relative of de Sade named Paul Chevalier. Then the movie moved from a period movie to a modern story. Then the shooting location changed from Egypt to Israel. Then the original director Gerry O'Hara quit.

In an issue of Fangoria, Hooper spoke highly of the movie, saying "Nightmare is not exactly a horror film, even if there are many horror elements in it. It's more of an erotic thriller, and I'm very happy to be able to do something different." The title changed along the way as well.

Beth (Chandra West) goes to Israel to meet her father, the archaeologist Dr. Matteson (William Finley, who like Englund was in a much better Hooper movie, Eaten Alive) who is studying Gnostic cult ruins. One night, as Beth wanders the streets, she's nearly attacked by some men and saved by a woman who has a book from de Sade. Her father is killed as he finally gets into the burial ground and the cult kidnaps her for a sacrifice when she's not passing out and having dreams about a horse racer making sweet love to her. Then the girl helps her escape the cult and then some monks save the day, then we go back in time to the day de Sade died.

You may read that and say, "That makes no sense."

You're right.

Honestly, if Jess Franco made this, I would have loved it. That said, he would have found a way to make it more interesting. This is an absolute mess with wild overacting, non-stop sex dreams that get in the way of the plot and no plot for them to get in the way of.

This was a Global Pictures movie, even if it has the Cannon logo.

There are only two real reasons to watch this movie. One of them played a guy that haunted your dreams, and the other dragged several kids from St. Rita's Academy to Hull House Mortuary. While I don't need to explain who Robert Englund is, not many people know who Zoe Trilling is. Born Geri Betzler, she was a short petite beauty with a doll- like face and an incredible figure who had a short horror movie career between TV appearances before she dropped out of movies and apparently out of the known universe. This is not one of her better movies. In fact, no one should have bothered to have made this one. Directed by Tobe Hooper of "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Poltergeist" fame, "Night Terrors," despite the promising name, shows none of his style or creative finesse. Zoe plays Genie, a young American girl who travels to Egypt to be with her father, an archaeologist with strong Christian convictions, but when she's attacked by local thugs, she's rescued by a prostitute named Sabina, played by Egyptian actress Alona Kimhi. Sabina befriends and takes Genie into the local nightclub scene where she and the movie are dragged into a drug den. From here on, the movie isn't much to watch, ignoring plot and direction for endless porn and nudity. The underworld of drugs and debauchery seems to be run by Robert Englund as Paul Chevalier at a party, a supposed descendant of the Marquis de Sade, and from there, the movie gets even worse as it sinks into debauchery and sadism disguised as hallucinations. It's implied that Genie's father is a part of the cult, and Sabina helped him lure her into it and as revenge, she drags in his daughter. Despite the interesting set-up to a promising movie, the movie is a waste of time. The early scenery is great, and Zoe does as her best as she can with the material, as does Englund, but film is plot less, the characters wander from scene to scene and eventually becomes nothing but pointless nudity and violence. It's not hard to tell that Zoe was starting to feel exploited for her looks, and one only has to look at how bad and pointless this movie is to make her leave acting. The movie actually kills itself, and one can't tell if the ending is real or another illusion. It's not worth the DVD it was wasted on.

What does the Marquis de Sade (Robert Englund) have to do with Egyptian archaeology and mermaid-worshipping cults? Tobe Hooper tries to answer that question in one weird little film. Genie (Zoe Trilling) is a young cutie who visits her nerdy archaeology father in Alexandria, Egypt. Genie gets caught up with a mysterious hooker who services daddy on the side. Daddy gets sent back to the site, where he uncovers a tomb with what appears to have a mermaid on it. Genie meets a descendant (also Robert Englund) of the Marquis de Sade, and falls for a hunky Egyptian. Eventually, Genie finds out she is to be a sacrifice and the protracted and bloody climax gets going. Wrapped around this story is footage of the Marquis de Sade in prison, talking to a portrait of what looks like Genie.

Robert Englund is terrific as both the Marquis and his descendant. His acting abilities have always been sideswiped by his makeup requirements, so he is allowed to shine here. His best performance is still in "Killer Tongue," if you have not seen that yet. The rest of the cast, including young Genie, are pretty and average. The script, however, is problematic. You will quickly learn that the Marquis scenes are completely unnecessary, except maybe the film makers had access to the cool set. The mermaid cult makes no sense whatsoever. Who the mermaid is is never explained, and its link to Christianity, which is hyped throughout the film, is nothing. The film is very anti-Christian, as the archaeologist is a Bible-spouting father, but likes to be tied up by the local prostitute. There are plenty of scenes of depravity and violence, but Hooper probably had little idea of what the screenwriters were trying to say. I know I had no idea. So why am I recommending this film? It is weird. Englund is marvelous. Do you like snakes? This film is full of them. This is like Roger Corman with a bigger budget. Knowing Hooper somehow came up with "Crocodile" after this is rather sad. Also known as "Tobe Hooper's Night Terrors," this is not perfect, but definitely worth a winking, unserious look.

"Night Terrors" is a rather decent entry in the style, even if there's some problems with it.

**SPOILERS**

Arriving in Egypt, Dr. Matteson, (William Finley) meets up with daughter Genie, (Zoe Trilling) while looking for a new archaeological site. Touring the city, she is then rescued from an altercation by Sabina, (Alona Kimli) a local friend of her father. As she spends more time with her, to the detriment of her friend Beth, (Chandra West) and her father, the more she begins to pull away. She begins to pill away the most when introduced to the writings of the Marquis De Sade, (Robert Englund) the famous writer, as she feels he is trying to contact her and seek out revenge for his imprisonment. Soon haunted by visions of various cult members trying to get at her, she soon learns of the true intentions behind the cult and does her best to survive the torture they inflict.

The Good News: This one here wasn't that bad of a film. One of the great things about it is the gradual build-up this employs. There's a real slow approach here to it's finale, which makes it all the more suitable at the end. Things begin at a small scale, get more severe as it plows forward and eventually gets to a fever point. This is the way to do a slow-burning film, as it's the anticipation of what's going to happen next that brings in some sound suspense techniques. That it all comes out at the end, which is some of the best scenes in the film where the torture begins and the pieces from before finally come to a head in these sequences. With the real intentions of the film coming into view and the actions finally being represented, this is the film's best spot. These also come with some nice chasing to lead up to them, including a really warped spot through the tunnels underneath the city that's quite brilliant. The hallucinatory dreams and visions are all quite startling, and several can be pretty chilling. The crucifixion one in particular stands out as one of the better ones, and the later romance dream is quite nice. The fact that this also deals with the dark themes of pain and pleasure, with as recent a time as it did to come out, makes it feel quite a bit like the old-school films where it dwelled in those styles rather than avoided them. These all make the film feel much better than it should be.

The Bad News: The film doesn't really have a whole lot wrong with it. The low-key nature of is perhaps the biggest flaw. There's a lot more dialog than normal, and anytime anything happens it's a big shot of excitement but then there's not a lot of emphasis placed on them. They're over quite rapidly, meaning that there's not a whole lot to get behind for those who enjoy that kind of film. There's a feeling that not a whole lot could've been shoe-horned in to up the excitement as well, since this one is pretty lean as is, but the fact that there's such a low-key feeling to this one could be something to get through for those not that interested in this style. Even more is that the action scenes do come at the end, meaning that the beginning is full of scenes that basically amount to just talking between everyone. Every now and then something happens, but there's far more of the dialog scenes and they go on longer than the action scenes, giving this something of a rough beginning to also get through. The film's other big problem is that there's way too much confusion at what happens in the end. The flashbacks to the previous time, unexplained hallucinations and the random turn are just part of what makes this confusing, and this makes it a lot harder to really understand. These, though, are the film's main problems.

The Final Verdict: While not all that spectacular, this one does have enough positive points to give it a viewing. Those in the mood for the more subtle end of the genre or are fans of the style should give it a shot, while those who prefer more action-oriented films should heed caution with it.

Rated R: Graphic Violence, Nudity and Language

PURE JUNK! is poorly made and not the film we have come to expect of Tobe Hooper's caliber after her directed the brilliant Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Poltergeist he gives us this piece of junk that is very poorly directed and lacks interest plus it's so weakly written you can see plot holes all over the places it's quite funny (but not in a good way) i haven't seen this in a while but i remember enough to comment on it and that it was a piece of junk. the acting is BAD Robert Englund does what he can with the awful material he has to work with and manages to come out of this looking decent. Zoe Trilling is decent looking but a good actress she is not. same goes for Alona Kimhi. rest of the cast do bad as well i am not going to comment any more on this garbage if you see this at your local video store RESIST RESIST!!!! BOMB out of 5