John Carpenter's In The Mouth Of Madness

Love it. Big surprise, huh?

What's her name, Julie Carmen, I thought she was the only wink link in the fence. Her performance is just all over the board, I don't think she realizes what kind of movie she's in, she never strikes the right tone. Even her supposed dip into madness only comes off as being ditzy, or retarded, rather than in the grip of absolute evil.

The shot of the old lady monster hacking away at her husband gets to me, that's some creepy shit. The whole thing with her, him cuffed to her, fucked up stuff right there.

Where did you go, this Carpenter?

Carmen isn't the strongest member of the cast, but the rest is aces. David Warner, John Glover, Chuck Heston, and Peter Jason all are great in their brief roles.

Big fan of the pulsing door.

Huge fan. I can't understand how lukewarm it was received. It's the best Lovecraft film and it's not even based on a Lovecraft story.

It's still one of my favorite John Carpenter movies, that along with Vampires! I loved the premise of the movie! Lived any good books lately?

Is there anything that links these Apocalypse Trilogy flicks together, aside from the "John Carpenter's" atop the title on the posters?

They're all apocalyptic.

No, it's not a shared milieu or anything. Just Carpenter's musings on the end of the world.

I saw this in theatres, and it really freaked me out. The movie didn't follow any kind of rules or logic; it seemed like normalcy completely went out the window. Which was the whole point: the system was breaking down and a new order was coming. The use of sound was especially unsettling. Lots of loud noises, jump cues, etc. When I saw it again at a second run theater, the sound wasn't as good so it wasn't as effective. Still, a very enjoyable flick.

Incidently, I went to school in New Hampshire. If Trent's map is right, it puts Hobbs end square in the middle of the state...Where Manchester and the capital city, Concord, are located. There is no Hobb's End there. Or fields. And believe me, I went looking.

Good Carpenter flick, with one of my favorite scenes of any horror movie: Sam Neil and Bernie Casey are sitting in a resteraunt discussing the case, and their need to find an editor who has gone missing. They are at a window booth. Casey is pumping Neil's character up, telling him what a great detective he is, he is sure to find the guy etc. Meanwhile the guy in question comes out of a shop across the street wielding an ax, heads right towards the oblivious detective, crashes through the window and is subdued (not before revealing that he has toad eyes!). Neil's "detective" never realizes that the ax wielding lunatic is in fact the man he was supposed to find!

This movie just does nothing for me. I love The Thing and POD but dislike this movie. It is just so unneven between the story, acting, casting, etc. It's a great concept and some very freaky filmmaking that falls apart 2/3 of the way through and ends very poorly.

Not to derail the conversation, but this is a sentiment I've seen expressed around CHUD a lot recently. And, honestly, it baffles me. What's good exactly about Vampires? In my opinion, it's a poor adaption of a poor novel (albeit with a fun premise). I'm not criticizing. I simply don't understand it. I mean, did you enjoy Ghosts of Mars?

Regardless, I'm off to netflix In the Mouth of Madness.

Ah, Julie Carmen. Making the lazy eye sexy long before Kate Moss ever waifed it up.

The novel was kind of lame, but to answer your question, what's good about Vampires, I'd answer in two words: James Woods. That guy was awesome in that movie. His monologue about what Vampires are really like cracks me up every time. Of course, I hate the Vampire-worshiping sub-culture that's sprung up of late. I mean really, how are Vampires sexy. You're food to them. Does a cow think a butcher is sexy? Oi vey...

And yes, I did enjoy Ghosts of Mars. It's a great Saturday afternoon TV flick.

I was with you up until this. James Woods make Vampires tolerable, and I'll watch it when it comes on, but there's not one thing about Ghost of Mars that doesn't make we want to change the channel. Back on track, I really like In the Mouth of Madness, but remember thinking it seemed to have plans on going somewhere great that either time or money did not allow.

Wait, you like Prince of Darkness but find ITMOM uneven?

Why doesn't this film have a decent DVD treatment?
...or a Region 2 DVD at all?

...bastards...

I saw ITMOM at just the right time: in college, studying post-modernism in film class, and reading a lot of Philip K. Dick novels. The pump was primed for a good mind-fuck. Yeah, I love this film. I also dig Wes Craven's New Nightmare, which came out around the same time and went very well with ITMOM and the rest of the "question reality!" shit that I was ingesting at the time. It's the best of the second-tier Carpenter films for me.

Vampires is awful and I hate the way it treats women.

Just saw this flick yesterday after not having seen it in a while, and I still love it. I also love seeing the trailer on the dvd, as back when it came out, just that trailer scared the shit out of me.

I liked how on the commentary, Carpenter notes that a lot of the characters that Trent runs into have those crazy blue eyes, because they're all characters in his book.

Points of note:

Sutter Cane ripping his face like paper
Viggo The Carpathian's small role
The aging bicyclist
The demonic looking kids.
"You're my mommy and today's mommy's day."
The morphing painting
Trent always ending back at the main square with the mutating axe wielding crazies.
The scare with the demon cop sitting next to Trent T
he great reveal of "the map"
Peter Jason, and Bernie Casey's cameos
David Warner, and John Glover, together and being awesome.

I saw this film back in college I thought it was pretty bad actually.

It wasn't until the third time or so I watched this that I realised (rendered invisible for the sake of those who haven't seen it) Sam Neill was a figment of Sutter Cane's imagination too.

That is the case, right? Or should have I not smoked that bowl prior to viewing?

And I don't mind GHOSTS OF MARS. The set-up's pretty cool but it kinda loses it once Ice Cube appears. And what the fuck kind of nickname is 'Desolation'? Seriously, man. What's wrong with 'Wasteland' Williams?

I remember seeing Ghosts of Mars at the cinema, with a friend, a fellow Carpenter fan. We would laugh whenever people would walk out. Which was a lot.

Movie isn't so terrible, it's just not as good as his early work, and I think it gets compared to that. I don't want to sound like a GOM apologist, given the choice to watch it right now I'd probably pass.

Regarding your theory, Tommy, I was actually planning on watching it tonight or tomorrow, I've only seen ITMOM twice, and it's been a bit. I don't remember thinking that before, but sometimes I'm a bit dense.

Okay, more than sometimes. Frequently.

I thought Ghost of Mars was unadulterated nonsense, made all the more disappointing by the fact it was a follow up to Vampires, which was awesome.

Its crap enough to laugh at in parts, and Ice Cube is the lamest action star, plus hes fat!

Bowl smoking didn't screw with your head. That is one of the big plot twists in ITMOM.

When I interviewed Sam Neill - who's rumoured to enjoy the odd toke himself - I told him the same story. He laughed and laughed. Then coughed some. Then laughed some more.

I really dig his performance as Trent in this.

Neill is very good in ITMOM. The shot of him in the mental hospital with all the crosses drawn over himself and the padded room is quite memorable.

Quoted for truth.

I'm the Carpenter fan that doesn't like In the Mouth of Madness. I just don't find it particularly interesting, although to be fair I saw it a LONG time ago.

I find Ghosts of Mars enjoyable but it is definitely shit.

I've never actually seen Vampires but I've always wanted to. That and Dark Star.

sorry

What's good exactly about Vampires? In my opinion, it's a poor adaption of a poor novel (albeit with a fun premise). I'm not criticizing. I simply don't understand it.

I think the characters of Jack Crow and Montoya were what made the movie for me. It is a fun premise. One of my favorite older movies by John Carpenter has to be "The Thing".

James Woods and Sheryl Lee's gorgeous ass.

Vampires is a blast until the third act, when you can hear Carpenter yawning. So lazy, that finale. I doubt it was shot in sequence, but it plays like he just stopped caring at about the hour mark.

Can't be certain, but I seem to remember reading that the budget for Vampires was slashed by nearly 2/3 right before filming started. It really shows too. The action in that flick is beyond bland and boring.

Yeah, that's the point. That's why Sam Neill ends up the way he does. And then the music creeps in.

F'in love that ending so much (best laughing like a maniac ending since Alan Moore's The Killing Joke)

And Jakespeare, definitely see Dark Star.

I just watched In the Mouth of Madness for the first time last night and, yep, I'd agree that it's the best Lovecraftian film made to date.

Regarding the issue of whether Trent is just a character in Kane's latest novel, however, I think the answer is a little more nuanced than a simple affirmative. I think the answer lies somewhere more along the lines of he may have existed as a real person prior to Kane's new novel, but it doesn't matter now because Kane wrote him into the novel. As Styles explains earlier, reality is just a matter of perspective and perspectives can shift ("A reality is just what we tell each other it is."). In the film, reality has shifted so that Kane's novels are becoming reality. Trent may have existed before the novel, but that reality (which is never definitively proven) has been/is being consumed by the new literary reality. Of course, he may not have existed prior to the novel. As the Hobb's End resident states just before blowing his head off (and I'm paraphrasing), "The one question I have: did we exist before he wrote us?"

Oh, and who knew that a kid wearing crappy old person makeup could be so creepy when plonked on a bicycle and required to ride along a dark country road?

After reconsideration, In the Mouth of Madness is the second best Lovecraftian film. Ghostbusters is the first.

Decided to revisit this great flick (I tend to do this once or twice a year). The movie is truly Carpenter's last great film, aside from the magnificent MOH episode "Cigarette Burns".

Vampires was good, and I saw Ghosts Of Mars in the theaters and liked it, but In The Mouth Of Madness was the last time we'd see the Carpenter of the late 70's to the mid 80's. The one who wanted to either scare the crap out of us or entertain us. The scares come nice and fast, and to add to my previous list that I did earlier in this thread, I have put in the scene close to the beginning when Trent is looking through the window, and the shadow of Cane walks into frame behind him. Creepy and great.

Also when the crazy ax wielding guy slowly walks across the street to where Bernie Casey and Sam Neil are having coffee. This scene is not only scary, but it foreshadows elements that come into play later on, like when Trent says that "Nobody pulls my strings" and the color of the crazy ax guy's eyes.

Carpenter needs to get back into the zone and deliver at least one more great movie like this before he completely retires to play Xbox and collect paychecks.

You liked Ghosts Of Mars? Really?

I do enjoy the hell out of this film tho. I've only seen it the once but it's stayed with me ever since. No one ever seems to give Sam Neill the props I reckon he deserves but god damn he's good in this as a man slowly losing his mind.

As a lifelong Carpenter fan Rene, I hate to say it, but I think that's already happened.

I think most people probably know this, but as an FYI, that kid is Hayden Christianson, in his greatest role.

This movie doesn't quite coalesce into a coherent whole, but it's damn close. While the messy ambiguity may be some people's cup of tea, I think I would like it more if it had an elegant 'answer', some kind of inevitable conclusion it's been driving towards the whole time, instead of endless questions about subjective vs objective reality. Clarity isn't always essential, 12 Monkeys works perfectly the way it is. But I feel ITMOM might have benefited from a Sixth Sense style completeness. Love Sam Neill though.

Now that I've heard this theory about the ending, I have to see the movie again.

I hated Ghosts of Mars. I thought the concept could have worked, but the movie was just bad.

Just saw this movie. I got it on Netflix and im not even sure why. I don't remember what made me think of the film but for whatever reason I Netflixed it and enjoyed the fuck out of it. Normally im not that into "mindfuck" films although im not sure this one really qualifies.

Love this movie, it's great fun, but still creepy.

Easily one of Carpenter's all time greatest films (and one of Sam Neil's as well while we're at it). I remember catching this in theaters and my mom and I were two of like five or six people in the whole theater. That nobody outside of ardent horror circles seems to even know of this movie's existence is something that will forever drive me nuts. Every time I've ever shown this to anyone, it works them over like gangbusters.

Whenever people lament on how horror in the 90's sucked, this is one of a whole mess movies I always point out to prove them otherwise; what I think people who say this mean is that slasher movies in the 90's sucked, and with a few rare exceptions that much I can at least get behind. But horror in general? No fucking way sir. The 90's had more than it's share of excellent gems; this is most definitely one of them.

A wise-ass cynical and psychotically unhinged Sam Neil, Lovecraftian Old One-ish creatures, masterful KNB effects, axe murders aplenty, Jurgen Prochnow absolutely owning the screen, reality itself crumbling and imploding within the movie, an absolutely balls to the wall perfect ending, and some of Carpenter's most alive and vibrantly energetic direction shy of Big Trouble in Little China... and a random John Glover appearance like a cherry on top. Everyone and everything in this movie was firing on all cylinders. This one is absolutely essential viewing IMO.

Apart from a couple of cheesy effects this movie holds up fantastically. I'd even go as far as saying it's maybe Carpenter's best - definitely his scariest. Gave me non stop nightmares when I was a kid.

And what Jaquio says is right on, it works great on everyone, even non horror fans.

I still enjoy this film quite a bit, but Carpenter's best? That's gotta be nostalgia talking. It's easily his best from the 90s onward but it can't touch THE THING or HALLOWEEN, and I'd personally rank most of his other 80s films above it as well.

This sounds cool, I'm going to have to NETFLIX it. I read the wiki description and though it spoiled the film it did let me know that it stars SAM NEIL

I like this movie a whole lot, really underrated flick, but it's not even close to his best movie. The Thing and Halloween are both in a different league.

You know what? It may seem like heresy and it's certainly nowhere near them in terms of influence but it's a more than worthy addition to this company. Keep in mind that I'm a huge Lovecraft fanboy though and that I already said that I consider this the best Lovecraftian movie by far.

Well, I don't disagree with anything you said really, I just consider The Thing and Halloween to be perfect, or near perfect movies. But I didn't mean to give the impression that I thought there was a huge discrepancy between those two movies and this one.

I'll take my own stab at heresy and say I think In the Mouth of Madness is better than Escape From New York.....


Don't hurt me