THE BEYOND

This is one of my favorite movies.
The story might not be linear, but you really feel like you are in some kind of nightmare world.

The tarantula attack was fake beyond all hope, but yet it is pulled off pretty well, and delivers the gross out that we all wanted to see.

Could've used a some more zombie action, but thats ok - they were used pretty well.

And the scene where the little girl's head meets the magnum is one of my favorite scenes ever.

All in all...masterpiece.

Oh yeah, I love the scene where David Warbeck and Catriona MacColl are in the elevator and he starts to reload his revolver by pushing the bullets down the barrel.

Check out the look on MacColl's face right before the doors shut...

I recently went back and watched that and 'House By The Cemetary' and 'City of the Living Dead', the MacColl thriple threat, and fell in love with them (and her...my GOD) all over again. Just a great set of movies all in all, and it's really sad that his career started traveling so viciously south afterwards.

Ever watch the "Hey brah" video on the DVD? The band is beyond funny, but they replay that tap to the little girl over and over and over

One of Fulci's best for sure. The box, which is identical to the Evil Dead II and Maniac box, is pretty sweet. There should be more horror box sets. It's typical Fulci with the plot eventually unraveling but that's Fulci and it turns out better than most of his movies in the end. Great gore!

A great, great film to be sure.

However, I don't agree with any love for the box for this DVD. I was displeased with the jewel case. I would much rather have seen the DVD itself in the original clamshell. Hell it would have fit in the damn tin.

Anyway, the Book of Eibon (and any other Lovecraftian tool - yes, I know that it was actually created by Clark Ashton Smith - but it is still Lovecraftian) is a great plot device.

I've always appreciated Fulci's (and Argento's for that matter) use of dogs in film.

You know, it looks like a 'The Beyond' / 'City of the Living Dead' double feature this weekend...

I own the crappy U.S. edit, "Seven Doors of Death."
I'm not sure what's all cut out of it as it shows the head explosion. Either way you can tell Fulci shines in this one.

Sorry but I have to disagree... I never really understood what people could see in Fulci that I don't. The photography's always superb and very stylish, but I always get bored after 20 minutes.
As for THE BEYOND, some scenes are pretty good but I don't like it. I don't know, it just doesn't work for me.

The Beyond is a pretty bad film IMO. Gore saves the day, yet again. Nothing else to recommend it though.

I find there's always some cool set pieces and zombie action in Zombie, Beyond, etc...but I don't know, I could never use the word masterpiece. I saw Beyond at a midnight show and most of us were laughing at alot of it. It was fun, I enjoyed myself, and the girl I was with who has a hard time with horror was creeped out--which says something I guess. But I don't know. I'm all over Argento, but I guess I just don't fully appreciate Fulci. (although I do dig City of the LIving Dead.)
As for "House by the cemetery," I thought House was pretty unispiring. Never understood the love for that one. I always feel as if I must have seen a different film than everyone else.

FULCI LIVES DAMMIT!!!!!!

jst bc y0us guyz d0nt liek Fullchi d0nt g0 arrund dizzissing teh mastar 0f harr0r!!!BUTTFAIREZ!!

Fulci had an atmosphere to his films that really couldn't be compared with. He has his own style to his films, which I think add class to his flicks. You can see that, even though he didn't know what he wanted in a story, he sure knew what he wanted his visuals to look like.

- Fixxxer

Sergio Salvati's photography & Fabio Frizzi's score are two highlights of Italian horror cinema period, let alone this picture.

Like most cult pictures, it's less about a coherent narrative and more about a feverish waking dream punctuated by stabs of the bizarre and the surreal and by definition, a bunch of people aren't going to connect with that. Not because they don't understand it or are any less of a relevant horror fan, it just may not gel with their sensibilities. Which is a shame.

The pacing and design are both all about unsettling the viewers identification of familiar horror loctions (houses, hospitals, basements)leading you into the realm of the "what the fuck?!", that is never less than satisfying. It also has a classic ironic pay off that has none of the gob-smacking gimmickry of many pictures of this type.

To me, in set peice after set peice, The Beyond does this better than any Italian horror picture out there save Suspiria, The House With The Windows That Laugh and maybe Inferno and it stands as Fulci's crowning achievement. A pity then he had to sully that rep by making a decade's worth of fairly poor (but sometimes interesting) cinematic diversions.

Honestly, the first time I saw 'The Beyond', I was a bit dissapointed. At that stage of my horror-loving life I hadn't grasped the concept of the "waking dream" as a narrative force, if the plot didn't go from Point A to Point B, it just seemed like bad filmmaking to me.

Since then I've learned to appreciate it a lot more, and my reading of 'Beyond Terror' (<a href="http://www.creature-corner.com/reviews/bookbeyondterror.php3" target="_blank">review</a>), I've been able to get to a whole new level of apprciation. I highly recommend to anyone with even a passing interest in Fulci, it's great stuff.

That Fulci book is worth reading if you want to see gorehound apologism taken to truly absurd lengths. The section on New York Ripper is priceless. Author seems to have a unique insight into Fulci's motivation and subtext, which the rest of us seemed to have missed because we were too busy watching the SADISTIC CLOSE-UP NIPPLE SLICE.

Seriously, Fulci himself would be perplexed if he was still around. But it's worth reading for a laugh.

Fulci himself was actually delighted and humbled by the serious consideration his pictures got in horror circles, epecially at the late lamented Eurofests in London that Stephen Thrower himself used to frequent and assist in organising.

Sure, it aint Tarkovsky, but there's far more cultrally-specific depth at work in many of the pictures of Italian grindhouse era, from filmmakers who had been working for years churning out hundreds of pictures from a multitude of genres making them some of the most experienced directors working in film (certainly as prolific and diverese and worthy of analysis as someone like say, Roy William Niell who churned out similarly some-might-say insignificant confections for Universal et al.)than a lot of people are willing to give credit for. Sure, most of them are certainly not the second coming and are workman like at best for a good percentage of their running times. But there's a spark in them that means they're never going to be the other end of the spectrum - the disastrous embarrassments to celluloid that the mainstream sensibilities might lead you to believe.

Not necessarily apologism, then merely an exhaustively researched exploration that probes a touch further than surface shocks - which is never a bad thing.

I've watched about 15 or so Fulci movies and it's clear to me that book is trying to find depth where there is none. Fulci's films were about as deep as your average hardcore porn film. He made cheap, derivative, loveless horror films mostly to pay the bills (which IIRC were mounting up around the time of NYR onwards). Beyond the gore, the films were so vague and empty that they were the perfect canvas for this kind of "analysis". Some drooling fanboy with a lot of time on his hands comes along, points out nonexistent meaning for people to oooh and aaah at, and basically uses his (considerable) writing skills to justify all those years spent tossing off over exploitation flicks when he could've been doing something useful with his life. Later, writer gets together with a bunch of like-minded mouthbreathers to throw a party for Fulci, who gets a bit emotional, which must mean that his films DO have depth after all.

The best I can say about Fulci is the man knew how to stage gore and carnage like no one else. That I'll give him. That's the reason I watch his stuff. The only time he ever REALLY TRULY impressed me was with the ending to Don't Torture a Duckling, which stayed with me. But I think even that was a fluke, considering all the "religion" baggage that comes from other, better films.

I don't necessarily agree with the viewpoint that Fulci's films are void of depth and meaning. Truely difficult to deciphyr, I'll not argue that point. However, to say that a dead man's films have no point is a narrow field of view, my friend. Thrower may well have been tossing off with his love for Fulci. But, unless you're absolutely closed to the idea, I'd seriously recomend you reading elsewhere for viewpoints concerning Fulci's work.

There is a very interesting article concerning 'The Beyond' <a href="http://www.kinoeye.org/03/02/grant02.html" target="_blank">here</a>. (Not a bad little website I might add. kinoeye has some interesting reads.) The article exlores 'Vampyr' and 'The Beyond' as vehicles of the "Real".

The notion of either of these films being viewed as post-symbolist poems of sorts is intriguing.

Now I'm certain that this is another (although one I happen to subscribe to) of many interpretations of, not only 'The Beyond', but a good portion of Fulci's work.

But, for Christ's sake man, ? That's a bit harsh contrasted against some of the crap we've been exposed to, dontcha think?

Wow! I feel like I just got out of a film study class. I like alot of Fulci's movies though not all. Like Argento, he made some pretty abysmal stuff at times. I like them for what they are not for what I think they should be. When I watch a Fulci movie I go in knowing that the plot is meanigless, at least to me, and the acting and dubbing is going to pretty bad for the most part. There have been a few good performances but on a whole not really. Fulci, to me, is about gore, blaring, inconsistent usage of music which is pretty funny most of the time and characters that I can't wait to see get knocked off one by one by the various gory, disturbing methods that he liked to use. His Zombies always seemedo act different than the ones before as if he was always experimenting with different ideas of how a zombie could and should act but I gotta go with Romero on that one. He also seemed to make the actors in his movies over dramatize everything no matter what it was.

Another thing I love about Fulci flicks are the sound effects. He must have come up with the freakiest array of sounds of any director. I fell asleep once with Zombie on in the background and those were the strangest half-sleeping dreams I've ever had.

That's just what I get out of them but horror is such a subjective thing I know most people wouldn't feel that way at all.

yes, Fulci has that effect on me too sometimes.

All I can say is "holy shit"

I never, ever thought I would have the urge to watch the god-awful BEYOND again, but you guys and ghouls have piqued my interest ... I think ...

I do not believe Fulci films carry this kind of meaning, however, the fact that some of the posts in this thread have, in a very articulate manner no less, at least attempted to find depth in these dreadful films, well, that has fired my interest .....

*** ... hits palm of right hand to center of forehead and thinks to self ***

You mean there was more than just a "Cash In On Romero" reason for naming a film ZOMBIE 2 , and shamelessly rippng off THE SHINING in HOUSE BY THE CEMETERY ???

'Thing is, Tind has hit the nail on the head. It's not just about the films as objects of art, it's about the mindset they were created in and the cultural specificity they carry. Why, Fulci made these pictures and how they became the icons of horror they are (even why people have such a violent distain for them) is as worthy a notion for study as the qust to fathom "Rosebud".

That specificity is why these films can be dissected in the way that they frequently are, perhaps like no other genre. Because they are a mish-mash of jumbled, fascinating ideas that - admittedly - don't always gel into a cohesive package, just makes them all the more intriguing. To me at least. Hell, I got an honours degree out of just this field of study. If you want put that down to mouthbreathers anonymous, fair enough - though you are on a horror devoted website, so I think you're lumping your own adenoids into the fray there, sir.

No one's hailing them as the greatest films ever made (and if they are who the fuck are we to chide and goad them for it?), but to piss over someone for exploring and probing the psychoanalytic machinations of a too-often-trivially explored genre is a bit closed.

Thanks for the link Tind.

Strax, if you are reffering to my post, perhaps I wasn't clear ... I'm sincerly impressed with what the fans of Fulci's films have to say - I didn't intend to discredit that ... and whether or not the views here are accurate is irrelevant: that's what undeniably makes this art ...

Elmie, it's not amied at anyone in particular really, just echoing Tindalos' very admirable sentiments that to discredit anyone's interpretation or exploration of art is to be closed minded. Disagree by all means, but don't rubbish a critic due to a subjective aversion to his field of study. I can't stand reggae, but I'm not going to claim that Timothy White, author of Catch The Fire: the Life Of Bob Marleyis a spastically eardrummed gibbon because his field of study doesn't jangle my angle.

Anyway, I also find it admirable that such a discussion has made you want to go and at the very least check out if your original assertions of The Beyond were well founded. You may still hate it. Some people don't. I wish we could be happy with that state of affairs is all and be thankful there are intelligent, creative people out there fortunate enough to be able to echo our passions and sentiments in a forum more consumable to the regular Joe than we are able to be here.

I think it's cool you wanna give Fulci another shot Elmie his movies definitely deserve their fair shake.

The film study class comment I made was a compliment in case that came off wrong. The posters on the CC are some of the most knowledgeable and thoughtful in the realm of horror I've ever run across and it's great.

I know alot of people don't like Fulci or any foriegn horror for that matter which is fine. I got into the foreign horror scene a couple years ago and really grew to accept what it was all about and appreciate it. They are definitely a departure from what a Hollywood or US made film is but it's also the culture that has an influence in any particular countries film industry. Have you seen any French horror? They're about on the same level as Italian horror. I also love the Hammer movies which some don't get either.

Sue me, I enjoy pissing over the pretentious and telling them where they can stick their degrees. Thanks for the fun discussion guys.

Dude, you're just as right, just don't go round slinging the proverbials at someone who doesn't champion your aethetic cause, that's all.

To you it's pretention. To others it's legitimate academic study of someone's art. Whether it's high or low is moot (and no one would argue it's "high", it's a fucking gore picture), the fact is it's art. And therefore worthy or study. Deal.

Who was that directed at? It's a thread about Fulci for christ sake.

Who was that directed at? It's a thread about Fulci for christ sake.

Look, I talk a load of shit and I'm sorry. Let's change the subject.

Did anyone have any problems getting the Anchor Bay DVD of The Beyond to play in their DVD player?

I have a Region 1 Samsung DVD player that has not had any problems playing region 1 DVDs. I bought The Beyond at Amazon.com --&gt;http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/6305972052/qid=1056315005/sr=1-9/ref=sr_1_9/104-7611958-7459124?v=glance&s=dvd

When I put the disc in the player it says it is loading but then it displays "no disc". I then get a message on the screen saying the "disc could not be played, please check the disc".

Anyone else having problems getting the disc to play?

I don't watch Fulci films for "messages" or proverbial what not, I think he makes some damn fine entertainment - be it mindless or full of angst, or whatever.

When I watch his films, it's like no other, and you know you have something special...

I mean, c'mon, are we all that far gone that we can't just watch a movie for what it is? Entertainment?

That's how I see it. Every movie has to be taken for what it is. Sometimes it's just pure enjoyment, a masterpiece, or a piece of crap and how you view that is subjective although I know alot of people who are always looking for the masterpiece but that just isn't the case or the intention as with Fulci films.

Fulci is no Kubrick he's Fulci. One of the masters of gore. Kubrick, imo, was a master storyteller.

fulci is horrors equivalent to Gregory Dark