MovieChat Forums > Quella villa accanto al cimitero (1984) Discussion > I hate Fulci

I hate Fulci

posted 8 years ago by Sean_Haze
14 replies | jump to latest

Go ahead, call me a troll.

I'm *beep* sick of Fulci though. I've watched the Gates of Hell trilogy because people keep insisting they're masterpieces.

But between the 15 minute scene of that one lady getting her multi-coloured face melted by an ever-filling jar of acid.

The lip-smacking spiders.

Boring, drab sets with bad soap opera music.

And now Bob.

I'm tired. Fulci is *beep* You can like his stuff, you can sing his praises, but these movies are awful. They're convoluted messes with the same gimmicky tropes used again and again. The dialogue is always painful. The acting is wooden. The endings are always vague and unfulfilling.

OH HEY. WE WENT DOWN THE STAIRS AND NOW WE'RE INSIDE THE PAINTING OF SOME HELL DIMENSION. HURDEDUR. THE END

"WELL THAT'S RESOLVED" *takes children and walks down the road* THE END.

Modern Argento is better than Fulci's classics. THAT'S HOW BAD HE IS. If someone tried to release any of this *beep* these days even SyFy would turn it down. But because they're older, people give them a pass because of how "quirky" all the flaws are. Guess what, Sharknado was quirky too. But it was still *beep*

Like Fulci.

That's all I gotta say about it.

[–] jjk50 8 years ago

I agree with you up to a point. Fulci was the poor man's Mario Bava, whose movies are much better done. Bava's were far better looking and didn't look as cheap as Fulci's. There was little "style" to his movies and he just went for the gore. You're also right that Sharknado was "bleep".

[–] !!!deleted!!! (63057267) 8 years ago

Fulci's splatter efforts (from ZOMBIE onward, with a few exceptions) are treasured among a lot of horror fans because they're so visceral, graphic and aggressive. They're also exceedingly well shot and uncommonly stylized. Your complaints inform me that you're looking for sensible, enveloping storytelling that are relatively grounded in reality, or are at least palatable/credible on some level. I can respect that as it's typically what I seek. However, the man's agenda was simple: Capture what plays like a nightmare on film. Nightmares are rarely logical or structurally coherent, so it would stand to reason that Fulci's attempts at recreating such experiences would lack logic as well.

Fulci made a good many films that are comparatively relatable or realistic (e.g. A LIZARD IN A WOMAN'S SKIN, DON'T TORTURE A DUCKLING, THE DEVIL'S HONEY, NEW YORK RIPPER), so I have to believe that he knew exactly what he was doing with his nightmare-like gore offerings. I highly recommend watching one or more of his afore-mentioned films before writing him off. I understand your dislike of his barf-bag flicks, and would never belittle anyone who doesn't connect with them, but thankfully he went through many phases as a filmmaker and garnered praise each time.

[–] Sean_Haze 8 years ago

I disagree entirely, honestly, at least based on the films I've seen (The Gates of Hell Trilogy, and Zombi).

His gore is cheap and hokey. And I say this with the era these movies were made in firmly in mind. The acid scene from The Beyond, for example. The strange colour-changing nature of her sub-dermal tissue? It was interesting, I suppose, but not particularly effective as an "OH GOD, THAT WOMAN JUTS GOT ACID POURED ON HER HEAD" gross-out effect.

I liked Zombi, well enough, but again, the gross-out just wasn't there for me. Films like Suspiria--in all regards, but let's focus just on the gore--blew anything I've seen by Fulci right out of the water. The heart stabbing alone was more graphic than most of the deaths in Fulci's work.

I dig "nightmarish dream-trips", I do. I don't need a story to be so tightly wound that there're no plot holes or questions left at the end. What I do need though is for the movie to be coherent enough for me to care about what's going on. The House By The Cemetary just wasn't that. It was a bunch of loosely connected scenes filled with terrible actors doing nonsensical things for reasons that were left a mystery to the audience, and that led to me tuning out after awhile because I just didn't give a *beep* about anything they felt they needed to do, because nothing flowed together well enough to create any kind of consistency to the actions.

I'll give the ones you mentioned a look just because I have to believe there's more to Fulci than what I've seen, but I'll be honest, to me he's a midget riding the coat-tails of far better Italian directors, whose gotten a pass from fans of Italian horror cinema just because it's a niche genre and he happens to be prolific in it.

[–] FlyingSaucersAreReal 8 years ago

I don't see the appeal really, either. His direction seems kind of clumsy to me. Argento did the whole weird nightmare loci stylish gore thing so much better.

The only Fulci movie I've seen that really pulls that off is the Beyond. Fluke's direction is pretty clumsy and so is his storytelling most of the time. I wouldn't say he's terrible, his movies can be entertaining, but I'm not all that impressed by them.

[–] MooseNugget 8 years ago

I agree with The OP.

I bought The Beyond based on the cool looking cover for The Blu-Ray disc and how highly rated it is on Amazon and IMDB.

I should have read some reviews and I would have known better. Everyone says the story doesn't make sense but the effects and gore is great.

It was rated higher than 7 the last time I checked. I gave it a 2. It's really overrated garbage.

At least The House by the Cemetery is okay. There's a story that connects together with this movie.

But just like The Beyond the ending is just a real let down. Thankfully this film I didn't waste my money, this movie was playing on TCM.

[–] heelmaster2000 8 years ago

I too agree with the OP, to an extent. While I don't hate the director I don't think he is a genius either. I enjoy Zombie and for the most part the Beyond, but this film and The Gates of Hell were just two massive messes.

[–] jackthehack 8 years ago

I agree with OP to an extent. The Beyond and House by the Cemetery are extremely overrated. Good gore but too slow paced and no momentum to the "story". I surprisingly enjoyed City due to some good suspense and Christopher George who added way too much class to the movie than it deserved unlike the leads of the other two films who were nowhere near George.

Zombi is his best film IMO and Fulci's earlier stuff like Don't Torture a Duckling and The Psychic are very good.

Even post the GOH trilogy, New York Ripper is underrated and The Cat in the Brain takes a good idea and extends it too long.

[–] ElectricWarlock 8 years ago

I think Lucio Fulci has a very distinctive, unique style. All the films I've seen have a certain cheap yet surrealistic quality that no other director can duplicate. Some of his films are more about the style than story or character which can be a problem for some people. The first time I watched The Beyond I didn't really care for it at all because I found the whole thing muddled and confusing. Then the second time I watched it, I understood what kind of film it was so I was able to enjoy it more. Now I consider it a good movie. I considered this one underwhelming in a similar way but admired some good qualities, so I have a feeling I will like it more with further viewings. I think many of his films are probably ones you can't enjoy fully the first time, but they require more viewings to truly appreciate.

[–] movie_nazi 8 years ago

I agree with you 100%. These films suck. I honestly was not impressed with Argento's magnum opus Suspiria. I made the fateful mistake of buying the DVD with extras about 10 years ago on reputation alone. Boy, was that a mistake. Although visually stunning and decent gore scenes the story was a mess and incoherent. Fulci films seemed to be a bad imitation of this so while I rated Suspiria a 6 on the IMDB scale, most of the Fulci films I have watched which includes Zombi and the first 2/3s of the Gates of Hell Trilogy (watching Cemetery now and I have to stop every time I see something absurdly ridiculous to see if there is an answer for it here) I have given a 3.

Although some of the gore scenes are done rather well, such as the drill to the head scene in City of the Living Dead, some of them are rather hokey such as the brain ripping scene (which was over done in the film) of the Christopher George character where it appears as though a kidney falls out of his head. But the real problem with his films is how the storyline does not follow a coherent path to suck the audience in as to what is going on. The story is told in a half ass sort of way. You mix this is with bad acting, terrible dubbing, and sh!tty directing and you have yourself a classic Fulci "masterpiece" .

They are really bad and their only charming quality is the fun one may get pointing out all of the ridiculousness in the film. These films would be perfect on Mystery Science Theater 3000. They would have a field day with this sh!t.

My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

[–] philstbarnetby-937-230001 8 years ago

Well, I have to say even as a massive fan of Fulci, I can’t argue with any of the points raised above.

I think it must be a generational thing, because for horror fans growing up in the early ‘80s, especially like me in the UK where film censorship was so extreme and store owners were actually being prosecuted for renting out certain videotapes, Fulci’s work was considered so extreme he wound up being idolised by the gorehounds of the day.

The Italian horror scene from 1979 to around 1990 held a special place in many fans’ hearts because it gave them far more than the mainstream film industry in terms of balls-to-the-wall violence and sleaze and people were prepared to put up with all the crappy dubbing, bad acting, total lack of internal logic and unconvincing FX just to get to the wet stuff that elevated them above popular major studio releases like Lost Boys and Fright Night. That’s why movies like Zombie Holocaust, Nightmare City, Cannibal Ferox etc are still getting deluxe blu-ray collectors editions released, despite the fact they are, objectively, utter dreck.

I can't imagine what appeal this stuff may have for anyone born after 1980, seeing as how you can see far more extreme content on TV now than anything created back then. Nothing's shocking anymore, but a lot of people still have affectionate nostalgia for the times when they could sit down in front of their VCR and have their minds blown by City Of The Living Dead and The Beyond. Hence the sheer number of glowing, yet subjective, reviews.

[–] movie_nazi 8 years ago

I can't imagine what appeal this stuff may have for anyone born after 1980, seeing as how you can see far more extreme content on TV now than anything created back then. Nothing's shocking anymore, but a lot of people still have affectionate nostalgia for the times when they could sit down in front of their VCR and have their minds blown by City Of The Living Dead and The Beyond. Hence the sheer number of glowing, yet subjective, reviews.

Ha! True. I was born in 73 so you can imagine when these films were being released they would scare the crap outta me. I find it quaint saying this, but here in the States they were much more liberal when it came gore and I was renting gory flicks like this when I was 9 or ten years old without anyone batting an eye. Of course back then you didn't really care about the terrible story or bad acting, you just wanted to get the sh!t scared outta you which it indeed did! 

I just get a little perturbed when people throw around terms like "masterpiece" and "genius" when the writing is absolutely atrocious. What drives me nuts is that the writing doesn't even have to be especially clever to make it decent. You could in fact, use the "bones" or the "frame" of the story already there and just fill in the gaping holes which tells me the director didn't really have it together if he didn't even bother with it. So when I hear people say, "Oh it's a masterpiece!" I wanna say, "Please STFU already!" .

My Vote history: http://www.imdb.com/user/ur1914996/ratings

[–] Eve_of_Destruction 8 years ago

We are not in High School anymore you can like what ever the F you want.

For me it's the mood that I like. A lot of your points I agree with.

[–] Chucky_Jr 8 years ago

Never understood the hype either. They're fun exploitation flicks, but that is only what they are; exploitation flicks. Not ground-breaking masterpieces. They have a more interesting visual style than most other films from the genre, but when it comes to story and acting they are about the same level as the majority of Bruno Mattei's output.