The Worst Film Ever

One of my all time favorites.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Miguel Ferrer breathed life into the role of jaded tabloid reporter Richard Dees, who is determined to chase down the Night Flier, a serial killer who exsanguinates his victims as he travels from place to place in a small plane. Ferrer's character is a driven, self centered man who has no interest in life other than his next sensational byline.A young female competitor brings out the worst in him, and he leaves her behind while he pursues the vampire responsible for the killings. What Richard encounters is more than he bargained for. The ending is actually better than for most of King's stories. The acting, especially Ferrer's, is good. He also appeared in the TV miniseries adaptation of King's novel, The Stand, the same year The Night Flier was made. May Ferrer rest in peace; we will miss him.

Films like this fill me with hope for straight-to-video flicks. For hours I'll sit through endless trash, totally irredeemable and pointless. But occasionally, very occasionally, something interesting will turn up, as is the case with this film. Don't be put off by the fact it's been languishing in the dark for nearly three years before release in the UK, as THE NIGHT FLIER is a highly enjoyable and in some ways, old-fashioned, thriller.The plot comes across a bit like an episode of THE X-FILES, with a journalist (instead of an FBI agent) interviewing suspects and gradually getting closer and closer to the killer of the story. This isn't cliché land, though, as the 'hero' of the story, played by Miguel Ferrer, is for a change a totally heartless character, out for his story and nothing else. In fact there are no sympathetic people in this film at all, everybody is out for themselves, whether it be for fame, fortune, or just plain food in the vampire's case. A lot of people found Ferrer's performance to be misjudged and criminal, that in a lot of ways he is actually more evil than the vampire he seeks. Ferrer is cynical to the point of hopelessness, walking around with his camera and snapping dead people like a birdwatcher would take pictures of birds. A car accident he coincidentally passes he regards as a "bonus", photographing the sprawled corpses with relish. Although Ferrer seems to be typecast in villainous roles, it's something he does brilliantly.And I did feel sorry for him too by the time the finale arrived. Okay, so he had been warped by the sickness around him, but he was still human, just at mercy from the own dark side of his soul. Unfortunately, apart from Ferrer's performance, the rest of the acting in the film is of a low standard, with Julie Entwistle supplying a pretty face but little depth. Thankfully Ferrer is on screen for most of the running time (yes, the film focuses on him instead of the vampire, refreshingly). I was glad that this film didn't bother with all the standard talk about vampires being killed with garlic and stakes, in fact the makers knew that the audience would already know what a vampire was so there was little reason to explain.Okay, so the film does fall foul of some of the conventions of modern horror (i.e. the scenery is littered with bloodied corpses at every opportunity, there's little plot to move things along, it's more like a series of linked scenes), but it overcomes these flaws and turns out to be a nice little gem of a film, offbeat and different enough to appeal to the fan tired of slug-like films, bloated with gore, like WISHMASTER and its sequel. The vampire himself wears an old fashioned cape (I would have sworn it was the one that previously belonged to Lugosi, except he was buried in it) and looks like a decayed version of the guy from SALEM'S LOT. The makeup is very good, and used only briefly to be more shocking (except thanks to advertisers they smeared the image in close up all over the posters and video boxes, ruining the impact. This really annoyed me as the vampire's face was hidden throughout the film, yet the suspense coming from his unknown appearance was ruined by the stupid box designers). The gore level is quite high, especially in the last third, and mainly takes the form of bloodied bodies.One thing that is brilliant about this film is the twist ending, which I won't spoil, only to say that it's very similar to the ending of ARLINGTON ROAD and just as effective. There's a hallucinogenic moment where Ferrer is forced to drink the vampire's blood and sees the dead coming back to life around him, enshrouded in mist, just like in NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD; made more effective through the use of black and white. I loved the corpse with flashing eyes saying "can you look this way?", a reflection of what Ferrer had become, a camera and no conscience. THE NIGHT FLIER somewhat bravely breaks the boundaries of the genre, and, although disliked by many, definitely deserves at least one watch. It's also one of those films which has a long-standing appeal and can be enjoyed more than once, because it's not just about special effects.

Stephen King has many horror films made from his hit novels, yet only a few were made into true cult classics. Some movies were hits, and even fewer were classified as hidden cult classics like this movie. The most numerous of his films were the stinkers. Stinkers are King films that were made into terrible incarnations of the novels they attempted to emulate. As a hidden cult classic, the night flier never really made it big in the theatres, it was not critically acclaimed and the movie wasn't popular enough that common people would even recognize the name of it. With all of that working against the movie, it still managed to develop into a cult classic. Why? How? I will tell you the why, and it's because this truly is a good flick! The acting is good, the story itself is well written and conceived and the premise is great. The supporting actress who plays a beautiful yet brilliant ambitious reporter does a better than average job portraying her character. She is fighting to get ahead of her competition "Deez" but he is too smart, dedicated and one heck of a manipulator that manages to steal her credit, story and make her look bad at the same time.What this fantastic horror story has working against it is the ending. The ending does tie up some of the loose ends, but not nearly all of them. In fact the ending leaves quite a few things for the viewer to decide on their own. If only the story filled in more of the back story on the vampire and tied this up in a pretty ribbon it could have been great! I am convinced that if this movie spent another 30 minutes more on vampire back story and a bit more on Deez's outcome this movie would have pushed out of cult classic status and into horror classic. A great movie, one that I would recommend to any horror/vampire fan.

Sometimes, movie adaptations end up totally missing the point of their source material, but this was a very faithful adaptation. In fact, I'd argue that it's probably near the top, as far as faithfulness goes. Unfortunately, there a few things wrong that kind of drag down my rating.I like Miguel Ferrer, so I was pretty excited when I found out that he starred in this movie. As I expected, Ferrer is the high point of the movie. Dees is one of those characters that you love to hate, and he was done to near perfection. Unfortunately, given that film is such a visual medium, it was more difficult to get into Dees' head than the short story, but that's pretty much an obvious and unavoidable issue. Still, Dees' commentary in the short story was the best part, leaving me feeling slightly sad that much of his internal dialogue was missing.As far as the other actors, they were all pretty much passable. None of them were ever bad, at least. A new character was introduced, as a foil to Dees, I suppose. Usually, when this happens, it's a disaster, but I thought it was handled fairly well. Unfortunately, the actress, Julie Entwhisle, was one of the weaker elements in the movie, in my opinion. She wasn't bad, but she wasn't great, either. Dan Monahan, as the editor, played his character as a cheerfully sleazy bastard. I usually dislike comic relief in my horror movies, but it was done well enough here that it didn't bother me. Michael Moss, as the Night Flier, was fine. Other people really seemed to enjoy him, but I did not find his performance particularly memorable.I guess what really bothers me is the plot. This is not unique to the movie, of course. I really don't understand what possessed Stephen King to write a story about a vampire who flies a Cessna. I'll just say it: this is a stupid idea. However, the story really does work, even though the main conceit is too wacky to take seriously. I like how Dees and the vampire serial killer are compared and contrasted, even if it is a bit heavy-handed and lacks subtlety. Nonetheless, it raises interesting questions about morality, ethics, and the role of sociopaths in our society. Still, it's difficult for me to just let go of the ridiculous idea of a vampire flying a Cessna. I mean, really? That reminds me of a hilariously bad European movie I saw once about a haunted elevator. Yes, that's right, it was about a haunted *elevator*. I think it was titled Lift, if you're morbidly curious.While somewhat generic, there are times when the movie does rise above being your average direct-to-video King adaptation. Some of the special effects from KNB are quite good. There's a fairly well-done homage to Night of the Living Dead near the end. Unfortunately, the atmosphere was frequently a bit flat, leaving you with gross-out effects or grisly, black humor, rather than suspense. Certainly, that's not bad, but it makes for a somewhat less fulfilling horror movie. Instead, I think Night Flier works better as an exploitation movie, since it's so lacking in atmosphere, tension, and suspense.Some people were disappointed by the ending, but I found it to be perfectly acceptable and perhaps even satisfying. If I sound a bit unenthused, then keep in mind that many King adaptations end up being dismal failures, and that finding even an average or mediocre one is something of a coup. While not High Art, this is still enjoyable enough to recommend to other King fans, even if they're only familiar with the movie adaptations.