A Masterpiece!

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

Erratically inventive horror film. The screenplay comes across as imaginative avoiding many clichés of the genre. Sure, there's the shopworn escaped maniac terrorizing respectable people as they come to an accursed old house. Not too much new here, but that's only the surface. Beneath, there's a novel story of events happening years ago that suddenly burst into the present as the new owner of the old house moves to sell it. The clues as to the background story dribble out until the shattering flashback that mostly ties things together. (My copy is from a Mill Creek collection, and the visual quality is poor. So I don't want to pass hasty judgment on the movie itself.) Still, the plot's crux concerning what happened to the maniacs, though imaginative, remains quite a stretch.Good to see movie great John Carradine again, even if in diminished condition. However, giving him a bell to ring instead of spoken lines deprives viewers of one of moviedom's great basso voices. (I wonder if he was perhaps ill.) Also, I wonder if the well-known Patrick O'Neill's rather brief appearance was to build marquee appeal. It would seem any number of lesser actors could have played his lawyer role. Then too, I don't recall seeing actor James Patterson before, but he's got one of the great non-Hollywood faces I've seen, definitely unlike the usual leading man. Plus, casting him in an appropriately ambiguous role helps suspense.All in all, it's an interestingly creepy production, heavier on plot than blood splatter, despite the title.

"Silent Night, Bloody Night" is a frustrating film. It manages to set a great mood--chilling and brutal. Yet, it then seems to lose so much momentum late in the film--and left me feeling totally uninterested.When the film begins, you learn that a rich guy died 20 years ago under mysterious circumstances. In the meantime, his home has sat abandoned until recently when his son declares that he's going to sell the place. Soon after his attorney arrives in town to finalize the deal, folks start getting hacked to pieces (the first few are amazingly realistic). All this worked well. However, to explain who it was and how it was, the film had a HUGE and awkward flashback sequence that seemed to take up the last third of the movie!! Surely all this could have been done in a much more straight forward and less sloppy manner. And, as a result the film left me wondering if perhaps a re-write might have resulted in this becoming a much more popular and worthy movie. As it is, I'd only recommend it to die-hard horror fans or folks wanting to see a young Mary Waronov in a major role.

Story that takes place in Arlington MA (my home town:)). A creepy old mansion that has been deserted for years is going to be sold...despite the will of the former owner who said it should never be touched. The real estate agent who helped sell it (top billed Patrick O'Neal) and his girlfriend decide to spend a night in the mansion...and are axed to death. Soon townspeople are getting calls from the mansion telling them to come on up...to celebrate.The story is disjointed (to say the least), the dialogue is terrible and some of the acting is pretty bad...but it works in spots. It was shot in the winter giving it a sparse, creepy atmosphere. The house itself is beautiful...and scary. Genre favorites John Carradine and Mary Woronov are on hand and are pretty good. The murders are mostly heard and not seen but that actually works in their favor. Best of all is an incredibly eerie sequence during the last half hour shot in sepia. That part alone makes this worth watching. Also there are a few surprising (if totally implausible) twists at the end. It's worth at least one viewing for horror fans.

If you hate low budget schlock, tread not towards the TV when this is playing. However, should you be a lover of obscure weird old trash, this might be just what you are looking for.The basic plot follows a sordid family tree and the mysterious Butler house, an isolated "mansion" off in the woods near a tiny town. When the home suddenly is put up for sale after so many years of laying empty(or is it?) the town VIPs are hopeful that there might be an end to the trouble associated with the house. However, almost before the very finale, you will discover that all the townies worth mentioning are somehow tied to the history of the home and its bloody trail.This is shot on grainy, murky film with terrible editing and lackluster sound. Some of the dialogue is dubbed. John Carradine has more than a cameo but slightly less than a minor role and has no speaking parts. He does, however, ring a little bell frequently and annoyingly. Mary Woronov is quite a dish and this is the first film I recall watching with her in the cast. This is a largely bloodless film, except for a "meh" scene near the beginning where two people get the axe. While a bloody scene, it is not realistic in the slightest. The axe hits the bed sheets several times, but you never see it penetrate any bodies.Yes, there is some atmosphere to be had here, but it is mainly due to the low budget and murky quality of the film overall. I wouldn't give any props to the actors or director(or writer) since they don't add up to much. As I said before, though, Woronov is nice on the eyes if you like 70's tarts. A sepia-tone flashback adds an unusual touch towards the end, but several voice-over narrations are tedious.Effective time waster.