Titreenp SERIOUSLY. This is what the crap Hollywood still puts out?

Rio Hayward All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Marva-nova Amazing worth wacthing. So good. Biased but well made with many good points.

hte-trasme This seems often to get pegged a horror film, and the first Soviet example of one. It certainly takes the imagery of that genre in certain sequences, but is thoroughly too an adaptation of the Nikolai Gogol story of the same name. It's a somewhat eccentric adaptation, but in a sense it needed to be. The story is someone short, and not really especially visual. In the transition to feature film, this means that events get spread out quite a bit (even as events that happen to the other seminary students than our main hero are streamlined out), and therefore the film, especially in its first half, is rather slow moving. Though the visuals that are filled in end up including some very nice outdoor cinematography, and interesting scenes of the nineteenth-century Orthodox Church. Gogol's story was also characterized by a sort of ambiguity of tone that was part of his effectiveness as a writer, and that is not really completely maintained. Things become broader -- the old lady in the farmhouse at the start is obviously decrepit and witch like, for instance, and, yes, the ghostly scenes at the end are more horror-like. These sequences where the dead body in the church rises and summons demons are really very effective and thrilling (though sometimes showing budget limitations) and its no surprise they end up among the most memorable elements. Leonid Kuravlyov plays the lead as so hapless and dim that he's often not easy to believe in scenes that are not supposed to be funny -- except these ones. In all, an imperfect but worth-seeing adaptation of a Gogol story that would be very difficult to adapt in any circumstances -- and the better for the "horror film" influence that several appropriate scenes show.

Ralphus2 "Vij" is a masterpiece of Russian cinema and a masterpiece of 60s horror. Having said that, it is perhaps a film that may not appeal to the gorehound variety of horror fan. Not only does it not possess any gore, but it plays for much of its length like a bucolic Russian fairy tale. The scary scenes when they come are in the last 20 minutes or so. What makes "Vij" so wonderful are the lovingly shot scenes of rural Russia. The faces of all the peasants are shown in frequent close-up: ruddy, jovial, deeply lined with characterful wrinkles, blue-gray eyes twinkling. The camera is used to great effect in close-ups, blurry shots, spinning around our hero, zooming in and out, and those loving shots of farm houses and livestock. It often has a dream-like character and certain supernatural scenes are extremely surreal and effective. The blend of lighthearted comedy and echoes of folklore and a near-religiosity at times is also extremely effective. The lead does an excellent job as Khoma and his cohort of minders are equally good. Our deceased witch is a picture of beauty and reminds one of Snow White, such is her rosy-cheeked, fairytale beauty.I could go on and on about what makes this film so wonderful. I'll suffice to comment on one more feature. The music by Karen Khatchaturian (nephew of the great Aram Khatchaturian, he of the "Sabre Dance" and the "Onedin Line" theme music) is very effective and draws on the sounds of several other Russian greats. One reviewer here mentioned both Prokofiev and Rachmaninov. I thought the exact same thing in the same scenes. There is an overall Prokofevian sound to the music and the choral numbers bring to mind Rachmaninov's "All-Night Vigil", most likely intentionally. The music in the demon scenes draws on Mussorgsky's "Nite on Bald Mountain" with its eerie string scratchings, again most likely intentionally. These are wonderful and evocative sources for Khatchaturian to draw from.In summation, this is a cinematic masterpiece and is a must for fans of Russian cinema or classic cinema in general. Horror fans who can enjoy say, "Nosferatu", "The Cabinet of Dr Caligari", "Black Sunday", "Carnival of Souls" or other early greats, will no doubt want to seek this out. "Vij" is one of the early greats of the genre which it also transcends.

jennyhor2004 "Viy" is more Gothic fairy tale than a straight horror film, due to its close adaptation of the original short story by 19th-century Ukrainian / Russian author Nikolai Gogol. Yet the film itself has the look of many horror movies made in the West at the same time with lots of colour, some excellent photography and a staged look to the sets. What makes this movie different from contemporary horror films is that the story is steeped in the culture of the people and time from whom and which Gogol was inspired to write his story. The setting is in rural Ukraine some time in the 1300′s or 1400′s. An Orthodox seminary breaks up for holidays and the students walk to their homes: three of them decide to take a short-cut across some fields but get lost. One student, Khoma (Leonid Kravulyov), stays at a farmhouse and meets an old witch there who tries to ride him like a horse; he beats her severely and runs away home. Later he is contacted by his seminary to be told that he must say prayers for a Cossack chieftain's dying daughter (Natalia Varley). He is forced to travel to the village where the chieftain and his family live and discovers that the girl is not only now dead but may be the incarnation of the old witch. The chieftain compels Khoma to stay in the village and say prayers for three nights for the girl who specifically requested the young man's presence before her death. During his stay, Khoma gets drunk, acts stupid and tries to escape but the chieftain and his servants make sure that every night for three nights running Khoma is in the dilapidated church next to the young woman's bier reading and chanting prayers.The first half of the film builds steadily to the moment when Khoma's three-night ordeal begins; there isn't much to attract people looking only for horror but for parents and children watching together, the scenes of past peasant and religious life in a faraway country will be of interest. The character of Khoma is clearly established: he's young and not particularly devout, and he likes to drink and have a good time with the other seminary students. By the time he starts his night watch, viewers already have a clue his faith in God is shaky and there's a good chance he won't last the three nights. Apart from Khoma, everyone else plays support but the film is all about a test of one fallible man's character and faith when surrounded by evil. Kravulyov perhaps looks too healthy and robust to play a fragile, naive youth but his portrayal of Khoma as perhaps not too bright and very out of his depth in the real world away from the shelter of the seminary is very good.And what evil there is, in the second half of the film – the special effects might not be great by the standards of horror films made outside the Soviet Union and eastern Europe in the 1960s but they're adequate for "Viy": the girl's coffin flies through the air in circles, giant hands emerge from the walls and floors and deformed creatures literally crawl out of the woodwork to menace Khoma. They cannot breach the circle of chalk he has drawn around himself so they call for Viy, the biggest and most evil demon of all, to break through the magic protection sustained by Khoma's rapidly fading courage and confidence. Some of the acting probably needs to be more overdone, the demon make-up and costuming are at once hokey and scary, and Viy does look like a laughable carnival freak but the demon attack on Khoma is truly frightening though not at all gory. The animated skeletons and a close-up of a cute bristling monster weasel are major highlights. The filming method used in the horror scenes is outstanding with the camera continuously circling around Khoma or the flying coffin to create a sensation of delirious fear, dizziness and helplessness.Apart from the use of special effects and the constantly rotating camera during the night watch scenes, the cinematography isn't very remarkable though it does show the colour and flavour of rural Ukrainian life of several hundred years ago very well. The aerial riding scene is good with aerial photographs of lakes and forests whizzing by in the background behind the witch and Khoma to suggest the couple's speedy flight. Viewers will note a sexual subtext to the story: the witch's ride can be read as a metaphor for seduction or rape and the chieftain himself suspects Khoma of having had sexual relations with his daughter. He knows Khoma is poor and tempts him with the promise of a thousand gold coins in payment if the young man can sit through the three nights with the girl's corpse so the night-watch is as much a test of his self-control and honesty as it is a test of his religious faith. Perhaps if the film-makers had deviated from the original short story during the horror scenes and allowed the witch to try to seduce Khoma and tempt him with pleasure mixed with terror, the film might have become an artistic work in its own right that appeals to all audiences and not simply a retelling of a story with fairy-tale elements.There aren't many horror films that mix horror with dark fantasy, folk-tale elements and an examination of human nature and superstitious cultures, and put them all in a world that's at once ordinary yet fantastic enough that witches, vampires, demons and werewolves can live there and "Viy" remains a good example of what's possible with that kind of fusion.

rightwingisevil This movie was adapted from Gogol's short story collected from the Russian folklore. We could also peek the punk style of hairdos and attires already appeared in the 1960's Russia. The screenplay was a roughly adapted product from the original story, there were some weird unexplainable plots, but also hinted that whatever religion=superstition=evil=crap, all but a mixture of shitty stuff. The abbot of the monastery was the absolute authority over those primitive and retarded apprentices, usually orphans and good-for-nothing, using God and constant crossing in front of themselves, got more craves for vodka than God. The master priest still needed the donations from the rich landlord, because those bunch in the monastery only provided the commons with hollow words lip services and gestures either crossed their hearts or crossed to the others. Hand gestures and hand/finger signs were actually meaningless and foolish accompanied with gibberish mantra from the mouths. This movie also hinted that witchcraft was more powerful than the words from the Bible, that's why the young apprentice finally fell prey to the demons and died with evil demons neutralized and penetrated the protective circle of the Christendom; just like what we are experiencing nowadays.