In Search of Darkness

source: In Search of Darkness

Sadly that's really all it is. It's great to see some of the faces but they don't really have anything interesting to say. They give a quick intro on what the 80s was like and then 7 minutes in they start listing movies, giving a short description and saying they like them over alternating shots of talking heads and clips from the movie. The first movie is The Fog. You get 3mins, 5secs of talk about The Fog. This is a transcript I made for you. ----- John Carpenter: After Halloween I had a deal with AVCO Embassy to make two films and the first one turned out to be "The Fog". It was a ghost story conceived on a trip to England and Stonehenge. I said to Debra Hill, man it's really amazing here. And a fog bank at the time was off in the distance. "I wonder what's in there?" we said. I was gonna get hired for horror films, that's what was gonna happen, 'cause that's where I had a hit. So off we went. Tom Atkins: You know, it's kind of an old-fashioned ghost story. It's not big, gory, scary stuff. Carpenter: The Fog was shot up in Point Reyes, California. It was a beautiful area. Atkins: My dear friend Adirienne Barbeau, she spent the entire time up in that tower and so we were never ever on screen together. Jamie Lee: she's hitchiking and the first thing she says when she gets in the car is "Are you weird?" -brief clip of the Are you weird? moment- Atkins: Then I offer her a sip of beer and then they cut and there we are in bed. Just like that. It's that easy 'cause I'm smooth. Hah! I don't think it bothered her to get on that scream queen path as long as she thought she might be able to get off of it. And she did. Nick Castle: The Fog has Nick Castle as the lead! That's the name of the character in it! I also remember that very fondly because as you pan across inside Adrienne's room she's holding a baby and that's my son. Atkins: The guys that come out of the fog at the end, into the church, take Hal Holbrrok to heaven. Or hell. Somewhere. Andre Gower: The seaweed dudes: did not like. Did not like the seaweed dudes at all. Atkins: They look great in their seaweedy ooky outfits. Big box fans and fog machines at the end of a street trying to make enough fog to look eerie and creepy, threatening, the slightest breeze took it all away and then... to start over again, to build it up and get it going... Carpenter: That was re-vamped after we finished it as it didn't work and the script was changed. Atkins: It didn't get going quick enough, somehow. Carpenter: I was... that was a nightmare. I don't ever want to do that again. ----- And that's it. That's the level of insight you can expect. Hell, I'd say you get a bit more from The Fog than most of them - they hint that there's an interesting story about post production. They don't tell you anything about it but you know something interesting happened so that's something. And they don't waste a tonne of time telling you how much they like The Fog, something that happens on a lot of the other films.

In Search of Darkness sounded like a great idea to examine the horror films of the 1980's and maybe ask why it was the kind of epoch it was. But soon after it started I could feel what was going to happen. Essentially it goes year by year and looks at the films that essentially there were interviews for. Which was quite a bit, granted. But I immediately noticed that there was no organizing principle. No historical examination. No critical perspective. And at well over 4 hours that is a great fault. I'm sure fans of the idea of the 80's as the great decade of horror films, I'm not one of them, will just be happy to see so many favorites mentioned. Very much a fan effort that just goes on and on. Lots of useful information. But no narrative at all. You could stop the film at any year and walk away and not feel compelled to come back. Again unless you are an 80's horror fan. Period. And we seem to have bred fans who can only deal with exhaustive compendiums. (You'll probably see lots of comments lamenting films not discussed below.) But I was looking for the meat. To deal with the 80's properly you'd have to discuss it's prehistory in the films of the 70's. And how the 80's changed the formulas. Then you'd have to deal with the films by subject. So starting the 80's off with a section on Slasher films would have been a good place to start. Really examining the effect of make up and prosthetics on the craft of storytelling would have been good. Some of this was dealt with, but in a slight and simple way. There are no real horror historians interviewed. And there are lots of anecdotal interviews about what happened on the sets. So again history and context is rarely mentioned. There were a couple of very large oversights. One being the original Evil Dead. It was barely mentioned during the discussion of Evil Dead 2, but it was a very important film for the age. And they had Joe Bob Briggs whom I'm sure would have loved to discuss it. (His essay on it is brilliant.) Then where was Henry Portrait of a Serial Killer? A film whose struggle to be seen gave us the signs of changing times. And why did this era end? Was it just because the calendar changed? (More 80's style horror films were made into the 90's.) Did films like Henry or Silence of the Lambs have anything to do with it? And it becomes very clear that the second half of the 80's is filled with loads of sequels and jokey horror films. And frankly isn't nearly as crucial as the first half. No discussion of a diminution of quality? Everything is essentially the same. What about the larger cultural disgust with the blood and gore in the films, which came to a head by mid-decade? And why did certain films get so slagged off, The Shining, The Thing, etc, to later be seen as classics? I applaud the film in many ways for getting so many interviews. And yet for being so long it just meandered without a real introduction or conclusion. Why were the 80's important to horror films and to society? The answer is not found here. But it is an enjoyable film if not so meaty.

Complete list of films as discussed in order. 1980 1.) The Fog 2.) The Changling 3.) Friday the 13th 4.) The Shining 5.) Dressed to Kill 6.) Fade to Black 7.) Motel Hell 8.) Maniac 1981 1.) Scanners 2.) My Bloody Valentine 3.) The Howling 4.) The Burning 5.) American Werewolf in London 6.) Full Moon High 7.) The Evil Dead 8.) Halloween II 9.) Ghost Story 1982 1.) Cat People 2.) Basket Case 3.) Poltergeist 4.) The Thing 5.) Halloween III 6.) Q - The Winged Serpent 7.) Creepshow 1983 1.) Videodrome 2.) The Hunger 3.) Psycho II 4.) Cujo 5.) Sleepaway Camp 6.) Christine 3-d sub-section 1.) Friday the 13th III (3-d) 2.) Parasite (3-d) 3.) Rottweiler (3-d) 4.) Amityville 3 (3-d) 5.) Jaws 3 (3-d) 1984 1.) Children of the Corn 2.) Friday the 13th: The Final Chapter 3.) Firestarter 4.) Gremlins 5.) A Nightmare on Elm Street 6.) Night of the Comet 1985 1.) The Company of Wolves 2.) The Stuff 3.) Day of the Dead 4.) Fright Night 5.) Return of the Living Dead 6.) Howling II 7.) Silver Bullet 8.) Re-animator 1986 1.) Chopping Mall 2.) The Toxic Avenger 3.) Poltergeist II: The Other Side 4.) Psycho III 5.) Maximum Overdrive 6.) Friday the 13th VI: Jason Lives 7.) The Fly 8.) Night of the Creeps 9.) The Texas Chainsaw Massacre 2 10.) From Beyond 1987 1.) A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors 2.) Dolls 3.) Evil Dead 2: Dead by Dawn 4.) It's Alive III: Island of the Alive 5.) The Lost Boys 6.) The Monster Squad 7.) Hellraiser 8.) Near Dark 1988 1.) Critters 2 2.) Friday the 13th VII: The New Blood 3.) Killer Klowns from Outer Space 4.) Phantasm II 5.) The Blob 6.) A Nightmare on Elm Street 4: The Dream Master 7.) The Lair of the White Worm 8.) Elvira: Mistress of the Dark 9.) Pumpkinhead 10.) Halloween 4: The Return of Michael Meyers 11.) The Live 12.) Child's Play 13.) Hellbound: Hellraiser II 1989 1.) The Burbs 2.) 976-Evil 3.) Pet Sematary 4.) Friday the 13th VIII: Jason Takes Manhattan 5.) Stepfather 2 6.) Society

I was expecting an insightful documentary... what I got was 4 hours 20 minutes of talking heads. This is literally just a year-by-year picking of random horror movies, and having a random selection of the talking heads say what they thought about it. There's no commentary to tie the whole thing together. It doesn't start anywhere interesting, do anything interesting in the middle, or end with any kind of conclusion. It's extremely shallow, dull and repetitive. After watching for 30 minutes, a title card came up saying "1981", and my heart sank as I thought of how relatively expensive this Blu-ray was to import from the USA... (and, incidentally, how the back of the case says "Stereo Surround", yet it's actually just 2.0 Stereo). There are far more interesting documentaries on horror films available on YouTube for free... seriously, go seek those out instead. I recommend "Good Bad Flicks", "Oliver Harper"... even "Dead Meat" (whose presenter appears in this movie) as better examples of movie analysis that "In Search of Darkness". If you're already a horror aficionado, you'll learn nothing. If you already seen every movie presented here, you'll learn nothing. For any movies that weren't on your radar, you'll get spoilers. I can't see who this is aimed at except the sort of people who like to veg out on the TV equivalent of methadone.

(SEPTEMBER 2020 DISCLAIMER: At the time this review was written in February, 2020, all indications were that the film would never be available to stream online, and would only be limited to a single brief release window on DVD and Blu-Ray. This was based on information provided by the creators at the time it was written. However, the film has since been re-released for a second printing, and there are plans to re-release it yet again to coincide with the release of the sequel, "In Search of Darkness Part II." Additionally, the film is also available to stream through the SHUDDER streaming platform. Thus, the review will contain some inaccurate information in regards to the availability of the documentary-- it is now readily available for viewers. I do not plan on editing the review itself beyond this disclaimer, as most of my points still stand.) The great tragedy of director David A. Weiner's delightful "In Search of Darkness" is that sadly, many won't be able to see it. Produced for only a limited window of time, it is unfortunately no longer available for purchase. While I don't know if an official reason was ever given, it's not a stretch to guess that this short period of availability is presumably due to rights and licensing agreements. Especially given this was a lower-budget documentary produced primarily through crowd-funding. So at least for the foreseeable future, it will remain the ultimate cult film in a strange way. A movie that truly belongs to a small, dedicated crowd. But for those who were able to purchase a copy, it is most certainly a dream-come-true. A remarkable little documentary that showcases and examines dozens of films released in the decade of the 1980's. All while featuring numerous interviews with a wide and varied range of subjects. If you are a horror hound like I am, "In Search of Darkness" is most certainly a must-see film. The format is relatively simple. The documentary goes through the decade year-by-year, discussing a number of films for each year. Each film is given a window typically lasting between 1-5 minutes, as our interview subjects discuss the movies' plots and productions, along with interesting bits of trivia and factoids. We are also occasionally treated to specialized segments discussing various topics of the decade, including the re-emergence of 3D cinema, and the phenomena of the "final girl." And as for our subjects, we have everything from actors like Tom Atkins and Doug Bradley... to directors like John Carpenter and Stuart Gordon... to cult figures like Joe Bob Briggs and "Darcy the Mail Girl"... to modern internet entertainers like James "The Angry Video Game Nerd" Rolfe. It's a varied and eclectic group that all add much to the proceedings. If I were to point out any weakness in the film, it would be that I do feel the movie could have been longer. That might sound shocking given its immense length at over four hours... but some of the more obscure films discussed only get very brief lip-service, and it would have been nice to have seen them discussed in greater detail. Especially with major franchise films like "Friday the 13th" getting a greater focus. But this is only a very small complaint in an otherwise excellent production. It successfully highlights numerous movies, is thorough and informative, and is just a joy to watch. Not only did I learn more about some of my favorite films, but it also introduced me to many new movies that I now plan to seek out and enjoy. I'm giving "In Search of Darkness" an excellent 9 out of 10. If you are a horror fanatic and have the opportunity to check it out, do so. It's a gift to audiences and a fine film filled to burst with love and respect to the genre.

Lots of juicy clips from films, not much substance otherwise. No big names among the talking heads. They are pleasant enough but don't bring anything new to the table. Its nice to see how some of those 80's femme fatales have aged-Barbara Crampton is still impressive while Heather Langenkamp doesn't seem to care about her appearance. It is really disappointing that this documentary spends too much time on well known franchises such as Halloween/Friday 13th/Nightmare on Elm Street while other much better films are not mentioned. A couple of UK releases are mentioned but nothing from Europe or Australia. The guys behind this video need to expand their horror horizons.

Good to watch and select couple of missing pieces from old times. Each horror like 3 mins overview and last for 4 and half hours.

This is easily one of the best documentary movies I've ever seen!

Just tons and tons of horror thrown at me. I loved it. Interviews with directors, actors, practical FX artists, horror hosts, and lovers of the genre. I liked the format as well. They showcased several films per year as well as topics such as exploitation in horror. I've only really been into the horror scene the last few years and have mainly stuck to the more well known movies so there were a number of films highlighted that I've yet to see. That alone was a treasure to me. I now have a checklist. :) For a 4 1/2 hour documentary, time flew by. As for negatives, I thought they spent a little too much time on certain series, such as A Nightmare on Elm Street, but they are talking 80s horror. Also, it would have been great to see more key actors and crew. For example, a lot was said about Tom Savini's work yet he's not an interviewee. Budget, scheduling, and the willingness of the individuals could have all played a part in who participated though.