When a horror film is done properly it grips the imagination (and secret dread) of the viewers, so that they admire the end result despite the fears it has resurrected. A good horror film can achieve these results even with the barest of film budgets (such as THE BLAIR WITCH PROJECT a decade ago). One marvels at one of the most effective moments in that film - when the female is all alone in that spooky, haunted, deadly wood at night, in her tent, speaking into the video machine's recorder and holding a flashlight to her face showing the strain her isolation has left her in. The thought for that effect must have been considerable, but the expense was minimal. And it remains in our memory as effective.
NIGHT OF THE DEMON shares a similar sounding title to the American release title THE NIGHT OF THE DEMON, which was known in England as CURSE OF THE DEMON, and is one of the best horror films of the 1950s. NIGHT OF THE DEMON is an attempt to build a horror film about the question of the existence of "Big Foot", the American "Abominable Snowman" that supposedly exists in the forests of Oregon and Washington. Tall and furry with reddish hair, "Big Foot" usually is supposed to look a little like Chewbaca in the STAR WARS films. Whether or not "Big Foot" really exists is an issue I am not prepared to discuss. The creature has appeared in other films, probably most notably the comedy HARRY AND THE HENDERSONS.
Here the story is about how a group of students accompany a professor on an anthropology trek into the north-woods to see if they can find the creature. The students are made aware of the history (as it is) of "Big Foot", where he supposedly came from, whom has he terrorized and killed. We see how his father creature raped his mother (a farm-girl that was thrown out by her fanatical father), and how the father shot and killed the father of "Big Foot" after the rape.
Eventually they do meet the creature in a deserted cabin, only to be destroyed by him (only the badly burned professor survives the encounter. It is the professor that is telling the story of the creature's crimes. One is, of course, listening to his retelling these tales, of lovers being butchered, or wanderers being killed, wondering why anyone would seek to meet such a creature at all. It vaguely reminds one of the old cliché from the Universal Horror cycle films of the 1930s that there were some areas of knowledge mankind should not delve into.
The film has memorable sequences. It does give pure shock value - most notably when a motorcyclist taking a pee by the side of the road gets his penis ripped off by "Big Foot" as a result. What I find fascinating is that the shock value of this and some other really awful moments are treated as so funny by many viewers. Somehow total amputation of a sex organ is hardly humorous. Nor is the use of a person's large intestine as a whip like devise to attack other people with. But both sequences stick to the memory even if they certainly go beyond the point of good taste. A better effect is the murder of a young couple in a van having sex, particularly as the bloodied corpse of the young man is slowly dropped from the vehicle's roof.
I will give the film's creators their due in the use of music that lulls the viewer into a sense of false security, and some effects in the film (making the lens seem to be a green and red tinted eyeball at times). For it's strengths I willingly give the film a 6 out of 10. But the graphic nature of some of the effects make it less enjoyable to most viewers (I think) than other horror films are.
One sequence that I watched I will try to correct a small error in the descriptions that are given of it. Two young women are mentioned by as having been probably killed by the monster. We see what happened: they are shown walking together when they start running from "Big Foot", who catches them. They are stabbed to death. Now the sequence has been dismissed as another silly joke by some viewers. Reason: the girls are holding knives when they are walking through the woods, and continue holding them when they are running from the monster, and when caught. So that "Big Foot" (according to one reviewer) does a crazy "Hoky Koky" dance causing the two girls to stab each other to death by pushing them into each other. This is criticized as being stupid because the girls should just drop their knives.
The two young women are scout leaders, and they are holding the knives because they are protecting themselves in that dense wood. The appearance of the monster causes them to get flustered, and (even before "Big Foot" reaches them) bump into each other while holding their weapons (though without wounding each other). They don't drop the knives because they still rely on these weapons to help protect them. In doubling back to escape they run into "Big Foot", who grabs them by the arms they hold the knives in - AT THE WRISTS! They can't drop the knives. He then keeps knocking the two into each other's arms (severing blood vessels in those limbs) and then forces the girl's hands into each other's chests and necks. We watch them both gradually get fully bloodied by each other, until they both die from blood loss. It is a rather grim sequence - hardly funny at all.
NIGHT OF THE DEMON shares a similar sounding title to the American release title THE NIGHT OF THE DEMON, which was known in England as CURSE OF THE DEMON, and is one of the best horror films of the 1950s. NIGHT OF THE DEMON is an attempt to build a horror film about the question of the existence of "Big Foot", the American "Abominable Snowman" that supposedly exists in the forests of Oregon and Washington. Tall and furry with reddish hair, "Big Foot" usually is supposed to look a little like Chewbaca in the STAR WARS films. Whether or not "Big Foot" really exists is an issue I am not prepared to discuss. The creature has appeared in other films, probably most notably the comedy HARRY AND THE HENDERSONS.
Here the story is about how a group of students accompany a professor on an anthropology trek into the north-woods to see if they can find the creature. The students are made aware of the history (as it is) of "Big Foot", where he supposedly came from, whom has he terrorized and killed. We see how his father creature raped his mother (a farm-girl that was thrown out by her fanatical father), and how the father shot and killed the father of "Big Foot" after the rape.
Eventually they do meet the creature in a deserted cabin, only to be destroyed by him (only the badly burned professor survives the encounter. It is the professor that is telling the story of the creature's crimes. One is, of course, listening to his retelling these tales, of lovers being butchered, or wanderers being killed, wondering why anyone would seek to meet such a creature at all. It vaguely reminds one of the old cliché from the Universal Horror cycle films of the 1930s that there were some areas of knowledge mankind should not delve into.
The film has memorable sequences. It does give pure shock value - most notably when a motorcyclist taking a pee by the side of the road gets his penis ripped off by "Big Foot" as a result. What I find fascinating is that the shock value of this and some other really awful moments are treated as so funny by many viewers. Somehow total amputation of a sex organ is hardly humorous. Nor is the use of a person's large intestine as a whip like devise to attack other people with. But both sequences stick to the memory even if they certainly go beyond the point of good taste. A better effect is the murder of a young couple in a van having sex, particularly as the bloodied corpse of the young man is slowly dropped from the vehicle's roof.
I will give the film's creators their due in the use of music that lulls the viewer into a sense of false security, and some effects in the film (making the lens seem to be a green and red tinted eyeball at times). For it's strengths I willingly give the film a 6 out of 10. But the graphic nature of some of the effects make it less enjoyable to most viewers (I think) than other horror films are.
One sequence that I watched I will try to correct a small error in the descriptions that are given of it. Two young women are mentioned by as having been probably killed by the monster. We see what happened: they are shown walking together when they start running from "Big Foot", who catches them. They are stabbed to death. Now the sequence has been dismissed as another silly joke by some viewers. Reason: the girls are holding knives when they are walking through the woods, and continue holding them when they are running from the monster, and when caught. So that "Big Foot" (according to one reviewer) does a crazy "Hoky Koky" dance causing the two girls to stab each other to death by pushing them into each other. This is criticized as being stupid because the girls should just drop their knives.
The two young women are scout leaders, and they are holding the knives because they are protecting themselves in that dense wood. The appearance of the monster causes them to get flustered, and (even before "Big Foot" reaches them) bump into each other while holding their weapons (though without wounding each other). They don't drop the knives because they still rely on these weapons to help protect them. In doubling back to escape they run into "Big Foot", who grabs them by the arms they hold the knives in - AT THE WRISTS! They can't drop the knives. He then keeps knocking the two into each other's arms (severing blood vessels in those limbs) and then forces the girl's hands into each other's chests and necks. We watch them both gradually get fully bloodied by each other, until they both die from blood loss. It is a rather grim sequence - hardly funny at all.