Mother of Tears (2007) User Reviews

A Mixed Bag of Italian Horror Sensibilities

[pieceoftime · 6/10 · 6 December 2015]

It took me several viewings of Argento's final film in his Three Mothers trilogy before I finally arrived at a sure, albeit ambivalent, conclusion.

The "plot", as they call it, involves an ancient urn which causes the city of Rome to erupt into violence. Robbery and murder run amok and it's all the result of Mater Lachrymarum (the Mother of Tears.) It's ultimately up to a young art student by the name of Sarah Mandy to stop the chaos.

Asia Argento plays the role of Sarah. I don't think Asia is without talent (I enjoyed her performances in Trauma and the Stendhal Syndrome – two earlier Argento efforts.) But while she shouldn't entirely be held at fault here, her performance isn't exactly great. She frequently comes across as wooden, although I believe much of this is a result of the poor dialogue. And perhaps more importantly, her wooden delivery and still fairly thick Italian accent give the proceedings quite a bit of charm. I wouldn't say her performance enhances the film, but I suppose her looks are enough to keep the film going. Adam James' character is boring and not at all engaging; this is true even when we're given the chance to poke fun at him. He does nothing for me, and, at best, is forgettable. And then there's Udo Kier. Doing what he does best, he's over the top enough to be memorable, but he somehow never crosses into "too ridiculous" territory. His screen time is short but worthwhile.

One of Mother of Tear's saving graces is its gore. Gone is Germano Natali's (Deep Red, Suspiria) garish, paint-like blood (excellent in its own right); instead, Argento opts for a more Fulci-esque display of bloody mayhem. The camera lingers on every moment of gory detail. Argento has rarely been this brutal; there are plenty of memorable moments for gore hounds and the film's first big sequence is a perfect example.

Mother of Tears' soundtrack frequently pays homage to Argento's past supernatural related works. The music during the aforementioned first murder sequence is a clear nod to Suspiria's over-the-top, yet haunting operatic music. And later scenes do more than enough to hint at Inferno's piano-based instrumentals. Overall, the film does a good job score-wise.

From a visual standpoint, Mother of Tears is hardly lacking. It may not have the Technicolor look of Suspiria or the nuanced production design of Inferno, but it's hardly dull. It takes some of the artsy indoor/outdoor scenes of The Stendhal Syndrome and combines it with the more elaborate set-pieces found in previous "mother" films.

Overall, Mother of Tears is a mixed bag. It has its boring moments, but it's also a good example of Italian Horror's love for grandeur and charming carelessness toward what is considered logical or politically correct. Those comparing it to films of Argento's golden era need to stop living in the past. Mother of Tears has its great moments and not so great moments and it is neither a failure nor a rousing success. If you're a fan of 80s "godfather of gore" era Fulci and take into account the 21st century's distinct lack of anything Giallo/Italian Horror-related, Mother of Tears is worth a watch.

Let's just pretend this didn't happen...

[Stay_away_from_the_Metropol · 5/10 · 15 July 2009]

This was one of the biggest disappointments for me in a long time.

If you've ever heard the name Dario Argento - it's probably because in 1977 he crafted one of the most stylish and genuinely creepy horror movies of all time, called "Suspiria". It's one of my personal favorite movies of all time, from one of my favorite directors. If you can appreciate horror, or even if you can't but you're an open minded person, I suggest you give SUSPIRIA an hour and a half of your life because it's unlike any other horror experience you will ever have.

SUSPIRIA was intended to be the first movie in a series of three, known as the "Three Mothers Trilogy". After Argento's crowning achievement, he did the 2nd in the series in 1980 which was called "Inferno". Although Inferno was just as stylish and just as mysterious, it was not quite as effective or fulfilling as Suspiria in the end. Yet, it is still a bizarre cult classic. The soundtrack from Keith Emerson is probably even better than the movie itself.

Anyways...Argento decided to hold off from finishing off the trilogy, and ended up holding off for 30 YEARS..., so finally in 2007 he decided it was time to create the finale, The Mother of Tears.

What can I say? There are maybe one or two gratuitous murders that are worthy of the Argento name, specifically the very first in the movie which comes out of nowhere and may have you clenching your mouth to make sure your teeth are still there. It is always lovely to see Argento bringing back actors and actresses from classic Italian horror films - in this case it's Coralina Cataldi from his awesome 1987 film, Opera, and the roller-coaster ride that is DEMONS 2.

Aside from a few memorable deaths, this movie really has almost NOTHING to offer. It is nice to see someone making movies about black magic, demons, and sorcery since no one else really does that anymore. The concepts are wonderful but unfortunately NOTHING is pulled off effectively here.

For one, the CGI totally abolishes the legitimacy of the movie. It's some of the cheesiest CGI i've had to bare with in some time. I figured Argento would be smarter than this - but then again, he is getting really, really old...

Asia Argento (the director's daughter and lead actress) can act but she isn't given much to work with here. The script, as usual with Argento's films, is the weakest part. The dialogue is far too basic to keep your emotions invested in the characters. No one else stands out as a particularly great performer either.

The saddest thing of all is that the movie completely lacks atmosphere. The setting and atmosphere was always the absolute BEST part of the director's classic films. And the fact that one of my favorite bands of all time, Goblin, provided the majority of soundtracks heavily added to that. But they've been out of the picture since his 2001 movie, Sleepless. The sets were completely plain and in no way stand out. I appreciated the shots of the creepy old mansion like building towards the very end, but even that building looked fake and CGI-induced...and it was clear that it was not actually filmed there - which took a lot away from the entire finale.

The finale was probably the most depressing part. It felt extremely rushed, and aside from that, the "lead villain" who is supposed to be "the most evil of the three mothers" was SO half assed. A good looking chick with nice tits and some black make up around her eyes?????? c'mon!!!!!!! what IS this?!?!?! I wanted to laugh at it but was way too saddened by the film overall to have a good time with it. And then all of a sudden, it's over...

I was so let down!

I guess I'll have to depend on Asia Argento to make good movies instead from now on. Her last one, The Heart is Deceitful Above All Things, was a masterpiece of it's own kind!!! See it!

Dear Dario,

[doctorprogress · 4/10 · 16 June 2008]

I know this is going to be hard for you to hear, but I have to get this off of my chest: I'm leaving you.

We had a good run for years, but now its time to move on. I'm not going to patronize you by using the tired "its not you - its me" cliché. In fact, it IS you. You've changed, and I'm not in love with your movies anymore.

In the early days, we had a blast. Your films were artistic, original, vibrant, gory and scary. They were lush with complex themes woven into horror films that broadened my mind...

In the Eighties, we had a rocky period. Your films became sloppy and convoluted. Yes, the honeymoon was over - but we still stuck it out. I had faith that we (you) could work through this and get back in the game.

Towards the end of the millennium, you did have your flashes of brilliance - glimpses of our blissful beginnings... Sadly, as I now see, those were merely the final stages of your decline. Your brief and violent death throes before truly going off the rails.

I am writing to you now after seeing "Mother of Tears." I had such high hopes for us again!! All the planets were aligned: Late night screening - full house - open mind - belly full of tequila and lime... and the NEW DARIO ARGENTO FILM!!! What could possibly go wrong! Then it starts... Gore right off the bat! Then witches!! THEN a very wicked little monkey!! This is going to be great!

Then... oh god, then.... I'm not sure when it started exactly, but at some point pretty early on the plot twisted off into nowhere - followed shortly thereafter by any pretense of acting. I mean - I love a b-flick, but this was just pathetic. Especially when you know everyone can do better. (Oh, Udo, my secret Lover... Why? WHY???)

What bothers me the most was that it seemed that you, Dario - the once great horror maestro- didn't care about this one. Where was the signature color palate? Why would you let the one of the brilliant Goblin boys write one great Argento-esquire piece, followed by half an hour of hackery?

I hate to say it, but after your last three flops - I'm done. Thanks for the great years, Dario, but you and I are through.

We'll always have the 70's, my Love. And I will remember them, and you, fondly. Good bye, Dario.

Reprehensibly bad, one of Argento's worst movies and a pitiful wrap up to the "Three Mothers" trilogy

[squeezebox · 1/10 · 30 April 2009]

MOTHER OF TEARS sucks. It's one of the worst movies I've seen in years. The fact that it was made by Dario Argento surprises me despite the fact that Argento has made more than his fair share of stinkers.

Sure, there are a few decent moments. A demon screaming into a phone until his jaw is impossibly extended is a creepy image, Sara descending a staircase into "Hell" is atmospheric and Argento delivers one good jolt with the old "did I really wake up or am I still dreaming" gag. But these scattered effective moments are crushed underneath a movie that looks like it was shot by a fanboy trying to make a movie like Dario Argento.

Asia Argento, who is a decent actress, is embarrassingly bad here. Her performance is so wooden and monotone she looks like just showing up to the set everyday was enough of a chore. Most other performances are lousy as well. The dependable Udo Kier fares the best in the role of a priest who shows up just long enough to spout out a few convoluted lines of dialog which connect this movie to SUSPIRIA and INFERNO before being hacked to death.

And that brings up the already infamous gore. MOTHER OF TEARS is likely to forever have a place in horror history as "one of the goriest movies ever made," but that honor is obligatory at best. Yeah, there are several outlandishly gruesome set-pieces, but they are all taken to such an extreme that they become ridiculous rather than horrifying. A woman being disemboweled and then choked with her own intestines is unintentionally funny, more like Peter Jackson's work in DEAD ALIVE than the surreal horror of SUSPIRIA. The scene is also not helped by the fact that the "intestines" look more like industrial extension cords than actual innards (even more so in an equally absurd moment in which a woman's intestines are being sucked out through her anus).

A monkey which serves as a familiar to the Mother is sort of creepy at first, but when it kept showing up and screeching it started to grate on my nerves. Even more irritating is Sara's mother's ghost, who repeatedly materializes to give her advice, even after telling her it's the last time she'll be doing so. The special effect used to place her in front of Sara is so bad it was hard not to chuckle every time. Unfortunately the unintentional humor that may have made these scenes amusing is killed by the excruciating banality of their dialog.

Worst of all, however, is the Mother herself. Turns out the "Queen of All Evil" is a runway model with fake boobs. She's about as scary as Paris Hilton. Maybe this is why the only witches who show up to honor her are the ones who wear ten pounds of make-up and have no fashion sense. For a secret society these ladies sure haven't nailed down the art of inconspicuousness. Argento apparently thinks all witches dress like Madonna circa 1985. And I expected it to take just slightly more to vanquish the Mother than to simply throw her T-shirt on the fire.

If this was just a random movie, with no connection to two of the most unique and surreal horror movies ever made, then MOTHER OF TEARS might be fun in a PLAN 9 FROM OUTER SPACE sort of way. As the final entry in an intended trilogy, however, this movie is inexcusably awful.

The Mother of Rubbish: Broken Magic, Broken Movie

[cosmosblack · 1/10 · 15 July 2008]

I saw 'Mother of Tears' last Friday and left quite devastated. I went in excited but with low expectations knowing that the colorful visuals of the prior films (1977's Suspiria and 1980's Inferno) would not be replicated. Argento has been quoted that he wanted this one to have a realistic and brutal tone, unlike the dream-like surrealism of the previous two. The opening credits/score were actually pretty decent but sadly what followed wasn't.

Soon after a coffin with an urn inside is discovered near an Italian cemetery, Rome is threatened by the resurrection of the Mother of Tears and her evil little monkey. Meanwhile the viewer is assaulted by a movie that is so poorly written, acted, staged and as promised, without the trippy splendor of the director's heyday.

The first murder felt rushed and was not very shocking - the idea of it is vile (a woman having her teeth bashed out, stomach slit open and then being strangled by her intestines) but at the same time it feels filmed in a detached manner - no tension or atmosphere. Maybe it was the atrocious acting, the by-the-numbers pacing - but most of the time I felt like I was in one of those "haunted" houses around Halloween-time where the actors (and in this case the director) try too hard to shock and scare - and all one ends up with is indifference.

Then we are treated to a boring cat and mouse chase between Asia Argento's Sarah (probably the worst performance in a Dario Argento movie ever!) and the second coming of witches and these witches are not as elegant and well-spoken as Joan Bennett - no, these witches giggle and frolic around Rome like they escaped some bad 80's goth convention.

Early on, a woman throws her baby over the bridge and you see the arm pop off mid-way sans blood - what should be horrific is chuckle inducing. I know Argento was wanting to give this chapter a more realistic feel but is he kidding?!? This doesn't feel realistic at all. The fall of Rome just involves a few people fighting in the streets, those pesky 80's witches and a priest that conveniently notes there has been a rise in exorcisms as of late while Sarah hails cabs and conveniently runs through all the "chaos", going from one character to the next to learn more about her own special powers and the Mother of Tears and how all three films tie together - which is over-written and lazy. And we ultimately learn that Sarah's mum, Elise Mandy (first played by Daria Nicolodi in Inferno) was a powerful white witch and fought with Mater Suspirium from Suspiria. And when Elise comes back from the grave like Obi Wan, all Sarah can do is annoyingly scream, "Mommy! Mommy!". Oh, there is another dead baby in the second act also which is more realistic-looking but at this point it's so obvious that you are watching a movie and a bad one at that - that the image has no real shock or power.

Then after all the running around, we arrive to the conclusion where Sarah destroys the Mother of Tears by burning her gold glitter glue pink top deep within the catacombs of an old abandoned building and while trying to escape poor Sarah falls into a pit of goo, maggots, and skeletons ala 1985's Phenomena. There are a lot of winks like that to fans of his previous (and superior) films but I didn't go to 'Mother of Tears' for winks - I went hoping for the experience of a modern Italian horror masterpiece. What I got was a joke and a slap in the face to the previous films in the series.

And when Argento has fans as big as Tarantino - why the hell is he co-writing with the lame screenwriters that wrote Tobe Hooper's last two direct to DVD duds?? What the 'Mother of Tears' could have been. Such sweet sorrow.

Some great touches

[ian_powell · 5/10 · 22 September 2012]

There is much to like here and I found myself more impressed with the film on 2nd viewing. I particularly liked the monkeys. But what kills the film for me is the lack of gravitas around the Mother figure here. she is too soft porn and thus difficult to take seriously. Her henchmen are fine, but she lacks genuine magic, and i. a film that takes magic as its subject, this pulls it down. In an Argento movie, we Can swallow the odd bit of scenery chewing (Udo) and even lack luster CGI and a lessening of the visual poetry of suspiria.... but only if that underlying sense of magic works. It half does work until the Mater turns up looking like a playboy centefold in a cape

My 30th Birthday Film: Daro Argento's The Three Mother's Trilogy:part 3.

[morrison-dylan-fan · 7/10 · 10 February 2017]

Oct 2014:

Watching the movie late at night for the 2014 October Horror Challenge on the IMDb Horror board (RIP) I found it to hardly leave me with any lasting memories, partly due to being tied,but also due to the flick being so disconnected from the other two in the series.

Feb 9th 2017:

Whilst trying to decide which of the last 4 titles (one alt cut,and two in need of re-watching) from auteur film maker Dario Argento,I read a review from a fellow IMDber on Argento's Dracula,who said it was not as "entertaining or gratuitous as his bonkers Mother of Tears." After reading this,I decided to pay another visit to the final mother with a new mindset.

View on the film:

Whilst stripping the film of the distinctive appearance of Suspiria and Inferno,co-writer (along with Jace Anderson / Walter Fasano/ Adam Gierasch and Simona Simonetti) director Dario Argento & cinematographer Frederic Fasano unearth a dusty, golden appearance that keeps the horrors linked to the nightmare unearthed.

Tearing the limbs out of anything even slightly subtle,Argento attacks the low budget for a piece of gloriously weird,pure Horror kitsch. Making the end of the world look like a Friday night out,Argento jumps over the limited extras with practical bonkers delights,from gallons of over the top gore and bad CGI ghosts,to a random cheeky monkey and the witches looking like a Goth band.

Criss-crossed from various screenplays written over 30 years,the writers struggle to keep any of the original elements of the first two films intact,with bone-dry scenes involving "research" featuring characters showing illustrations in books for scenes the budget can't cover.

Rolling down an Adventure Horror path,the writers push the mammoth flaws aside for hilariously odd shocks,that leaps from Mandy fighting hobos on the eve of the apocalypse,to Mandy being unable to spank a demonic monkey. Reuniting with her dad, (who lingers a bit too long at her naked body) sexy Asia Argento gives a fittingly peculiar performance as Mandy,who largely appears oddly relaxed at the end of the world,as her dad closes the urn on The Three Mothers.

Terrible in every way

[YugoNinja · 1/10 · 16 January 2008]

Dario, Dario, Dario... You shouldn't have made this movie. All ended in Inferno. There it was explained clearly that the Three Mothers are one. One entity, namely Death. Why making such an absurd and pointless sequel as The Third Mother? The plot is just laughable. Literally. It was hard to watch at one point. It looked like it was made by an amateur and not by the great Dario. The genius that he once was is gone. For good. The old Dario will never be back. The new Dario is just a mere shadow of himself. Pity. If nothing else, the third and last part of this trilogy could be at least a decent ending. Bye, Dario. I really loved you.

MOT: a twisted fairy tale for our modern times!

[guigui-paul · 7/10 · 3 February 2008]

Following the positive experiences of JENIFER and PELTS for the "Masters of Horror" TV series,MOTHER OF TEARS/LA TERZA MADRE received the typically mixed reviews for a Dario Argento work: People liked the film,or they disliked it,but very few of them were indifferent at the experience of watching MOTHER OF TEARS!

True,the last chapter of the Mater trilogy is a very different "beast" in comparison to SUSPINFERNO:

this time Argento doesn't repeat the totally surreal,colorful,abstract dream worlds of SUSPINFERNO but the director instead throws his viewer into our modern urban world.

In fact,MOT offers itself as a clever metaphor of the end of our days,our regular apocalypse.

The "second fall of Roma",as shown in the film, isn't the fake,typical "CGI-zed" apocalypse view of the world that you can see in many horror films like DAWN OF THE DEAD 2004 or 28 WEEKS LATER,but it is rather the daily,sad and gruesome chaos and madness that we can see in our every day lives: People beating and killing each other,rape,mothers killing their children,suicides,racism,etc.

If MOT is of course a (crazy!) fairy tale,the film has overall a more "down to earth" and tongue in cheek,ironic approach to its subject:

The characters in the film (especially Sarah,Michael and Marta) are likable human beings,they are slightly more defined than the puppets of SUSPIRIA and especially INFERNO...the relation between Sarah and her dead mother is also somewhat touching,and subtly linked to the past life of the Argento's family. The "baddies" in the film are deliberately over the top,they are cackling,"punk" witches who are governed by a sexy top model who enjoys her catwalk,the beautiful Moran Atias!

As usual with Argento,the use of locations (old buildings,streets,museum,book shop,station,catacombs...) in the film is really striking,also nicely enhanced by the use of 2:35 cinematography...there are also some nice use of moving cameras,from the opening shot in the cemetery to the beautiful and "argentoesque" long Steadycam shot when Sarah finds the Mater's lair. There's nothing here as spectacular as the crows's scene in OPERA or the carpet crawl in SLEEPLESS,but Argento's direction is quite solid,with its nice use of frame compositions and editing (see the first Roma's fall scene,for example!)

The opening scene in the museum,the incredibly nasty "TENEBRAEesque" scene with the likable lesbians and the night taxi ride/Mater's house's scene are really effective set-pieces that easily rank among the best set-pieces in the glorious career of Argento.

Frederic Fasano's camera-work in the film is also good,but unlike the "Technicolor Disney style" of SUSPIRIA and INFERNO,the film is shot in mostly cold,naturalistic and dark tones full of shadows,even if Fasano also delivers from time to time some welcomed and subtle bursts of vivid colors in the key "Mater" scenes set in the witch's lair.

The casting is quite good too,Asia Argento delivers an uneven but very physical,energetic performance,Adam James is a decent lead and it's always nice to see old legends of Euro cinema like Udo Kier,Coralina Cataldi Tassoni and Philippe Leroy doing some fun cameos.

The special effects from the great Sergio Stivaletti are mostly good and gory,delivering many effective nasty shocks in the murders's scenes.

Claudio Simonetti's music isn't as loud and memorable as SUSPIRIA and INFERNO's soundtracks,but it does the job very well and it is again a slightly different composition for the ex Goblin: full of electronic beats (remember IL CARTAIO?) but also with some lyrical,effective nods to Jerry Goldsmith,Bernard Herrmann,etc.

MOTER OF TEARS isn't a flawless film (Daria Nicolodi's character is questionable,the few CGI effects are quite average,the ending -like the one of SUSPIRIA- is a bit too rushed,...),but it is overall an enjoyable and touching tribute to Arts and especially to the sadly missed Italian "cinema de genre" from the 60's to the 80's:

There are lots of references in the film to Mario Bava,Lucio Fulci,Sergio Martino,Ruggero Deodato,Mario Caiano,Dario Argento (!),the "fumetti",Goya,Bosch,the 19th century painting,etc.

And finally,it's always a great pleasure to see that in 2008,a year where some opportunists directors like Rob Zombie or Alexandre Aja are somewhat considered like "Gods" by the young horror fans,an old cinema legend like Dario Argento is still breaking taboos and experimenting audacious,fun and personal stuff,with each one of his new work...

I came, I saw, I wept.

[qiqilla · 5/10 · 12 March 2008]

Before I start, I have to say one thing: I you ever loved Dario Argento's classic films, spare yourself the trouble. Please, by everything that is sacred in cinema, don't watch it. If you see it anywhere, move on, do not stop, whatever you do, Do not sit there and watch this... thing.

Mother of Tears is a very apt title for the movie indeed. It WILL make you cry. Because it's so bad and it completely ruins the foundations it was built upon. To make us wait almost thirty years just so you could ruin your trilogy on the silver screen, Dario? I know you love torturing people, but this is probably your cruelest murder trick, ever.

MOT has none of the dreamlike, surreal atmosphere of Argento's great films. It has no beauty. No style. No particular rhythm that makes it operatic. The movie tries to build a certain tension, but never manages to capture your interest fully. You care for none of the characters. The storyline lacks any trace of subtlety. The lines are heavy-handedly delivered by actors who have no presence, no personality. Udo Kier is wasted, as is Asia Argento. The dreadful end-of-the-world atmosphere needed for the story to work is just not there, probably because the means didn't allow for a larger production. It just would have required something much more ambitious. As it stands, the end-result is a disappointing film that doesn't pack any punch.

Things are explained so thoroughly by various random characters, that it's as if Argento completely gave up on ways to make the story come to life through other means. We don't need a lecture every ten minutes by Captain Obvious' cohorts to understand a film. At the same time, Argento criminally lacks to develop vital plot devices. Sara's magical powers are never truly used. The showdown against the Mother of Tears is the worst letdown you could imagine. She pales even in comparison to the Mother of Sighs, when she's expected to be the cruelest, most powerful of the three. The movie never truly succeeds to make you believe in its universe.

The ending sequence feels rushed, and clearly, Argento just wanted to indulge, copying bits from older, more successful films. You'll recognize moments that are attempting to mimic Suspiria, and even Phenomena, but those scenes will lack any of the visual strengths that their predecessors possessed.

Claudio Simonetti's work is at times passable, but overall it's nothing special. It is technically well-done, but has no personality and the melodies are sadly forgettable. The music to the closing credits are sung by Dani Filth. Yes folks.

You will laugh at the witches. You will laugh at the possessed folks outside Udo Kier's church. You will laugh at the supposedly distressing random acts of violence all around Rome. You will laugh at the policemen. You will laugh at the nonsensical script. You will laugh at Daria Nicolodi's abysmal "ghost mom" performance. You will laugh at the cheap scary moment that will make you jump out of your chair, because it's so unlike Argento to resolve to such cheap tricks in order to get a reaction out of you. You will laugh at the poor CGI effects. You will laugh when you shouldn't be laughing.

As for the gore... ...probably the only worthy thing in the whole movie? While some death scenes are especially nasty, they are deeply lacking. It's easy to be repulsive. Any hack of a horror schlock director can do it - look at Eli Roth. But nothing here will make you cringe like the sudden, shocking deaths in Deep Red. Nothing here has the style and cruel beauty of Suspiria's murders. Forget all about the original, imaginative ways to kill people that Argento has shown in the past. Eye-gouging, vaginal impalement, 'zombies' strangling a woman with her own intestines and then proceeding to hack at her body, lying lifeless on the floor (think Zombi 2's scene where the zombies are eating Paola Menard's corpse)... if anything else, what you have here is a postmortem Lucio Fulci production, complete with bad actors, random scenes of nudity, nonsensical plot, and unpolished ending.

I wanted to like this movie. I really did. I waited so long for this. But in the end, I felt betrayed. We all knew Dario had lost his touch... but this is truly the bottom. This is the film that should never have been made. If anybody else had shot this, and called it the last part to Dario Argento's magnum opus, everybody would have been up in arms over it. But it truly IS Dario's work. All we can do is weep.

Old Argento's style

[PsychoAndy75 · 8/10 · 15 July 2013]

Sure it's not the new "Inferno" or "The Bird with the Crystal Plumage", but we finally have glimpses of the old "Argento's style" back! A good, gory, horror movie, average scary scenes, nice FX and great story.

This is the third movie about the "three mothers", "inferno" and "suspiria" are the other two, and it close the circle of the three demons story.

As I said we are still a little far from the great directing we had in the first 70ish Dario's movies, but at least it's far better than the latest releases we have seen! The story goes on nicely, Asia is perfect in the leading role, Udo Kier find his "usual" bad ending in one of the best scenes of the movie (and of latest 20 years horror movies!), demons and gore scenes are really well made with the right amount of suspense.. what else do you need in a classic gore story! Sure, in this "twilight" era, when horror movie seems closer to its sunset, you'd like to see more movies like this!

Not Suspiria, but a lot of fun

[doug-697 · 7/10 · 7 September 2007]

I just saw this movie at the Toronto International Film Festival and it's entertaining, gory fun. The movie begins with the unearthing of an ancient burial in Rome. The urn is taken to a lab for examination and when it's opened it brings some evil witches back to life. This starts an epidemic of evil across the city of Rome and the fun begins. It's not up there with some of the classics Dario Argento films, but I found it quite enjoyable (in the gruesome-Argento fashion) and it had a few genuine shocks which got a strong reaction from the audience. In fact, I can only think of one weak part of the movie. There's a long scene where the main character, played by Asia (Dario's daughter) is walking down these long series of basements and sub-basements searching for the witches who are causing all the trouble. It's a long scene which is clearly meant to add to the tension of the final scene that's coming. However, there's no music. The old Argento would have had some electro-pop soundtrack pounding away cranking up the tension. You would need a strong stomach with this movie, there's some pretty graphic violence and the Dario's proverbial maggots make an appearance. It's not Suspiria, but it's still a lot of fun.

Please retire...

[T-bird-7 · 2/10 · 16 November 2007]

I must admit I quit watching Argento's movies after Phenomena ('84). At that point, his style was no more very appealing, but I've always considered him a great director anyway, basing my judgement on his '70s movies, in particular Profondo Rosso ('75), Suspiria ('77) and the slightly weaker (but still powerful) Inferno ('80).

When I heard this movie was soon to be released, I was excited at what it could be, after 30 years. Also I heard him talking about this movie, saying that it was his original plan to film all three chapters of the story about the three mothers from the book "Suspiria de Profundis" (1845), but that he got somewhat taken away by other projects. He also said that he never abandoned the idea, thinking about it in the last 30 -or at least 27- years. Well, this is the end result?

I'll never say "save your money", because I think everyone has the right to judge by her or himself, but I bet you'll regret spending your hard earned cash on this movie, I did for sure. What an inconsistent parade of "said,seen&done" stuff. If the idea at the base of the story was nothing new but intriguing anyway, the filming is, in a word, bad. Very, very bad.

Is Argento a soft-core director, a B,C,D...Z movie director or simply a guy who can't do his work in a decent way anymore? Where are all those touches that really were scaring? - and I'm not talking about gore here, but those disturbing traces that you didn't notice at first but somewhat got creeping their way into your head while you watched. Even the gore scenes were conventional. Some naked girls, bad acting, a pretentious plot and already-seen-before everything else. You got this movie.

Unbelievable. ...And if I only remember when, in the summer of 2005, I met Argento in person for Profondo Rosso's 30th birthday. He looked (and IS) so competent and imaginative. But, don't ask me why, all this doesn't show in this movie. After the first five or ten minutes, you start looking at your watch, wondering if the next scene will be more disappointing than the one you just survived. Even the characters are so conventional that only a child can find them interesting. Only Asia Argento proves, after all, to be a capable performer and her appearance is the only reason I haven't rated this movie at the minimum. Please, Dario, stop making this kind of trash, you'll pollute all of your great past works in this way, just like those once famous rock&roll bands that don't understand when it's time to disband. Or, go on and switch to soft porn, there is still some market for in on cable TV...

Sorry to sound so harsh, I liked this director's style so much. It simply isn't there anymore. I wish I hadn't seen this one.

Horrifyingly stupid!

[dna1280 · 1/10 · 19 April 2008]

A rating of 1 is the minimum I could give this ludicrous film. I wish IMDb introduced negative marking to warn intelligent viewers from keeping away from moronic films such as this.

Simply put, the film is stupid on all fronts - Acting - 0\10 (Asia Argento cannot even walk without making you realize what a bad actor she is); Script - 2\10; Direction - 0\10; Dialogues - negative 10; Consider this, the film is replete with stupid, nonsensical scenes such as - an old man who can barely walk when he enters the scene, suddenly becomes as active as a young man, in the same scene!; In the train station a gang of the bad witch's followers walk around behaving like a pack of rabid dogs and the public hardly reacts!.

You would normally ignore such stupid scenes if the acting was at least B grade class, but that is the bane of this film. Not one factor works in the movie's favor.

Red delights

[chaos-rampant · 25 April 2008]

As the opening credits rolled by in the midst of medieval drawings, I couldn't help but wonder to myself. Is this it? Could this be it? Is this the long awaited return of the undisputed king of horror to his rightful throne? All the marks were on the wall. Asia Argento returns to the fold, and so does Claudio Simonetti (the mastermind behind Goblin and their beautiful scores for Profondo Rosso, Tenebre and Suspiria among others), Daria Nicolodi (Profondo Rosso, Inferno, Tenebre, Opera and writer of Suspiria), Coralina Cataldi Tassoni (Opera), Udo Kier (Suspiria), Sergio Stivaletti (Argento's regular SFX man since Opera) and his brother Claudio Argento producing. As if this first class ensemble from the Argento universe wasn't enough, the first tracking shot through a graveyard and above a door screams Argento and I can't help but wonder. Is this really it? As the rest of the movie unfolds, the first thing that becomes quickly obvious is that La Terza Madre is definitely not a throwback to his colourful 70's days. This is neither Suspiria nor Inferno and perhaps Argento wisely decided to distance stylistically the closing chapter of his Three Mothers trilogy instead of emulating his vintage style (and risking failure?). The movie is decidedly darker, with a DV kind of look that brings to mind his last couple of works and subtle yet effective lighting that reminded me of Mario Bava circa Black Sabbath. Not a bad thing, aye? A medieval urn that is discovered in the cemetery of Viterbo heralds the coming of the Third Mother, the powerful witch Mater Lachrimarum. As Rome is plunged into utter chaos with people committing random acts of violence in the streets, Sarah Mandy (Asia Argento) is called to battle this ancient evil.

Story-wise La Terza Madre is typically Argento-ish. Occasionally nonsensical, with a relatively weak climax that doesn't mesh well with the build-up that leads up to it and very sketchy character development and motivation. But if you're a member of the Rosso Brigades and a sworn Argento hooligan you won't let that stop you. You never did, right? This is Argento and you don't expect profound drama from his idiosynchratic blood operas. That's not why you come back for more every time. You know his stories are mere skeletons for him to hang on his stunning imagery and violence. It's the style, the set pieces, the masterful way that visuals mesh with the score, the intricate build ups that lead to beautifully staged gore. You come to his movies for that pure cinema that no one else can deliver. You always did, right?

So will you find it here? I can safely say that yes... yes you will goddammit! Of course it is not Profondo Rosso and neither Suspiria or Tenebre, but for those who have followed his career closely the past 10 years that's hardly a big surprise. This is Argento2k. Visually darker but soaked in blood and entrails and atmospheric as all get out. There's an apocalyptic air about it and combined with Simonetti's decidedly more dark-wave score (it has evolved from the 70's in similar ways as Argento has visually), it manages to be chilling enough for most of the duration. Also this may very well be his most violent and gory film to date. There are several long drawn out death scenes, gruesome and stylish that will please every blood hound out there. And the atmosphere is as dark and nightmarish as one would expect from the subject matter. Closer to Sleepless than Suspiria overall, but definitely rewarding and head and shoulders above most Hollywood horrors this decade.

Now for the bad. I didn't like the CGI. It's not that it's badly done. Far from it actually. Compared to the horrible CGI of movies with 10 times its budget like I Am Legend and The Mist, La Terza Madre is OK. I just happen to think that CGI generally cheapens a movie. So there are moments that one may find a bit silly or cheesy (such as a spectral Daria Nicolodi hovering in the air), but not as bad as other efforts. Also the climax is a bit unrewarding. After a series of gruesome gore scenes the ending is a bit too hastily put together. And the Mother of Tears is just not menacing or chilling enough. Another actress (decidedly older) should have played the part in this reviewer's opinion. Also the dialogue and character decisions may appear a bit childish or nonsensical, but again that's something I can live with in an Argento movie.

As the ending credits rolled by I asked myself again. Is this it? Well... probably not. At least it is not a 70's throwback nor is it as monumental as Suspiria. It's the closure of old affairs with new style and attitude. Think how Sleepless upgraded his giallo style for the new millennium. La Terza Madre does the same for his supernatural horror. Personally speaking, I'm just glad he's still able to make a damn good horror movie. His 70's gems will always be there so the man gets carte blanche from me to take his style wherever he wants. As long as the results are this good I have no reason to complain. He's probably the last of the masters of horror from his generation that still has it in him. As far as I'm concerned, even mediocre Argento is better than 90% of today's horror. And this is very good Argento...

Mother of God!

[BA_Harrison · 4/10 · 24 April 2019]

When I stop and think about how far Dario Argento has fallen, it's enough to make me cry, but this final movie in his Three Mothers trilogy is so monumentally bad that, occasionally, the tears were of laughter.

Problem number one is the script, which borders on the farcical at times: new-wave witches (think Bette Midler in Hocus Pocus crossed with mid-'80s Madonna), a malevolent monkey, a friendly ghost, a taxi driver willing to pick up fares while the city is in chaos - even for Argento, this one pushes credibility a bit too far.

Problem number two is the acting - utterly dreadful performances all round, with Dario's daughter Asia the biggest offender (watching her character trying to will herself invisible is hilarious).

Problem number three... the visual effects: Stivaletti's practical effects are great (and make this one of Argento's goriest films), but the digital trickery is cheap and wholly unconvincing. How those awful ghost effects got the go ahead, I'll never understand.

Problem number four: the direction. Dario Argento has a crack at creating some memorable moments, but he's unable to work the magic this time around: the most notable shot is one long take, the camera following Asia as she wanders around a derelict building. It's technically impressive but ultimately pointless.

Problem number five is the ending: it sucks. After all that we have seen, the Mother of Tears (a naked silicon-chested bimbo) and her acolytes are destroyed in a flash, leaving Asia and the bloke she is with unable to contain their mirth. The joke is most definitely on us.

A generous 4/10 for the graphic violence, which includes a woman chucking her baby off a bridge, a person being strangled with their own intestines, a witch having her head crushed in a door, Udo Kier getting his face smushed, a neat eye-gouging, some throat slashing, and a woman impaled by a spear (which goes up her hoo-ha and comes out of her mouth!)

Yet another disappointment by Dario.

[idoru2099 · 5/10 · 16 February 2010]

I'm sorry, Dario but this doesn't belong next to your other "Mother" films. It's really funny that some people dare compare it to his older films and especially to Suspiria.

On the good side, Dario proves that he is still inventive in his killing scenes. Actually, this may be his most gory film. Violence and gore are really over the top, sometimes to such a degree that it can be comic. But in the direction/atmosphere department things don't look that good. The film never manages to build the really tense atmosphere we've seen at other Argento films and old masterful camera moves are mostly absent. The special effects don't help much, either. Blood and gore is done pretty good, but the Spirits and other CGI moments (God, I hate CGI in horror films) are at least cringe-worthy.

Of course Dario's decline hasn't started now, I consider his last decent film to be Sleepless (2001) and before that, Opera (1987). It's just that the story and the acting don't help either. What's new ? you'd say. Admittedly, especially in the acting department Dario's films were never that good, but here most of the acting is really bad. Especially his daughter (which he so much likes to torture in his movies) delivers some of the worst acting I've seen. She was never that good an actress, but especially in this film she's very bad. The fact that she has lost that exotic youth she portrayed in his older films lessens even more her overall appearance.

I'll give it a 5/10 because there *are* some strong moments in the movie (albeit a few), but all and all I would only recommend this film to die-hard Argento fans, or people that badly want see some over-the-top gore. There can be no comparison whatsoever between this film and the previous "Mother" movies, or his other golden-era films. If you really want to get to know one of the best horror filmmakers ever, watch Suspiria, Tenebre, Phenomena, Inferno and Profondo Rosso.

Argento without the art: mad, bad yet entertaining!

[fishermensmell · 6/10 · 28 February 2021]

I saw this a few weeks ago and am still "processing" it, which I think is a good sign as there are some images and tonal aspects of the film that linger longer than its time on screen. That said, my initial reaction was a bit mixed. I hadn't seen any of Argento films after 'Two Evil Eyes' in 1990 and the overall look and loss of artistry was a bit jarring. It has a "made-for-TV" feel throughout and some rough CGI that really drags it down. The stylised "otherworldliness" of Suspiria, Inferno and many other Argentos (including some of the earlier giallos) is sorely lacking, with some quite everyday locations and characters (some of the witchy characters are basically goth teenagers that hang out at the shopping centre). Mother Lachrymarum herself also lacks serious gravitas: yes, she's be touted as the youngest and most beautiful of the three mothers, but her overall look and presentation seems more appropriate to soft porn. This, along with some very vicious violence that lacks the stylised aesthetic of his older work, contributes to an overriding tackiness in the film. Whilst some of Argento's 80s films may have sometimes seemed lurid, they were never tacky.

And yet, the extremity of the violence is what in some ways lets you know that this is an Argento, and it turns out to be one of the most hectic and crazed films I've seen of his. What it lacks in charm it makes up for in feverish brutality. You may call it undisciplined, but the accumulation of outlandishness in this film starts to have an effect and as it becomes more and more madcap, it also becomes more entertaining. The culmination is one of the most OTT and blood-soaked (until Luca Guadagnino's Suspiria came along, which possibly takes some inspiration from Mother of Tears). Along the way a fairly compelling mystery is spun with some cardboard characters, but the ending delivers a pretty satisfying pay-off. I'm glad Argento concluded the Three Mothers trilogy; whilst it might not have been the film we expected - or wanted - it still delivers, and rounds out the mythology without sullying the legacy of Suspiria and Inferno.

Disappointing dead space...

[guitarkelly · 4/10 · 10 June 2008]

Just got back from the Boston screening and I still feel empty and unsatisfied. The movie started out good with some super-gore, an evil monkey and some witchcraft. Then it slows down and assaults the viewer with endless scenes of nothingness, nonsense, confusion, bad acting, repetitive, and pointless scenes. There must be at least 30 minutes of scenes that should have been cut out in the editing room. There is also no lighting, scenery, or camera-work that stands out like Dario's early work.

Spoiler alert; The Mother of Tears is indeed the most cruel and beautiful of the Three Mothers, and she also spent a hefty dime on top-notch breast enhancement plastic surgery! It is an insult casting some hot boob-job bimbo with a shaved clam as the mother. I would have cast a Salma Hayek/Penelope Cruz-type. And the ending was a joke, the most powerful witch of all 3 mothers was killed with almost no effort from Asia at all. It was like stepping on an ant, by mistake! It just seems that there are too many small details overlooked like the prior mentioned.

I loved Deep Red, Suspiria, Inferno, and Phenomena. This was amateur in comparison, and I watched it with a open mind. I do appreciate Dario's contribution to the art world, but like any world-class athlete he is past his prime. I didn't expect a masterpiece, and this sure wasn't.

Entertaining, but strangely "non-argentoish"

[jangu · 7/10 · 11 January 2008]

From the word "Go", I was thoroughly entertained with La Terza Madre (LTM). But in many ways I was also a little disappointed because I expected a visual treat in the "Argento-way" and a fitting close to the Mater-trilogy. Both "Suspiria" and "Inferno" (the last one among my favorite horror movies of all time) were hallucinatory experiences where the gaudy visuals and terrific set-pieces triumphed over slow pacing and confused plots. Not so here. LTM often leans more towards Lucio Fulci and the recent TV-movie "Pelts" style-wise, than to the two previous Mater-films.

LTM has a decent pace (actually I find "Suspiria" too slow for my liking), fair to awful performances (nothing new in an Argento film) and some okay set-pieces. But the gaudy visuals are almost nowhere to be seen, the style Argento offered us in the 70s and 80s has changed into a kind of polished and subdued style. Gone are the vibrant colors (almost) from "Inferno" and "Suspiria", gone is the eye-catching art design. One particular scene that underline this is a taxi-ride through Rome where Argento tries to copy a similar scene from "Inferno", but he doesn't even come close to the same intensity.

*spoilers ahead*

The finale is also a bit disappointing, but not in a too damaging way. It just feels like that after 90 minutes of build-up, you expect more of a fight between Asia and Mater Lacrymarum, who is destroyed far to easily for someone who is supposed to be powerful and omnipotent. And what about Asias magical powers? She discovers that she has quite a few tricks up her sleeve in that respect, but when the push comes to shove, she doesn't use any one of them. And there is also the fact that the police inspector, a quite insignificant role until the finale, shows up from nowhere and is made into a hero of some sort. He could have been eliminated from the final quarter without anyone noticing it.

*end of spoilers*

And there is one thing I really dislike in this movie...and that is the way the witches are presented. Apparently modern day witches look like supermodels in goth-gear, have hideous make-up and laugh hysterically at nothing unless they are occupied with semi-lesbian activities! You could very well say that they look frightening, but in totally the wrong way. They ALMOST ruined the movie for me, but only almost.

Because when I distance myself from the previous two ma(s)terpieces and judge this movie by itself, it's not really that bad (except for the witches). Like I have stated before, the pace is decent and almost never flags, performances are variable (to say the least) but fun, there is gore a-plenty (some scenes of murder are truly nasty!), some female nudity (for those who like that sort of thing with a lesbian flavor to it), one GREAT and unexpected scare, a (mostly) good score with echoes from both "Inferno" and "Suspiria"...and the movie looks good although not in the Argento-way, but more mainstream. I get the feeling that good old Dario had fun doing this movie. And the viewer will certainly never get bored...at least I wasn't.

Asia is adequate, but sometimes she shows examples of truly baaaad acting, like in a scene where she is longing for her dead mother and tries to sob. That was embarrassing! She is at her best when she has to be tough and determined. Otherwise I thought the acting was mostly quite okay, at least when you consider what kind of characterizations and lines they had to work with sometimes. Poor Daria Nicolodi was particularly unfortunate in this respect, reduced to a (poor) ghostly vision. The best set-piece is reserved for the beginning, when the antique urn is opened and the evil is unleashed. Other than that, we get a few scattered scenes where Argento can show at least something of his mastery of the medium.

All in all, I was entertained and had this movie been directed by a newcomer or someone else than Dario Argento, I think I would have given this horror movie an 8 in rating. But since I had higher expectations, it has to be a 7. Still, LTM is better than "Cartaio" (although I admire that Dario was trying something new), "Sleepless" (a decent effort but it felt a little "flat" and like he was directing half asleep) and "Phantom" (one big, expensive and failed joke!) and it's probably the best he has done since "Opera" (even though I have a soft spot for "Trauma"), so I have high hopes that his next move will be in the right direction.

Poor acting and no "Argento look"

[innocuous · 5/10 · 5 January 2009]

MOT is a competent film, but not something that I think Argento should be proud of. As other reviewers have pointed out, the rich color palettes and clever cinematography of the early Argento are nearly absent from this film. There is more gore and it is more competently done, but it does not have the desired shock value, since it doesn't seem random and the viewer is not as disoriented as with Argento's earlier films.

The story is satisfactory and fits in with the other two "Mother" films fairly well. The script is mundane and the dialogue doesn't seem to have any passion.

The biggest problems are the casting and acting. Nearly all of the actors start chewing the scenery as soon as they are introduced. Udo Kier is perhaps the worst offender in this respect. Moran Atias, in her final scene, is simply awful...artificial and totally unbelievable.

Which brings us to Asia Argento. What can I say? Her acting can best be described as "often competent." But the lead in a film of this sort has to be more than that. I just never developed any belief in Asia as her character. No belief means no sympathy. No sympathy means no drama, as I'm not really concerned about her.

If you like Argento, or if you've seen the other two "Mother" movies, then you should probably see MOT. If you are looking for an introduction to Argento's work, this is not the place to start.

Now, this is a horror movie

[TdSmth5 · 9/10 · 17 November 2008]

I'm reviewing this movie as a standalone movie, independent of its precursors or its director's career.

An excavation near a cemetery yields a coffin and an urn sealed with crosses and marked with ancient letters. The priest takes the urn and sends it to a university so the anthropologist there can take a look at it. Instead, the assistants, one of them played by Asia Argento, open it. Inside are 3 figures, a dagger, and a tunic- supposedly a talisman of some sorts. While playing with the dagger one them cuts herself and blood drips on the urn. While Argento leaves the room, a monkey and 3 dark creatures appear and disembowel the other woman and take the urn and the contents.

The tunic is placed on the Mother of Tears and that brings about chaos, violence, and destruction in Rome. While Rome is in flames, Argento, who now is a suspect in the other woman's death, goes to her significant other who is the anthropologist at the university. His son has been kidnapped- a kidnapping that may be related the the urn? While he goes in search for his kid, Argento is being followed by some annoying group of witches, who look like 80s punks. The police are also on her trail. But she discovers that she has powers. A voice guides her to making use of those powers.

Argento gets in touch with a priest and an alchemist/architect who reveal to her what is going on. The tunic has reawakened the Mother of Tears, the most powerful and terrifying witch that is almost indestructible. Argento finds out that she herself is the daughter of a white witch and her mother stars appearing to her. Her mission now is to destroy the evil witch. In the meantime, the witch has her acolytes kill one buy one those who help Argento, and she kills in the most gruesome ways.

This is an excellent horror movie overall. The movie looks good, it has great sets, attractive women, a story!, gory violence. It is a good old fashioned Italian horror movie. Something different from the usual American slasher/serial killer movies and the French ultra bloody avenging-girl theme. Here you have witches, ghosts, spirits- the supernatural element is refreshing these days when horror movies are all about realistic horror.

That is not to say it doesn't have shortcomings. Argento is an excellent actress but not very sympathetic. The Mother of Tears doesn't get enough screen time as the main villain. The CGI effects could look better or better, replaced by non-CGI effects.

Still, it's highly recommended.

More gore,less style in the final installment of Argento's "Three Mothers" trilogy.

[HumanoidOfFlesh · 7/10 · 29 January 2008]

Sarah Mandy,an American studying art restoration at the Museum of Ancient Art in Rome,examines an urn found at an ancient,decrepit grave near Viterbo.Bound within are the relics of a witch known as the Mother of Tears,Mater Lachrymarum.Breaking the seal heralds the return of the beautiful yet malefic sorceress' powers and Rome is plunged into chaos.A wave of suicides and crime sweeps over Italy's capital as witches congregate to pay homage to their reborn queen.Sarah must eventually discover her latent supernatural powers with the help of her deceased mother and confront Lachrymarum at the opulent Palazzo Varelli."The Third Mother" actually bears very little resemblance to "Suspiria" or "Inferno".The film is not as beautiful as the most famous Argento's works.The gore is pretty extreme and some killings are extremely vicious and bloody as hell."La Terza Madre" feels more like a Fulci film in so far that the narrative is only a vehicle to the gore scenes.Unfortunately some scenes are downright terrible with the use of awful CGI and the climax is weak and disappointing.Still I quite enjoyed this film and you should too if you are a fan of earlier works of Italian maestro.

Great deaths. Great breasts. But not much else.

[jmbwithcats · 4/10 · 24 February 2008]

Argento fans have waited eagerly 27 years for the last installment of Dario Argento's Witches Trilogy on The Three Mothers.

First of course was Suspiria, then Inferno and now Terza Madre, the Mother of Tears.

When one watches an Argento film we come to expect a uniquely surreal directing experience and an immersion of genius proportions. A darkly penetrating use of tactile impressions and textures, colors, music, and vantage points with film that get under your skin like Death itself pulling you into his fantasy world.

Sadly all these things are missing from Terza Madre, and in that sense the movie feels to be missing the Argento signature.

That aside, the film does killings in a very unforgiving and cruel manner that those of us in America never see. They were really quite impressive.

Argento even messes up his own mythology here, but I can forgive that I suppose. What I cannot forgive is pretty much everything else.

The acting is horribly shallow, expressing dialog so banal and linear it left nothing ambiguous, mysterious or enticing. The cgi of the good mother helping her character and the contrast of Sarah as a good witch was just wrong, and should been have left out. The magic shirt also should have been left out.

What made the other Argento movies so effective was the overall imbalance of darkness and light that stays in your mouth like a coppery taste of rich blood. This movie is too balanced, and thus comes off as lukewarm on a script level.

The all-out mayhem, suicides, violence occurring due to the urn being in Rome was not consistent throughout the film and I never felt any impending doom due to the overall poor pacing of the film.

This movie would have worked really well in the 80s when this plot line hadn't already been done to tears, but sadly the 70s and 80s used this plot line so often it is almost cringe-full to see it again.

The story was thin and I just didn't care for any of the characters was the big problem for me here. Sarah was out of reach as a good witch her inherited her powers from her bloodline to due battle with The Third Mother. It was simply not developed well, and not directed well. And the dialog was banal.

The ending is so horrible it makes me sad inside. Great deaths. Great breasts. But not much else.

Suspiria 10/10 Inferno 8/10 Mother of Tears 4/10

Argento delivers!!

[ultra_tippergore · 10 April 2008]

OK, Mother of Tears is not Suspiria. A lot of people is disappointed because this movie is not as good as Suspiria...bad news for you: Suspiria is a masterpiece and is very tough to found movies as great as that. The good news is that Mother of Tears is a very good horror movie. The third part of the trilogy is IMHO better than Tenebrae and is one of the best Argento movies in a long, long time. Good scares, a lot of gore (this must be the goriest Argento movie) and very entertaining overall. There are a lot of bloody and great scenes, amputations, decapitations, impaling. If you like ultra gore you will like this, If you like Argento you will like it (if you don't expect a new Suspiria) and if you are just a horror fan, I'm sure you will like this too.