I find I dont like Argento

[BrokeNads]

Is for many years now take me to see some Argento so I never make opinion in one way from this. Recent I see Deep Red and now I think I see enought from Argento movies to make a say from this and I say I dont like. :(
I see on time big opinion in Argento about people say he is amaze so I start to look out. First movie I see is Trauma and I enjoy very much so I think maybe he is amaze. Next movie I see is Suspiria and I say What! I dont like this. Next movie I see is Phenomenina and I say What? Take away!
I see now is Deep Red and I say What?!? Is like Trauma but worst version. Is my opinion but is see to me is cheap in acting and stories and confuse. I dont now. Trauma is for me the one is mostly consentrate to make a story. Is truth is the style he make but is not meant when story is confuse and acting is not to watch. Is my opinion and I only want to comment because I only find in myself that I dont like Argento and I always want to enjoy this man because I like Trauma. Is any films more of Argento that you think can change my mind about? Also is anyone think about Deep Red and Trauma is similar. Is almost like is continue or remake.

[Grim]

I like Argento, but I have found that I can't get into most of those giallos with the five bajillion word titles that a lot of people love, so I can see how someone might not like his stuff. In terms of Italian horror, I really only like Argento, Fulci, Bava (both of them), Saovi, and some Lenzi.

[BrokeNads]

I like some Fulci but is for a reason. When I see movie from Fulci I now I am to see maybe a bad movie and many crazy gore and is why I watch and is some times story is intrest but in Argento this things I think I am to like and I dont. So for Trauma I like the story and is not factor in director styles. In other movies is note director styles but is nothing else I like.

[Ash28M]

I think you may have enjoyed Trauma more ironically because it's a lesser film that's allot easier to digest in one viewing. His better films need 2 or 3 viewing each to fully absorb and appreciate IMO.

[mcchrist]

Not necessarily, I find Argento's work wears out its welcome over time. I have a hard time sitting through his work these days.

[Mutilated Prey]

To me some Argento is pretty good, but some is horribly boring and too, dare I say, "artsy". You really have to be in the right frame of mind to enjoy his work I think.

[allmessedup]

I like some of his work, but even his best stuff seems more like an academic exercise instead of a proper movie. I'm not really a fan. Fulci I can watch any day--I have to be in the right mood for Argento, and I seldom feel interested enough to re-watch his films.

[Cydeous]

I love Argento movies, and I love his more artsy moments. To me, he is definitely AMAZE :)

[Anaestheus]

While I am not going to try to explain why you should think Argento is a genius, I will attempt to explain how I came to love him.

The Italian horror aesthetic, in general, is very different from other countries. And it requires a different approach from the viewer. For the most part, Italian horror tends to discard the importance of plot and character development and focus on stringing together a collection of set pieces designed to create a particular mood. In many ways, this is a more mechanical way of producing a film as the characters and plot are just devices to get from one set piece to the next. So, the plot becomes secondary to the rhythm of mood shifts that the director is trying to create from scene to scene.

I think a lot of this goes back to Bava. With "Blood and Black Lace" and "Bay of Blood" he stripped the narrative down to its bare minimum to get to the images he wanted to put on the screen as quickly and efficiently as possible. Instead of using dialogue to define the characters, he used lighting and framing. To him, the image was much more important than anything in the script. In many ways, his films function more as visual poems of horror, rather than stories put on the screen.

Argento is obviously aware of what Bava was doing and expanded on that in his own way. In particular, by creating far more elaborate set pieces with virtuoso camera movements and composition. But, also with a greater willingness to sacrifice the script to get those images on the screen.

In many ways, the Italian horror masters appear to be bad film makers. But, to those who can get into the aesthetic they are working from, there is extreme genius at work. The best analogy I could make is that it's like complaining that Stockhausen or Glass can't write a good melody.

I'd definitely suggest you give Suspiria another go with this in mind. If you can get yourself into this groove, I think you'll begin to understand why it gets such high praise. If not, at least you can say you gave it the good try. You also might want to give Opera a chance. When I first got into Argento, it was my favorite for a long time. The music can be bad, but the visuals are stunning.

[BrokeNads]

While I am not going to try to explain why you should think Argento is a genius, I will attempt to explain how I came to love him.

The Italian horror aesthetic, in general, is very different from other countries. And it requires a different approach from the viewer. For the most part, Italian horror tends to discard the importance of plot and character development and focus on stringing together a collection of set pieces designed to create a particular mood. In many ways, this is a more mechanical way of producing a film as the characters and plot are just devices to get from one set piece to the next. So, the plot becomes secondary to the rhythm of mood shifts that the director is trying to create from scene to scene.

I think a lot of this goes back to Bava. With "Blood and Black Lace" and "Bay of Blood" he stripped the narrative down to its bare minimum to get to the images he wanted to put on the screen as quickly and efficiently as possible. Instead of using dialogue to define the characters, he used lighting and framing. To him, the image was much more important than anything in the script. In many ways, his films function more as visual poems of horror, rather than stories put on the screen.

Argento is obviously aware of what Bava was doing and expanded on that in his own way. In particular, by creating far more elaborate set pieces with virtuoso camera movements and composition. But, also with a greater willingness to sacrifice the script to get those images on the screen.

In many ways, the Italian horror masters appear to be bad film makers. But, to those who can get into the aesthetic they are working from, there is extreme genius at work. The best analogy I could make is that it's like complaining that Stockhausen or Glass can't write a good melody.

I'd definitely suggest you give Suspiria another go with this in mind. If you can get yourself into this groove, I think you'll begin to understand why it gets such high praise. If not, at least you can say you gave it the good try. You also might want to give Opera a chance. When I first got into Argento, it was my favorite for a long time. The music can be bad, but the visuals are stunning.


I understand how you say is a difrent way to make movies. Susperia is a movie I see maybe 5 times because I like Trauma and I see this movie many times again. I see Trauma because I enjoy and I see Susperia becuase I try to enjoy like Trauma. For me is important to have the story for main thing and is maybe why is not to my way to enjoy. If movie is very much in style I think is still can come from the story. If I can see more Argento I will make another chance maybe for Opera and maybe Inferno but only if is cheap used dvd. I show my girlfriend Deep Red when is piano man talk to Daria and do the arm wrestle and she say what is this? So bad she say. Ha ha.

[Anaestheus]

I'd definitely recommend Opera before Inferno. Inferno is less coherent than any of the films you have seen so far. While I doubt they will do much to help you acquire a taste for his stuff, I'd think you may like Stendahl Syndrome and maybe even Card Player or Do You Like Hitchcock. For those films, Argento does focus more on narrative and less on style. But, again, he may just not be to your liking. They certainly are not for everyone.

And, if you haven't seen the Bava films, I do highly recommend them. Outside of being pretty damn good in and of themselves, I think they kind of help ease someone into getting the groove for Italian stuff. Both the plot and the acting are much more restrained and consistent than in Argento's films and they don't have quite the lunacy that Argento has, for better or worse.

[boycrieswolf]

I've been an Argento fan for about as long as i can remember. His early output is definitely in a class all it's own visually and stylistically. Sadly, his later efforts seem to want to trade in almost all of his signature trademarks for more obvious and linear plot development and gratuitous gore. I recently tried to give Mother Of Tears another chance because I had only watched it once and frankly was greatly dissappointed...I fell asleep 3 times in 3 nights before the closing credits every time......Italian horror is definitely an acquired taste, and to be sure, is not always good. In my opinion what makes Argento's films work is their visual asthetic. They don't always make the most sense, but usually they look and feel creepy and unsettling. One of my all time favorites is Suspiria. I love to put that one on late at night with all the lights off, especially if it's a rainy night! The mood that is created by Argento's use of clever camera angles, garrish lighting and Goblin's ultra sinister score is second to none in my book. By the time the climax rolls around and some of the gory set pieces come into play I've got a smile on my face every time. :D Give his earlier stuff another chance, you may come to appreciate it more over time, maybe not. For the record, I too thought Trauma was a good Argento film, not his best, but definitely solid.

[vampyr789]

well it also depends on the movie, and if you are watcing the Cut or uncut version. Deep Red, the uncut versions is boring. really it is, boring. the Cut version has much better pacing. IMO, but what Ash said above, some if his better films do take a couple viewings to digest. i agree with that

[Ptflea2]

I've always been on the fence with Dario. I'm not really a big fan, but can clearly understand his appeal. Some of his movies I like (Opera, Tenebre) some I don't (Stendahl Syndrome, Trauma) and some, dare I say, I feel are overrated (Suspiria). Regardless, I think he's an important filmmaker to the genre and would never suggest his works not be seen by horror film enthusiast.

[dave13]

i remember the first time i saw deep red (in its cut vhs form of the hatchet murders) i didn't think anything of it, and thought it was actually quite bad indeed. that was about 15 years ago. since then my tastes have changed and its now my favorite of his works. i agree with most here in that it does take a little while to appreciate his stuff.

[Harry Warden]

Argento has always been hit or miss with me. I really enjoyed Suspiria, Phenomena and Deep Red, but I didn't car for Inferno or Tenebre at all. I also agree with several other posts here..giallos are an acquired taste, and some are boring as hell. I haven't seen any of Argento's very recent work, so I can't comment on those films. My personal favorite is still Mario Bava.

[Workshed]

I've not seen Argento's Card Player or any of this MoH short films, but I've always enjoyed sitting down to one of his films. He certainly hit a stride there, early-to-mid career, that was very impressive. Phenomena never appealed to me, although I appreciated the effort, and the less said about Mother of Tears the better, but I honestly enjoy a very sizable chunk of his filmography.

Heck, I even get a kick out of his cut of Dawn of the Dead (1978).

[othervoice1]

I am really on and off on Argento myself. I love Suspiria and really liked Tenebrae and Bird with the Crystal Plumage. I also enjoyed Phenomena but can see why some might hate it. I couldnt get into Opera and, believe it or not, I could not really get into Deep Red and actually found IT to be the more overrated movie (well at least to me). There are several by Argento I still have not seen but I can see why his movies are not for everyone, I am sure most if not all of my friends would give me a strange look if I had them watch one of his films. I still plan on giving Deep Red another watch someday because I may have just been looking for something else, it was only the second Argento film I had seen after Suspiria. His films do at times have some bad acting and plot holes present which can be distracting, but there is definitely some great art in the mood and presentation in his films that will appeal to some and not to others.

[captain_brandon]

Well I am a HUGE Argentophile here. I enjoy most of his filmography, and as a matter of fact, after John Carpenter and George Romero, he is my favorite writer/director. He has always rounded out my top three.

However, I'll basically cut this short and say I don't really care for Sleepless or his embarrassingly generic The Card Player, but I did enjoy both of his Masters of Horror episodes, and I found the enjoyable Mother of Tears recently underrated, and I honestly don't get some of it's hate. I found it a fine return to his supernatural form for what it is. The sequences of "Rome falling into chaos once again" I so loved. I truely didn't expect that baby/infent bit that genuineally up-set me.

Phenomena (aka: Creepers), Tenebrea, Suspiria, Cat O' Nine Tails and The Stendhal Syndrome are my my favorites of his. I'm still trying to get into The Bird with the Crystal Plumage. Phenomena and Suspiria are ALWAYS required Halloween seasonal viewing in my October yearly scheduale for the last several years, which is sort of interesting for me. As anyone who knows me, I take advantage of October DVD sales, but cause I watch & collect so many genre films year 'round, I honestly try not to get October over-killed in genre film watching during said month. Guess it takes one of us big time genre fanatics to truely understand that, for the most part, every month is pretty much Halloween for me (as well as many others) cause of my genre film addiction, including December as well.

I must say, even as a big time Argento lover & his film collector, when he is off, like many Italian film makers, he IS off (and big time). Inferno and Deep Red (Prefondo Russo) I'll admit to never being into, and I'm never watching The Card Player again. I only own that generic tripe he never should have directed because it comes in the now year old Anchor Bay Argento/Giallo films five disc set.

To each they're own is the best thing to say about Argento. There are simply SO many celebrated "masters of horror" that very few will ever agree to liking or enjoying all of someone's filmography.

[msw7]

I really didn't like Suspiria the first time I saw it, but now it is one of my all time favorites. Tenebre I liked from the get-go. I liked Inferno a lot too, but not Mother of Tears as much...

I'm not sure I've made enough effort to really love all his films, but for those that have grabbed me (for whatever reason or however many viewings it took), I hope they never let go. I would be lucky to find more that I like as much.

[Angelman]

I like Argento, and from about 1975-1980 he was GOLD. After that with a few curious/interesting exceptions (Stendahl) it has been a long, slow painful slide into mediocrity. I also think his time passed. Horror now is not horror then. He feels like a student of Bava, and while I love Bava, his movies feel like OLD horror. It's like this for me: if I sit down with a picture I usually take a glance at the director, country of origin and year it was made and then put myself in that time to watch it. So when I sit down to watch an old noir, I forgive its stage-y dialogue delivery and cheap sets and enjoy it for the masterpiece it was in its time. Argento just never grew. You watch Mother of Tears and it feels like a movie from 1982, except its not then and our aesthetic needs/appreciation has changed.

Same with Fulci. Psychic, Lizard, Zombie , Ripper... that era is gold. But no one likes those shitty TV movies, not really. No one says "I'm really in the mood for some House of Clocks!" or whatever that one was called.

Makes me appreciate Sydney Lumet. Dude killed it with 12 Angry Men and is still killing it with Before the Devil Knows Your Dead. He is the man.

[spawningblue]

I found the enjoyable Mother of Tears recently underrated, and I honestly don't get some of it's hate. I found it a fine return to his supernatural form for what it is. The sequences of "Rome falling into chaos once again" I so loved. I truely didn't expect that baby/infent bit that genuineally up-set me.

Agree. I enjoyed Mother of Tears quite a bit, and it met my expectations and ended the trilogy nicely. I knew it wouldn't be Suspiria on Inferno, it was it's own movie for it's own time, and it had some great gore!

As for Argento's other movies, I love Suspiria, Deep Red and Bird with the Crystal Plumage. I also really liked Inferno and Tenebre. The only Argento movie that I didn't love was Phenomena, but even that I thought was still pretty good, especially the last 10 mins.. I too have the Argento box set, but haven't gotten around to watching the rest of the movies in the set yet, but so far Argento is 7 for 7 in my books.

[dave13]

I too have the Argento box set, but haven't gotten around to watching the rest of the movies in the set yet, but so far Argento is 7 for 7 in my books.

hahaha...thats a great set, but i think the flawless record is destined to be broken with a few of those other gems.

[shape22]

I'll echo what others have said. Argento is definitely an acquired taste for those raised on more traditional Hollywood horror films. Story almost always takes a backseat to the set pieces and camera calisthenics. The bad dubbing and insipid dialogue can also be very distracting.

But I'll say this. I have REALLY come to enjoy the bulk of his work. Suspiria is one of the most cinematic experiences you can have if you watch it on a big screen with a quality surround system cranked up. Argento marries sound and visuals in a way that elevates even pulpy material to the level of art. But I didn't get it on my first viewing. It was so weird and incoherent to my American sensibilities that I didn't know how to process it.

I agree with those who aren't high on Deep Red. I think it's his most overrated film. There are great set pieces and the score is tremendous. But I find it to be very slow-moving and tedious when the killer isn't in action.

It DOES manage a brilliant trick. I've never seen anyone catch sight of the killer in the psychic's apartment on their first viewing. Yet you go back and everything is in plain sight. I couldn't believe it the first time I wound it back.

All films that follow dream logic tend to alienate a lot of people, especially on first exposure. Once I got used to the lack of linear narration I found I could really, really enjoy most of Argento's flicks. You might just need to watch some of them again.

[allmessedup]

I enjoyed both of his MASTERS OF HORROR episodes as well, and enjoyed MOTHER OF TEARS for what it was.

I wonder how much of Argento's appeal is that his work was "forbidden fruit" to American fans for so many years--very hard to find other than via bootleg. It'll be interesting to see if his reputation holds up as the years go on, especially since his later work has been pretty weak.

[spawningblue]

hahaha...thats a great set, but i think the flawless record is destined to be broken with a few of those other gems.

You are probably right, but then again, I enjoyed Mother of Tears, and that film seems to get a lot of hate around here.

Oh, and I forgot I have also seen Cat O' Nine Tails, Opera, and Two Evil Eyes, and once again, I enjoyed all three of them. So make that 10 for 10.

[captain_brandon]

Agree. I enjoyed Mother of Tears quite a bit, and it met my expectations and ended the trilogy nicely. I knew it wouldn't be Suspiria on Inferno, it was it's own movie for it's own time, and it had some great gore!

As for Argento's other movies, I love Suspiria, Deep Red and Bird with the Crystal Plumage. I also really liked Inferno and Tenebre. The only Argento movie that I didn't love was Phenomena, but even that I thought was still pretty good, especially the last 10 mins.. I too have the Argento box set, but haven't gotten around to watching the rest of the movies in the set yet, but so far Argento is 7 for 7 in my books.

Indeed: Never got all of it's recent hate. Maybe it's cause it's modern Argento, with a modern cover from Dimension/Miramax and all, and the music, ect. But truely, aside form Asia's "American" accent (as Rhett said: Yeah, I know...), I truely dug it for the most part. I'll take it over Sleepless and The Card Player any ol' day of the week.

From your set like I got as well, have you watched Do You Like Hitchcock? (Ti piace Hitchcock?) He did it right after The Card Player, and a full two years before Mother of Tears. It's a good Italian/mainland European TV movie. It's NOT ground-breaking Giallo material, but it's a fine return to form. Like it it was a lost, obscure film, it would have been one heavily traded back in the old days on our North American continant, in many VHS tape dub trading circles and at convetions if the quality was good enough. The hot Spainard chick from fine modern French film L' Auberge Espagnole (aka The Spanish Inn, but The Spanish Apartment or Euro Pudding to many) and it's sequel, Russian Dolls, is naked through out it. Also look for Argento posters in the DVD video store that the lead character goes to. It's entertaining and involving, which is all one chould ask from a Giallo.

It does lack visuals and a few things left my cold, but I've since re-watched it and it's a good, involving time. Didn't REALLY get into his segment of Two Evil Eyes, as I prefer Romero's (although both, with all due respect, have they're flaws), but I'm glad to hear that Cat O' Nine Tails getting some love. fine film, and except for some fashions, isn't dated much (not to mention the DVD is from such a good print). Trauma I found very average and definately shows that it was made in the U.S. here, in Minesota of all places. I can take it or leave it. The final half of it is much better & involving, I think, then the first half.

[Carrefour]

I'm not a huge Argento fan, but Suspiria is one of my favorite horror films ever. It's truly a masterpiece, IMHO.

I had a very hard time warming up to Deep Red. In fact, I started it about three or four times and would always turn it off after about 30 minutes. I just couldn't get into it. However, I finally made myself watch the whole thing, and I ended up really enjoying it. Tenebre is quite good as well.

Inferno is interesting but flawed; I think it tries very hard to achieve the otherworldly ambiance of Suspiria but ultimately fails. Mother of Tears is by far the lesser of that trilogy, but I actually had a good time with it. Just don't expect a classic.

[dave13]

You are probably right, but then again, I enjoyed Mother of Tears, and that film seems to get a lot of hate around here.

Oh, and I forgot I have also seen Cat O' Nine Tails, Opera, and Two Evil Eyes, and once again, I enjoyed all three of them. So make that 10 for 10.

you know, i dug mother of tears a lot too, and brandon beat me to the punch by pointing out that do you like hitchcock is actually surprisingly decent. trauma is a seriously flawed film, but i found elements of it to enjoy, and there was a lot of effort there. but the card player...? damn, im sorry, but most of that was just lazy lazy stuff. there were a few decent scenes (and one really great death), but for the most part it was lousy.

[Ash28M]

I can honestly say that there hasn't been an Argento film that I haven't enjoyed on some level including Mother Of Tears, The Card Player and Phantom of the Opera. My Disappointment with Mother of Tears had more do to with it being the 3rd film to a Classic Trilogy. As far as style and mood it doesn't feel like it belongs. it seemed like to me from listening to him speak about the film and watching the film it's self that he thought his fans wanted a film full of Gore and Nudity. When that is such a small aspect of what attracted me to those films.

[spawningblue]

From your set like I got as well, have you watched Do You Like Hitchcock? (Ti piace Hitchcock?) He did it right after The Card Player, and a full two years before Mother of Tears. It's a good Italian/mainland European TV movie. It's NOT ground-breaking Giallo material, but it's a fine return to form. Like it it was a lost, obscure film, it would have been one heavily traded back in the old days on our North American continant, in many VHS tape dub trading circles and at convetions if the quality was good enough. The hot Spainard chick from fine modern French film L' Auberge Espagnole (aka The Spanish Inn, but The Spanish Apartment or Euro Pudding to many) and it's sequel, Russian Dolls, is naked through out it. Also look for Argento posters in the DVD video store that the lead character goes to. It's entertaining and involving, which is all one chould ask from a Giallo.

It does lack visuals and a few things left my cold, but I've since re-watched it and it's a good, involving time. Didn't REALLY get into his segment of Two Evil Eyes, as I prefer Romero's (although both, with all due respect, have they're flaws), but I'm glad to hear that Cat O' Nine Tails getting some love.

No, I haven't watched it yet, but it seems like more people like it then hate it so... we'll have to see I guess.

you know, i dug mother of tears a lot too, and brandon beat me to the punch by pointing out that do you like hitchcock is actually surprisingly decent. trauma is a seriously flawed film, but i found elements of it to enjoy, and there was a lot of effort there. but the card player...? damn, im sorry, but most of that was just lazy lazy stuff. there were a few decent scenes (and one really great death), but for the most part it was lousy.

Well hopefully it doesn't ruin his, in my opinion, perfect track record but I guess I will just have to go in with low expectations and hope for the best. it's premise sounds kind of cool though, but I guess best intentions do not make a movie good.

I can honestly say that there hasn't been an Argento film that I haven't enjoyed on some level including Mother Of Tears, The Card Player and Phantom of the Opera. My Disappointment with Mother of Tears had more do to with it being the 3rd film to a Classic Trilogy. As far as style and mood it doesn't feel like it belongs. it seemed like to me from listening to him speak about the film and watching the film it's self that he thought his fans wanted a film full of Gore and Nudity. When that is such a small aspect of what attracted me to those films.

I agree, it has a different feel then the earlier two films, but I mean, they were made what, 20-30 years ago, you can't expect him to make a film the same way he did than. Everyone cries for more Star Wars films, or Indy films, or this finale to the trilogy, and then are upset when it doesn't turn out like the earlier films. The truth is Directors, like all people, change over the years, age and experience play a part in the way they now make films. You can't expect them to go back to that style that they had when they were younger and make the same film.

I went in expecting the worse and came out quite surprised in finding I enjoyed it quite a bit. Is it different then the earlier films, yes, a lot! But it wasn't a bad film either. I would have like to see more of his stylish colours, but again, would it have fit this film, or would he have just been putting them in so it feels like Inferno or Suspiria. It may have ended up coming off kind of cheesy. And the music, even though it was no Goblin, I thought was really good and fit nicely with the film. The kills and gore were well done as well, which always have been a staple in Argento films, so I can't complain there. And although I will agree with you, the abundance of nudity was a little out of place, seeing lots of naked women sure as hell didn't ruin the film for me either. :D

I think the main thing that stands out, is the earlier films took place mostly in the school and then in the hotel. They had that secluded feel to them, where as with Mother of Tears he really wanted to go all out and make a big epic world impacting movie. I think that's the main thing that I missed from the earlier films, but again, if he just made it take place in another building, he would have just been remaking his earlier films, and I think he wanted this to be bigger and more epic for the finale.

[captain_brandon]

No, I haven't watched it yet, but it seems like more people like it then hate it so... we'll have to see I guess.

Well hopefully it doesn't ruin his, in my opinion, perfect track record but I guess I will just have to go in with low expectations and hope for the best. it's premise sounds kind of cool though, but I guess best intentions do not make a movie good.



I agree, it has a different feel then the earlier two films, but I mean, they were made what, 20-30 years ago, you can't expect him to make a film the same way he did than. Everyone cries for more Star Wars films, or Indy films, or this finale to the trilogy, and then are upset when it doesn't turn out like the earlier films. The truth is Directors, like all people, change over the years, age and experience play a part in the way they now make films. You can't expect them to go back to that style that they had when they were younger and make the same film.

I went in expecting the worse and came out quite surprised in finding I enjoyed it quite a bit. Is it different then the earlier films, yes, a lot! But it wasn't a bad film either. I would have like to see more of his stylish colours, but again, would it have fit this film, or would he have just been putting them in so it feels like Inferno or Suspiria. It may have ended up coming off kind of cheesy. And the music, even though it was no Goblin, I thought was really good and fit nicely with the film. The kills and gore were well done as well, which always have been a staple in Argento films, so I can't complain there. And although I will agree with you, the abundance of nudity was a little out of place, seeing lots of naked women sure as hell didn't ruin the film for me either. :D

I think the main thing that stands out, is the earlier films took place mostly in the school and then in the hotel. They had that secluded feel to them, where as with Mother of Tears he really wanted to go all out and make a big epic world impacting movie. I think that's the main thing that I missed from the earlier films, but again, if he just made it take place in another building, he would have just been remaking his earlier films, and I think he wanted this to be bigger and more epic for the finale.

Fine quote, as always.

And dave13, sorry for playfully beating you to the Do You Like Hitchcock? mention. :) And yeah, to spwaning: When you get time, just sit down and enjoy it is is: a largely bloodless Giallo, that is surprisingly involving and has a nice bi-speckled hero like me who wears glasses (though I'm getting contacts at the end of this month, just to note), and some nice ending twists. The lead does spend some time by himself, and there are older feeling Argento twists and a turn I honestly didn't see, as well as the usual tit shots for all the few people who care about that.

I DO so much agree that his more modern work so painfully lacks the vibrant film set colors and as well as Italiano prog rockers Goblin music and especially--as you so brilliantly noted--the isolation of al ot of characters being by themselves, even in public (such as John Saxon's character waiting on his client when he is murdered in Tenebrea in broad daylight, even though we all know it's coming). The color scheme is probably what I miss the most from his more modern films. I feel The Stendhal Syndrome was the last film in which he truely was overly eccentric, but to each they're own.

I AM glad he ditched the painfully immature sounding heavy-metal soundtracks though (so sorry to all of my big time Argentophiles. I DO oddly enough like it in Phenomena, but not in Opera/Terror at the Opera). Truely wish the living memebrs of Goblin would produce more musical soundtracks for any & all remaining films he's gonna do, but it seem's highly unlikely.

I also agree that people age & they're visions change. We all want more Star Wars and the like, but people get older and maybe don't have "more of the same" in'em, if they think that'll be boring, so we'll have to take what we can get indeed.