Az őrület torkában

Plot-wise, Carpenter's films have never been anything innovative, so the uninhibited B-movie theme of a pragmatic insurance agent confronted by a weird horror writer is a very enjoyable tease for all lovers of one uncrowned "king" of written horror. The director's unmistakable set construction, which pushes aside all possible distractions and uses the camera to go into essential detail, is the perfect basis for building the cramped small-town atmosphere. While the performances match the depth of the characters prescribed by the script, Jurgen Prochnow is sufficiently demonic and Sam Neill is more than decently expressive, and they are able to bear some of the plot’s missteps, which more or less culminate about 15 minutes before the end when Carpenter has to add in all that latex. Yet even the biggest portion of mistakes is forgivable thanks to the tightly-held atmosphere throughout the entire runtime and especially the masterfully open ending, which is filled to the brim with pessimism and in which Carpenter made the maximum fun of himself. (2006.05.14)

In the Mouth of Madness, as has been mentioned several times, teeters on the edge of heavy kitsch, but Carpenter's mystical package turns that into a great advantage. The director is not afraid to insert a reasonable amount of absurdity into horror scenes, nor does he hesitate to mess with the viewer's head and envelop the story in an impenetrable veil that prevents us from seeing his final intentions until the last minute. In addition, the film has a flawlessly rendered atmosphere, a demonic villain in Prochnow, and the always dependable Sam Neill, on whom Carpenter can lean at any time (including the final scene). In my opinion, one of the most interesting horror movies ever. (2012.10.13)

Wackier and more humorous than the previous films in Carpenter's loose apocalyptic trilogy (The Thing and Prince of Darkness), but more nihilistic, cynical and pessimistic. In the Mouth of Madness is an homage to H.P. Lovecraft and his tales of cosmic horror. Lovecraft often relied on a banned book as a source of unspeakable evil, and here, reading the books of a horror writer so popular that his fans profess their own "religion" induces a murderous frenzy in readers, and with it a Lovecraftian invasion of monsters. Carpenter, however, conceived this film as a meta-horror, revealing the mechanisms behind the creative process and the fan devotion that can dangerously consume you. Fiction and reality intertwine, and evil grows as people lose the ability to tell the difference between reality and fantasy. The creator of the artwork eventually takes over the world. In doing so, Carpenter subtly mocks conservative debates that reading books or watching movies can lead to violent behavior. Indeed, the entire story is deliberately absurd and ambivalent (told from the perspective of a mental patient). Sam Neill is said to have approached his role of an extremely cynical and contemptuous anti-hero as a comedic one. On the other hand, this is one of the few films that manages to bring the Lovecraftian cosmic horror of something beyond us to the screen, even if it is not an adaptation of any of Lovecraft's works. In the Mouth of Madness is one of Carpenter's most underrated, visually striking and narratively complex films, and along with the similarly self-reflexive Wes Craven's New Nightmare from the same year, it preceded the later wave of postmodern horror films kick-started by Scream. (2023.12.08)

Surprising bizarreness that every horror fan should pay attention to. The story is similar to Carpenter's contribution to Masters of Horror, Cigarette Burns, it blends reality and fiction, giving the viewer the remarkable chance to find their bearings together with the protagonist. Sam Neill’s performance is not flawless, but In the Mouth of Madness is still a film with good acting, much better than other B-movie horror. The atmosphere is really thick at times, and the little town of horrors was great. (2008.05.05)