Vakrémület

A diligent interpretation of one of the most hackneyed themes in the horror genre, namely the “fragile heroine in danger”. Just as Sarah, the blind protagonist, gets her bearings mainly thanks to objects in the setting, the props are also crucial for building suspense. They serve as clues, which are sometimes false (the vase on the staircase, the gardener’s shoes), as to what might happen and what might be important for the narrative. Viewers’ frustration arises from the inability to warn the protagonist of the dangers that are seen, as well in the ostentation with which the film conceals from us a key piece of information, namely the killer’s identity. All we are shown of him is his feet, and that is unfortunately not utilised to make a more imaginative point (when we would know who the killer is based on his shoes, whereas the other characters would remain unaware). The deviations from the central, substantially uneven duel, whether toward romance or western (!) are not atmospherically as well-thought-out as Fleischer’s work with the enclosed space. However, I consider the very poor clarification of the motive for the crime committed to be a fundamental failure. Everything essential about the killer’s damaged mind is conveyed to us in the prologue as the opening credits roll (violent films, violent toys), which may have carried a certain weight in Britain in the 1970s, but today it can be seen as a mockery of all of the serious research that has since been carried out in field of violent behaviour. 65% (2012.08.21)