Majority of Fulci movies are boring

Of course there is no point discussing horror films with somone who actually likes The Sixth Sense. So I’ll avoid the topic as such, and more in general terms talk (briefly for those interested) about a couple of films by maestro Fulci.

Yes Fulci “delivers cheap shocks and gore galore”, especially in his later films like “Cat in theBrain”, but also in his mid career films, the ones considered his classics. Like “The New York Ripper” or “Zombie”. This should be understood and possibly embraced. This said, I do think “House By The Cemetary” or “Zombie” are disturbing and effective. Granted “New York Ripper” is more laughable than scary, but it’s a bold film, and Fulci, mad or not, believed in it and had somesort of thought behind it. But like all his “big” films it represents the anit climax that is Fulci’s career in horror film making. (He was involved in hundred of films in any given genre).

The promising start of his thriller/horror career was “One On Top of The Other” in 1969, followded by class productions like “Lizard in A Woman’s Skin”, “Don’t Torture the Duckling” and “Murder to the Tune of Seven Black Notes” through out the 70’s. Then suddenly the times changed and Fulci was forced into fantasy films. The gore feast “Zombie” marks a turn to fantasy and a comicbook styled violence that is in no way realistic. Actually to say “Fulci lacks a sense of reality the audience can identify with” when we are talking abou zombie films is, excuse me, quite funny.

Well, what I want to say basically is if you are looking for realism in horror, don’t look for Fulci’s mid career films, if you are looking for intelligence, don’t look for Fulci’s mid career films. But if you want a good time, effective horror sequences and over the top gore. Look no further!

On the othe hand if you want excellent, unorthodox thrillers look for his early gialli. Especially “Lizard in a Womans Skin” is something of masterpiece in it’s genre.

Stephen Thrower's book on Fulci, "Beyond Terror", will tell you everything you need to know about why Fulci's later films decline in quality. His early (non comedy) films were outstanding, although many were never seen in the U.S. uncut (if at all). He broke big with "Zombie", which while hugely successful, pigeon-holed Fulci as nothing more than a horror director. "New York Ripper" was blasted in every country for its total lack of redeeming qualities, and Fulci's star dimmed considerably. The Italian movie industry was dying, and directors who worked in marginal genres like Fulci found little work; when they found it, budgets were practically nonexistent. Those who say Fulci is a hack may have some merit if they focus solely on his films from 1984 until his death. Even his most famous films from 1979-1983 could be said to be mere ripoffs of wildly popular American films. But to condemn Fulci's career output as mediocre would be the opinion of an ignorant reviewer who has obviously not seen Fulci's entire canon. Hunt down copies of "Lizard in a Woman's Skin", "Don't Torture a Duckling", and "Beatrice Cenci" for evidence of Fulci's filmmaking in his most creative period.

Fulci's films are meant to defy reality, he has stated that his films are like horrible dreams and nightmares; when all one can do is watch the horror around them, powerless to make sense of the madness. There is also a certain disconnect between the works of foreign directors and American audiences. Most of that is due to the horrible dubbing efforts of American studios who own the stateside rights to the film. The asynchronization of The Italian actors' mouths and the dubbed dialogue adds to the disconcertainty of the viewer and adds to the breakdown of any sort of "reality" the film was going after.

The "horror expert" who claims that Fulci was great because "most of his so-called 'masterpieces' had been banned in several countries" doesn't give Fulci the credit he deserves, and sounds like the exact type of fan who would enjoy movies like "New York Ripper" solely for the exact mix of sex and violence that made the movie infamous to begin with. I hope my reply puts Fulci in another light for you.

why 2 posts exactly da same?..by da way you seem 2 dislike movies with gore...that kinda makes ya partial my boy...think about that

I might get a little out of topic here, but i'll write a little something about my favourite director, The Maestro

Troughout my years as a huge enthusiast of the horror-genre, i have never seen anything quite like the films of Lucio Fulci. His dediaction for the genre is something you can't put a value on. He has inspired countless films, using his apocalyptical atmosphere, using violence in a serious way. It's almost strange to think about how unknown he was and still is (getting more and more famous theese days).

It was "Zombie" that launched the maestro's career, unfortunatley så late in his career, even thought he had done a lot of sucess earlier but mostly just in Italy. It was the director, Enzo G. Castellari, that had been offered the job frst, but he refused it, so Variety passed the job over to Fulci. Who would belive that a film with such a small budget would become such a huge sucess? It even outclassed Dawn of the Dead, which was the reason that "Zombie" was made. Even at this "early" stage in his career, he showed us his stylish use of extreme violence combined with an apocalyptical ending using voodoo as the maintheme. The film was, has always been and will probably always be critisised for trying to re-create Romero's "Dead" trilogy in some sort of a cheap rip-off. That is not true. Variety saw the potencial of zombieflicks and wanted to go with the possible future of a mainstream of theese films. "Zombie" has nothing to do at all with Dawn of the Dead and the movies are completly different.

After the huge(!!) sucess of "Zombie" came Contraband. A stylish mafia-film clearly inspired by The Godfather, but even so, creating it's own style by using the local inviorment of the streets of Italy. I fine ang great gem from Fulci.

City of the Living Dead followed. The first of a "trilogy" (even thoug Fulci disagreed on that). Followed by the greatest film of all time, The Beyond, and The House by the Cemetery. All three of them are absolutley fantastic! Using gore and extremly stylish atmosphere and creating films that should have won every Oscar there's possible to win. I've noticed among many filmfans, that horrordirectors using altot of gore and blood, is taken for a fool and unserious. Thats where i highly disagree. Yes, there is a lot of directors out there who only wants to give us what we want, blood, gore and sex (and i love the for it!), but there are also serious types like Lucio, and he must be the biggest prime candidate for that role. The way he manages to combine theese creative and weird scenes of violense using f.ex. spiders in The Beyond and worms in both City of the Living Dead and House by the Cemetery, gives us a twisted and different kind of film. There is something more to it that just blood and guts. There is something deeper. Fulci drove the gore into the storyline, creating wonderfully and passionate stories. You may not find the best plots in his film, but why should a horrormovie have a plot? It dosen't need one. The true art is to make a horrorfilm that can be plotless, but still manage to involve the audience. Fulci managed this, especially with this trilogy.

Quote from Fulci:

"People who blame The Beyond for its lack of story have not understood that it's a film of images, which must be received without any reflection. They say it is very difficult to interpret such a film, but it is very easy to interpret a film with threads: any idiot can understand Molinaro's La Cage aux Folles, or even Carpenter's Escape from New York, while The Beyond or Argento's Inferno are absolute films."

Along followed The New York Ripper. An extremly underrated and misunderstood giallo. The film isn't just about a crazy murderer using the voice of a duck when killing women. It's also some sort of an attack on the American way of life and how the standard of the underground is (hope i don't offend any Americans now). He wanted to show the dark side of America, using this "Jack the Ripper" inspired killer.

Working with extremly tight budgest and a filmcrew that could irritate the hell out of you, Fulci managed to influence the horrorgenre much, much more that people give him credit for. Fulci is truley the king of the cinema!

"Violence is Italian Art"
"Cinema is everything to me. I live and breathe films. I even eat them"

This is plain and simple.
You don't understand the wonder that is GIALLO.
Or you are just retarded.

Fulci's work is top of the line.

WTF, you are saying fulci's movies are boring and comparing it to The Ring, The Sixth Sense and The Fly? First off The Sixth Sense is not horror, it's mystery/thriller.

Secondly, you are saying that fulci's movies leave logic and suspense aside? It's the new age horror that leaves logic aside. I have seen so many people in new age horror do stupid stuff that nobody would ever do that I can't even count it. I haven't seen a decent "new" horror movie in the last two years, really.

Fulci's movies do have a ton of gore, I have to agree with you on that, but think about it, fulci's movies are based on realism, and real horror is really gory. Killers don't worry about making their victim's look pretty. If somebody kills somebody it's usually going to get bloody. In almost every one of fulci's movies there is a derranged psychopath killer, psychopath killers are messy.

Fulci's movies have plenty of suspense in them and when have you seen a horror movie that uses logic? To tell you the truth, fulci's movies are as close to logic in a horror movie as i've ever seen and i've seen a lot of horror movies before.

What Fulci does is he shows us what most new age horror director's are afraid to do, he shows realism, perhaps too much, more than you can take, so in return he gets criticism from it, my opinion is if you can't take the gore then don't watch it. There are reasons why they were banned in several countries.

Most of Fulci's movies are all basically about one person's descent into madness and he shows it from the killers perspective, that's why some people criticise. He does things this way, not because he can't scare the viewers without gore and "cheap shocks" but because that's simply the way horror should be. The other movies that are not about somebody decending into madness are all about somebody who is already "mad" and we just don't know it until the story unfolds.

I also don't get why you disagreed with this "Horror Expert" and his claiming Lucio Fulci is the "Godfather of Gore" Because judging from your article it seems to me that you are agreeing with him?

I like a few of his movies. The Beyond for example is fairly surreal at times. Other movies of his, such as New York Ripper and Zombi, are dull, inept and overrated by fanbots who somehow think gore alone is what constitutes a good horror movie. I guess they don't take into consideration the awful acting, terrible dialogue, flat direction and recycled ideas when they review these. Many of Fulci's ventures, same as D'Amato's ventures, were made quickly and with one goal in mind: Making $$$$. You can tell viewing the finished project that most are rushed and half assed.

Now that I've seen a bunch of Fulci's movies, I can say this: the guy wasn't a real director. More like a producer. He could have made porno films and be more famous at that, but ultimately wouldn't be any good at it, for the sex scenes in his own films are so very ugly (like in La Lucertola Con La Pelle Di Donna, Il Squartatore Di New York). The only film of his that actually works for me is Zombie. It creates itself as it moves along. No other Fulci film that I've seen managed to accomplish this task. None of them were building up, they were all bald in your face cheap crap excesses. The never effective gore only distracts you from the twists of the stories that were probably written on the way to the sets. Each and every Fulci film I saw could be improved significantly. Lucertola started off like an Argento ripoff, then it turned into a weak giallo, then it started to get interesting both in story and in visuals, but the ending...