Candyman

Clive Barker's works frequently address issues of xenophobia. "Nightbreed" is an excellent example of the persecution of the "Other." Told from the "Other's" perspective, it allows its viewer a small window into the struggles of "minorities" (not that any film can fully convey this idea, but this is an excellent attempt at beginning a dialogue).On the surface, "Candyman" appears to pick-up this thread. The viewer learns that Candyman was a master portrait-artist in the late eighteenth/early nineteenth century. He was commissioned to capture the likeness of a landowner's young, innocent daughter. Instead, he captured her virginity. For this "crime" he was summarily covered in bees and hanged. Fast-forward to today(ish). The viewer learns that Candyman's name has become an urban-legend in Calibrini-Green (the housing-projects which were constructed on the same grounds on which he was executed). A copycat killer stalks his victims ... but is Candyman more than just a moment in history? More than just a name? Interesting premise, right?So here is where we encounter problems. The depiction of Calibrini-Green (a very real, notoriously violent housing project in Chicago) is "white-washed." The film does not depict the overcrowding of this area: and has encountered opposition as a result (minor stuff though, right?). Now, here is the most serious offense the film commits: this film is supposed to reveal the story of Candyman ... but inevitably, it becomes the story of Helen. She usurps the narrative ... and, thus, his power. When Helen dons the hook and ultimately replaces Candyman in the mythology (as noted in the film's conclusion), her history is being compared with his. And can we really compare the history of a white woman who lives in a condo to that of a black man who was executed without a trial? Doubtful.The film is a bit dated. It plays upon the fears white Americans had of the exodus of middle-class blacks from the "projects" (Calbrini-Green in this case) into suburban areas. It also plays the fears white Americans had upon the destruction of housing projects and, thus, the displacement of blacks during the Regan/Bush era. (The question being, "Are we safe from 'these people'?") While this could be an enlightening film, the approach is painfully flawed. The treatment of the black community is borderline insulting.Still, the film is certainly worth a watch if you are interested in the portrayal of the "other" in film, Clive Barker's work, or if you are simply interested in the evolution of horror film.Suggested reading: Briefel, Aviva and Sianne Ngaî. "'How Much Did You Pay for This Place?': Fear, Entitlement, and Urban Space in Bernard Rose's 'Candyman.'" Camera Obscura: A Journal of Feminism, Culture, and Media Studies 37, (1996 Jan): 71-91.

Most horror movies are just incredibly stupid, boring, gross to be gross or a combination of those. Candyman, and its sequel to bit lesser extent, defy those tired tropes. Candyman is a dread inducing gothic horror film based off a short story "The Forbidden" by Clive Barker. Long, convoluted story short Helen Lyle is a graduate student in Chicago researching Urban Legends. She summons the Candyman who as mean spirited as he can be is really a tragic figure. An artist Daniel Robitaille was the son of a slave on a New Orleans plantation in the 1890’s. A wealthy landowner chose him to paint a portrait of his daughter, Caroline Sullivan. The two fell in forbidden love and Caroline got pregnant. Her father was furious and chased Daniel out of town along with a lynch mob. The mob caught Daniel and tortured him by cutting off his right hand with a saw blade. After they removed his hand they poured honey over his body from a nearby hive. As the sequel expands on this Caroline shows Daniel his reflection in her mirror as he lay dying. His soul becomes trapped inside the mirror. If you tie the two movies together Daniel is basically a very lonely, very angry restless spirit who does not want to be forgotten. He wants to be reunited with the woman and child he loved and was robbed of. His child, Isabelle was raised with no knowledge of his existence. If you pay close attention to the final act of Candyman you realize that Daniel believes Helen to be the reincarnation of Caroline and he steals a baby in the hopes of killing all three to join him in the after life. This is truly a haunting film. The sequel is just different enough and I applaud the sequel for expanding on the mythos. They DID make a third direct to DVD turd in like 1999 and...oh god. just don't watch it. Tony Todd needs to pay his bills I suppose but otherwise it is a lot cheap non scares and an annoying, big boobed playmate screaming throughout the movie. It was really a slap in the face to a series that capped it off perfectly at the end of the first sequel.

At first I was grossed out about this film. Depicting the castration of a little boy in a public bathroom was too much for me. It forced me to read the Wikipedia review before I continued further. What I read piqued my interest so I watched the remainder of the film while at work.The Candyman is insane. Why else would he kill his "own people"? People who themselves are still being oppressed to this very day. This film is a supernatural horror/thriller that gets more into one's mind more than one's body. If you can get past the first 30 to 40 minutes you will get to see an interesting film--a film that showcases a subtle delineation of race and class in America today.Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen have a solid chemistry together despite Todd's appearance only at the 43 minute mark of the film. Todd's brooding, dark intensity make this film. He's truly a film villain extraordinaire. Despite this, I never really knew what it was that Candyman wanted other than to be worshiped as he haunted Cabrini-Green Public Housing buildings.I give this film Candyman Three and a Half to Four Stars rounded up. Buy this film and you won't be too disappointed. Madsen is great and as beautiful as she was in Third Degree Burn. I'm the 147th person to review Candyman.A. Nathaniel Wallace, Jr.

Edizione UK con audio e sottotitoli in italiano, film molto bello, si vede e si sente bene e edizione ricca di extra

Grad student Helen Lyle (Virginia Madsen), unwittingly ventures in to a world of murder and the occult as she tries to unravel the mystery of a folk legend, Candyman, for a thesis on urban legends. Lyle’s investigation leads her to an infamous Chicago housing project, Cabrini-Green, where this ghostly legend seems to be working its eerie spell on its residents. But is Candyman real or just a fairy tale made up to scare the believers and to explain the horrific murders plaguing Cabrini-Green? Why does death befall anyone who whispers the word, … his name …five times while looking in a mirror- Candyman, Candyman, Candyman, Candyman… CANDYMAN?Born from the mind of Clive Barker, based on his short story “The Forbidden” and directed by Bernard Rose, this twisted little gem of a horror film didn’t impress me that much when I viewed it in the movie theatres over 2 decades ago. But then again, I was a teenager and in my juvenile mind, I wanted to see more of the usual- a mindless slasher film with a high body count, some throwaway characters and maybe throw in some gratuitous nudity while you’re at it. “Candyman” was to my surprise, not this type of horror movie. Repeated viewings made me realize just how well made this film is. It is mysterious, it is haunting, it is filled with wonderment; it creates a hypnotic world of violence, mysticism and despair and lets us get close emotionally to its leading lady and its killer. Who is this elusive Candyman and what does he want with Helen? The answer is obvious but is it really? Virginia Madsen is beautiful and her performance here is very under-rated. Far too under-rated even by fans of the genre where we constantly hear about the great Jack Nicholson in “the Shining” and practically everyone in “The Exorcist” and Mia Farrow and Ruth Gordon in “Rosemary’s Baby”, but Madsen? This is a horror film where we are totally drawn to her character and as she continues on her torturous odyssey, the more sympathetic and intriguing she becomes and despite this being a horror movie in every sense of the word, by the closing credits, I felt overwhelming sadness. Helen Lyle is truly a tragic heroine and one of the more captivating characters in a horror film. The killer, Candyman, played by the always compelling-in-a-horror-movie Tony Todd, is another great, iconic murderer; one who would unfortunately, become less menacing with each passing sequel, but here, he is effective. Todd’s towering presence is perfectly suited but his voice is what truly makes this character. Unlike other horror movie monsters, Candyman has the distinction of being the most intriguing. Less monster, more human and his dialogue is a bit more poetic than that of the other murderous ghost, Freddy Krueger. The kills are pretty graphic and the suspense is here in abundance. As I already stated, this isn’t your standard, typical slasher movie so do not expect pretty teenagers running around screaming and spewing mindless dialogue. This film is a bit more sophisticated, it’s classier, where character and story take centre stage. The multiple layers in this story may have you a bit mystified. After watching this several times, I still do not fully understand all of it and what role Helen truly had in Candyman’s plan. I know why he is tormenting her but is it more than what the story is letting on? Other elements that makes this so effective, performances, setting and characters aside, is the great score. The music is poignant and the film has a surreal, almost nightmarish quality to it. My biggest disappointment however lies with the ending. Without giving any spoilers, I will state it is a big surprise, but was it really necessary?Overall, “Candyman” is a great, classic scary movie. Definitely the best from the 90’s- a decade that failed to produce really good, quality horror cinema. It is a dark, adult fable where all is not what it seems and highlights one woman’s nightmarish descent into the depths of desperation and the unknown. It is beautifully filmed and acted with Madsen and Todd as the standouts, and the haunting score just adds to its beautifully eerie atmosphere. Get it.****1/2

J'avais commandé cette version restauré HD 2019 avec livret de Marc Toulenc avec un peu d'appréhension après l'échec de la restauration du "corps et du fouet" chez ESC, et je suis agréablement surpris par la qualité superbe des images qui montre que cette fois nous avons bien un vrai travail du master. Les éléments majeurs pour l'image sont bien sûr visible sur le Blu Ray, mais je me suis amusé à faire des comparaison avec le DVD fourni dans le coffret et il est lui aussi de très bonne facture. Les images sont lumineuses, avec des contrastes et une très bonne colorimétrie, j'ai ainsi pu découvrir l'oeuvre de Clive Barker dans un excellent contexte et suivre les aventures de la jeune femme que Candyman, l'homme au crochet à choisi pour l'accompagner dans l'au-delà. Il faut dire que Clive Barker était pressenti pour être le nouveau Stephen King, mais il n'en a rien été, il a disparu après quelques romans de plus en plus hermétiques...Le film a été vu sur une installation de Home Cinéma comprenant un écran Samsung de 40 pouces, une platine de salon Sony UBX-800, un ampli Denon haut de gamme et des enceintes française Focal SIB Dolby Atmos 2.0 complétées par une enceinte centrale Bose. La qualité est vraiment au rendez-vous et même la bande son en 2.0 reste très correcte à condition d'adapter le volume : un bon spectacle qui devrait vous divertir agréablement. Bonne séances à toutes et à tous.

I did a multi buy to save on postage, this great film was the last to arrive by almost a fortnight and I had been granted a refund for it as it clearly wasn't in my collection in time. I feel bad and apologise, this original Candyman I feel is superior to its remake in most ways but either is worth a watch.

Imagen super correcta la de esta película en su formato Blu Ray y comento la edición castellana, por lo tanto nada que decir sobre este aspecto en cuanto a los idiomas.Criticando la película, es sin lugar a dudas una de las mejores de la década de los años 90 en cuanto al género de terror, si bien para mí es más thriller o suspense que terror, aunque flirtea con escenas que encajarían dentro de lo último sin ser lo predominante. Los actores en general muy bien así como la ambientación de la película. Especial atención a la actriz principal Virginia Madsen, guapísima y que sin ser una actriz muy conocida interpreta su papel espléndidamente. Quizá se le debió haber sacado más punta porque no cabe duda que la tenía.Una historia muy bien narrada y un final mejor aún. En resumen, una película que no fue muy famosa en su tiempo, allá por el año 92, pero que con los años se ha valorado y se le da su notable lugar dentro del género que representa. No fue un desastre total de taquilla pero mereció mucho más y no quedar tan ensombrecida y olvidada a pesar de tener posteriormente secuelas muy distantes de la calidad de la original.Una compra casi obligada para cualquier coleccionista de cine y que gusta de este tipo de filmes. Saludos de Cayetano..