Deadly Blessing (1981)

Powerful

Just what I expected

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

The movie's not perfect, but it sticks the landing of its message. It was engaging - thrilling at times - and I personally thought it was a great time.

Like many others of my generation, I first encountered the work of Wes Craven with Scream (1996), which went on to influence a whole new wave of teen slasher movies that everybody thought they had seen die off in the early 90's. Shortly after, I watched A Nightmare on Elm Street (1984), and realised just how influential the horror giant was across his lucrative career. Of course, he was making his mark even before this with the notorious The Last House on the Left (1972), a film inspired by Ingmar Bergman that remains shocking even to this day. With Craven's passing just over a year ago, I've been busy rounding up all of those forgotten minor works, and Deadly Blessing, made in between TV movie Stranger in Our House (1978) and Swamp Thing (1982), is one of his oddest.On a remote farm named 'Our Blessing', couple Martha (Maren Jensen) and Jim Schmidt (Douglas Barr) live amongst a rural religious community known as the 'Hiddites'. The Hiddites are similar to the Amish in that they keep to themselves and reject modern technology. Some of the Hiddite youngsters, including the dim-witted William (The Hills Have Eyes' Michael Berryman), are fascinated with the Schmidt's tractor. When Jim, an ex-Hiddite and son of sect leader Isaiah (Ernest Borgnine), is killed in a suspicious incident in the barn, Martha's friends Lana (Sharon Stone) and Vicky (Susan Buckner) join her for company, but more deaths and strange incidents soon occur. Is it the work of the 'Incubus', the demon feared by Isaiah and his followers, or is there a deranged killer on the loose?Deadly Blessing represents Craven's awkward transition from grimy shockers such as Last House and The Hills Have Eyes (1977) to the more mainstream fare he had such great success with following Elm Street. The film's main issue is that there are too many characters, sub- plots and ideas flying around to form a coherent piece. It never seems to settle on a tone, whether it be all-out supernatural, grounded and dramatic, or giallo-esque. However, the messy style of the movie at least makes for a more interesting movie that it would have been if played completely straight. There are a few nice set- pieces, including the infamous spider-in-the-mouth moment, and some fun performances, including an early role for a gorgeous Sharon Stone and an over-the- top Ernest Borgnine, the latter harshly 'winning' a Razzie for his efforts. Certainly a minor work in Craven's repertoire, but recommended to anyone with a weakness for barmy genre movies.

Early work by horror specialist Wes Craven; his fourth film and first into the 1980's. Also one of Sharon Stone's earliest screen appearances. Unfortunately it stinks. IMDb reviews seem to be biased Craven lovers because this most certainly is not a gem. It's boring. The religious sect next door is supposed to have a deep secret. They don't. They're just ridiculous. Almost no chills in this except for a scene or two and they're very brief. A twist at the end doesn't do much to excite. Very bored with this.4.6 / 10 stars--Zoooma, a Kat Pirate Screener

This film is set in Amish Country, at a local farm, where a woman's husband is mysteriously killed by his own tractor! Personally, I think Ernest Borgnine is a good Hittite, leading a group of religious fanatics that "make the Amish look like swingers". Borgnine was nominated for a Razzie award for "Worst Supporting Actor" for this movie. Really? I mean, he may not be brilliant, but he is not that bad.AllMovie comments that the film "finds director Wes Craven in a transitional phase between his hard-hitting early work and his later commercial successes." I am not sure what the hard-hitting phase was (presumably "Last House" and "Hills Have Eyes"). I would definitely agree this film falls into his more obscure, less-successful period.Time Out wrote, "Deadly Blessing isn't a very good movie, but it holds out distinct promise that Craven will soon be in the front rank of horror filmmakers", calling it "an excellent example of a mundane project elevated into quite a palatable genre movie by its director." If nothing out, they predicted Craven's rise to the top perfectly. Which is weird, because this film (as opposed to others) would not be the one that suggests his potential.As I write this (February 2013), there is a new Blu-Ray version coming out. Up until now, the film has never been seen on DVD or BD. I watched it on Netflix. Admittedly, I am curious how the film transfers. I might consider bumping the rating up one notch if the picture improves. The disc is also loaded with special features. That may not improve the film itself, but it could help put it into a better context of Craven's career.

Rural thriller about a young woman and her friends being stalked by an unknown presence and dealing with an intimidating cult-like group of religious fanatics. First of all, this movie has a genuinely spooky vibe that is maintained throughout the entire movie. It never lets up for a minute, and holds the audience in it's spell. The photography and music is very effective and atmospheric, and all the actors maintain the seriousness, never giving way to campy self-awareness. Ernest Borgnine has an intensity that comes off very well, and the other actors similarly aren't afraid to be very emotional and revealing. There's some excellent scary scenes and some other ones that are just very intense. My only criticism is that the ending seems too abrupt. I wish the movie had gone on longer. This is the kind of film that can get inside your subconscious and haunt your dreams if you open yourself up to it's spell. A one of a kind movie that effectively presents a memorably haunting atmosphere.