Incubus (1966)

I am only giving this movie a 1 for the great cast, though I can't imagine what any of them were thinking. This movie was horrible

Although I seem to have had higher expectations than I thought, the movie is super entertaining.

This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Worth seeing just to witness how winsome it is.

I'm not quite sure how to feel about this one. I want to like these art house type movies, but they can be a bit dull at times like this one. I liked it's use of Esperanto. It, and the fact that it takes place in a fictional place make it seem otherworldly, but it could have had more eerie moments and less of Shatner and the rest of the cast wandering seemingly aimlessly through the woods. And speaking of Shatner, I thought it was funny that he sounds less hammy while speaking in the artificial and ridiculous language "Esperanto" than he did in Star Trek. Anyway, I digress. I liked the movie's simplistic ideas regarding good and evil, and the ending gave me goosebumps, but...it's just one of those movies my mind refused to be disappointed by but I still kind of was. I went in with high expectations and left refusing to admit it wasn't as good as I had expected. It wasn't as scary as I wanted it to be.

Pretension is arranging the surface perception of being deep without actually being deep. That's why 'Last Year at Marienbad' is not pretentious (It's the real deal). And it's why 'Incubus' is pretentious. It shoehorned full of 'poetic' hyperbole ...foisting wall-to-wall pap on viewers in case they might miss it. Poetics are something a filmmaker stumbles across along a structural path. Half-hearted poetics decimate the structure here. There isn't a single gambit, or any stakes here that concern a viewer.If you'd seen this as a kid, it would have done an end-run around your growing adult taste, and bought your affection with some deliriously well-crafted visuals for a horror movie. The effort behind the camera is very accomplished, and suggests a careful study of old noirs. Really nice work. They can't seem to decide on what night looks like; but day for night looks better here than it ever did in noir.Then there's the horrid acting and that whole Esperanto thing.

"Incubus" is a very strange movie to be sure – it's unique because it is the only film ever shot in the "universal language", Esperanto. It may be worth it for some viewers to see the film simply because it has camp-master William Shatner speaking his lines in this never-land language. But not for me. From the very first moments of the film you can tell what you're looking at – a good photographer with a bunch of amateur actors and an overambitious director gathered on the beaches of Big Sur in a desperate attempt to capture some of the magic of Ingmar Bergman's films "The Seventh Seal" and "Hour of the Wolf" and apply that magic to a straight-up horror film in the occult vein.The story is very confusing despite being very simple, due to the cryptic dialog and ineffective direction. I've seen it twice now so this is what I have been able to piece together – Shatner is playing a guy who is some kind of idyllic woodsman who lives with his sister in a cabin. A female devil worshipper sees him somewhere and gets a crush on him so she decides to corrupt him and make him a Satanist too, which her sister discourages. Soon Shatner is following the evil woman across a lovingly photographed wasteland, back to the beach again, and eventually he is involved in a confrontation with the "Incubus" (a male version of a Succubus, for those not in the know… this movie won't tell you so I might as well).The "Incubus" is literally a goat that someone put on top of Shatner that kicks him a bit and then disappears. Outside of some interesting but unoriginal photographic effects there really is nothing happening in this movie. Shatner's character completely forgets about the sister character, who has been blinded by a solar eclipse and spends most of the movie wandering around. There's no scares whatsoever. Maybe this movie appeals to people who like surrealist cinema. Usually I don't like that kind of thing anyway so I couldn't tell you if this is a good or a bad example of that school of cinema. My guess is that it's bad, and it's certainly bad from my perspective as someone who expects at least a minimum of character development and plot in a film.However the music is interesting and the photography is great. This is a good movie to watch if you were curious how to distinguish directing from photography because this is a very poorly directed but well photographed film. Other than that and the fact that it has Esperanto dialog there's nothing to distinguish it or make it memorable.By the way, I was able to see it this time in a 35mm presentation in the theater thanks to the producer Anthony Taylor who has a nice print and lives in Southern California.

A very weird, quietly creepy horror film... I think a big chunk of the weirdness and creepiness goes down to the fact that the film is entirely in Esperanto (and also the bit with the goat). Put together by Outer Limits staffers (who were apparently obsessed with artificial languages), the production values are not dissimilar to 50s/60s TV (the odd camera shadow, out of focus evil beings, etc), but the effects are strangely effective and the use of sound is genuinely creepy in a way that made me think of "Eraserhead".This film is worth seeing if for no other reason than to see William Shatner overacting in Esperanto. Most of the film he keeps the overacting in check, but about an hour in he clearly can't help himself.