Movies-TV

One of the Best...

One of the best horror movies of the past twenty-five years, Candyman is a masterpiece. Beautifully filmed, with a great cast, and with one of the best movie scores I've ever heard(Philip Glassis is a master). People tend to unfortunately focus on the ideas of Helen's isolation, and separation of fact and fantasy, rather than in the Gothic horror aspects. This was written by Clive Barker after all.

Disturbing, Eeire, Unnecessary

I know a great deal of horror fans consider this movie to be one of the bests, but on the scale in which The Exorcist, The Haunting, and Psycho are measured, Candyman doesn't even make a mark. The sets are amazing, but the plot is far-reaching, the acting is forced, the gorey scenes go overboard, and the overuse of characters sink this film before it even has a chance. I try not to hate individual films because of the art form's young and tender age, but it's pretty hard not to hate this one. I hated the plot, the gorey sequences, the flashbacks, and the characters. Not to mention that the ground in which this movie walks on is tainted with the run-of-the-mill "Nightmare on Elm Street" slasher garbage. I profess to my friends, who agree with me, that this was one of the most unnecessary movies ever made. If you are looking for something scary, this terrible movie will scare you, and suck away two hours of your life as well.

Better than a thriller, a marrow-chiller

This film is strange and totally disquieting. It is a rewriting of the old tale of the ferryman who will be liberated from his enslavement to the ferryboat by the coming of a naive victim he will abandon in the boat as soon as they reach the other bank. It is then loaded with the lynching of a black man for some sexual offense at the end of the nineteenth century. This legend becomes then an urban tale and the rejected populations in the projects of Chicago have to assume his coming if you call his name five times in front of a mirror, and to assume their mission is to help in the passing of the candyman's fate onto the next candyman who in fact will be a candywoman. The film is terryfing in many ways, very well done and its mythical and folkloric logic is absolutely unevadable. This mythical and folkloric dimension makes this thriller a lot more powerful than a simple thriller like Seven for instance, because there is a mental level, a level of necessary belief in myths, a level that is never absent in man's consciousness, in the consciousness and culture of any man or woman, either simple uneducated people who believe out of superstition, or educated people who believe because they know myths are an organizing and energizing force in humanity and will always be. A good film indeed. Dr Jacques COULARDEAU, Paris Universities II and IX.

Spooky...eerie...haunting - an adult horror classic

POSSIBLE SPOILERS!!! Candyman centres on a university researcher who investigates a local legend that is the "Candyman" - a ghost of a affluent slave. When she delves more and more into Candyman and its legend - Candyman takes over her. This movie scared the beejebus out of me when I saw it as a young teenager.
The ghoulish, goose-pimple performance by Tony Todd (as the Candyman) adds soooo much to this movie. The voice effects of the Candyman are just sooo creepy. Also - the tragic aspects of Helen (the film's heroine) AND the Candyman plight - gets the audience more emotionally attached to the characters. This movie is definitely mature in its approach to horror and I think it demands a more adult audience. I feel that this is a highly underrated film - which is well worth it if you are in need of a chill or two.

One of the Scariest Movies Ever Made

This really got me off. To this day this gives me the willies. The racism, homoerotic undertones, the real life ghetto of it, the disturbing nature of the title character- the acting to suspend your disbelief. Especially the mystery of Cabrini Green, what I heard was again a real life ghetto. The ending is probably the worst. A real life super mega low budget ghetto is the closest thing to a hell on earth. The sequel was even worse, exploring the character's origins.

Scary... (additional)

To correct a mistake in my review below: Clive Barker didn't have anything to do with Halloween. I meant to say Hellraiser.lol.. OK now that I've corrected my mistake I'll be on my way :-)greetings from Holland everybody!

4 3/4 stars-is more accurate

I am personally not a fan of horror films, their attempts to thrill never work at- least not on me- and for that reason this could never be a 5star film.

However certain scenes in this film -all in the first half-contain genious cinematography and imagery all worthy of an art house film. From the surreal first shot of the swarms of bees over chicago to the title shot taken from a helicopter- flying over a highway, this film contains some of the most interesting imagery shot in the last ten years.

The score by Philip Glass -which I've transcribed- is highly sinister and adds much to the atmosphere, the actings is generally good and the story quite exciting.

Unfortunately the second half of the film contains too many 'thriller' sequences (ala 'nightmare on elmstreet' / 'Scream') which are not particularily thrilling, and eventually descend into tedium and comic.
However the story is rather dark the dialogue is not always high quality.

So, despite some of the most sinister images ever committed to celluloid the film itself is never chilling enough and becomes all too predictable in the second half.
Still I definately recommend watching it as an excellent but deeply flawed film, but not as a scary movie.

Actually scary movies are ,par example :'Rosemary's Baby' ,'Dont look now' ,'Wicker Man'

"All you have left is my desire for you."

WARNING: REVIEW CONTAINS SPOILERSI have to confess that the initial appeal of Candyman was completely lost on me. Only on second viewing could I begin to fully appreciate what it has to offer.Thematically it's similar to Clive Barker's other great film success, Hellraiser. Not just in the way that dabbling in forbidden practises will raise the undead, but in it's necessary plot contrivances. That the heroine (Helen/Kirsty) can call forth the creature/s which slay on sight, yet are allowed, by a tweaking of the film's own rules, to converse with their tormentors. Just as Pinhead and co. would spend their existence tearing men limb from limb the instant they solved the lamentation configuration box; here the mad slayings of Candyman are put on hold as he finds all manner of reasons, or alternate victims, to let Madsen survive to (almost) the end of the film. However, this is neatly explained by Candyman's desire for her, proving he's a man who knows all about the birds and... er... the bees.Its subtext is what makes the film most rewarding. Not only does it play on accepted urban myth and superstition (even though the particular myth is fabricated, I find very few people WILL dare to say his name five times), but also sociological fears. Or, in the same sense, urban myths again. That is, the myth of the white woman being subjugated by the black man.Of course, this being a horror film, even one well above the intellectual average, it does round up the usual stereotypes. A fellow lecturer, the most pompous and self-important character in the whole film, is English, while the policewoman who orders Madsen to strip for searching is a butch bulldog of a woman who obviously receives sexual gratification from said task.There is also some nice quizzical gothic music throughout, which can get a little over the top and pretentious, but is generally quite beautiful. The notion of Helen's sanity is often called into question, and we see scenes where Candyman cannot be picked up by camera, causing us to believe it may all be in her mind. This also leads to some black humour as various characters double take at the sheer number of mitigating circumstances Helen finds herself under.Yet what initially made me dislike the film is its fundamental lack of scariness. The use of mirrors is always a guaranteed spooker, though the name "Candyman" had only previously seen the inside of cinemas when sung about in Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. The fact that when Candyman does arrive he's dressed like a camp pimp and has a tendency for poetic prose didn't add to the fear factor. I must admit to finding Tony Todd a little scarier this time around as the first time I thought he was putting on a ludicrously deep voice. It turns out that this is Todd's real voice, though it still seems to be siphoned through some form of modulator. His somewhat exaggerated supernatural powers and fleeting appearances led me to conclude that this was a scary movie that forgot the scary, but then of course that's missing the point.Candyman is both victor and victim rolled into one, a phantom of the opera for the nineties. His literary origins are quite impeccable, and when the book of Frankenstein is mentioned towards the start of the movie, this is counterbalanced by an ending that references the 1931 adaptation by Universal. He has a hypnotic hold over women, like a Dracula/De Sade hybrid, and his rapport with Helen means that this could justifiably be seen as a romantic movie. Perhaps not a good idea to take someone out on a date to see it though. Only a predictable and trite coda really detracts from what is a thoughtful, and thought-provoking, modern horror.The same choral themes occur in the pointless sequel, Farewell to the Flesh. However, this merely serves to illustrate how mainstream and tacky the follow-up is. While it's an established rule that sequels are rarely as good as their predecessors, this is – Bride of Frankenstein and Dawn of the Dead possible exceptions – doubly true with horror sequels. Before you can say Freddy 2-6 or Michael Myers 2-7, Candyman re-emerges onto the scene with souped-up gore, dumbed-down dialogue and an irritating DJ who narrates the thing for the hard of thinking. A sort of Annie through the Looking Glass as Kelly Rowan tries to find the one big mirror that can finally destroy the Candyman. Everything is spelt out in this one, including a depiction of his death which is unnecessary and nowhere near as striking as it was when narrated in the first. Of course, the real problem is that Candyman is such a self-contained story that it doesn't NEED a sequel. But Hollywood beckoned with its chequebook and so even if Candyman 3 wasn't intentionally the end of the series, it would have killed it off anyway. Avoid the inferior follow-ups, watch Candyman as a solo work... it's really quite wonderful.

CANDYMAN 3: Day of the Dead

The mythical killer with a hook for a hand is back in CANDYMAN 3: DAY OF THE DEAD! A young woman named Caroline is having strange nightmares concerning the killer known as 'Candyman.' Soon, she discovers that she is the great-great granddaughter of Candyman, and he has come to kill her. This is another good sequel in the CANDYMAN series, but I also hope that this is the last one they ever make because I don't think they could make any more interesting stories about the Candyman.

Cerebral horror movie, but undercooked

Bernard Rose's adaptation of Clive Barker's novel starts out wonderfully. University researcher Helen Lyle (Virginia Madsen) is investigating urban legends and finds that one of them might have a basis in reality. Numerous leads draw her to the Chicago's infamous Cabrini-Green housing complex where residents speak of a supernatural killer who appears when his victims say his name five times in front of a mirror, then disembowels them. Is it a myth? Is the Candyman some kind of serial killer associated with the drug trade? Or is he something supernatural after all? It's a great setup and the early scenes are handled masterfully, establishing the requisite tension and an engaging subtext about sexual double-standards, marital infidelity, and yuppie race anxiety - Helen discovers that her own apartment block was built as a housing project but then converted to condos when social planners realized it was too close to the white folk's suburbs. Unfortunately, the movie goes off the rails almost immediately after the Candyman himself appears. Helen is confronted in a parking station by a mysterious black man then wakes up in a blood-soaked apartment back at Cabrini-Green. She is accused of kidnapping a baby and things go from bad to worse for Helen - and for the audience - as the story lumbers from one violent confrontation to another. Is the Candyman really a supernatural force of evil empowered by those who believe in his legend, or is he a manifestation of the victim's own tortured conscience? "Candyman" admirably taps into a range of white, middle-class anxieties and delivers something certainly more cerebral than the average horror movie, but it isn't quite as successful as it should have been.

Dare you say his name five times... "Candyman"

Undoubtedly one of the more original and frightening horror movies of the early 90s, Bernard Rose's "Candyman," an adaptation of famed author Clive Barker's "The Forbidden," stands well on its own as an effectively creepy film.I was only about six or seven when I first heard the terrifying "Bloody Mary" legend, which was similar to the Candyman legend. And I'm sure others have heard stories about alligators in the sewer or the hesitant 911 operator. Indeed, the "Candyman" and "Bloody Mary" legends do share some common ground, in that if you chant their names before a mirror "x" number of times, they'll appear behind you and hack you to pieces.I used to believe in these legends - when I was kid - but as I grew older, I realized that they're just legends and therefore aren't meant to be taken literally. But that's the central dilemma with 1992's "Candyman": If you believe in something enough, will that belief make fiction reality?The Candyman (Tony Todd) has claimed responsibility for a series of grisly slayings in a particularly rough Chicago housing project, and Helen Lyle (Virginia Madsen) is anxious to discredit the myths. But when she is falsely accused of several brutal murders, could the Candyman be out for revenge, because she doubted him?I'll admit upfront that I'm not familiar with the works of Clive Barker, who is clearly one of the most talented writers of the last 20 years. Only this film and "Hellraiser" have been able to capture my interest, unfortunately. "Candyman" is certainly a terrifying experience from start to finish, as you can't really be sure if the hook-handed spectral entity of the title actually exists in the physical world.10/10

succeeds in the 'creepy' factor but fails as a film

'Candyman' is no exception to the popular lack of a sufficient plot in the horror film genre. (This is not taken to mean that horror films do not have a good storyline but to mean that many do not because the horror and gore is more of the norm.) What 'Candyman' does succeed at is its ability to 'do' horror well. Typically, horror films are not frightening, even when they want to be. In fact, some of them can be downright amusing. 'Candyman' did have its creepy moments. Although I saw this film in my teens (12 or more years ago now), I remember the scene showing how the Candyman character became Candyman through torture by bees / his slave masters. That is really all that I can remember.I must not have thought the film was terribly frightening because I remember repeating his name in the mirror to impress the friend that I watched the movie with. Of course, nothing happened. Despite the creepy factor succeeding, I can only give this film a '2/10' because it is not what I would consider to be a great film, and it is certainly not the best film in this genre.If you are looking for something to creep you out this Halloween, however, this is your film. (Though, I am not sure if it has aged and how creepy it actually is now.)

Horror of the highest order from a master storyteller.

The incomparable Clive Barker, known for penning such horror classics as "Hellraiser" and "Lord of Illusions", hits the bullseye dead-on with "Candyman," based on yet another of his gripping short stories, "The Forbidden." This is every bit as gory and ghoulishly engrossing as you might expect and plays havoc with your fears more seriously than any sweat-inducing nightmare you've ever had. Unlike the "Scream" trilogy and "I Know What You Did Last Summer," this movie casts a hypnotic spell that haunts your very soul to the core. I dare anyone out there, as a matter of fact, to try and claim they enjoyed a peaceful night's sleep after watching it.

The whole urban legend mythos along with the tie-in to Chicago's Cabrini Green really helps in elevating the suspense level for this film. It goes without saying, as well, that Tony Todd makes an imposing ghostly presence.

I was thoroughly impressed with this film and find it hard to comprehend how any other serious horror fan could not be. If you haven't seen this rare find of a motion picture, please, do yourself a favor and check it out. It belongs in every horror fan's video collection. God Bless you, Clive Barker!

A truely frightening masterpiece

This is one of those movies that can stand alone in the Horror world. The tale of a son of a slave brutally murdered because he loved a white woman and he returns from the grave to extract revenge is pretty cool.
The story itself revolves around a woman researching the myth for school. She doesn't believe in it despite the fact that many people tell her it's true. So she decides to chant his name 5x and from there her world spirals into a path of destruction and chaos.
What's cool is how effective Tony Todd plays the candyman. YOu almost feel sympathy for him but then he guts someone and you groan.
HTis is a very cool movie that is a must see.

A TERRIFYING LITTLE JEWEL

For weeks after I first saw this movie, I'd look in the mirror and the name would tremble on my lips, but I was always too frightened to let it slip out. That's how deep the effect on me was. The villian gives Jason, Freddy, et al a true run for their money due to being one of the few bad guys with real spirit. Another must-see for ANY true fan of the genre, without delay. Scream? Please. Sit down. Candyman completely blows it out of the water.

Very depressing, but very fun

CANDYMAN (1992)starring: Virginia Madsen, Tony Todd, Xander Berkeley, Kasi Lemmons, Vanessa Williams, DeJuan Guy, Michael Culkin.plot: Helen Lyle (Virginia Madsen), the wife of a college professor (Xander Berkeley), uses the legend of the Candyman (Tony Todd) for her thesis along with her friend Bernadette (Kasi Lemmons). After checking out the big city housing project which he is though to haunt and saying his name five times in the mirror which is supposed to summon him, Helen discovers those around her are dying one-by-one and she is blamed for all the murders. Helen tries to clear her name, but discovers the only way to do so is to become a victim of the Candyman.my thoughts: This is a classic horror film with a great cast and a spooky premise. I felt for Virginia Madsen's character the whole way through, it was very sad to see her friends begin to die and she is the only one blamed, without being able to prove that a ghost did it.Tony Todd was also great as the villain, the 'Candyman.' He is very creepy, but also a tragic character when you hear his origin.Bernard Rose creates a dark atmosphere through his directing while there is an amazing, haunting score by Phillip Glass.One thing that was very original in this film was that in usual ghost films, the ghost haunts a dark and secluded mansion, but here, the Candyman haunts the projects in a big city. It was a breath of fresh air to see something new.***1/2

It ranks up there with the best

I am a horror buff, and i have to say that Candyman is a masterpiece of modern horror. Candyman should be compulsory viewing for anyone making a horror/thriller movie as an educational tool. It has the best soundtrack that i've ever heard in its genre, and, where there is elements of horror, it is not exploitative. The whole movie is created with an eye for sensitivity, while at the same time shocking the hell out of you. Liam, you don't know what you are talking about. Texas Chainsaw Massacare is a sick perversion, not horror. Candyman is a classic and will be popular for years to come. The ending is exquisite, and is a fitting end to a brilliant movie.

One of the best horror films of the 90s

* MAY CONTAIN SPOILERS *Candyman, basically, is the REAL DEAL. It is a frightening urban legend tale which suceeds on almost every level.Starring Tony Todd and Virginia Madsen (both who I might add, play their roles brilliantly), it is basically an extention on an urban legend which has been around for thousands of years. Helen (Madsen) is researching urban legends with a friend, and encounter the story of the Candyman. After much research into the subject, she just can't help but try saying Candyman, five times in the mirror, and you can probably guess what happens. She gets framed for the murders of her husband, and her friend and co-worker.This film is frightening, it seems real and it grabs you in, right through to the ending, which I must say, is very interesing in itself.I can not recommend this film highly enough to any horror buffs.

The best

Candyman is affecting for as many reasons as it is scary. The idea that the worst stories we have heard are actually based in reality makes you think twice about how you address the stories you hear. I cannot say Candyman in front of the mirror, I just don't trust the world anymore after sitting through Candyman. It is my favorite horror movie, it is also the scariest horror film I have ever seen. Bernard Rose gets rid of the gore and splatter (There is one on-screen death) and instead uses tension, fear and death as tangible physical realities. I show this film to the most stagnant anti-horror person and they succumb to the beauty and terror that this film conveys. I love it.

Creepy and effective Clive Barker horror

Based on the story 'The Forbidden' by Hellraiser writer and director Clive Barker, Candyman is another tale of people delving into places where they shouldn't delve and otherworldly evil. Rather than a demon from hell, the antagonist of this tale is an urban legend going by the name of Candyman. The mythology behind the story is one of the film's major plus points, and director Bernard Rose does a good job of building it. The mythology combined with what can only be described as a fetid atmosphere bode well together, and ensures that this film is both a creepy and absorbing tale of horror. The film follows a pair of University students; Helen Lyle and Bernadette Walsh doing a thesis on urban legends. They decide to research the modern day myth of 'Candyman', a figure who appears complete with a hooked hand to savage whomever stupid enough to say his name five times in front of the mirror. However, one of the duo starts to put a bit too much effort into the work, and ends up coming a cropper when Candyman decides to have his wicked way with her.The parts of the story that stand out the most are the relationship between the protagonist and Candyman, and the idea of a community of people believing in title character. However, this is where the film falls down to me. The scenes between Helen and Candyman put too much focus on the 'evil' dialogue, and the relationship is never really built upon. The urban legend theme is often touched upon, but we only meet a handful of characters that believe in the almighty Candyman, and they aren't in the film for long. The basis of the story follows Helen's bid for sanity, and while this provides an interesting backbone for the film - I really do think it could have been a lot better. The casting is largely good, with Tony Todd putting across an effective portrayal of Candyman, and Virginia Madsen delivering a believable performance as the film's victim. Xander Berkeley, who came to fame recently with a role in the first two series' of 24 rounds off the cast, which is under the direction of Bernard Rose. The only other film I've seen from him is Paperhouse, and Candyman is certainly a lot better than that. Although that isn't exactly difficult. Overall, this is a creepy and interesting film; but I can't say I'm a huge fan of it.