Screams of a Winter Night (1979)

Can someone tell me why this is a hard sought OOP flick. Really i mean, I have searched a long time to catch it and finally it is in my possession. I thought, well, this is going to be a classic. In the genre. I knew that the quality of the reel is terrible with a lot of bad editing and hue problems and bad sound, that I don' mind. I have seen a lot of drive-in flicks and exploitation ones but this one really has nothing to tell. It starts of pretty well. You got the prologue credits and while they are given with black intervals you hear people screaming and you hear some kind of howling. But still it's black on your screen. I was hooked on the television to see what would happen next, but nothing really happened. It's just a bunch of friends telling scary tales, and while telling they cross over to that story on screen. But being 1979 and being in the heydays of the slashers this doesn't deliver. No blood, well, not to mention, no knifes going in, no nudity just a lot of blah blah. Only the ending, the last 7 minutes things go wrong with the friends and that's the best part. The monster (bigfoot) shown on the cover of the VHS, well, he appears maybe for 2 minutes. But still a lot of geeks are searching for this for me boring flick. The only thing I can say is, I have it in my collection. Not my cup of tea. Only available on VHS.

Are we all watching the same movie here?? I'll admit that SCREAMS OF A WINTER NIGHT is a great title for a movie, and a sound premise which would eventually be put to better use: Nine or ten college aged acquaintances who don't seem to really like or even know each other take a road trip to a summer camp cottage closed for the off season where a gruesome mass murder (oddly heard but not seen during the opening credits) took place 30 years prior. On the way they stop at a local hick cracker gas station operated by what appears to be the evil twins of the Beverly Hillbillies, who try to warn them off to no avail. So far so good.The problem begins when the kids start sitting around telling each other ubran legend-ish scary stories to pass the time. Which would be just fine except that they seem to be telling each other these stories because they don't have anything else to talk about. There is no exposition, no character development, and no visible bonds exist between them except for one couple who don't even have sex on-screen since the movie was only rated PG.Then there is John, the knucklehead who organized the road trip. To call him annoying is complimentary. He is insufferable. The idea was to try and portray his character as some kind of a nerd or dork whose family used to frequent the cottage. The film unintentionally does a good job as setting him up as a potential lunatic who lured his associates to this setting just to brutally murder them all, but no dice. He's just annoying and we don't even get the satisfaction of watching him die in an amusingly ironic manner after being inflicted with his presence for an hour plus.The horror anthology angle is interesting though, and all three of the stories shown have effective moments. The CREEPSHOW films are still the modern day kings of the horror anthology tradition, one that stretches back to the 1940s with the incomparable DEAD OF NIGHT, another classic being Mario Bava's fabulous BLACK SABBATH from 1963 and the overlooked H.P. Lovecraft collection NECRONOMICON: BOOK OF THE DEAD from 1992. Usually a horror anthology has some sort of linking story connecting three or four segments that each tell their own twisted tale of the macabre. The unique angle this time is that the stories are actually populated by the people in the linking segments as sort of alternate identities.Which could have been a great idea except that the people are so unlikeable that the story segments don't serve as a reprieve from their company. There's one really odd part when the "kids" start tapping & clicking out a rhythm which slowly builds into a cacophony that drives one of the females into a rage. I would have cold-cocked them all for being so childishly obnoxious. They don't even seem to be drinking from the empty beer cans they wave around as props, and John's antics of deliberately trying to startle the females in the group quickly becomes unlikely. Somebody would have knocked a couple of his teeth out for being such a dick and split the scene. It isn't funny, it isn't scary, and the tension that builds is not based on fright but a diminishing ability to be patient with him.Eventually the film does build to a satisfyingly gruseome supernatural climax that apparently took so much of the movies' low budget production cost that the filmmakers appear to have literally run out of money while four of the ten were making a frenzied escape through the woods. The movie ends with a freeze-frame of them running hand in hand, and I can't help but wonder if maybe the last few minutes of intended action was abandoned at the film lab when they couldn't afford the processing bill.So again I ask, are we all watching the same movie here? I enjoy low budget regionally made horror movies starring no-name talents and have a particular fondness for anthology chillers. But the legends surrounding the film are more interesting than anything which takes place on screen. One of the college dorms used for one of the story segments is rumored to be haunted, and maverick wunderkind Quentin Tarentino has championed the movie, supposedly owning his own print which he screens for people who don't know any better than to go do something else just because it's Quentin Tarentino showing it. He could show old toothpaste commercials and people would watch in rapt awe.The film was pioneering in the sense that it did beat "Friday The 13th" into theaters by over a year with a story of college kids being menaced at an off-season summer camp. And it also proceeded THE EVIL DEAD with a story of college kids sitting around a disused cabin running afoul of some sort of hyperkenetic supernatural force of evil. But since this evil is never explained and the summer camp angle isn't ever explored as a setting the result is a null-sum gain. They could have been anywhere, the summer camp angle only serving as a device to make it more difficult for them to seek out help when their lamps start running out of fuel. Which might be the most frightening aspect of the movie: Being stuck sitting around in the dark with John and his creepy, disturbing sense of humor & not even having a radio to listen to. A college road trip to a disused cabin with no tunes? Come on.So I just don't get it. My expectations were perhaps a bit high, especially based on the title which suggested a winter time setting and horror hijynx involving snow, sleighs, rusted shovels, colorful scarves, lost mittens, homicidal Christmas elves, maybe a possessed snowman. If you ask me it looks like they made the wrong movie. Great title though!4/10

I watched this on Halloween night that year with the whole town and it scared the heck out of everyone at the theater. Good enough for me to look it up after all these years. Just something way creepy about the green light scene I can't forget. Im sure some of it is my youth perspective in 1979 but I think its in the class of something like Legend of Boggy Creek which is a classic because it brought something new though campy as all heck. Screams is dated by now Im sure but still good fun compared to a LOT of other bigger budget movies. Be nice to see it posted somewhere like on you tube as Im sure its a rarity! I gave it a seven meaning you ought to check it out for yourself.

I was 14 in 1979, and my brother and I went to a twin theater in Bowie, Maryland. I don't remember what film we intended to see, a comedy I believe, but when I saw there was a horror movie playing in the other theater I decided to watch it while my brother saw the comedy. So there I was, sitting by myself in the near empty theater with about ten other people sporadically seated throughout. I figured a PG horror flick might be good for some cheap thrills, maybe a few laughs, but nothing I couldn't handle. Then the movie started, and from the scary opening which is comprised of sound effects over the credits through the second story, I was scared nearly to tears by this. It's hard to say exactly what it is, but this movie just has that special "something" that can't be planned, but must come through in the execution. I recently attained a copy of this and watched it again after all these years, and I still think it is quite effective. Reading the other reviews here, I'm glad to see I'm not the only one with a soft spot in their heart for this little unknown movie. To the filmmakers who just might read this, I say ignore the negative critics. That little movie you made way back in the 1970's still holds up well, and has a good creepy atmosphere that many of today's big-budgeted have not a clue of how to accomplish. Oh well, thanks for reading!