Clown at Midnight [VHS]

This film has what a horror film is all about. It has gore, suspense, frights and it could have had a good mystery to it if it wasn't spoiled by one small scene. Its about a girl who has found out that her mother was murdered by a clown at the theatre she was performing at. She tries to come over it by going to work and tidy up the theatre with her friends and Ms Gibby.Ms Gibby is played by Margot Kidder who is Lois Lane in 'Superman'. Soon the same clown starts to kill them off one by one with some good killings. Axes in heads, heads cut off, electric shocks and one person getting thrown off the roof of the theatre are all good killings and the suspense of the film is great. Who could not be just a little bit frightened by a haunted theatre and a killer clown. Like I said though, the mystery is spoiled but this is supposed to be a horror film and not a mystery thriller so just sit back and enjoy!

In this great horror movie with good performances all round
especially Christopher Plummer as the smiley,sly murderous clown.The film starts us off with the main story line:a actress in the Walker theatre gets brutally murdered in her dressing room by a masked clown.Years later the daughter of this actress
kate Keeps encountering visions of her mothers murder.When Kate
and her classmates try to renovate the theatre, the creepy clown reappears with an evil,Deadlier plan to kill kate, but first he must kill off any distractions before his deadly evil plans can be completed.

So what is it about this film that I can't stay away from? Indeed, I will be the first person to admit that it's not the most original or memorable film in the world - in terms of production, budget, suspense and casting but after buying it on VHS in 2000 I still literally cannot get enough of it.
After searching on the internet for other reviews of this film, there seems to be a shared view that it's one of cliche, poor acting and un-original plot. However, I beg to differ - The plot does share many common themes with alot of the slasher films that were around during the 1990's [when the film was originally released] which may cloud peoples perceptions and judgement. The acting by some cast members is 'wooden' to say the least - for example, in some points during the film bloopers are clear and errors in script are apparent.
The levels of suspense are variable and the death scenes are pretty average in terms of build up, gore and delivery. I guess depending upon ones experience of watching films within the horror universe will of course alter the level of critique one will use when reviewing the film. However, even if you end up rewarding the film with one star or less, some 'chunks' of the film remain some of the best I have ever seen. The best example of this would be during one of the death scenes, at one point I literally cover my face with whatever object happens to be in my vacinity at the time - cushions, hands, pancakes [you get the picture] - This has remained constant for ten years; so personally this seems a good enough reason to regard this film as one of my favourites, if not 'the' favourite. After all, isn't it the sole purpose of a horror to give the viewer a good scare?
The cameos of Margot Kidder and Christopher Plummer are not vital in shaping ones opinion of the film, in fact when I first watched this at eight years of age [thanks for the brilliant parental skills of my mother] and did not have a clue who both of these actors were, of course out of childhood ignorance than anything - but when watching the film now, I still do not take much notice of their roles as it seems other things attract me or have attached me to this film for over a decade. Other members of the cast fizzle into the background, delivering some memorable lines here and there but mainly filling typical roles seen in thousands of slasher films accross the years [jock, prom queen, nerd, homosexual etc]. On the other hand, it may be their inexperienced acting that charms me into thinking they belong in the same category as greats such as Depp, Eastwood and Nicholson.
When reading the review up to this point, it seems as though I have not yet put a finger on why I love this film so much - I think it's more about growing up with it, watching it at different stages in my life and over time, falling in love with it's 'rough around the edges', cheap approach to a slasher flick.

[Note: I'm the same J Briginshaw that wrote the review in 2002 at aged 12, Despite that review frequently making me cringe; does this not show my attachment?] - Enjoy.