Silent Night, Bloody Night

December 17, 2012

Silent Night, Bloody Night

So we have Wilfred Butler, the owner of a notorious house, burned alive (ruled an accident but it is presented as right the opposite) outside on Christmas Eve on his residence. He leaves his grandson, Jeffrey (James Patterson), in a will, the estate and grounds. Jeffrey’s lawyer, John Carter (Patrick O’Neal, given star treatment in the credits, although he’s not in the movie but at the beginning), has an offer from his client to the mayor and town to buy the estate and grounds for $50,000.

***

I will tell you, besides a very overlong flashback sequence towards the end where history of the Butler mansion elaborates on its use as an insane asylum, that this little movie really won me over. To me, it wasn’t too shabby! I had only watched it once; picked up Silent Night, Bloody Night in a Haunted Places four movie set when I noticed that House on Haunted Hill and Satan’s School for Girls were both featured. SNBN wasn’t a film that cried out to me, I must be honest. It was when I sat down and watched it after checking out SF Brownrigg’s Don’t Look in the Basement (also included on the set and another pleasant surprise) that SNBN rather took me by surprise.

The House Where Evil Dwells

It is essentially what I live for when watching horror. It is played straight—Woronov’s performance doesn’t wink at you—and the characters (the local establishment: the mayor, sheriff, news publisher, and phone transfer operator) are all behaving strangely as if a secret connecting them is in direct correlation with Butler mansion. Director Theodore Gershuny (I noticed while researching his background that he directed Tales from the Darkside and a film I enjoy for obvious reasons, Sugar Cookies, with Woronov and Lynn Lowry) uses a ton of POV (especially in the dark of the mansion, with the killer relying on a lit lantern for light), some fish eye lens, for optimum effect (I just love the technique of concealing the identity of the character by allowing us to see a great deal through his/her eyes).

The Tragic Lovebirds

Their future plans are rudely interrupted, to say the least.

The violence is actually limited to brief, massively cut scenes. The ax murders are shot in a manner of seconds, with momentary shots of horror on the faces of that unlucky bed of lovers who should have stayed at the local hotel. The sheriff takes shovel blows while investigating a light in the local cemetery. The phone transfer operator decides against her better judgment to go into the mansion, after noticing that the sheriff’s car was parked near the entrance, soon meeting “an old acquaintance”.

You have these horror movies where a figure is glimpsed in moments, but the director isn’t about to give you a full body until the very end; director Gershuny does so as well, but when he presents the killer—unveils him, if you will--what we get is little face, but his transient-like look adds a bit of creepy to him, as Woronov freaks out (and rightfully so), trying to get away from this wackjob.

Targets of Revenge

I thought the funnier part of the story is how Woronov and Patterson always seem to go everywhere but the Butler mansion. Destiny will lead them there, eventually, of course, but Patterson’s Jeffrey Butler seems to always go elsewhere, intentionally or unintentionally. However, he is there at the mansion, takes his lawyer’s Jag (the keys were in there), and attempts to find the mayor, meeting his daughter (played by Woronov), and eventually decides to contact someone who will perhaps pay for the property so he can make some fast cash.

John Carradine; at this stage in his career, JC was taking supporting gigs to pay the bills, but sometimes a role gave access for him to add a quirk or odd touch. Here, he rings a bell. Yes, he rings a bell. But it is flat hilarious. That and he’s mute because of his throaty voice that deters communicating to others important matters about his colleagues and the Butler mansion.

I think SNBN can be lumped into those kinds of films parodied in the Grindhouse trainer, “DON’T” because it is really about a creepy mansion with a dark history housing a maniac we see at the very beginning (again, POV, the escapee using a wrench and stealing a car available to him while fleeing) and patrolling the innards of the building, unannounced and creepily moving about.

You, as a viewer, know that a killer is inside, seems to have a particular association with the place, and harbors malevolence for the nearby town’s most powerful members. In my opinion, the money scenes involve the killer calling up certain characters, using an eerie whisper that chills the bones, and the way the house is dark while he uses the phone, his lantern sitting next to it, a leather gloved hand clutching the receiver (it has always been fascinating to me how the sound of tight leather against the flesh of a hand can create this sound that just send chills; not sure why, but this film has that), as those who listen from the opposite end are left puzzled, creeped out, and concerned. When a Stranger Calls and Bob Clark’s Black Christmas are just two excellent examples of how to utilize the sinister voice of a psychopath to great effect. It is really a simple technique; with the right filmmakers—and voice—you can set a tone that permeates throughout the whole film. There’s someone hiding in the darkness, intentions quite severe, and a purpose that involves revenge and retribution. The face of Wilfred Butler is featured heavily so we won’t forget him; his story is also of great importance to everything that happens in the plot.

A Killer on the Line...

I have often went on record in saying that films about a house with a dark history (madness and mayhem paramount with the location) and characters conclusive to the setting (often contributors to what transpired there) all appeal to me as a horror fan. This film does have violence, but Gershuny applies the technique of “less is more” in the two major murder set pieces. The ax murders of a couple making love are not nearly as brutally explicit as it might appear and the shovel attack is barely shown at all. Gershuny doesn’t want to give you too much of the killer, just quick flashes of his figure (like when he comes down with the shovel, and one swipe of an ax a little later). Like others before and after him, Gershuny allows you to add the horrific details without elaborating too much.

Fans of Woronov might be a bit disappointed here because she often portrays characters written with black humor, often in satirical, trashy stories. She’s gifted at delivering a performance that puts emphasis on a punchline, on irony. She doesn’t have that kind of character here, as the film’s tone remains serious. She’s never altogether trusting of the Jeffrey Butler character, and the film rarely removes that cloud of suspicion that hangs over Patterson…his wearing leather gloves, stealing the Jag owned by his lawyer (an attorney he’s never met, by the way) parked on the driveway of his mansion, and carrying the look of a possible creep (Patterson just looks like someone that might have accosted pretty little things along with the trio in Last House on the Left or snuck into apartments to sexually rough up female occupants in roughies). Patterson’s enigmatic behavior—not saying too much, man-of-few-words approach to conversation further adds mystery to his character—remains a hook because while partnered with Woronov, there’s a question as to what his motives might be. Is he who he says he is? Does he have ulterior motives that include the mayor or the sheriff? Is he the killer? Does he have knowledge of the past that would motivate him to kill the four who want his mansion to be bulldozed?

SNBN features Woronov at her most stunning. She’s positively beautiful. She narrates the film, as does Staats Cotsworth (his voice is Wilfred while Philip Bruns is his face), and the film opens with her walking in the woods near the Butler mansion…both are key voices that clue us in on the secrets/revelations of the mansion. They’re our guides into the darkness, shedding the light so we will know what they know.

The public domain print I watched was devastated/ravaged by the elements; time, wear and tear, and mishandling of the film seem to have left SNBN in a really bad state. I think, however, this might work to its advantage because some films seem to benefit from a rougher, beaten-up print, like Texas Chainsaw Massacre and Last House on the Left. Because of the rough subject matter and characters involved, the print perhaps should also follow suit. I did ponder how striking this film might have been if digitally mastered; I have to believe there’s so much more to see that is lost within the damage. Despite such accessibility, SNBN isn’t in the Christmas horror vernacular as Silent Night, Deadly Night and Black Christmas. Hell, even Don’t Open Till Christmas and Santa Slay are in the conversation a lot more than Silent Night, Bloody Night.

I noticed during some research that SNBN was re-released in the 80s, and the film currently is recognized as a cult film with a minor following. I’m one of those who thinks it deserves greater publicity, especially when we talk shop regarding horror set during the Yuletide season. It sits just under Black Christmas and You Better Watch Out (Christmas Evil) on my favorites list of Christmas horror. I suggest finding it on the public domain on late night and give it a look.