World Famous Comics: J. Clifford Forrest Jr. Martin
J. Clifford Forrest Jr. Martin
Starring: John Amplas, Pasquale Buba, Tony Buba, Roger Caine, J. Clifford Forrest Jr. Average Rating: Aspect Ratio: 1.33:1 Audience Rating: R (Restricted) Binding: DVD Format: Color, DVD-Video, NTSC Label: Starz / Anchor Bay Number of Items: 1 Picture Format: Academy Ratio Release Date: June 20, 2000 Running Time: 94 minutes Theatrical Release Date: July 07, 1978
Amazon.com: Martin (John Amplas) is a modern sort of vampire--he gains his victims' cooperation with the use of a hypodermic needle instead of hypnotism, and uses razors in the place of fangs. "There's no real magic," he says. "There's no real magic, ever." He says this to his elderly Romanian cousin, Tati Cuda (Lincoln Maazel), a true believer in the old religion, and self-appointed keeper of Martin, who threatens to do away with the boy if the vampirism doesn't stop. According to Cuda, the boy is actually 85 years old--young for a vampire. Truly, the supernatural element of the film is always at odds with psychological explanations that make Martin out to be a sexually disturbed teen, not an ancient bloodsucker. Martin's vampiric episodes are intercut with sepia footage of similar exploits from some gothic era, which may either be Martin's memories or his imagination; take your pick. Garlic, sunlight, mirrors--these are devices of Hollywood, and have no effect on a hypo-toting vampire like Martin, as he explains the rules in his role of frequent call-in guest on a radio talk show where he's known as "The Count." These ambiguities are left teasingly unresolved by the film, which is more interested in establishing the relationship between the traditional vampire and the modern-day psycho. Along with the film's narrative economy, these ambiguities make Martin Romero's midnight-movie masterpiece.
At the very end Romero borrows an image from Carl Theodore Dreyer's classic silent film Ordet, ratifying a moment of religious ritual. Knowing this as you watch the film only deepens the chill. --Jim Gay
Color Me Blood Red... Martin (John Amplas) is a lad with a serious problem. He simply must kill and drink the blood of his victims. Is he a vampire? A serial killer w/ an interesting twist? A compulsive blood addict? We are left to decide this for ourselves. Martin moves in with his cousin Cuda (Lincoln Maazel), who is totally convinced of Martin's vampirism. Is he correct, or just an overly zealous religious fanatic? Cuda bombards Martin with all the tired old anti-vampire stuff of legend, like crosses, garlic, mirrors, etc. to no avail. Martin fears none of these things. He is a complex individual who just might be schizophrenic, as his b&w "flashback" sequences could imply. But then again, he may be nosferatu as well! Either way, Martin is a murderer. His prey are drugged with hypodermics, then stripped and drained of their precious red fluid via razor blade. Martin is very careful about not getting caught, covering his tracks well in an age before DNA technology and superior forensics. I really enjoyed this movie. MARTIN is one of George A. Romero's forgotten classics (like THE CRAZIES), and deserves to be in every horror collector's crypt! ...
"A Vampire for Our Age of Unbelief" "Heir to the Blood Lust"
Horror master George Romero's 1976 film MARTIN is one of those studies in ambiguity where the edges of reality get pretty fuzzy. John Amplas delivers an engaging and affecting performance as the titular character, a young man who believes himself to be the victim of a family curse in which one member is every so often born as Nosferatu (i.e., a vampire). Romero's script, however, abandons traditional vampire lore--Martin isn't bothered too much by sunlight or Christian crosses, he eats garlic, and instead of fangs, he uses razor blades to access the precious crimson fluid of his victims. So is Martin actually a vampire, or just a severely disturbed young man? What, really, is the distinction? After all, he IS killing people and he IS drinking his victims' blood--so what if he doesn't have fangs? And his elderly cousin, steeped in the ways of the old country, definitely believes, and HE is determined to save Martin's soul or else destroy him.
Films like this don't come along too often, and they rarely come out of Hollywood. Produced a few years before DAWN OF THE DEAD (1978), the first sequel to his magnum opus NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD (1968), MARTIN is one of Romero's more thoughtful and thought-provoking works. Characters stripped of cinematic romanticism, gritty on-location shooting in Pennsylvania suburbs, and brilliant use of grainy black-and-white footage for flashback sequences--actually, are they flashbacks, or has Martin blurred reality with sequences from his favorite films?--help to create a moving and realistic portrait of a young man who, in spite of his murderous habit, is both sympathetic and genuine.
The influence of this film on later indie filmmakers is obvious, most notably on the relative newbie Larry Fessenden. Indeed, Fessenden's 1997 work HABIT would make a nice companion piece--or perhaps the second of a double feature--for Romero's MARTIN, as both offer a slice from the life of a bloodsucker without making it really clear whether or not the preternatural is involved. In actuality, the two films differ in point of view only. MARTIN tells the story basically through the vampire's eyes; HABIT has viewers following things from the victim's standpoint.
The Anchor Bay DVD edition of MARTIN offers a good transfer of the film in the 1.33:1 Academy Ratio. An excellent film that most genre fans will find is well worth the price of admission.
Murderous Martin Martin, a very early film directed by George Romero, is the very definition of an unsung classic horror film. Released on a shoestring budget at the end of the 70's and dismissed by audiences as "just another slasher film", audiences missed out on a razor sharp black comedy sprinkled with moments of an ultra-sadistic personality study. Martin just doens't believe he's a vampire. Emotionally and morally, he sucks the blood and life out of all those who trust him and are around him, a perfect allogory for the decade to come. Martin deserves to be seen and appreciated by the masses at this time, if only to observe one of the most ironic and startling final scenes in the history of horrific cinema.
A Masterpiece I saw this film months ago but it still lingers in my memory. I checked it out because I very much enjoyed Romero's zombie films. I already knew many consider it a classic.
From the brooding opening to the unexpected shock of the ending, this films delivers non-stop tension. The disturbed (and disturbing) main character acts wonderfully. Actually, the whole cast is fine.
I recommend it wholly.
Bottom line: As may be expected, there is some blood.
Flawed Masterpiece. Still worthy of 5 stars, although all we are left with is the incomplete cut. The original director's cut is seemingly lost for good. This version suffers somewhat from uneven, jerky pacing, but no matter. It still manages to compete with the best of Romero's 'Dead' Trilogy for billing as his greatest cinematic achievement. Like 'Night...', this film succeeds because, not in spite of, its' humble resources. Slow as it occasionally gets, there is a certain dreamy, depressive quality to the film that fits the theme perfectly. John Amplas is unforgettable in the title role and I find myself watching it over and over again. This easily tops my list of greatest vampire films of all time (and that's figuring in 'Nosferatu' and 'The Vampyr').
Anything Goes Trivia
Megaton Man
Not Available Comics
Trevor
