Customer Reviews

Gargoyle - Wings of Darkness

5 star:		(1)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(4)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

This is an interesting film but it looks like somewhere along the way the art was changed.

In Romania, a kidnapper disappears from a rooftop and the CIA gets involved in events of eerie proportions. A gargoyle has gotten loose and is terrorizing the land. Meanwhile the local church and the Vatican seem to be involved in what is going on. Basically, after 500 years, gargoyles are ready to surface again and only the Church seems to be able to defeat them.

During the movie, we see paintings of dragons and the dialog states that the creature looks just like the paintings. There is even talk of dragons and St. George specifically. This has led me to the belief that this was originally intended to be a dragon film but that the CGI was changed to make it a gargoyle. The inclusion of Castle Dracula was unnecessary (and what is the Church doing maintaining a presence there?).

Ultimately we get a reasonable monster movie where conventional weapons are useless. There is the threat of gargoyles returning in large numbers to add real dread to the plot. We have clashing branches withing the Church. We have historic art pointing the way. All told it was not as bad as some reviewers have mentioned but makes for a good popcorn movie.

This isn't a particularly bad movie. It just isn't goord, either. An earthquake releases a gargoyle that is active at day and night on Romania. Odd, I thought gargoyles turned to stone during the day. We're also shown pictures of dragons, and the characters tell us their gargoyles. Michael Pare plays the FBI agent who dosn't actually believe there's a gargoyle flying around attacking people until the last fifteen minutes, and when the hero dosn't even think the villian exsist until the climax, well, that's kind of stupid.

The CGI for the gargoyle isn't the worst ever put on film, and it does get satisfactory screen time. None of the kills are creative, and we only actaully see one or two. Usually its just the CG gargoyle grabbing someone and flying off with them. The acting and diolauge is cheesey and lackluster, the direction bland. So what's the saving grace?

This movie is rather entertaining and delivers a few so-bad-its-good moments, such the gargoyle chasing a car down a country highway. Sure, its stupid and looks fake, but at least the filmakers tried to put something fun in this slightly boring flick.

I'd recommend it to monster movie fanatics, but no one else.

Hey, its not that bad... at least we do see the monster in details and not just quick edits...there is a story and the landscape is real and not just a blue screen.
The only thing that bugged me about this movie is the ringing of
the cell phones....argh just too many...
But i do recommend this movie for anyone who like monster movies

Michael Pare is one of those B movie actors who keep getting roles in direct to DVD movies like this one. He joins guys like Casper van Dien, Michael Dudikoff, etc. in providing little acting credibility. Fortunately, the special effects are above average for a movie of this ilk, so GARGOYLE becomes an entertaining horror flick. Unlike many films of this nature, we even see the gargoyle in daylight, a brave move in this genre. The gargoyle is pretty impressive, though and there's significant bloodletting to please hardcore fans. Martial arts hero Tim Abell turns up as Lex the Slayer, who goes bonkers after a midnight gargoyle attack, and his performance is appropriately campy. Surprisingly good if you don't have too high expectations.

2004's "Gargoyle: Wings of Darkness" (also known as "Gargoyle" and "Gargoyle's Revenge") is a low budget made-for-tv creature feature about the invasion of gargoyles in modern Romania. It's Grade-B all the way and I'm going to review it as such.

As far as I know 1972's "Gargoyles" was the first film on the subject and was also made-for-tv. That film dealt with the rebirth and invasion of gargoyles in the American Southwest and starred Cornel Wilde, Jennifer Salt and Scott Glenn. If you've never seen it sell everything you have and get ahold of a copy because it's a masterpiece for what it is and proves that you don't have to have a huge budget to make a really good film.

"Gargoyles: Wings of Darkness" is sort of a sequel in the sense that it shares many of the same elements of "Gargoyles" (e.g. gargoyle eggs [or cocoons] hatching in a cave, a gargoyle attacking a speeding car by getting on the roof, etc.); the main difference of course is that the invasion here takes place in Romania and the gargoyles are all CGI as opposed to stunt people in cool rubber costumes. Is "Wings of Darkness" as good as "Gargoyles"? I'd say no, but it's hard to say for a few reasons. For instance, "Gargoyles" was the first of its kind in many ways and there was nothing else like it in the early 70s; hence, it's naturally easy to view it favorably with nostalgia-tinged glasses. "Wings of Darkness" came out 32 years later amidst a glut of low-budget creature features, including many with winged monsters like the two "Jeepers Creepers" flicks, not to mention later films like the excellent (for what it is) "Wyvern" (2009). What if "Wings of Darkness" came out in '72 and was the first flick of its kind? I'm sure it'd be regarded more highly.

Okay, why am I giving "Wings of Darkness" a 4/5 Star rating? Because it's good for what it is and tries hard to entertain. For one thing, many scenes are reminiscent of the Hammer films of the 60s and early 70s; needless to say, if you like Hammer you'll probably appreciate this flick. But what do I mean by "tries hard to entertain"? I mean that director/co-writer Jim Wynorski throws everything in but the kitchen sink in an effort to entertain the viewer; there are so many crazy ideas and subplots thrown in that it's almost impossible to get bored during the 87-minute runtime. Here's a list of items:

- Ancient Gargoyles with offspring being born from "Alien"-like cocoons. The gargoyles don't look bad for CGI, although to be expected they're kinda cartooney; plus you get quite a few good looks at 'em, including close-ups; there's even a prominent scene where a gargoyle attacks in broad daylight.
- Authentic Romanian locales with lots of castles, ancient churches, graveyards and mountain vistas.
- A terrorist kidnapping.
- A wild shoot-'em-up car chase.
- Mulder & Scully-like CIA agents (Michael Paré and Sandra Hess) and their investigation into the gar-thing phenomenon.
- A hip drug-lord and his sinister nightclub.
- A satanic ritual with quasi-altar sacrifice and requisite scantily-clad wenches.
- Rival drug gangs (i.e. mafia).
- Dracula's castle (actually Vlad the Impaler).
- Another wild car chase; this time with a winged gargoyle along a spectacular mountainside road.
- Other than Sandra Hess, a stunning brunette leading lady, Dr. Christina Durant (Kate Orsini). In fact, the film's full of incredibly gorgeous women (like Hammer).

How can all this stuff possibly gel together in a coherent story? I don't know but it's not bad for a low-budget tv monster flick.

On the downside, some of the acting/dialogue is kinda wooden or unconvincing as if the actors first read the script that morning, but that's to be expected in this type of Grade-B creature-on-the-loose movie; it's not "Apocalypse Now" after all. Also, at one point the movie mixes up gargoyles with dragons, which is strange since they're two totally different mythological creatures; although I'm not sure 'gargoyle' can legitimately qualify as a creature since the term is actually a word of French derivation meaning "water-throat" referring to ornamental fixtures or grotesques on Gothic era cathedrals who's mouths served as water spouts to facilitate the flow of rain buildup from their roofs. A quick search on Google reveals little as far as supernatural mythology of gargoyles and chimera, the non-functional grotesque variety that were added as pure decorations. Some mention is made of tales regarding the gargoyle forms as guarding their cathedrals during the night in a living form and then returning to their stoned state during the day, but such tales were created after the fact to explain why they were so commonly seen. Humans have always had a ghoulish, darker side to them and the forms stuck in the popular consciousness. So enterprising 14th century devotees came up with a fanciful explanation for why they were there for young inquisitive minds, perhaps as a put-on to scare kids into finishing their vegetables. There are no tales of gargoyles having banded together with Satan to do his bidding on Earth as depicted in the 1972's film's commanding prologue, and in fact the opposite is actually what is implied since they were guarding churches.

If you're into gargoyles, Hammer Films or creature features in general you should check this one out. Like I said, it tries hard to entertain despite the low budget. It's at least an enjoyable guilty pleasure.

i was so surprised at this movie.I thought it would be gory and guts and it was not a bit like that. I loved it and any Micheal Pare fan would too. he was excellant in this and looked so gorgeous and sexy. A great addition to your Michael film collection..it wasn't even scary.

The special effects are not bad and the story line is pretty good to. This is one of the better Gargoyle movies that are currently out. A good 'critter' movie if you are into these types of movies.

You know that mouthwash commercial where the guy has a mouth full of Listerine or whatever it is and he's trying really hard to keep from spitting it up into the sink? That's a great metaphor for this movie. I kept watching, even though it was really difficult. But keeping mouthwash in your mouth will leave you with a minty fresh feeling. This movie left me with a bad taste in my mouth. I should have spit it out when I had the chance.

The premise is corny enough to be fun. For the first time in like a thousand years, Gargoyles have returned to Romania, and all of the priests who knew how to fight and kill these things are long dead. It's up to Michael Pare and some other secret agents to get to the bottom of things before the Gargoyles run amok. Unfortunately, the premise is completely lost in bad dialog and less than enthusiastic acting on the part of the human leads. The best acting is done by the CG Gargoyles.

In the end, this movie feels like a poor man's Van Helsing. If you check your brain at the door, this might get you through a dreary Monday night. I gave it 2 out of 5 stars.

I first thought this was a remake of that old TV movie from the 70s "Gargoyles," but no such luck. (Hint Hollywood) Instead this is a cops movie searching for a murderer. SOme genuine suspense, but overall predictable. Ther critters are computer generated and look very much so. This might seem a little distracting at first, but still worth a view.

I wish I had not bought this DVD, don't waste your money, believe me!!!