Customer Reviews

Keep, the

5 star:		(39)
4 star:		(25)
3 star:		(12)
2 star:		(13)
1 star:		(9)

 

 

No, don't get your hopes up. Paramount still han't put this out for DVD release in the United States, but "The Keep" is one of my cult favorite flicks and so I went to the ends of the Amazon to get an overseas copy viewable on Region 1 DVD.

After some dealing with an Amazon marketplace seller, I got a copy that was viewable on the second of two DVD players I tried. It is an extremely no-frills DVD to say the least, it has a menu with scene selection and, a, uh "preview" reel that shows some truly odd previews ("I Married a Monster from Outer Space" and "Barbarella" for example....no, I'm not kidding, those are the previews). It doesn't pad any of the spots in the film which were obviously butchered by a ham-handed editor (like all of Scott Glenn's dialogue). No deleted scenes, no interviews, no nuthin'. So really the only benefit of having it is that the flick is on DVD and not VHS, and since the price was $40.00, you have to be a hardcore fan of the movie to go to the demented lengths I did to lay hands on it (I forgot to mention it is presented in widescreen, so that is also a bonus).

It had been years since I had seen this early Michael Mann film and indeed I wrote a review of the VHS version some years ago, but it was instantly recognizable as his work. His trademarks leap right out at you: the grim tone, the wonderful score (by Tangerine Dream and like the DVD, impossible to find anywhere, which is IMMNENSELY frustrating because not only is the music gorgeous, the band has made at least 7,373 albums, but they couldn't put out a soundtrack to this? GRRRRR), the cut-to-the-bone dialogue, the lush, sumptuous visuals. This film, like all Mann's works, is a visual feast: the black uniforms of the SS, the washed-out, coldly lit grays of the keep's interior, the horribly evil-looking demon, all beautiful). Unfortunately, it has the same flaws it had when it was released twenty years ago, and I can't get past them no matter how much I watch it (I keep looking for a "Director's Cut" that will flesh out the pruned-down characters of Eva and especially Glaeken...alas, none exists).

The big mistake of the film was the decision to make it primarily visual and reduce the characters of Glaeken and Molasar to simple icons, one representing good, one representing evil. Neither has more than a few words of dialogue; none of the rich subtexture of Glaeken's character, which a great actor like Scott Glenn could have handled easily, is shown. Nor is the necromancing Molasar shown as anything but an evil presence who wants out of his prison; his long violent history with Glenn, the deceptive games he plays with Dr. Cuza and the psych job he does on Woermann in the book, all of these are all whittled away, leaving only a big dude in a demon costume (nevertheless with some great lines, most especially his comeback to Gabriel Byrne: "Who am I? I am...from you.")

The movie does succeed with the characters of Cpt. Woermann, brilliantly played by Jurgen Prochnow, and Maj. Kaempfer, played with tremendously banal evil by Gabriel Byrne; their chemistry is excellent, and the scene where they tear into each other's beliefs at the end is a classic. Given fairly little, Alberta Watson and Ian McKellen both do a lot; it is mainly Scott Glenn who is left in the cold.

There is so much acting firepower in this movie (including veteran Robert Prosky and even wonderful Wolf Kahler in a minor role) and so much talent in the director Mann, it has such a great score and is shot so beautifully, and is predicated on such a great horror novel by F. Paul Wilson, I am continuously grieved by the fact it isn't a better movie. Just 15 minutes of dialogue would have saved the film from being a cult favorite instead of a horror classic; this is why I long for a director's cut. If enough of us beat the drums, it will happen; not even an outfit as stubborn as Paramount (look how they've done the fans of the Jason films)will turn down the chance to make more dough. So let's start beating.

The Keep is, as far as I know released in at least two different versions, one with a different ending. Anyway, it's a very good movie directed by Michael Mann. It was released in 1983 and was technically advanced for the age. The cinematography is outstanding, the director has made a great job. Good acting by Sir Ian McKellen, Scott Glenn, Jürgen Prochnow, Robert Prosky and Gabriel Byrne. It's a movie that really puts you right in the action, and I regard it as one of my top 10 movies of all time. I have to mention the soundtrack as well. Composed and performed by Tangerine Dream, the German electronic group. It is nothing short of a masterpiece. I can understand why people who have reviewed this movie before me have had trouble finding the soundtrack on album, since up until today it has only been released in 150 copies.

I have rarely watched a movie in which I felt as though I was there but this is one of those rare moments that Hollywood produced! Scott Glenn is mysterious as the "good" Sentinel preparing to do battle with the ultimate evil while the film include superb performances by Jurgen Prochnow, Gabriel Byrne and Ian McCullum. The soundtrack is a masterpiece perfectly done by Tangerine Dream. As a matter of fact, I've looked for this soundtrack for over 20 years and, as of yet, have been unable to find it. If you know where to find it, please let me know. Contrary to most of the earlier critic's reviews, this is a "you are there" movie not to be missed. Finally, I have it on Laserdisk, as it's not yet available on DVD. The laserdisk can be found at several of the large laserdisk outlets on the web. Enjoy!

from the opening sequence of the trucks and the music from tangerine dream this film made a great impact on my life when i first seen it near dark is another film with tangerine d music i remeber the shot of the vampire creature as it came out from the keep scared the frighteners out of me! great movie!

Good news, The Keep will be released on DVD in November of this year. I'm a big fan of this movie and looking foward to it's release. Jim H.

The Keep is one of those lesser known horror movies that is quite successful in creating a supernatural atmosphere and virtually mesmerizes the viewer. The acting is superb, the music is haunting, and the visuals are exciting to watch. The scenes involving Gabriel Byrne and Jorgen Prochnow are the best that either actor has ever done in film. I strongly agree with others that this film should be released on dvd with extra footage. Even if Paramount charged double the normal price for such a product, I am certain that they would make more than enough profit from all the horror fans out there. Let's keep on bugging Paramount, people, then maybe they will get the hint sooner rather than later!

i do have a bit of nostalgia for this film, as i first saw it on tv when i was 11 or so...
now 20 years later...sure, it's kind of a failure at a coherent story. and the effects didn't age well (that talisman is so obviously a flashlight with wings)...however, the film is still more compelling to simply watch than 80% of the crap produced these days. good atmosphere, bizarre sequel-unfriendly story, long stretches on beautiful shots. my girlfriend hated it, i give it a 4 for mood and originality.

I saw it when it came out in '83 and read the book as well.

The good parts are the visuals, of course, for which Michael Mann would later become known. There is some great character acting in it such as the old coot who was the caretaker for the Keep. Jurgen Prochnow steals the show as the wermarcht officer with a conscieous. Alberta Watson was a babe, too. She was also in The Soldier and several recent TV shows.

The unusual Tangerine Dream score helped the mood of the movie-- I think this is only their second or so score soon after Sorceror.

What the film suffers from is poor continuity and editing. For instance, towards the end of the movie they suddenly refer to Scott Glenn's character as Glaeken Trismagistus (his real name from the book) which they had never done previously. It's interesting that TV versions added scenes in the end to give it a happy ending (I think that's how the book ended, too) but I liked the poignant theatrical ending better.

The story gaps other critics mention (why the priest started freaking out, etc) are because the movie didn't cover everything that the book did. It could have been taken care of with a monologue about evil being released and fraility of human will, etc., but I actually preferred just implying it. I hate the way everything has to be explained in movies.

Overall it was an interesting movie with the best parts being the visuals.

With the up-front caveat that I have never read the "The Keep" I must disagree with those those who have written overly negative reviews of the film. Although I concededly would not describe the film as "great", I nevertheless finding it compelling on a variety of levels -- and find myself coming back to it over the years more often than some so-called "classic" films. Visually, it is beautiful and entirely successful in evoking -- from the outset -- a spooky "otherworldly" tone. I am not troubled by the lack of detail and arguably cryptic nature of the dialogue and story development. Contrary to what other reviewers have written, I think this lack of overt detail enhances the impact of the story. Moreover, I find the acting to be excellent and I love the soundtrack, which is quite unusual and adds tremendously to the "spacey" tone the film is reaching for. The "creature" -- especially its oddly vacant eyes at the end of the movie -- still gives me chills even after many years of watching the film. In fact, I watch certain scenes over and over and I still find them to be fascinating. I disagree with the prior reviewer who critiqued a scene which abruptly cuts in as the Doctor is walking around in a hallway and then suddently meets the monster. It's irrelevent why the doctor was there, since the scene effectively evokes a sense of mystery and fear. The unexplained nature of why he was there and what he was doing, is entirely consistent with the tone of the film, which creates tension and mystery with just this sort of editing. In sum, I think the creativity and beauty of the film more than outweighs its negatives aspects and I would recommend it.

I was all of 12 years old when I saw this film in the theater, and I understood it perfectly well:
There are the good guys: Glaeken (Scott Glenn), Dr. Cuzar (Ian McKellan), and his daughter Eva
And there are bad guys: the Nazi soldiers, Gabriel Byrne, and, most importantly, Molasar (the vampire).
The good guys are fighting the bad guys. And everything looks and sounds really cool and funky.
I've read previous reviews (here and elsewhere) where the reviewers complain that they didn't understand the film, what it was about, what was happening. This is one of my pet peves in movie reviews, and I find myself asking the same question I always do; what's not to understand? Okay, so it's wierd, strangely paced, but the basic elements of any story/myth are there and obvious.
I didn't read the novel before seeing the film. In fact, I rented the film many more times as a teen before ever reading the novel (which I finally read in my 20's) and never had a problem following the plot of the film independant of the novel.
Some people seem to have a difficult time just letting go. Leaving behind preconcieved notions, ideas of how things are "supposed to be" presented to them, and just actually "watching" the film.
They have a hard time letting a film wash over them and exist "as it is," not how it "should be."
Some fans of the novel spend the entire film thinking of how the film "should have been made" base on the novel.
Others spend the entire film thinking of how it "should have been made" based on the usual spoonfed, straight-forward logic, no-wierd-stuff-allowed cinema we've had in the U.S. for decades.
All of this is just absurd.
The film is, at the risk of sounding philosophical, simply "what it is." It exists as it is and should be taken, accepted, viewed as such, not with a bunch of preposterous "outside rules" applied to it which have nothing to do with it's existance as an independant entity in and of itself.
If a 12 year old has no trouble understanding a film, following it's logic, and being effected by it profoundly through it's images and sounds, then those critics who claim they didn't "understand" need to re-think their reactin. I mean to say, is it "really" that you didn't understand, or is it just that since it wasn't straight-forword in presentation you were a bit taken aback and had to actually think about it?
I have only heard rumors as to why this film's dvd release has been delayed for so long. It is, after all, the work of a legendary director, despite what the critics think. I have heard the delay may be due to copyright problems with the infamous Tangerine Dream score. And others have said that Mann despises the theatrical version and since a directors cut doesn't exist he refuses to allow the films release (this, however, seems fly in the face of the evidence of recent VHS releases).
As for now, the widescreen Laserdisc version seems to be the only quailty format this film can be viewed in for a while.