To me, this movie is perfection.

Fresh and Exciting

I really wanted to like this movie. I feel terribly cynical trashing it, and that's why I'm giving it a middling 5. Actually, I'm giving it a 5 because there were some superb performances.

This is a gorgeous movie made by a gorgeous spirit.

Being the directorial debut of Robert 'Freddy Krueger' Englund, it comes as no surprise to find that 976-EVIL follows the same cheesy route as the numerous Nightmare on Elm Street sequels, with the villain of the piece, high school wimp turned demon Hoax (Stephen Geoffreys), cracking corny one-liners as he offs those who have made his life a misery.There's not much originality on display, the pace is a little slow, and the film is lacking in outrageous gore effects, but with decent performances from Geoffreys (whose film career would soon take a surprising turn), Patrick O'Bryan as Hoax's cool cousin Spike, and Lezlie Deane as school hottie Suzie (who provides the obligatory T&A), a memorable scene guaranteed to have arachnophobes squirming, plus a reasonably spectacular finale over the pits of Hell, it's not a total loss, and not nearly as bad Jim Wynorski's diabolical sequel.

A typical late '80s horror film, which has an goodish premise (a direct phone line to Hell), but which loses things at the end. While the film could have been a lot more thoughtful and interesting, it wastes the story and instead gives us lots of special effects and gore, in place of plot development.However it's not quite as bad as some of the trash turned out in the 1980s, and the story is just about diverting enough to pass the time. Unfortunately, director Robert Englund, better known as Freddy Krueger in the NIGHTMARE ON ELM STREET series (and for his incessant cameos in many 90's horror films) gives us a rather poor film, this man is an actor, not a director for god's sake, so why did he even bother? Most of the scenes are too dark and it's difficult to see what's going on. Englund's presence is even more obvious in the way that the demon makes stupid wisecracks and jokes at the end of the film, just like Freddy.The acting is pretty poor. Pat O'Bryan tries to be like Kevin Dillon in THE BLOB remake, but he's never convincing or sympathetic. He's just a clichéd rebel. There is a boring subplot involving a PI investigating the strange goings on, but this is frankly uninteresting. Sandy Dennis is quite good as the religious nutter of a mother (shades of CARRIE here) but is not given enough to do, while Robert Picardo (THE HOWLING, the Doctor from STAR TREK: VOYAGER) steals his single scene as a whacked-out loser who might just be the Devil in disguise. It's left to Stephen Geoffreys (FRIGHT NIGHT) to carry the main body of the film, and while he's quite funny as the nerdish, snivelling loser, he's not in the least bit effective at the end. I mean a tanktop, of all things, doesn't really cut it does it? There are quite a lot of special effect scenes, with people burning and getting ripped open, although there appears to be absolutely no police presence in the city where the film is set. While the gore is not excessive there are lots of people dying in bloody ways, and one girl nearly goes the spider death routine from THE BEYOND, only for the scene to change track halfway through. The demon makeup at the end of the film is surprisingly understated and therefore more realistic, and as the scenes are set in the dark this makes it more believable too.If you can get over this film's flaws and accept the fact that it's no different from a million others, then you might enjoy it in fits and starts. Or if you're a strange fan of cheesy, poor '80s horror films then you'd probably like it as well. The fact is, though, that the theme of revenge is old (the ultra low-budget MASSACRE AT CENTRAL HIGH did it a decade before, and better), and the theme of selling one's soul to the devil is even older, i.e. with Faust. Critical watchers would be well advised to watch something else, as there is a lot of stuff in here (90% of it in fact) which wouldn't stand up to those with a low tolerance threshold.

I watched this movie after years of really wanting to. Funny that I watch it now in an age where a number such as this is pretty outdated. I also am surprised to see that Robert Englund directed this one and I think he did okay as most of the problems I found with the film came more from the story and from the editing. The imagery is great and it has some okay acting as it is not stiff, the end has the killer getting a bit too cute with the one liners actually reminding one a bit of Freddy Krueger's lines in the Elm Street horror films.The story has a strange phone number that seems to predict things a bit too well being used by a dude named Spike; however, Spike soon stops using the number after nearly being killed by a runaway car. His cousin, though, finds the number and listens to it and heeds it and is soon transformed into a supernatural killer with the power to take revenge on all those that wronged him.The story is a bit rushed, we are introduced to Spike who finds the number and then quickly uses it. He has a girlfriend who seems integral to the plot, then cast away suddenly. There is a guy who is sort of a reporter that seems to be important, but at the same time he doesn't. A teacher who seems inconsequential becomes a main character at the end. Editing that made me wonder what was going on at times. Spike, who seems to be the main character, disappears just as his cousin begins his killing spree and does not reappear till the final showdown. Still, loved the imagery especially at the end as Hoax (the cousin) has some interesting powers. Hoax is played by Stephen Geoffreys, best known as Evil from Fright Night. He is pretty much the same character, just a bigger nerd this time around.The film had some good moments and I liked it somewhat. Just needed work (a running theme in most horrors). They needed to either establish that teacher and reporter more or simply do not have them at all. They could have had Spike try to dig for further evidence or something. The ending though has some nice kills and effects, but it also has some pretty bad one liners. It is as if they were trying to make Hoax sound like Freddy Krueger at the end with the puns and such. I am glad I finally saw this one though, because now I can watch 976-EVIL II as I have that one in a collection of DVDs. I caught this one on Encore.

Made in the late eighties and directed by Robert Englund, I pretty much knew what to expect from '976 Evil' before it even began. Then I see the front cover which depicts some kind of beast above a telephone and the tag-line reads "One Number For Hell". I knew straight away I was going to enjoy this movie to a certain degree because it's exactly the type of film I like to watch, and I'm pretty sure most of the people who give this film terrible reviews and ratings knew they were going to hate it before watching it.Written by Brian Helgeland who boasts an expansive back catalogue of quality, solid screenplays, the story moves along at a solid pace. As the tension builds you know exactly when something awful is going to happen but heah, isn't that what this style of horror movie is all about.From the leather clad greaser Spike, right through to the awkward teenager Hoax (played by Stephen Geoffreys of 'Fright Night') the characters are standard fare for an eighties horror flick.Basically this is an eighties horror film about a teenager who becomes possessed after calling a 1-900 number. The rest of the film plays out exactly as it should with some nice one liners, a healthy portion of gore and an even healthier portion of cheese.The acting is far from perfect here but this isn't something that will bother an eighties horror fan.So if eighties horror isn't your thing give this one a miss. If however you normally like this style of horror, give it a chance. It does exactly what it says on the box.