Fresh and Exciting

It's hard to see any effort in the film. There's no comedy to speak of, no real drama and, worst of all.

It's entirely possible that sending the audience out feeling lousy was intentional

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Italian film director Lucio Fulci portrays an Italian film director named Lucio Fulci in this film made up primarily of films made or produced by Lucio Fulci with a wraparound story about Lucio Fulci being affected by the disturbing films he has made and also the one he is currently making.If that summary confuses you, congratulations, because you are sufficiently prepared to enter Nightmare Concert. I really did feel like I was participating in someone else's bad dream. I was never quite sure what was actually happening to the Fulci character, what was an hallucination of his, or what was part of the film-within-a-film that the director is working on. Throw in a crazy subplot about a real killer in Rome trying to frame Fulci and you should end up like me - confused and disoriented, yet entertained.Sure, this isn't up there with Fulci's best, but I get the impression he was trying to have a little fun with his image and career and although it's a bit of cheap ploy to insert gore scenes from other movies, at least they're quality gore scenes and fun to watch. Nightmare Concert is quite a good time if you go into it without trying to compare it to your favorite Fulci film(s).ff

Lucio Fulci is an infamous Italian Horror director, well known for staging extremely violent gore scenes. Lucio begins to question his own sanity when weird visions start to commence. He goes to a nearby shrink for help. Lucio foolishly takes his Shrink's advice, because he doesn't realize The Shrink is much less lucid than Fucli. The Shrink hypnotizes Fulci to commence vicious murders. This was Fulci's swan song. With all due respect to one of my favorite Italian filmmakers, this is one of his weakest movies. It's basically just a compilation of gore scenes, with a bit of plot thrown in for good measure. It's without a doubt, one of the goriest movies I've ever seen. A guy gets run over multitudes of times (Extremely brutal stuff, and very well done) a cat gnaws away at brains, woman is sawed to pieces, and MUCH more. The problem with all the gore is I got bored of it after a while. The movie is nowhere near strong enough to get by on gore alone, because the story is quite weak. When it's not throwing all that gore in your face, its busy boring you by being overly talky, and as I mentioned previously. Even the gore gets tiring after a while, and I'm a big gore hound. I'll give credit where credit is due. Lucio Fulci is a director, so his poor acting skills can be excused, but he is not pretty to watch. He does this inner monologue at times, and relies on confused facial expressions. I didn't buy he was on the brink of being a madman. Not sure why he felt the need to do this film, but it doesn't work. Despite the somewhat abrupt ending, it has a clever little twist at the end, and reeled me in, I'll admit that, but to be honest? I didn't care about it, because I was underwhelmed by this movie. Final Thoughts: Die hard Fulci fans ought to seek this out to watch at it at least once. The rest needn't bother. Fulci has done worse in his career, but he's also done way better. Check out The Beyond, House by The Cemetery Zombi, or City of The Living Dead if you haven't already4/10

A splatter film director (Lucio Fulci) is having difficulty distinguishing between real life and the violent movies he makes. He consults a psychiatrist, but this does not help matters... it makes them worse! Lucio Fulci directing and also starring as himself, having a fear of hamburger and gardeners. Not surprising after his visions of nasty cannibal dismemberment, with a woman who is unbelievably meaty, and some Nazi sex crimes...The film starts with possibly the most disgusting thing I have ever seen in my life -- the titular cat chewing its way through a field of bloody, smashed brains. The cat hardly looks real, but this is as repulsive as it gets...Jim Harper hates this film, calling it "Fulci's worst film" and "one of the worst horror films ever made." This is "a total failure", being "slapdash" and "badly shot". Oddly, Harper says Fulci himself considered it "one of his better films and a personal triumph." While I agree that it is not Fulci's best work, I have a hard time being as harsh as Harper is -- the gore alone makes this film interesting for Fulci fans, in my opinion.Indeed, Fulci has called it "extraordinary", though even an apologist like Luca Palmerini calls the movie "confusing" and "mediocre" (hardly an improvement from Harper's denouncement). Me? I did not like it, but find it hard to believe it is his worst... I recently watched "Conquest" and it was pretty bad.If someone wanted to, they could draw parallels between this film and Fritz Lang's "M" (with the whistling) or Clive Barker's "Nightbreed" (with the murderous psychiatrist), but those connections might be too complimentary for this movie.

Lucio Fulci had a master craftsman hands doing what he did, which was making thrillers and horror movies. I mention both of those since, as he says on an interview on the DVD in a gruff and old-man manner, there is a difference. This would most likely lean towards horror, and a kind of self-knowing horror. In the same interview he says that most American horror filmmakers of the 70's and 80's and on into the 90's ripped off the Great Italian Masters (as he says, i.e. Argento and Bava), but with this film he might be even more on the money. It's knowing of what makes a horror film and how an audience responds, but it also plays with how a filmmaker looks on at the horrors around him. Scream would play around with the idea of a horror audience's expectations, but Fulci isn't just into playing. He's take a hammer and smashes any conventions to the ground and splatters it. Dr. Fulci is in on the joke, and on the horror on display.He plays himself too, which helps and makes things more absurd than they would be with another actor. He's been making his latest horror film, loaded with sadism and Naziism (we don't see much of the Naziism except for one pivotal sequence he imagines as being directed with a Nazi orgy). He seeks psychotherapy to deal with these visions of graphic murder around him, which get egged on by just visual associations (a vision of raw steak, a chainsaw). But as it turns out his psychotherapist has some other ideas of his own, and in hypnosis he takes over where the director is just visualizing. It's not a thriller because, basically, we know who the 'killer' is the moment he says it on screen, looking every bit like an Italian Christopher Lee.There's blood, lots of it, and dismembered heads, and dismembered hands, and throat sliced and eyes gouged out (at one point Fulci looks at his footage and says "Not real enough" over some eye test footage), and some dismembered other bits. It's hard to say where it might rank among the goriest of the gory Fulci films, but it's up there. But what makes it work better than it might from other circumstances is that Fulci, by proxy playing "himself", gets to say 'Hey, look at what we do here?' Fulci in the same interview on the DVD expounds on how much he despises psychotherapy, and it's here too that he gets to have a lot of fun. It even looks like they were having fun making it, getting to fool around much as 'Dr. Fulci' get fooled on himself. Hell, there's a shower stabbing scene to boot!Sure, it's still crude like a lot of Fulci's movies, but there's a kind of demented artistry at work as well. Fulci is serious about what he does, and what he does is delivery mountains of violence, but always in a kind of fantastical way. And there's always a sense of humor here, some of it very morbid. If you can tap into it, it's really one of Fulci's most entertaining films.