I like the storyline of this show,it attract me so much

I cannot think of one single thing that I would change about this film. The acting is incomparable, the directing deft, and the writing poignantly brilliant.

a film so unique, intoxicating and bizarre that it not only demands another viewing, but is also forgivable as a satirical comedy where the jokes eventually take the back seat.

The best films of this genre always show a path and provide a takeaway for being a better person.

I feel like the slasher genre has yet to get its due. A lot of the backlash no doubt started with moral watchdogs and high-minded critics, who felt that the genre both glorified violence while preaching a highly conservative (and even misogynistic) agenda. It certainly didn't help when Scream came along and created a list of largely inaccurate slasher rules that are quoted to this day. Even a cursory glance at the most mainstream of slashers (Halloween and Friday the 13th) will reveal numerous cracks in the popular theories surrounding the genre (the most prominent being that the final girl is rewarded for her virginity/purity), but these sweeping generalizations are even more difficult to justify when looking at something like Curtains.When I first bought a used VHS copy of Curtains from my local video store, a certain meta-fictional detail on the box baffled me. I must first explain the plot to show you why. Curtains is all about six actresses auditioning for the coveted titular role in Audra, the newest project of director Jonathan Stryker (John Vernon). After having the original lead, Samantha Sherwood (Samantha Eggar), committed to an asylum - the method actress initially agrees to this for research, only to discover that Stryker has no intention of bailing her out - he invites the six actresses to his country home for what he tells him will be a unique and life-changing audition process. Meanwhile someone wearing an old hag mask (apparently a prop from Audra) is killing them all off one by one. The strangest detail in all this is that the film itself is credited to Jonathan Stryker, the director played by John Vernon. As I later learned, it was an extremely troubled production requiring massive rewrites and reshoots (most of them under the producer's direction), and the actual director chose to have his name taken off of the film.As troubled as the production apparently was, it mostly doesn't show on screen. Compromised or not (producer Peter Simpson says Ciupka wanted to make an art film, whereas Simpson actually wanted to make his money back), this is one of the most ambitious, mature, and surprisingly nuanced slasher films, with excellent performances across the board (barring a stilted psychiatrist in the opening scenes). What really gives this film a staying power that its contemporaries lack is the decision from Simpson and Ciupka to appeal to an adult audience. This means we have a completely adult cast of characters, and we deal with mature themes: megalomania (Stryker was inspired by Klaus Kinski), sexual manipulation, emotional abuse, and the exploitation of women in the film industry. Stryker claims that his audition process will give these actresses invaluable insight into themselves and acting, but what's really revealed is the ugly sexual politics and backstabbing so prevalent Hollywood. Unlike many films of this type, Curtains dwells on the impact that this emotional and physical violence has on its characters. Perhaps the saddest of these moments occurs after Stryker manipulates a naive young actress into sleeping with him. After he wordlessly puts on his clothes and leaves the room, she rolls over and starts to cry, the camera lingering on her wounded expression.Sadly the film doesn't end quite as strongly as it begins. The climax is where Simpson gains complete control of the narrative. He actually proves to be a skillful director, and the long cat and mouse sequence (set in an improbably labyrinthine prop shed, filled with all kinds of creepy knickknacks), is a definite highlight of the film. Its quasi-Surrealist imagery (an exit door leading to a bricked up wall, a room of hanging mannequins, a room of Twin Peaks-esque curtains) and baroque lighting would fit comfortably into an Italian horror film, and it gives the film a much needed shot of suspense. Unfortunately the ending, in which our killer and their motivation is revealed, isn't entirely convincing, and somehow this whole section seems to lose sight of the themes and conflicts built up so beautifully by Ciupka in the earlier parts of the narrative. The murder scenes throughout are quite striking (especially a ballsy one committed in broad daylight, generally considered a horror no-no), but the most impactful and disturbing scenes are those involving Stryker's mind games. While the killer's motivation is tied up in the audition process, somehow it doesn't resolve the film's themes in a satisfactory manner. The last scene ends things on an appropriately melancholy note, however, helped immeasurably by a Satie-inspired theme from composer Paul Zaza. Overall an impressively mature take on a much reviled genre, whose art-house aspirations elevate it beyond mere shocks for shock's sake. Try to see it in Synapse's brilliant restoration, which reveals how much love and care was really put into the film's visual style.

Actress Samantha Sherwood is a long time collaborator with director Jonathan Stryker. She gets the rights to his latest project Audra for him. He convinces her to sign into an asylum for research. She acts out as a charade but he may have other motives. He's actually interviewing other actresses for the lead. Sherwood manages to escape to join them while the actresses are getting killed off one by one after they discover a creepy doll.It's rather stupid that these wide ranging actresses are all going to an isolated mansion for an audition. It's a pretty bad 80s Canadian horror but I love the crazy mask. When the killer is skating across the ice with that mask and that blade, I laughed out loud. The whole scene is put together in such a wonderfully campy way with the music and the slow motion. The seriousness of the acting adds to the campy feel of the movie. It's like an Actors Studio discussion and killings happen every once in a while. There are no real scares because none of the characters are that compelling. I don't really care about any of them and I don't care who the killer is. The hideous mask is fun and there are other fun stuff too. However I wouldn't say this is an undiscovered gem. It's just undiscovered.

Samantha Sherwood has worked with director Jonathan Stryker on all his major films. She assumes she has been the title role in his latest venture. He tells her that she needs to do some research on the part, so arranges to have her committed to an asylum. She goes along with this, not realising that he intends to leave her there indefinitely and audition six young women of various professions for the part instead. She manages to escape, and returns to the mansion where the auditions are taking place.....Another one of those slashers from the eighties that disappeared without a trace, and on this occasion, its clear to see why it vanished, it's blooming boring.The concept though is wonderful, but the execution is not giving the concept justice. It's just John Vernon arguing with his partner every other scene, and then one of the girls getting killed, getting discovered by another girl, and so on.It's not good, the performances are below par, and the final reveal is just laughable.But it's the best movie where a main character falls from a window in slow motion ever made in 1984 called Curtains.

First of all, I love cheesy 80's slasher movies. They're probably my favorite when it comes to horror films. This movie was so boring, I barely made it to the end. The characters aren't likable. The writing was poor and it got to point where I didn't even know what the heck was going on. The plot was just kind of dumb unless you want to watch a movie about some bickering actresses who only care about winning the part of an audition.Anyways, the best part about this flick is the killer that wears a creepy hag mask. Seeing pictures of that was intriguing. Unfortunately, those scenes are too fast and too few. I just didn't like this movie overall.