Nonureva Really Surprised!

Twilightfa Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Bob This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Kayden This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

Claudio Carvalho In Los Angeles, the librarian and aspiring actress Virginia (Jenny Wright) works in a bookstore of used books with her friend Mona (Stephanie Hodge) and her boyfriend is the police detective Richard (Clayton Rohner). Virginia is reading an horror book called "I, Madman" written by Malcolm Brand (Randall William Cook) and is impressed with the creepy story of Dr. Alan Kessler, a deranged doctor that takes pieces of his victims. Soon Virginia realizes that the book is non- fictional and everything that she read really happens. She tries to warn Richard, but his superiors believe that Virginia is nutty. But she is frightened since Dr. Kessler's next victim is her. "I, Madman" is a cult-movie with a original story and the gorgeous Jenny Wright from "Near Dark" in the lead role. The movie deserved a better conclusion but anyway is a great horror movie with a wonderful music score. My vote is seven.Title (Brazil): Not Available in DVD or Blu-Ray

smccar77 "I, Madman," is a lower budget horror film that plays with the idea that reading can draw monsters into the real world. The story attempts to blend a dark and horrific tale with the sleazy conventions found in pulp novels. While the goal definitely has potential, the execution is lacking. IM is bogged down by slow pacing and an unfulfilling development of the main antagonist. The failings are very unfortunate because this film had the potential to be scary, innovative, and engaging.The premise of the film is not really new. The plot is based on the idea that reading and interacting with a text has the ability to make the subject of the text a reality. Essentially, this is a theme explored by European mystics over the centuries. This film tried to take a "magical" assumption and apply it to the horror movie genre. In the past, this idea has usually been used in demonic film, for example, "The Evil Dead." The ingenuity here is contextualizing magic in the more mundane. The magical books are not esoteric religious. Rather, they are pulp novels written by a demented mystic and alchemist. The situating of dark magic within a mass produced yet poorly distributed article of mass consumption is creepy. The problem is that this part of the story is left mostly untold. The film seems to rush through any background setting so as to allow more shots of dimly lit corridors and shadows. Needless to say, the lack of development hurts the film far more than the "spooky" scenes lead to enjoyable mood. A second shortcoming is the story's reliance on characters to act stupidly when confronted with desperate situations. The assumption that humans react with less thought when pressured is valid. The assumption that humans become incoherent stupid messes when pressured is spurious. The film makers advance the story a great deal by relying on stupid characters as a plot device. This second assumption causes the film to overly distance itself from reality. In essence, the film lures people in with questions about horrifying occult evil placed in plain sight and then never answers those questions in a plausible way.On the whole, this is a devilishly fun idea involving off beat and unique antagonists. The film falters due to slow pacing, lack of background, and stupid by definition protagonists. The degree of negative criticism found here is unfortunate. IM really did have the potential to be a fresh take on some tried and true genre motifs. The lack of thought by the film makers led to a movie that is barely mediocre. With the current vogue of remaking films, IM would benefit from fresh eyes and a better thought out story line. However, the possibility of this film ever getting such a chance is vanishingly small.On a personal note, I loved this film as a kid. Watching it again provided that warm and fuzzy feeling typical of nostalgia. It also informed me that, as a child, I had some very lax criteria for evaluating movies. Should you choose to see this film, it makes a pleasant prequel to a nap after a large greasy meal. 5.5 stars out of 10.

James Bourke Well back in the day when I was an impressionable teenager, I couldn't even tell the difference between such things as fact or fiction. That being said I always knew a pretty decent horror movie when I saw one.This little gem first caught my attention when I caught the trailer prior to it's initial release, and much like many a movie with a decent trailer I just knew that I had to see it.The trailer I saw courtesy of Entertainment in Video announced the title as 'Hardcover' Of course I never realised that the movie was actually called 'I Madman' which was the better title, and which currently graces my MGM retail release which is sitting right by my side as I write these very words.The 1980's were a good time for horror movies, and they were also a good time for me when it came time for me discovering the many gems that sprawled themselves across the videostore shelves, I still remember hiring the likes of 'Pumpkinhead' 'Killer Klowns From Outer Space' 'Retribution'.As with most movies that I liked and revered down through the years there have been some that haven't quite stood the test of time, 'Society' springs to mind, that being said, certain elements of 'I Madman' have always remained within my memory.Having just watched the movie prior to writing these words, it struck me just how visually stunning the movie was and more importantly just how good the script written by David Chaskin was.Filled with many a wonderful set piece, director Tibor Takacs really knew what to do with the camera, and aided superbly by the acting talent he had to work with, Jenny Wright as Virginia the bookstore clerk who begins to find herself immersed within the hideous world of the mad scribe Malcolm Brand, always had a very distinct acting style, very distant but always alluring, a prime example of this was her star turn in Eric Red's ultra cool 'Near Dark'.Also on hand and acquitting himself admirably was Clayton Rohner, (who I'll always remember from Nigel Dick's 'P.I. Private Investigation')as Virginia's detective boyfriend, who can't quite bring himself to believe anything that Virginia's tells him, as he attributes her flights of fancy to her taste in reading material written by the villain of the piece Malcolm Brand.If truth be told one of the best performances in the movie comes from Murray Rubin as Brand's publisher Sidney Zeit, the way he talks, his mannerisms and the interior of his office just encapsulate that closed in world of the low rent publisher.Kudos also must go to Randall William Cook, who not only does he appear as the titular on screen villain, but he also doubled as the special effects creator, truly rocks as the lovesick Brand, who'd do just about anything for the love of his life(and if you haven't seen the movie, just wait and see and wait for your jaw to drop when you see what he's done to his facial features).Director Takacs might not have directed anything of note in the last decade of so, but this movie along with the original 'The Gate' stand as a testament to his directing talents and as for scriptwriter David Chaskin, yes he might have been lambasted for his scripting of 'Nightmare On Elm Street 2' but through this movie he truly showed that he really had an ear for good dialogue and attention to detail when it came to setting a good gore laden set piece.It really is too bad that the MGM release doesn't have a director's commentary attached to it, as it would have been nice to hear how the movie was financed and put together.This movie would make a good companion piece with John Carpenter's 'In The Mouth Of Madness' and as a stand alone feature, this horror movie really delivers upon the promise of it's trailer and it's artwork cover, plus it's a true testament to it's abilities to chill and entertain twenty plus years later.Loose yourself in this great little horror curio tonight, you'll be awful glad you did! Without hesitation, 10/10

The_Void I, Madman is a rather odd little film. The story straddles a line somewhere between art and absolute rubbish, as we have the idea of fiction and reality coming together; but the fiction side of the story is far from art, as we follow a psychopath who has seen fit to tear his own face off. Furthermore, the production values are really good considering the sort of film; yet it doesn't do it any favours, as it always feels like a high quality B-movie, and films like this do better with an appropriate style to them. The plot is pure hokum and unlikely to be taken seriously by anyone. We follow Virginia; a young woman who works at a used book store. She's into horror literature, and is pleased with herself one day when she happens across a certain book. She soon wants to read the author's only other work, and is surprised when it ends up on her doorstep. She begins to read the novel entitled 'I, Madman' - a macabre tale about a man who ravages his own face in the hope of getting a girl to like him (...). However, the horror of the book becomes more real when Virginia begins to see the title character murdering people for real...Director Tibor Takács made the silly horror flick 'The Gate' two years prior to this film; and if you asked me he should have stuck to films like that. It's not that I, Madman is essentially not fun; but the way it comes together doesn't feel very fluid or logical. The acting is decent, however, with Near Dark's Jenny Wright taking the lead role and doing well with it, while supporting cast members provide decent feedback. The central villain is a fairly clichéd creation, as similar ideas of deformed maniacs killing people have been used many times before. The special effects aren't too bad for most of the film, and it's nice to see a few gory sequences in any horror film. At the end, however, a sub-plot involving a half man, half jackal comes into play; and we get treated to some spectacularly awful stop motion effects, and it brings the film crashing down on it's head as any credibility it has built up so far is lost. Still, most of the film isn't too bad; and while there are a lot of inconsistencies and unlikely character choices - I, Madman is worth seeing if only to marvel at how bizarre it is.