Are we all watching the same movie here?? I'll admit that SCREAMS OF A WINTER NIGHT is a great title for a movie, and a sound premise which would eventually be put to better use: Nine or ten college aged acquaintances who don't seem to really like or even know each other take a road trip to a summer camp cottage closed for the off season where a gruesome mass murder (oddly heard but not seen during the opening credits) took place 30 years prior. On the way they stop at a local hick cracker gas station operated by what appears to be the evil twins of the Beverly Hillbillies, who try to warn them off to no avail. So far so good.<br /><br />The problem begins when the kids start sitting around telling each other ubran legend-ish scary stories to pass the time. Which would be just fine except that they seem to be telling each other these stories because they don't have anything else to talk about. There is no exposition, no character development, and no visible bonds exist between them except for one couple who don't even have sex on-screen since the movie was only rated PG.<br /><br />Then there is John, the knucklehead who organized the road trip. To call him annoying is complimentary. He is insufferable. The idea was to try and portray his character as some kind of a nerd or dork whose family used to frequent the cottage. The film unintentionally does a good job as setting him up as a potential lunatic who lured his associates to this setting just to brutally murder them all, but no dice. He's just annoying and we don't even get the satisfaction of watching him die in an amusingly ironic manner after being inflicted with his presence for an hour plus.<br /><br />The horror anthology angle is interesting though, and all three of the stories shown have effective moments. The CREEPSHOW films are still the modern day kings of the horror anthology tradition, one that stretches back to the 1940s with the incomparable DEAD OF NIGHT, another classic being Mario Bava's fabulous BLACK SABBATH from 1963 and the overlooked H.P. Lovecraft collection NECRONOMICON: BOOK OF THE DEAD from 1992. Usually a horror anthology has some sort of linking story connecting three or four segments that each tell their own twisted tale of the macabre. The unique angle this time is that the stories are actually populated by the people in the linking segments as sort of alternate identities.<br /><br />Which could have been a great idea except that the people are so unlikeable that the story segments don't serve as a reprieve from their company. There's one really odd part when the "kids" start tapping & clicking out a rhythm which slowly builds into a cacophony that drives one of the females into a rage. I would have cold-cocked them all for being so childishly obnoxious. They don't even seem to be drinking from the empty beer cans they wave around as props, and John's antics of deliberately trying to startle the females in the group quickly becomes unlikely. Somebody would have knocked a couple of his teeth out for being such a dick and split the scene. It isn't funny, it isn't scary, and the tension that builds is not based on fright but a diminishing ability to be patient with him.<br /><br />Eventually the film does build to a satisfyingly gruseome supernatural climax that apparently took so much of the movies' low budget production cost that the filmmakers appear to have literally run out of money while four of the ten were making a frenzied escape through the woods. The movie ends with a freeze-frame of them running hand in hand, and I can't help but wonder if maybe the last few minutes of intended action was abandoned at the film lab when they couldn't afford the processing bill.<br /><br />So again I ask, are we all watching the same movie here? I enjoy low budget regionally made horror movies starring no-name talents and have a particular fondness for anthology chillers. But the legends surrounding the film are more interesting than anything which takes place on screen. One of the college dorms used for one of the story segments is rumored to be haunted, and maverick wunderkind Quentin Tarentino has championed the movie, supposedly owning his own print which he screens for people who don't know any better than to go do something else just because it's Quentin Tarentino showing it. He could show old toothpaste commercials and people would watch in rapt awe.<br /><br />The film was pioneering in the sense that it did beat "Friday The 13th" into theaters by over a year with a story of college kids being menaced at an off-season summer camp. And it also proceeded THE EVIL DEAD with a story of college kids sitting around a disused cabin running afoul of some sort of hyperkenetic supernatural force of evil. But since this evil is never explained and the summer camp angle isn't ever explored as a setting the result is a null-sum gain. They could have been anywhere, the summer camp angle only serving as a device to make it more difficult for them to seek out help when their lamps start running out of fuel. Which might be the most frightening aspect of the movie: Being stuck sitting around in the dark with John and his creepy, disturbing sense of humor & not even having a radio to listen to. A college road trip to a disused cabin with no tunes? Come on.<br /><br />So I just don't get it. My expectations were perhaps a bit high, especially based on the title which suggested a winter time setting and horror hijynx involving snow, sleighs, rusted shovels, colorful scarves, lost mittens, homicidal Christmas elves, maybe a possessed snowman. If you ask me it looks like they made the wrong movie. Great title though!<br /><br />4/10