Dan Curtis' "Dark Shadows" remains the most thoroughly unique "soap opera" ever put on TV, because instead of melodramatic plots, love triangles and such being set in fictional settings, he decided to go Gothic and supernatural with all of those things. The saga of the Collins family and all the weird things that happen in the Collinwood estate was so engrossing that, even with the melodramatic and occasionally hammy acting and sets that were low budget even for TV, the show lasted for five years (1966-1971) and 1,225 episodes. Curtis extracted two feature-length films from it, both of which became as much cult films as the series itself had done on the small screen. The first was 1970's HOUSE OF DARK SHADOWS, which was revolved around Jonathan Frid's infamous vampire Barnabas Collins. The second one was 1971's HOSUE OF DARK SHADOWS, only very loosely related to its big-screen predecessor, and having more in common with some of the plot lines of the TV show's 1969-1970 season.Series regular David Selby returns to his role of Quentin Collins, now a painter who inherits the Collinwood mansion, only to find the place haunted, and himself possibly possessed, by an ancestor of his, namely Charles Collins (Selby again). A whole host of supernatural evils, some of them a tad bit bloody (though, absent Frid's vampire, they are less explicit than what we saw in HOUSE OF DARK SHADOWS), ensues. As had been the case with both the TV series and HOUSE OF DARK SHADOWS itself, NIGHT OF DARK SHADOWS does contain its share of fairly bizarre and twisted happenings; but series regulars Thayer David, Grayson Hall, John Karlen, and Lara Parker are on hand to offer some continuity, as is composer Robert Cobert, who once again provides the right amount of sonic atmosphere for this film, which, like the first film, was shot at the mansion once owned by rubber baron Jay Gould in Tarrytown, New York.Besides producing and directing, Curtis co-scripted NIGHT OF DARK SHADOWS with Sam Hall, his co-creator of the TV series, which, by the time of the film's release in August 1971, had left the air, only to wind up going into syndication and reruns in the 1980s, where it found a whole new kind of audience. The film itself, while certainly a fair bit less interesting than the admittedly ghoulish HOUSE OF DARK SHADOWS, does have plenty of atmosphere an excellent set designs, given that its budget was only $900,000; and the cast, including a young Kate Jackson (later to star in another ABC series, "Charlie's Angels", later in the 1970s), is able to give good performances with the unquestionably melodramatic material. Most of Curtis' output after this was for the small screen, notably the 1973 adaptation of Dracula, and as producer of both THE NIGHT STALKER and THE NIGHT STRANGLER (he also directed the latter), though he would return to the big screen in 1976 for BURNT OFFERINGS.While not necessarily a spectacular horror film, NIGHT OF DARK SHADOWS still has enough spooky moments in it to warrant a 7/10 rating.

'Dark Shadows', as was said in my review of 'House of Dark Shadows' and the relatively recent Tim Burton film (which despite some good things is the most disappointing of the lot), wholly deserved its popularity back when it was aired and it also deserves the high regard it is held in now.'House of Dark Shadows', the first film based on the show, is by far the best of the films based on the show and the only one to be just as good. Sure, some of the characters are given short shrift and Joan Bennett is underused which doesn't allow her to shine as much as she deserved. It looked absolutely great though (with improved production values over the show), was fun, tense and genuinely scary and the ending was unforgettable.'Night of Dark Shadows' is not an awful film, but it is a let down compared to 'Dark Shadows' and 'House of Dark Shadows'. There is a good deal to like. The production and costume design have a colourful and hauntingly Gothic look and it's mostly beautifully photographed. Bob Cobert once again provides an eerily spooky music score that is mostly used well, though his music for 'Dark Shadows' and 'House of Dark Shadows' fitted better.Some of the script is intriguing, there are some decent scares and shocks and Dan Curtis does what he can with what material is left in the film. Acting is decent considering, with Grayson Hall, David Selby, John Karlen and Nancy Barrett being the standouts. Kate Jackson is also at her most appealing, and is really very good in her role.Most of the cast however have very little to do and struggle to do much with their limited material, which does see relatively unexplored characterisation, characters coming and going and some corny dialogue. James Storm is pretty wasted really, and while it was evident one can't help wanting more of the great chemistry between the characters. And the film does suffer from the absence of the show's most iconic and interesting character Barnabas Collins, and of Jonathan Frid who could chill the bone just by being there, am aware there is a very good reason for why they weren't there but still.The film is badly hurt by its sloppy (often horrendously so) editing, too plodding pacing and a lack of consistency in the tension, suspense and horror (what there is is quite good but not as nerve-shredding or bone-chilling as in 'House of Dark Shadows'). Unfortunately, faring worst is the story which is a badly disjointed mess as a result of the editing and a lot of material having to be cut which gives the film a jumpy, incomplete and not always easy to follow feel, the final act is especially muddled. The ending is very abrupt and has none of the staying power of 'House of Dark Shadows' ending.All in all, not bad but a let down. 5/10 Bethany Cox

A painter (David Selby) and his wife (Kate Jackson) move into a home and find themselves plagued by ghosts and spirits of his ancestors that used to be witches.As this was written, directed and produced by the legendary Dan Curtis, there is pretty much no way it could be bad. Perhaps fans of the series were a bit disappointed that it wandered off from the core storyline, but hey, this still has the same great atmosphere that Curtis has created in other films (notably "Burnt Offerings").Allegedly, MGM forced Curtis to cut over 35 minutes from his finished film, and gave him only 24 hours to do the job. So the film went from approximately 129 minutes to about 94 minutes, which, according to some, caused the film to lose its coherence. I can definitely see that, and as a Curtis fan, I do wish there was a way to get that extended version back. Who knows? If they did it with "Nightbreed", maybe they can do it here.

I'm an avid fan of '70's made for t.v. horror movies so it's not surprising that I have both this and Burnt Offerings recorded. It occurred to me watching the end of Night of Dark Shadows that everything about the ending is identical to Burnt Offerings. In fact, you might even think that Burnt Offerings was based on or inspired by this earlier flick. I won't get into details so be sure to check out both films and let me know what you think. Meanwhile, I must say that they simply don't make good films they way they used to. These movies of the 70's and 60's are truly, truly frightening in that they couldn't rely on many camera tricks and other technology. The fear was based on realistic situations and, in many cases, good acting. Case in point: David Selby and Kate Jackson's performances in Night...and Oliver Reed, Bettye Davis and Karen Black's performances in Burnt Offerings. The cinematography of these films is also enjoyable -- often relying on the beauty of natural landscapes, etc. to capture the mood of the films. Anyway, again, please look at these two and share your thoughts!