With each coming decade, the history of horror films has always reflect the changing times, and the fears that accompany them. This documentary directed by Andrew Monument & adapted from the book of the same name by author Joseph Maddrey, tries to showcases that, by exploring its humble beginnings with silent era Gothic to 1930s Universal Monsters, to the Sci-Fi nightmares of the Atomic Age, to the present day reflection of real-world scares with 200 film clips of the various types within the horror genre, intercuts with archive news footages throughout the years. All divided into eight sections, each of which deal with a specific period of time and the socio-political context in which horror films of that era were born into. While, the idea of combining film from various sources to make something new is a controversial issue, with some people still, thinks it's stealing. I believe collage films like this, are fine, even if it seems like a glorious clip show. Nevertheless, it's still has problems in two important ways. One is the way, the documentary visually show them. "Nightmares in Red, White and Blue: The Evolution of the American Horror Film" doesn't present the film clips in their original aspect ratios, which means, that some of the film footages are zoomed way, too much to fit with the documentary's 1.78:1 frame or seemed cropped. Because of this, the film gives, somewhat half-ass blurry images of some of the subjects, tarnishing how good, these original films sources, honestly looked. Another problem with this approach, is how it cut down, on the suspense, that these scary imageries, were, original shown. It's really does strip down, the scare value. Only, leaving the somewhat distorted, out of context, disturbing fast-cut, quick blunt-force of violent gory imagery with large noises that could be, a little overwhelming to the senses & people's stomachs. The montages in this film can feel like being strapped to a chair, injected with drugs, and forced to watch films of sex and violence with your eyes propped open, as if it's 1971's 'A Clockwork Orange'. They can be a bit excessive & nauseating at times. Look, I get that the movie can't cover, all the material. That said, I love how all the film footages also supported, secondary by narrating from Lance Henriksen, whom does a great job, in establish credibility with his voice. However, I just wish, the information, that the filmmaker gave Heriksen wasn't so broad, without much context. After all, I really don't see much of a connection, in parallels between the charisma and motives of fictional antagonist Freddy Krueger of the Nightmare on Elm Street franchise and that of, former United States President Ronald Reagan, at all! Nor, how Leatherface from 'The Texas Chainsaw Massacre' can be compare with Osama bin Laden. Also, who though, it was a good idea, to brings in footage from 1969's "Easy Rider" and the James Bond films in a horror documentary? It doesn't make much sense. Another problem with the narrative is how short, some parts are. It really does make it seem, like they cut corners and really only skim the surface of a few pretty important moments in the evolution of the genre. I was really surprised that, the film didn't dig deep enough to explore the decline of the studio system, the rise of the independent movie movement, the advent of television, and the coming of the home video market. I get that, the movie can only go so far, but the whole sequence about the first ten years of the 2000s, seem a bit rushed. Look, I get that, streaming based viewing culture was still, starting out, when this movie was coming out, but, the documentary should had explore more, how the internet have change the industry, as a whole. It's kinda of, a big deal. Another thing, I think the film should get, some of their history, correct. After all, there were plenty of examples of events & movies, not fitting in with the chronological order, they were establishing with. Without going too much into detail, the idea that 1910's 'Frankenstein' is the first horror film is deeply wrong. I guess, the filmmakers never heard of 1896's 'The Devil's Castle' by film pioneer, Georges Méliès. Yes, I get that, it's technically, not an American film, but when talking the history of horror, you have to mention things like this, even if it's foreign. It doesn't make sense for a film to say that they will focus on Hollywood movies, yet talk about German Expressionist & Spanish Cinema and not much on Hammer Films, J-Horror or Italian Giallo. Obviously, a movie can't cover all the material that a book can, but to be fair, this movie should had been expanded into a three-part miniseries. It would had work better. The commentaries from the filmmakers, such as John Carpenter, Roger Corman, George A. Romero, Wes Craven, and others, would had more to say. Sadly, their interviews felt nothing, but sound-bites. Nothing really groundbreaking, came from their presence. It wasn't as entertaining and educational as it should had been. Overall: This documentary may not provide anything new for major horror fans, but it definitely worth seeing, even with its flaws. I just wish, it could had been better.

When it comes to film-making, horror flicks have carved out quite a nice little existence for themselves. This documentary does two things: it reflects back on the history of the horror movie, as well as gives some reasons as to why they have evolved over the years.That first part, the reflection, is truly what carries "Nightmares in Red, White, and Blue". It is interesting to see the history of the genre, remembering all the terrifying (whether physically or emotionally) images that have branded themselves into our collective "film conscience".However, the "discussion" parts of the documentary leave much to be desired. The approach here is very political (in one laughable segment, former President Ronald Reagan is compared to Freddy Krueger!) and really tries to understand why the "Monster Era" of the early 1900s gave way to the aliens of the 50s, the slashers of the 80s, or the psychological thrillers of the 90s, for instance. While I appreciated the effort, the reasoning just seemed a bit ridiculous at times, almost as if the panel of guests were reaching for conclusions where perhaps none in fact exist.Overall, then, "Nightmares" is a great doc if all you care about is a history lesson on horror movies. If you want anything deeper, be prepared to take pretty much every comment with a grain of salt or that nagging feeling of "this is all just being trumped up to sell a genre".

This review may seem as though it outlines the entire documentary, but believe me, it only scratches the surface. :) No spoilers to be had here! The pros: There are some interesting clips with some horror heavy-hitters - George Romero, John Carpenter, Mick Garrison, Joe Dante and more - interspersed with clips from everyone's favourite scary movies. We catch glimpses of other great talents behind the stories, too, like Tobe Hooper, Wes Craven, David Cronenberg and Stephen King. And when the description of of the documentary says that this is the history of the American horror film, they're not kidding: we're shown clips from the very first "Frankenstein" in 1910, through the classic Monster Movies ("Dracula," "The Phantom Of The Opera," "The Wolfman," "King Kong" and so on) all the way up to much more contemporary films, like "Se7en," "American Psycho," and franchises such as the "Saw" and "Scream" films. It's all narrated by the great voice of Lance Henriksen, who takes us on a chronological journey through what has been popular in American theatres since the silent film days and gives context to how (and why) we got from there to here.The cons: I felt it was too short for the ground it wanted to cover; a three-part series would have allowed more time and space to get into what each director wanted to say, rather than limiting them to sound bites. Also, for me, a lot of the attempts to politicize the evolution of horror films feel ham-fisted. Saying that Freddy Krueger's "making the children pay for the sins of the father" was a mirror of what Reagan was doing in office at the time? Tying in the ever-more excessive gore of the remakes like "Texas Chainsaw Massacre" and "Dawn Of The Dead" with the media coverage of the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan? Commenting on how there's a new moralistic level to horror films like "Saw" because victims now have "the power to choose"? "Hostel" being nothing more than a metaphor for xenophobia? According to some of the critics and writers giving their two cents, every horror film is made to have a moral (yes, they even manage to moralize "Gremlins" and Poltergeist"!). It's all a bit of a reach, really. Certainly art imitates life, though I wouldn't go as far as some of these guys do. Perhaps its brief running time adds to the problem, as each of the examples I gave above are no more than one line out of the entire documentary.Still, none of the cons take away from this being a fun and entertaining look into the history of scary movies. If all you're seeking is 90-ish minutes of great nostalgia (or a crash-course intro to horror), along with some face time with many of our favourite directors of the genre & clips of a whole lot of films that'll make you think, "Oh, I need to rent that again!"...then this is definitely for you! ||| ***½ out of 5 ||| ******½ out of 10 |||

"Nightmares" is as much of a social and political history lesson as it is a documentary of the origins of Horror films. I was taken back at how extensively and intelligently this film covered my favorite genre of film. There is a constant link made between the different subcategories of horror that have emerged over the years and the different social and political ties that drive them. "Nightmares" ended up being far more philosophical in its approach to the reasons why our society craves horror and violence on film. This is the closest I've ever seen to a "Ken Burns" history lesson on Horror Movies. I not only loved it, I learned something.