When seeing a Wes Craven film, you can never really be sure of what to expect. You might be in for a great ride, if you're watching the likes of The Last House of the Left or The Hills Have Eyes, but then again you may be in for a big disappointment; as in the case of The People Under the Stairs and the absolutely awful Scream sequels. The man's filmography is a mixed bag, and this film; The Serpent and the Rainbow, despite having an awesome title and good subject material (zombies, voodoo, being buried alive), still ranks as a disappointment. That's not to say that the film is bad, however - not by a long shot. It's just disappointing considering how good it could have been. Some of the Edgar Allen Poe adoptions from the sixties, among other horror films, have shown what an interesting topic being buried alive - a fate far worse than death - can be; but this film seems content to just coast along without ever really delving into it's subject. There's lots of interesting sequences and imagery in the movie, but none of it is done with conviction, which means that the movie is good enough while viewing; but it doesn't leave you with anything when it's over.
Bill Pullman has a persona that lends itself well to the horror genre and on the whole, it's a shame that the majority of the work he's done in said genre isn't really up to much. He does do well here, though, but it's a shame his material isn't better. Cathy Tyson, who impressed everyone but me in Neil Jordan's Mona Lisa, appears alongside Pullman and doesn't do badly; but I think her filmography aptly sums up her acting talent on the whole. Wes Craven's directing isn't bad, but it never really impresses and since he didn't write the script either, it's safe to say that any of the success of this film doesn't really have much to do with him. The jungle setting is nice, and makes for a nice change as there aren't too many horror films set there; and the film also impresses in the special effects side, as although the movie doesn't go over the top with great effects, the ones it does have are put to good use and it helps to create and intriguing and foreboding atmosphere. On the whole, this isn't fundamental horror viewing, but if you're into horror films and get a chance to see this - it's worth watching.
Bill Pullman has a persona that lends itself well to the horror genre and on the whole, it's a shame that the majority of the work he's done in said genre isn't really up to much. He does do well here, though, but it's a shame his material isn't better. Cathy Tyson, who impressed everyone but me in Neil Jordan's Mona Lisa, appears alongside Pullman and doesn't do badly; but I think her filmography aptly sums up her acting talent on the whole. Wes Craven's directing isn't bad, but it never really impresses and since he didn't write the script either, it's safe to say that any of the success of this film doesn't really have much to do with him. The jungle setting is nice, and makes for a nice change as there aren't too many horror films set there; and the film also impresses in the special effects side, as although the movie doesn't go over the top with great effects, the ones it does have are put to good use and it helps to create and intriguing and foreboding atmosphere. On the whole, this isn't fundamental horror viewing, but if you're into horror films and get a chance to see this - it's worth watching.