User reviews

Manhattan Baby is Fulci's dive into beautiful imagery. There's some scenes in this one that are genuinely breathtaking.

A medallion from an archaeological dig leaves a man blind. And a family falls into jeopardy after their son disappears into thin air, and their daughter is possessed by an ancient demon.

If the budget hadn't been cut for the film, I would imagine that this would be Fulci's most memorable film. People would think 'Manhattan Baby' instead of 'Zombie' when they heard the name Lucio Fulci.

Most horror fans haven't seen this one. It's true that MB isn't a film that succumbs to everyone's tastes. This is simply because in most Italian films, it's usually style over substance, which in some cases can leave an unseasoned viewer in total awe at the apparent inept plot line before them.

In Italian films (especially), you have to pay very close attention to the whole film. Certain plot definers aren't given 'camera-attention' at crucial times at any given time through any given film. in American films, the camera tells the story. The same can be said for Italian cinema, but a lot of times, it's much more subtle in its delivery and can leave one feeling incomplete until they eventually see it again.

Anyway, should you watch Manhattan Baby? Sure. I'll recommend it. It's a beautifully shot film with hardly any of that Fulci gore we all expected. It also has a great Gothic score that adds tons of surrealistic atmosphere that pulls you in for the most part.

Not a film for everyone, but the guru's of the cinema world will find a lot of redeeming qualities to talk about.

Hey - it's 1980 and Mr. Fulci wishes to do something 'not so horror'. So he created this tale about an Egyptian amulet which brings terrible tragedy to a New York family. I've seen about 15 of these Italian post-giallo horrors now from Fulci, Bava and of course, Argento. I found this one to be relatively well-dubbed and paced. In other words, the pace wasn't infintessimal and the actors didn't break from Italian into dubbed English and vice versa. For all I know, this was recorded in English given its title. Anyway, the two children in the film are strikingly eerie, remniscent of Village of the Damned's little miscreants, though the boy's voice seems very off (the only exception to my comment about the dubbing)- check out his first few lines in the park in "Manhattan"! Hilarious! The plot, while somewhat draggy as all of these films are (other societies don't demand a new scene every 2.5 minutes and either dialogue or action at all times it seems), it's not that slow. Of course these films are often watched for the unflinching depictions of gore that Italians are not afraid to deliver, and while the violence is a bit more subtle in this one than most, there are three scenes which will satisfy this type of viewer. Ultimately, this film's worst trait is its attempt at more 'psychological' horror in my opinion. However, it is not bad - as long as you are used to these Italians and their significantly different motivations and backgrounds from American directors. Oh, and as you might expect from Fulci, the cinematography is spellbinding at times.

So, what's the worst Fulci film you've sat through? Is it Sweet House of Horrors? Well, that had some gore in it at least. Or it Aenigma? That one had some women in the scud, and a picture stabbing itself. Or is it Conquest? Well, I reckon that one is a classic myself, because it's got drug snorting werewolf men in it.

Nope, for me it's Manhattan Baby. I've sat through 14 of his films now, and even his later period films like the deranged Cat in the Brain are more entertaining than this. It's taken me three viewings to get a handle on what story there is, and it does have some positive aspects, but Fulci completely fumbles the ball on this film.

It starts off really well, in Egypt, where Christopher Connelly is doing some sort of dig into an ancient tomb. His wife and daughter, meanwhile, almost immediately fall into Fulci's nightmare world, when a blind (like the Beyond) woman hands the kid an amulet. Connelly, on the other hand, breaks into the tomb only to get his guide killed and himself blinded by purple laser beams (eh?).

This is all atmospherically done, but the moment the family return to New York, the film slips its moorings. Strange things begin to happen, like Tommy, Connelly's son, walking into a cupboard filled with light. But it's okay, because a few scenes later he's back, and nobody really cares anyway.

That's the main problem with this film. Fulci goes for the same disjointed series of scares that worked so well in The Beyond, but here manages to completely arse up just about every scene but making it either too inexplicable, too tame, or just too stupid. Sometimes the kids are terrified by what's happening, and yet other times they think it's some sort of game. Plus, there's almost no linking between the scenes whatsoever, no attempt to let the audience in on what's happening, until that last twenty minutes, and by that time I swear you'll be beyond caring. The final insult is that the ending is as lame as a one-legged donkey.

There are some positive aspects to this film that raise the rating slightly. The cinematography is uniformly excellent, the Egyptian scene is a great way to start the film, and there's a couple of scenes that do genuinely work, like the Psychic rolling about on the floor, screaming in Connelly's daughter's voice.

I'd love to know if this was the film that Fulci intended, because I don't reckon it is. There's too many hints that something went badly wrong in production, like the disjointed story or the recycled soundtrack (from the Beyond).

Only to be viewed as a person familiar with Fulci's work. I'd hate to see some unsuspecting horror fan's reaction to this mess.

Lucio Fulci was a great filmmaker and unquestionably one of the most essential & influential horror directors that ever lived; still not all his movies are masterpieces. This one could be considered as one of his weaker efforts, especially because it got released amidst his most notorious achievements like "The Beyond", "City of the Living Dead" and "New York Ripper". "Manhattan Baby" is slightly more ambitious than we're used to see of Fulci and I'm not quite convinced whether that's a positive change. There are no hideous zombies or sexually perverted killers in this script, only supernatural types of malice and they're not exactly strongest trumps. During a research vacation in Egypt, a New York archaeologist is blinded inside a pyramid whilst a local witch gives his daughter an uncanny medallion. Back in the States, George's blindness only appears to be temporary but the medallion and its evil powers are there to stay! The evil spirit of an ancient Egyptian deity possesses his two children and suddenly there are doors leading to other dimensions, people vanishing inside elevators and ferocious scorpions crawling out of bedside drawers. The plot is incoherent as hell and makes absolutely no sense, like it's some sort of supernatural puzzle nobody expects you to solve. Oh well, senseless or not, Fulci still takes the time to implement his favorite trademarks, like loads of eyeball-terror for example! The very first character to die has his face impaled on stakes, the good old-fashioned Lucio Fulci way! The gory bits, along with the music are the only worthwhile elements in the entire movie. "Manhattan Baby" is slow-paced, poorly edited and just way too confusing.

"Manhattan Baby" sure is one controversial Fulci flick. I have friends who love the man and hate this movie. I also have friends who don't know the man at all and love this movie.

The plot is a bit silly. A girl is given a trinket on vacation in Egypt and it turns out to contain horrific powers of destruction. I told you it was silly.

The special effects are very 1982. But wait; this movie was made in 1982. I'd recommend this to someone who has never seen a Fulci film and is not expecting to see "Zombie" or "The Beyond" again. This movie offers something different and something that I, a true Fulci admirer, appreciate and can watch over and over.

Yes, I like "Manhattan Baby." While it's not like the aforementioned Fulci greats, it remains entertaining and it does deliver some good scares. And decent gore.

7 out of 10, kids.

Lucio Fulci, Italy's 'Godfather of Gore', was on a roll in the early '80s, wowing fans of splattery horror with The House by the Cemetery and The Beyond (both 1981), and The New York Ripper (1982). He must have run out of steam (and blood) for his next film, Manhattan Baby, which is a rather 'dry' affair by comparison. It's a great looking film - the cinematography is some of the best to be found in a Fulci film - but the pace is slow and the plot nonsensical, making it one of the director's more disappointing efforts overall.

Christopher Connelly plays archaeologist Professor George Hacker, who explores a cursed tomb where he find a strange blue stone that zaps his eyes with lasers, rendering him blind. Meanwhile, his young daughter Susie is given a strange pendant by an old woman. When the family return to New York, lots of weird stuff happens - people disappear and a couple of folk die in strange circumstances - all caused by the pendant, which is possessed by an ancient evil god called Happanubanah (at least that's what it sounded like to me).

Fulci is clearly aiming for atmosphere this time around, but rarely achieves anything scary. Towards the end, he gives up trying and resorts to ripping off The Exorcist, before giving his fans a gory set-piece that is even more silly than the pipe-cleaner spider attack in The Beyond: stuffed birds come to life and peck holes in a man's neck and face. In addition to a dumb plot, and one hokey splatter scene, Manhattan Baby also sees the return of Giovanni Frezza, Bob from The House by the Cemetery, as Susie's little brother Tommy. Seriously, Lucio... once was enough!

"Manhattan baby" is another supernatural horror movie shot during the Maestro's most prolific period.

The movie being accorded only a fraction of the planned budget, it never had the chance to become what its makers probably intended.

Still it contains some beautiful surrealistic and atmospheric scenes which are worth watching. The opening scene in Egypt is just marvelous and keeps up with Fulci's best work. After the Hacker family returns to New York, the little daughter experiences contact with evil through the amulet she got in Egypt. This allows Fulci to devise the movie like "The Gates of Hell" or "The Beyond", meaning as a succession of loosely related scenes depicting strange occurences. Some of those scenes are interesting, such as the snake attack and the blood stains on the wall, announcing the return of "poor Jamie Lee". Others are ridiculous, like Adrian Mercato winding in spasms on the ground. The final attack by stuffed birds is spoiled by the visibility of the wires (in good tradition of other phony attacks by animals).

Although the overall result of "Manhattan Baby" is not as convincing and terrifying as Fulci's previous flics, it still belongs to his strong period in horror film making and is therefore recommended to everyone who likes Fulci's style not just for the sake of gore (as "Manhattan Baby" contains only few).

Susie Hacker, the daughter of an archaeologist, gets possessed by an malicious evil spirit after her dad accidentally unleashes it from it's Egyptian tomb, that also leaves him temporarily blind. Being a big fan of Lucio Fulci, I didn't mind, let's just say the looseness of the plot, quite the opposite I expected the plot not to make much sense and be full of holes. What I didn't expect was the film's disconcerting lack of the gooey red stuff. When one watches a Fulci film, one expects certain things to happen and the gore to flow. But aside from a few VERY few instances, they never happen in this movie. We're left with an overly long badly dubbed film, which while still interesting to watch for huge fans of the director, is still pretty boring at times. It seems to me that Fulci's films can be separated by this film. Look at the films before this one "Don't Torture a Duckling", "The House by the Cemetery", "The Beyond". "Lizard in a Woman's Skin", "New York Ripper", and other classics. Now look at this film and the ones that came after such as "Conquest", "The New Gladiators", "Cat In the Brain", and others. Fulci entered his third period of films with this one and it wasn't for the better.

My Grade: D-

DVD Extras: An 8 minute interview with Writer Dardano Saccheti; Talent bios; and Theatrical trailer

It is absolutely fair to say that celebrated shock maker, Lucio Fulci's majestically mental, murder-mystical 'Manhattan Baby' rarely receives the plaudits it manifestly deserves! Frequently denied the universal acclaim of 'Zombie Flesheaters' or 'New York Ripper', unfairly disparaged as being a lesser work in the inspirational canon of the visionary gore-father, but it 'aint! I sincerely believe that maestro, Fulci's ominous, inventively grisly, supernaturally sinister, eerily eccentric offering has enough rewardingly off-beat, pan-dimensional splatter-slathered strangeness to beguile any true Fulci fan!

Maestro, Fulci and his frequent literary collaborator, Dardano Sacchetti unleashed a memorably macabre protagonist in their mythical murder fest 'Manhattan Baby'. This ancient, diabolically distempered Djinn resides in the pretty, ornately fashioned Egyptian amulet worn around young, Susie's (Brigitta Boccoli) delicate neck. After her cavalier archaeologist father, George (Christopher Connelly) violates the long-buried tomb, this vengeful entity renders him temporarily blind! Back in metropolitan Manhattan this antediluvian horror evilly manifests a nightmarish torrent of portal-spawned slaughter! Those in close proximity to the possessed poppet are despatched in a most gruesome fashion! Spirited away to an arid desert, metaphysically mangled in far-flung mythic realms, set upon by poisonous serpents or horrifically gored to death by eye-ball piercing stuffed birds, their profane facsimile of life another manifestation of the foul curse haunting the Hacker family!

We selected "Manhattan Baby" from the movie library last night, and I realized that it was to be probably the 7th time I have watched this rather uncelebrated Fulci offering in the past 5 years. Yes, this movie is a bit formulaic, and yes, it does move a bit slow in parts. But there is something undeniably menacing in this movie, an atmosphere of claustrophobia, the tightness of the endless close-ups of people's faces, that I enjoy and (obviously) come back to again and again. No, this is not a gory movie, which no doubt comes as a surprise (disappointment?) to fans of Fulci's other (mostly excellent) films. Even the death scenes, of which there are only 3 or 4, have minimal blood compared to something like "The Beyond", not that I would recommend this as hearty family fare by any means. But if you enjoy the uniquely "European" dreamlike atmosphere created by a combination of cheesy effects, plot holes, wooden acting, bad dubbing, and inexplicable motivations of characters, this may be one you revisit again, and again and again... you get the idea.

On the one hand, I'm given to understand that Lucio Fulci himself regarded this film poorly when all was said and done, and as a viewer, it probably wasn't the best choice for me to watch. On the other hand, while to date I've seen only a few of his works, I've yet to watch any horror film from the man that was actually good - the best was no more than "half okay" - so 'Manhattan baby' surely couldn't be any worse than, say, 'Aenigma,' or 'Demonia,' could it? Well, the good news is that no, this 1982 movie truly couldn't be any worse than those stated movies, because they were absolute rubbish, and the worst of Fulci's that I've seen so far. The bad news is that this pretty well fits in neatly alongside them as being dull and unconvincing, and I remain doubtful that the man should have ever been allowed to make horror movies in the first place.

I'm given to understand that a chief issue with this in Fulci's eyes was the lower budget than intended or expected, impacting what he wanted to do in terms of special effects. I suppose it's possible that in recognition of that lack, Fulci also altered what Elisa Livia Briganti and Dardano Sacchetti had written so as to cut scenes that would have taken advantage of those effects, and which wouldn't work without them. In fact, I think the generous view is to assume that's the case, because if it's not, then 'Manhattan baby' is even worse than it looks as is. And how it looks as is, I'm afraid, is just garbage. Either the cast can't act, which is certainly a possibility, or Fulci was just an awful director who couldn't put together a scene to save his life, because none of the performances are all that great to begin with, and there are many moments that just raise a skeptical eyebrow. Then again, whether or not there's any acting going on in a scene, from one to the next they're all a floundering, dubious mess, and I have to wonder how it was that Fulci had as long of a career as he did.

But hey, it might not be Fulci's fault, either, because if the finished product reflects what Briganti and Sacchetti wrote, then 'Manhattan baby' doesn't speak well to the screenwriters, either. The dialogue is appallingly bland and lifeless, if not also just unbelievable. The characters are empty shells of nothingness. The scene writing is laughably schlocky, with genre elements seemingly thrown in scattershot without rhyme or reason. Why, when you get down to it a substantial portion of the scene writing doesn't even make sense, and the same goes for the overall story. By and large the picture just feels like ideas thrown at a wall in the hopes that maybe, just maybe, some of them might land in a pattern that would form a cohesive whole. "Evil! So evil! Something is evil!" Briganti and Sacchetti said, and they hoped throwing ideas at a wall would somehow fill in the rest. Some of those ideas might be workable, but the key word is "some," and anyway - so what? With all this in mind it doesn't matter whether or not the effects are any good, because that which they are intended to portend is the real problem. Sound and music cues are tiresome. Some of Fabio Frizzi's music is half decent, but some of it is just ill-fitting for a given moment; while I can't place my finger on it, the one theme that is most repeated is one that I've heard before, and I'm inclined to think that means Frizzi just lifted it.

It's not specifically the fault of Fulci or 'Manhattan baby' that the dubbing in the widely available version is terrible, but nor does it help the title's case. What is the fault of 'Manhattan baby' is how some of the cinematography is simply overdone. Some instances are intended to heighten tension or something, yet there's no tension to be heightened with writing and direction this lousy, decisions like frequent and repeated close-ups of actors' eyes are almost funny for how kitschy they come off. Some of the sound effects are kind of quizzical, both in and of themselves and in how they are employed. The editing is overly curt, and sometimes the sequencing just feels choppy.

For what it's worth, the art direction is pretty terrific.

What's truly incredible is that I know Fulci actually was capable of making good movies. 1966 western 'Massacre time' had its problems, but was pretty enjoyable overall. 1967 comedy 'The long, the short, the cat' was utterly hilarious, and a fantastically good time from start to finish. So why is it that Fulci is best known for those films he made in a genre where his skills seemed to have just vanished right out of the gate with each production? I repeat that in this instance I don't think the man's dissatisfaction with the budget and the effects even matter, because the script is the problem. His direction is the problem. The acting is the problem. In fact, aside from the sets and props, the effects might actually be the best part of the whole picture! All I can say is that the filmmaker's priorities seem to have been profoundly misaligned, which says even worse things about him. A handful of good ideas, so far afield in their dispensation as to effectively be random, are not nearly enough to begin shaping an entertaining, satisfying, worthwhile horror film. Whatever it is you think you're going to get out of 'Manhattan baby,' you are mistaken, and your time is better spent watching anything else - truly, almost anything else. Good grief.

On a trip to Egypt with her archaeologist father, Professor George Hacker (Christopher Connelly) and photographer mother, Emily (Laura Lenzi), young Suzie (Brigitta Boccoli) begins having bizarre experiences involving things of a mystical nature. With her parents too busy to notice, Suzie encounters a strange person who gives her a very distinctive amulet. Meanwhile, dad has an Indiana Jones-style adventure of his own, getting blinded in the process.

Back home in NYC, it's back to life as usual.

Oh no!

Suzie's new amulet has its own spooky theme music! This can mean only one thing! Yes indeed, she's become the tool of some peevish supernatural entity! It's not long before all manner of weirdness breaks out.

MANHATTAN BABY is another of Director Lucio Fulci's supernatural horror offerings. As such, it's pretty solid, featuring some of his signature gruesomeness and eyeball closeups. The novel story has a few nice twists and ideas.

BEST BITS: #1- Death by elevator! Not in the usual manner! #2- The overdue demise of Emily's utterly annoying, "wacky glasses"-wearing, imbecilic coworker, Luke (Carlo De Mejo)! #3- Snake-cam / death by cobra! #4- "Poor Jamie Lee!" #5- Dead bird attack! Fishing line holding up the birds? You didn't see annnything!...

Manhattan Baby is what happens when Indiana Jones meets The Exorcist. I cannot say if I would enjoy this film more had I seen it at a younger and more impressionable time in my life (like watching House by the Cemetery in my early teens) but this one's a great big bore.

Also, hellishly, Bob's back from the previously mentioned cemetery house and he's even more annoying this go round.

I can't say enough about this 80s horror flick because there's so very little to say. A small girl with a big necklace becomes a menace to society after her privileged family does a plundering tour of Egypt. I find Roman Polanski's usage of Egyptology much more effective in the 1976 apartment horror The Tenant.

The Beyond, House by the Cemetery, Seven Notes in Black and Don't Torture a Duckling are all much better Fulci fims.

George Hacker (Christopher Connelly) is an American archeologist in Egypt (where part of this was actually filmed) with his wife (Martha Taylor) and daughter in a creepy EXORCIST/OMEN inspired opening. After acquiring a cursed medallion, he's temporarily blinded by blue light and returns to New York City, where his daughter (Brigitta Boccoli) becomes possessed by an evil spirit. Sand, cobras and scorpions show up in the apartment, characters are transported back to Egypt and, in the only gory part, stuffed birds come to life to peck apart the face of some guy named (insert lame ROSEMARY'S BABY reference here) Adrian Mercato. Some of the camerawork and music is good, but the typically awful dubbing, bad acting and choppy editing detract from the overall effect. Fulci fans will also probably be severely disappointed by the curious lack of blood/gore/violence.

(I have a hunch he was going through that I-want-to-be-respected-as-a-filmmaker phase).

Score: 3 out of 10

Almost always the same story with Fulci. Good idea, bad execution. Movie actually resembles a real movie, so that's not the problem. But often bad acting, weird choice of music (movie actually has some cool music, but then out of nowhere jazz sections are inserted and they don't fit at all) and almost complete lack of tension or scares outside some screaming really make this a boring movie with no real redeeming qualities. It is said that Fulci ended up with a half of promised money he was supposed to get for making the movie, so that might explain the result, but that doesn't change the fact movie is just not good. There isn't even a lot of violence, which is weird for Fulci, and movie also lacks any kind of nudity, which is also strange. All in all, I recommend it only to Fulci fans. Other horror movie veterans or casuals can safely avoid this one.

If you have some acquaintance with other Fulci films, especially the ones from the so-called "Gates of Hell Trilogy", then you know that eyes are, to say at least, a repetitive motive, from the gore set pieces, like the nail killing in "L'aldilà" (eng: The Beyond), to the many eye close-up shots in the dialogue scenes of "Manhattan Baby". Against this general background, this movie can be regarded as a key film. Here, Fulci is somewhat presenting in a very explicit way the coding of the eyes (and The Eye) in his own cinematic style.

While travelling in Egypt with his mother and his archeologist father, a girl receives an ancient medallion representing an eye (very similar to the Eye of Horus) from a mysterious white-eyed woman that then disappears in the air (literally). Almost at the same time, her father is blinded by the same eye-shaped symbol, only this one is carved in the wall of an underground tomb inside a forbidden pyramid. The family goes back to New York and there the medallion starts to exert its influence, taking control over the girl, triggering supernatural events in the family's apartment and opening a portal to another space-time dimension.

The medallion is the divine Eye (its link with divinity is explicitly mentioned in the film), an access to the world of The Beyond. The blind woman that gives the medallion to the girl has white-veiled eyes, just like the blind young woman with the dog and the main characters at the end of "L'aldilà". We know, from this last movie, what these white eyes can mean in the Fulci code: vision-knowledge of the other side, and the ability to move between that place and this human dimension. But we also have the fragile human eyes (e.g. the eyes of the father) and mundane blindness: the inability to see and to understand.

On a more stylistic level, we have all the already mentioned eye close-up shots during dialogues. The tension, the real intensity is always happening at the level of looks in Fulci and almost never at the level of words. Language is often banal and stereotyped in this film, as in many others by this director. Characters in the worldly sphere also tend to be very one-dimensional: the father is the scientist, the man of reason, the babysitter is the beautiful and lively girl, the parapsychologist is the somewhat sinister and dark man surrounded by antiques and stuffed birds, etc. And then there's that simple and repetitive sax score during many of the urban sequences, an almost vulgar soundtrack that is in violent contrast with the fantastic chaos raised by the medallion. It is Fulci's violent cut between the worlds, the one that seem to disconcert many viewers and that is also violently translated to cinematic form by this director. The cut between an abysmally stereotyped everyday human world, the world of frightened and fragile human eyes and the powerful world of The Eye that lies Beyond.

Lucio Fulci again directs another horror film supposedly taking place in New York City(but obviously not). This time around, Fulci opens with a somewhat intriguing opening in Egypt where archaeologist Chris Connelly finds the tomb of an ancient Egyptian god of evil. Once in the tomb, one man dies from a fall on sharp objects at the bottom of a pit and Connelly, through the electric light show, loses his eyesight because of light beams. While all this is going on, a stranger gives an evil amulet to his very young daughter. We then go to, what passes for, New York. There strange things happen, peripheral characters die, though no police become involved with these inexplicable deaths. All is to be resolved with Adrian Mercato's help(an obvious homage to Polanski's Rosemary's Baby). This film is weak even for a Fulci film. He doesn't even satisfy his gorehound crowd with minimal bloodletting and virtually no suspense. Fulci does have some nice sweeping shots here and there and a few tense moments but no more. What we do get is plenty of the Fulci trademark of close-ups of eyes. Fulci must have had 20-25 eye close-ups - no exaggeration! The two child actors - the young girl and her even younger brother - are atrocious actors(particularly the boy). The final scene, poorly shot, is a taxidermist's worst nightmare and le bad cinema buff's joy to behold. The actors are all pretty wooden, the direction uninspiring, and the script pure nonsense. At times I could not make head nor tails or beaks out of what was going on and why Fulci felt compelled to shoot the scene. A rather boring, tepid film from one of many's(not mine" acknowledged masters of horror.

Lucio Fulci dips his toes into the supernatural horror genre with fair results, in this mostly NYC set genre flick. Christopher Connelly ('Peyton Place', "Benji", "1990: The Bronx Warriors") stars as George Hacker, an archaeologist examining some ruins in Egypt. Gee, do you think he'll come to regret this decision? As it so happens, an ancient evil spirit is now free, and it comes to roost inside his adorable daughter Susie (Brigitta Boccoli). George must unravel the mystery of a strange gem and decipher the message left on a photo given to his wife Emily (Laura Lenzi).

It's not that surprising to learn that Fulci was left with a budget far less than what he had been promised. In the end, the film is certainly watchable enough, but has very little in it that's all that memorable. Fulci delivers gore only in small bits and pieces until the gloriously sadistic ending. Until then, we see some mildly amusing paranormal occurrences, which involve such people as the couples' au pair Jamie Lee (Cinzia de Ponti) and Emily's wacky co- worker Luke (Carlo De Mejo). The opening sequence in Egypt is pretty good and atmospheric. One of the most enjoyable components is the typically eclectic music score by Fabio Frizzi. The makeup effects are quite effective.

The performances don't knock your socks off, but they get the job done. Connelly, whose character is stricken blind for a while, rarely changes his facial expression all that much. Lovely ladies de Ponti and Lenzi are quite easy to watch. Boccoli does a decent job for a child actress. Giovanni Frezza (Bob!) co-stars as her smart mouthed brother, and Fulci has his customary cameo as a doctor in the final portion of the picture. Cosimo Cinieri has a good look as a stranger who lends some valuable assistance.

This is good fun for Fulci fans, but overall isn't anything really special.

Six out of 10.

What a silly movie! An archaeologist excavates a tomb in Egypt and accidentally unleashes evil, which then follows him and his family all the way back to Manhattan.

The biggest letdown of this movie is the absolutely incoherent script, with a story that just meanders along. The jump scares didn't age well, and some of the special effects are really silly (like, creatures hanging from the ceiling where you can see the wires). There's some Fulci staples, like lots of shots of eyes, and some nice gore, and there's a really cool shot from the perspective of a snake. It has some Lucio Fulci staples (lots of shots of eyes, some nice gore), but it's overall a really bad movie, with no coherent script, and jump scares that didn't age well. Also, the score doesn't hold up to other Fulci and Giallo movies... there's cheesy saxophone tunes and less funk in the music.

All in all, a big disappointment.

This is another film that gets down-graded unfairly because of the popular films such as "The Beyond", "Zombi" and "City of the Living Dead". Gorehounds expect--naturally--the same gore-levels as these films, which is also unfair. Besides, it's better to watch a film with no-expectations whatsoever. That-said, "Manhattan Baby" is a unique film for Lucio Fulci, and bears some resemblance to "The Awakening" and even "Rosemary's Baby" (hence-the-title?). The production was troubled by producer-interference in plot-elements, and then a reduction of the budget by 3/4's, dropping it to a cost of $300,000. That Fulci was able to rescue his and co-writer Dardano Sachetti's original-core is amazing, and the film still bears the mark of both creators in a good-sense. There is the continued-theme of the supernatural, and an unsettling-sense that normal "cause-and-effect" has been undermined by the unknown. This is a crucial-link between films such-as "The Beyond" or "City of the Living Dead", but the horror is not metaphysical, but isolated to one-family (then-another...). Much of Fabio Fabrizzi's score is recycled from the "opus" Fulci-films, and there are some new-additions, such as the title-theme which is really seductive and lush. What really throws most Fulci-fans off with this film is the combination of ancient-technology and the supernatural--it is extremely-unique, and I can only recall "Stargate" picking-the-up in later-years. But, I think Fulci explores this concept the best, and even transcends obvious-possibilities. Yes, the children of the archaeologist discover a portal to another-dimension, but it is almost an afterthought beside all the other narrative-subplots he throws-at-us. There actually is a lot of gore in this film! One scene stands-out: the attack of an Occultist by his own stuffed-birds, and boy is it nasty. And so, this is not really a film that can be called purely "horror", nor purely "science-fiction", etc. . It's my guess this is why so-many Fulci-fans and others don't like it--it's not easily-described, or understood. Like Fulci's "The Black Cat" (1981), it deserves reassessment and a better-reputation as a solid story of the fantastic. Check the final-scene, it was copied-by Clive Barker for the frame-piece of "Hellraiser" (1986). The Anchor Bay DVD is great. An entertaining, and bizarre film.

For Fulci fans, this may be a bit disappointing considering the pace and the lack of heavy gore, but this is not to say that nothing strange or ominous happens during the course of the film. In fact, i thought some of the random and strange deaths were good payoffs in their own right (i had to rewind a few of them to see if I missed something - turns out i didn't). Manhattan Baby really plays out like a poor sibling to "The Beyond:" an evil curse is unleashed and people start dying in strange, inexplicable ways while story coherence takes a backseat. This movie even features a lot of the same music used in The Beyond, but the similarities don't end there. As is characteristic by Fulci, there is ample coverage of the actor's eyeballs in extreme close-up overused to a comical effect and features its share of poor dialogue, wooden acting and some over-the-top characterization as well. All the same, this was a noble attempt on the part of Fulci and screenwriter Dardano Sacchetti to try something different within the horror genre and not rely so much on the bloodletting. While I wouldn't call this a runaway success, it tends to work on its own terms and is very enjoyable indeed.