User reviews

Viy is perhaps too short and has a slow start but when you stick with it it is really an excellent film that is very Russian in flavour and does its fantasy and horror elements in a most effective way. The scenery is both sumptuous and foreboding, so good in fact that you wish you were there. The film is lovingly shot and the special effects are certainly above-average with Aleksandr Ptushko's(also director of some of the best Russian fantasy films seen by me) style all over them. Another outstanding element is the music, it sets the atmosphere of the film brilliantly, at times lyrical and others surreal. Some have remarked about the influence of composers like Mussorgsky, Prokoviev and Rachmaninov and it's definitely there, the scoring of the creepy and surreal moments in particular have a very Mussorgsky-like wonderful weirdness. The dialogue is witty and thought-provoking, the Tolstoy and Poe comparisons remarked in a previous review are apt as well. The story engages throughout, the fantasy gives a real sense of wonder, the sense of adventure is exciting at least and the horror elements are appropriately creepy and unsettling. The characters are ones you have seen before but they really help to carry the film, fit in the atmosphere very well, have personality and all serve a point in some way to the story. All the characters are enthusiastically performed, sometimes with a tendency to be a tad over-theatrical but this is not uncommon for Russian/Soviet fantasy and especially from the 60s and it doesn't hurt things in any shape or form. To conclude, Viy is excellent and well worth watching if not quite a personal favourite. 8/10 Bethany Cox

I'm not particularly a fan of horror flicks. I watched this movie simply because I wanted to see something Russian. But as I found out, this is much more than a typical horror flick. It has a lyrical quality to it almost like a Greek play. True, it has ghosts & goblins & creepy things in it. But so do Greek plays.

I consider this to be a fantasy or an allegory with some nice subtle insights about rustic life and the human condition in general. Some of the witty dialogue is absolutely priceless. I'm not familiar with the writings of Gogol who wrote the original story of "Viy", but if you're a fan of Tolstoy's short stories ("The Imp and the Crust") or Guy de Maupassant ("The Devil") or maybe the lighter side of Poe ("Never Bet the Devil Your Head"), then this'll be right up your alley.

And of course it'll scare the socks off your arse.

The camera illusions in this movie are absolutely 1st class. Don't be put off by the fact that it had a "low budget" by Hollywood standards. The minimalist approach really brought out the director's creativity in this case. Like an old 1940s Jean Cocteau film, the special effects are timeless in their simplicity, and they will hold up for the next 50 years, long after CGI has gone the way of the dodo (and not a moment too soon).

Minimalistic story, minimalistic effects, amazing result. This what you' ll find watching the first Russian horror movie. A totally unusual movie, with an amazing atmosphere. I found it absolutely interesting to watch. I felt like exploring a new world.

Of course the movie isn't perfect. Of course most effects look odd and cheap. Yet, it's an interesting visual experience. It has beautiful nature pictures in it, and a few seriously impressive effects and a great set.

This movie is totally unusual and odd. It'll not be to the liking of most modern watchers. If you like watching the unusual (like me), this movie is for you.

Although the film starts off a bit in the fairy tale fashion, the film doesn't lack anything a great sixties horror movie, be it from Italy, England or the U.S. should have. I think it's wonderful that a Russian gem like this got re-released in the US, so that I could see it in Germany. If this movie had been distributed better, I think it would turn up in every horror movie history besides the works of Bava (yes, MASCHERA DEL DEMONIO was based on the same story...although the Russian version sticks a lot more to Gogol) and the Hammer and Roger Corman Productions. If you're a fan of atmospheric sixties horror, you definitely should see this one, if only for the unforgettable climax.

Viy is based on the same story, written by Nikolai Gogol, that inspired Mario Bava's masterpiece, Black Sunday. While the films have some similarities; for example, a witch and a fairytale atmosphere; the two really aren't much alike. Black Sunday went more for the straight horror, and was a better film for it. Viy is more of a religious themed film, and the witch plot line offers more in the way of the faith of the lead character than actual horror. The film has a massive amount of cult value, mostly due to the fact that it's not much like any other movie in terms of its style. The music and atmosphere combine to give it an other-worldly feel, and this helps massively where the plot is concerned. The basis of the film follows a man of God who must spend three days and three nights presiding over the corpse of a young girl, who also happens to be the local witch. Being dead isn't much of a hindrance to the witch, as she bombards our hero with black magic. With only his faith to protect him; will he be able to last three nights with her corpse?

The first half of the movie is really rather dull, as not a lot happens and it seems to mostly be a set-up for the latter section. The plot does pick up as the film goes on; but the film is never massively engaging, and that is its main downfall. However, the cinematography is great; and Viy has a very vibrant feel throughout. Black Sunday had a similar vibrant feel; and this film gives the viewer an idea of what Bava's film might have looked like in colour. The scenes that take place inside the church are the movie's main strongpoint, thus making it a shame that there aren't more of them. These scenes look great and brilliantly offset the gentle tone of the rest of the film. The climax delivers the best part of the movie, and the special effects there, while obviously cheap, look stunning and brilliantly suit the style of the film. Russia isn't very well known for its film industry, and this was one of the first horror films produced in the Soviet Union. Modern flick Night Watch has given the Russian film industry a new lease of life recently; and this film, like most other classics, is set for a remake. Oh well...I recommend Viy mainly to fans of art-house cinema.

Three drunken Russian seminarians are going home and ask for lodging to an old woman. Actually, she is a witch, who captures one of them and uses him like a flying broom. The young priest fights and kills the witch. After her death, she becomes a young and beautiful woman. Her rich father calls the young priest and orders him to stay locked up with her body in a wooden church, praying for three nights, as per her daughter's wish before die. The witch summons many creatures from hell to fight the priest in the church.

"Viy" is a very interesting tale, weird and non-sense, having a wonderful cinematography and excellent special effects for a 1967 film. I dare to say that the story is a little crazy, maybe better understood by Russians, since it is based on their folklore. Anyway, I believe that fans of horror movies will like "Viy". The atmosphere in the church is very dark. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): 'Viy - O Espírito do Mal' ('Viy - The Evil Spirit')

Note: On 10 July 2022, I saw this film again.

This was one of several fantasy films released by the DVD label RusCiCo (Russian Cinema Council) to promote classics in the field which would seldom have traveled outside their native land; it remains the only one I have watched (though I own quite a few) and, for the record, my second acquaintance with it came via a copy off "You Tube" rather than the extras-laden disc itself as a complementary viewing to Mario Bava's BLACK Sunday (1960) – since both films were inspired by the Nikolai Gogol tale "The Vij".

Needless to say, this version is much closer to the source material but this does not make it the better rendition; truth be told, many horror classics have been loosely adapted to the screen and, yet, the end result has been wholly embraced by critics and fans alike (say, James Whale's FRANKENSTEIN {1931}, Terence Fisher's Dracula {1958}, or any of Roger Corman's efforts inspired by the work of Edgar Allan Poe). Bava's film rightly placed the witch at the center of the narrative (amazingly, almost without her ever emerging from the family crypt!) whereas this film – and, one assumes, the original text – makes the frankly boring seminarian hero its protagonist. At just 72 minutes, the movie certainly does not overstay its welcome – but it also somewhat exposes the essentially thin plot line: a young man is helped by an old lady, but he understandably snubs her unwarranted advances; however, he allows her to ride him piggyback(!)…only for them to slowly rise off the ground, revealing her to be a witch. Back on firm land, the aspiring cleric beats up the woman, who turns to her true form of a young girl – after which the boy flees the scene. As soon as he reports back to the seminary, he is told to travel to the estate of a prominent local family to pray over the body of their dying daughter; when he arrives, it transpires not only that the afflicted party is the witch herself (who expressly asked for him to be there!) but that she had succumbed to her wounds. Tradition now binds him to make a 3-night vigil over her corpse… but her plan is to exact revenge by tormenting him with assorted supernatural occurrences that, inevitably, lead to his own demise (which proves just-as-baffling to outsiders, especially as he seems to be getting old before his time)!

The film looks very handsome in colour, and the striking special effects work by "artistic director" Aleksandr Ptushko are at once charming and sinister; still, these are mainly relegated to the final night – as the first two go by a bit too quickly, serving only for the revivified girl to repeatedly attempt in breaking the chalk-drawn circle inside which the young man has managed to attain sanctuary (once using the coffin itself as a battering ram!). The parade of grotesques at the end include the briefly-seen titular creature, which is not averse to being used as comedy relief – since the Vij asks its acolytes to fold out its overgrown ears because they are obstructing its field of vision i.e. their intended prey! Unsurprisingly, the movie is Russian to the bone – so that we get much carousing (singing, drinking and camaraderie) throughout – which tends to deflect attention from the otherwise nicely- handled genre trappings…and brings me back to the notion that, sometimes, foreign-made versions of any given tale can have a better chance of externalizing its core themes.

"Vij" is a masterpiece of Russian cinema and a masterpiece of 60s horror. Having said that, it is perhaps a film that may not appeal to the gorehound variety of horror fan. Not only does it not possess any gore, but it plays for much of its length like a bucolic Russian fairy tale. The scary scenes when they come are in the last 20 minutes or so.

What makes "Vij" so wonderful are the lovingly shot scenes of rural Russia. The faces of all the peasants are shown in frequent close-up: ruddy, jovial, deeply lined with characterful wrinkles, blue-gray eyes twinkling. The camera is used to great effect in close-ups, blurry shots, spinning around our hero, zooming in and out, and those loving shots of farm houses and livestock. It often has a dream-like character and certain supernatural scenes are extremely surreal and effective. The blend of lighthearted comedy and echoes of folklore and a near-religiosity at times is also extremely effective. The lead does an excellent job as Khoma and his cohort of minders are equally good. Our deceased witch is a picture of beauty and reminds one of Snow White, such is her rosy-cheeked, fairytale beauty.

I could go on and on about what makes this film so wonderful. I'll suffice to comment on one more feature. The music by Karen Khatchaturian (nephew of the great Aram Khatchaturian, he of the "Sabre Dance" and the "Onedin Line" theme music) is very effective and draws on the sounds of several other Russian greats. One reviewer here mentioned both Prokofiev and Rachmaninov. I thought the exact same thing in the same scenes. There is an overall Prokofevian sound to the music and the choral numbers bring to mind Rachmaninov's "All-Night Vigil", most likely intentionally. The music in the demon scenes draws on Mussorgsky's "Nite on Bald Mountain" with its eerie string scratchings, again most likely intentionally. These are wonderful and evocative sources for Khatchaturian to draw from.

In summation, this is a cinematic masterpiece and is a must for fans of Russian cinema or classic cinema in general. Horror fans who can enjoy say, "Nosferatu", "The Cabinet of Dr Caligari", "Black Sunday", "Carnival of Souls" or other early greats, will no doubt want to seek this out. "Vij" is one of the early greats of the genre which it also transcends.

Since I missed the showings other posters have mentioned, it took awhile for me to catch up with this on DVD. Nine and a half out of ten; a really wonderful horror fantasy. I would add only that the young preists harrowing experience

might well have inspired the Western horror novel and film "The Exorsist." I like this one, however, much better. This film is funny, scary, and visualy impressive. A real gem.

Good fairy-tale that can show what potential existed in Russian cinema decades ago. What makes it so special is not special effects but special rich national atmosphere: costumes, huts, talks, dancing, music, etc. It all has Russian flavour (Ukrainian, if you like). This film was very popular among Soviet kids and truly it remains the highest achievement of Russian cinema in horror/comedy genre. Years have passed but time only points out that it is an example of professional and artistic cinema.

9 out of 10 (have a feeling that its makers were restrained and were not allowed to dish all the horrors out). Thank you for attention.

Gogol's short story 'Viy' is freely available to read online, and I recommend it not just for the sake of perusing old literature, but certainly also before watching this adaptation.

My first impression upon watching (before I took time to read the story) was that the cultural context outweighs the content. Subpar effects I can forgive; after all, this was 1967. But the execution of the concept is unconvincing. Some films get by just fine with letting nothing happen (relatively speaking) until the last 5 minutes; this is not one of them.

Upon reading the original story, I was surprised that 'Viy' is actually a pretty faithful adaptation. Some details that round out the story or setting are lost, but as I read I noted no few things from 1836 echoed in 1967.

That faithfulness does improve my opinion of the movie, but it's strange for a fairly true adaptation to yet be weak and unconvincing. Is it Gogol's fault? Maybe; his concept could be developed more. But I think my issue is faithfully adapting such a short tale into a more than hour-long film. Think of the classic "scary story" about the kid who is dared to visit a grave, and to stick his knife into the ground as proof he was there. Imagine if that were adapted into a 77-minute film.

Gogol's 'Viy' is fine as a short folk tale. Sufficient detail makes it feel real. The film, however, tries to pad the length with longer scenes, while omitting details or failing to make them clear. It tries to turn a simple cottage into a skyscraper without fortifying the structure.

The scene in which villagers gossip about "the witch" omits half the content, a few details, and too much clarity to make sense in the film. The movie as a whole relies heavily on the visuals of its finale, yet lack's Gogol's narrative description to necessarily convey what happens.

Again, I think I appreciate the film more for its cultural context--accordingly the "first horror film officially released in the Soviet era." Enjoying Gogol's story and the film in tandem seems the ideal course of action, but that emphasizes to me that the film can't quite stand on its own.

Nikolai Gogol was a Ukrainian-Russian author. His works included "The Government Inspector" (filmed as "The Inspector General" starring Danny Kaye). But one of his most famous works is "Viy", whose title refers to a demonic entity. A notable movie adaptation of this story was Mario Bava's "Black Sunday", starring Barbara Steele. This was a loose adaptation; while watching it I suspected that the main purpose was to show off Barbara Steele.

But here we have a more faithful adaptation. And believe me, it has some intense scenes! Parts of the movie reminded me of Vincent Price movies, but once the main character has to face the body, things really get going. I guess that the point is that a well done horror flick is bound to be fun no matter which country it comes from. The Soviet Union's first horror movie isn't, say, "The Shining", but it delivers what it promises. I enjoyed it.

Circumstances beyond his or anyone's control seem to spell doom for an inexperienced priest. The strange and scary witch he confronts will probably frighten grown men. Had the great pleasure of being introduced to this movie at the Egyptian in Hollywood last year. Make it available on VHS and I'll buy myself a copy immediatly and give it as a gift as well! It's funny, too.

Full Review on my blog max4movies: Viy is a Soviet horror movie adaption of Nicolai Gogol's short story of the same name, which itself is heavily influenced by dark Ukrainian folklore tales. It is about a young philosopher who is forced to pray for three nights for a witch he previously killed. Due to its great atmosphere, the powerful performances - that are, however, mostly apparent in the latter half of the movie - and the eerie score and chanting of the people, the movie is a great example of a low-brow, yet effective horror movie. Read my full review on my blog movie-discourse.

Simple, yes. It's not modern, that's all. And that's the point. It's an older movie and even when it was made, the material it was made of was old. That works. And, it might seem like a dull idea - three truant seminarians, a philosopher, a theologian, and an orator, as they call themselves, on leave in the Russian countryside.

But, first, the filming is beautiful, outdoor country life for the most part - and I mean a-way out in the country of feudal Russia. Elegant, deliberate shots, artfully done - faces loaded with character (and, yes, check out the witch!); the country; the church, the age, the situation – you are transported to a place where a witch may just be.

Be sure to catch the music. The incidental music could be Prokofiev, by the sound. The hymn that comes about half an hour in could be a bit Rachmaninov's Vespers, while the camera pans the procession to and icons within, matching the piety on the faces of the servants as they lay the master's daughter to rest. Really beautiful in a way we can reproduce neither here nor now. (BTW, the English dubs are also well done.) For suspense, the transformation of the student meeting the real world - real? – really - a very naive youth encountering the witch. And doesn't it happen every day? And so, a moral – cool!

The film has all the well done elements of a neatly cinema-fied classic. Not at all trivial.

What could a remake offer, and what would it take away?

Previously filmed by Maria Bava in black & white, this richly coloured Russian version recalls those Eastern European fantasies the BBC used to regularly screen throughout the sixties & seventies and shares the bleak atmosphere of Jack Clayton's adaptation of 'The Bespoke Overcoat', with a spooky, long-haired witch that glides about like that in a modern Japanese horror; although a Japanese version would never have told this tale so succinctly.

While I will admit the ending of this movie wasn't enough to truly scare me in the way that other horror films do today, the climax brought a smile to my face. This isn't a movie I'd recommend to people that aren't genuine cinephiles, because I honestly think most audiences would find this movie a little anticlimactic. For me, however, this was a look back at film history, to a time when horror films seldom came from the Soviet Union. If you're a cinephile, you owe it to yourself to see this movie, not just because it's entertaining, but also because of its significance.

I'll admit it here myself. I'm judging this based on today's standards and maybe that's a little unfair. But then again, it's not on me when a movie is not good enough to stand the test of time.

There's absolutely nothing likeable in or about this movie. And I'm generally more than charitable to movies that might not be to my preferences, but this one was just me looking at the clock hoping it's over soon.

I get the folklore behind it, but it just seems like such a waste of resources getting this made. Things happen... why? Who cares? It's folklore. What comes of it? Who cares? It's folklore. Is it in the very least enjoyable? Who cares? It's folklore.

Yea, I'd like to say it wasn't my cup of tea, but I felt like I was served an empty cup.