MOTHER OF TEARS (2007)

Director: Dario Argento

Writers: Dario Argento, Jace Anderson, Adam Gierasch, Walter Fasano (uncredited), Simona Simonetti (uncredited), Thomas De Quincey (book) (uncredited)

Producers: Claudio Argento, Dario Argento, Marina Berlusconi, Giulia Marletta

Cast: Asia Argento, Adam James, Moran Atias, Cristian Solimeno, Udo Kier, Daria Nocolodi, Valéria Cavalli, Silvia Rubino, Philippe Leroy, Coralina Cataldi-Tassoni, Robert Madison, Jun Ichikawa, Tomasso Banfi, Clive Riche, Barbara Mautino, Franco Leo, Gisella Marengo, Marica Coco, Luca Pescatore, Alessandro Zeme, Antonio Pescatore, Stefano Fregni, Simonetta Solder 

In Italy an ancient urn is unearthed from a Catholic churchyard. It is opened at a museum in Rome and found to contain the talismans of the witch Mater Lachrymarum, aka the Mother of Tears. Strange beings suddenly appear to reclaim the talismans and soon violence is breaking out all over Rome as the Mother of Tears (Moran Atias) is resurrected. She is going to preside over a reunion of witches from all over the world to bring on the second fall of Rome and usher in an age of sinful chaos. Perhaps the only person that can defeat her is Sarah Mandy (Asia Argento), one of the museum staff that opened the urn. Sarah is the daughter of a white witch (Daria Nicolodi) that many years ago opposed another evil witch related to the Mother of Tears. Sarah has inherited her mother’s power, but is being stalked by the minions of the Mother of Tears. 

The Flashback Fanatic movie review

Mother of Tears is the long awaited climax to Italian director Dario Argento’s The Three Mothers trilogy of films that began with Suspiria (1977) and Inferno (1980). Suspiria remains Argento’s biggest hit while Inferno had a more mixed reception, but Argentophiles usually dig it. Anything anticipated for as long as the conclusion to this trilogy is almost always going to disappoint many. It is safe to say that Mother of Tears let down just about everyone.

This third film tries for a more epic scope, which is fitting as it is concluding The Three Mothers trilogy. I think that the more intimate stories of the first two films get away with being exercises in style over substance. In fact, they are even more illogical, or perhaps inexplicable, than this last film. But it is the style that makes them memorable experiences. They do something many films can’t be bothered with even attempting: They make you feel something unique. Mother of Tears delivers some weirdness and gruesome gore, but it does not have the same color saturated extremes of visual style that Argento lavished on the two earlier films. The musical score is not as strident and memorable as earlier Goblin scores, though Goblin’s Claudio Simonetti is the composer here. The closing theme by Simonetti with his group Daemonia is very catchy, though.

The major differences between this film and the two earlier ones are the broader scope of the events in the story, the faster pace of the events, and a bit more exposition regarding The Three Mothers legend. The filmic style is more generic, yet there is still some of Argento’s trademark out-of-left-field weirdness. Why the hellish minions of the Mother of Tears have a monkey as a sort of familiar is anybody’s guess. Then again, why do more traditional witches have black cats as their familiars? I can accept these quirky touches. Many of the quirks are more Argento style extremes of cruelty, such as the graphic violence and the strange tools used to dish out the punishment. If Argento is pushing himself creatively in this film, it is in the devising of new ways to kill. That is something that Argento has always been up for.

I think some of the dissatisfaction fans have had with this last film of the trilogy is that, in a film with a more conventional visual style and pace, some of the missteps seem more obvious. The police detective (Cristian Solimeno), who is a cardboard character of no interest, has no meaningful interaction with our heroine Sarah, yet he just shows up for the climax as her ally. Then there is a pack of cackling, garishly made up, sorta-goth girls that are supposed to be some of the witches arriving in Rome for the evil congregation to commemorate the rebirth of the Mother of Tears. They carry on like some bratty high school clique teasing all the passers-by. They are obnoxious to the nth degree rather than indicating any sort of power and rousing any sense of dread. The coaching that Sarah keeps receiving from the spirit of her dead mother to advise her where to go or how to summon a needed power is quite tedious and all-too convenient. Of course, that is also never specific enough to just give Sarah all the answers she needs to stay out of harm’s way and destroy the Mother of Tears.

Some ambiguity in supernatural stories is a good thing. If everything could be spelled out chapter and verse, the supernatural would be science. But when you have things going apeshit all over the place and someone needs to confront and overcome the evil causing it all, I feel some reason needs to be employed. Otherwise, everything is just an arbitrary daydream instead of good narrative. Argento’s earlier supernatural films also seemed rather arbitrary, but the style carried them. Sometimes style takes time and thought that I think is missing here. Maybe the need to wrap up the trilogy made for a busier film that needed to be more deliberate, yet it still feels empty. It’s not that delirious synthesis of the nightmarish and the real that make Argento’s best films work. It’s just a bunch of weird and cruel shit hitting the fan in our mundane world. That is a fine approach to have with the material if you have interesting characters and an intriguing plot. That is not the case in Mother of Tears.

Liking Argento’s work is often hard to explain beyond the great kills, cool music, and the cinematic style of lighting and camera movements. I think Argento works best when he pushes extremes of behavior and film style to the limit without violating the reality of the situation and shattering audience credulity. Many of Argento’s detractors say that he shatters their credulity most of the time. I think I prefer his giallo films because they are supposed to try for believability while still being outrageous. That is an interesting contrast. Utterly fantasy-oriented stuff should not just be an excuse to go bonkers on self-indulgent imagery and effects and call it a vision. Anyone in Hollywood with enough money can do that shit.

This film is frustrating because it could have been salvaged with a bit more thought about its characters and just what needs to be done to defeat the evil. There is not even any mystery or puzzle to be solved to figure this out, unlike the first two films.

I do appreciate that Asia Argento’s character of Sarah is afraid and not at all ready to play hero amidst all the danger and madness around her. This is a nice and realistic touch.

I wish Valéria Cavalli’s character of Marta were featured much more. She is easily the most intriguing character in the movie, as well as a great beauty. Okay, I admit I find any woman that beautiful intriguing. I knew there had to be some reason to like this flick.

The Mother of Tears herself is also quite magnificent. She just never does much more than fleetingly flaunts her naked beauty, which is never evil in my book. Okay, now that’s two reasons to like this flick.