Taking place during the early colonization of America, "Eyes of Fire" is a remarkable hybrid of horror and mysticism within a western setting. Will Smythe (Dennis Lipscomb) is a hypocritical, but charismatic preacher who is relatively new to the small settlement of Dalton's Ferry. Traveling with him is Leah, an odd girl, who seemingly possesses otherworldly powers. Her mother, suspected of being a witch, was burned alive. While residing in the settlement, Smythe beds a bevy of women, among them the wife of Marion Dalton (Guy Boyd), a trapper spending most of his time away from home. The townsfolk disapprove of Smythe's extracurricular activities and attempt to hang him, but he's rescued by both Leah and a small group of the settlers who see something in the man. They flee the township, hoping to find their own personal "promised land" in which to settle down. Eventually forced into a valley by marauding Indians, Smythe promptly declares it to be the sanctuary they've been seeking. As they begin to start a new life, little do they know that this place is already inhabited by a devil witch and her ghastly minions.Filmed in the wilds of Missouri, Avery Crounse's wondrously offbeat gem is one of the most beautifully photographed horror films of the 80's, American or otherwise. The dense woodlands are naturally pleasing to the eye, but they become something else entirely when seen through the stunning direction of Crounse. His style combines the contemplative visual poetry of a Terrence Malick with truly nightmarish imagery and acidic color fades. He makes sure that, while lovely in appearance, these woods are deeply foreboding. There's an eeriness in the air, one that never quite goes away. Brad Fiedel's score adds to the unease of the situation and gives off an otherworldly vibe to match.In spite of a low budget, the period setting feels authentic. You never once believe that these people aren't living in the colonial era. What a fascinating period that was, and I feel that more horror films should be set in and around that time. The all-encompassing isolation, the lack of modern weapons or technology and the endless amount of rich history are all elements which are positively ripe for tales of the macabre. Most of all, though, there are the superstitions and folklore which were so rampant back in those days. This continent was still a relatively unknown place then, none of the settlers really having a clue as to what they might encounter. I don't think there is anything more terrifying than the unknown, so what better time than the days of the unknown to tell a story of this nature? Crounse certainly realizes this, as he milks the period setting and the olden days mythology for all that they're worth.I've seen many reviews deriding the special effects, which is absurd. They are not only perfectly believable, but quite well-done at that. The hideous look of the devil witch herself and the surprisingly numerous explosions were especially impressive. On the acting front, Lipscomb plays slimy as if it were second nature to him. Boyd is strong in the role of foil, while Kathleen Crockett steals the show as Leah, a character that could have fallen into camp if not played correctly."Eyes of Fire" is right up there with "Black Rainbow" as one of the unsung genre classics of the 80's. It's a one-of-a-kind experience in desperate need of a proper release, one which preferably restores the original "Cry Blue Sky" cut, an ultimate holy grail for me, and allows the film's brilliant photography to shine through to it's fullest extent. The work of a true visionary, gems like this one shouldn't be forgotten.

Don't you just love coming across films that you've never heard of before and to your surprise it turns out better than it expected. The independent low-budget horror drama "Eyes of Fire" would be one of those films you'll either become attach to or simply can't fathom the fuss. It's easy to see why it's a sleeper though --- just look when it came out (just think of the horror of this period) and there's no-one in the cast that would really stand-out on paper. However the story alone had me intrigued. From beginning to end, it projects up as nothing more than a bizarre, hallucinating mood piece. While not completely satisfying (due to its experimental tailoring consisting of some convoluted writing in the latter acts with a weak ending and cheap tacked on final frame), its unconventional style holds you there despite its purposely slow-grinding pace. The mysteriously spooky nature of it had me thinking of the similar in vein western / horror variation "The Shadow of Chikara (1977)".A creepy folklore / witchcraft horror with absorbing atmospherics (the rich Missouri locations are alienating and suitably eerie) and a mystical layer is formed by it inspired narrative (where its told through narrated flashback) and distinctively lyrical script as we follow some western pioneers led by a reverend on the American frontier in the search of the promised land, but they stumble upon a valley that's inhabited by a devil witch and her captured souls. What really came out of left field was the dazzling direction of writer / director Avery Crounse. While methodical and low-scale, he managed some visually breath-taking imagery of edgy horror and haunting beauty caught by the elegantly earthy and unhinged cinematography. Even during the daylight sequences, it remains just as unsettling and also the authentic, fidgety sound effects of the forest simply unnerve. Brad Fiedel's music score is slight, but skin-crawling and the variable special effects feature plenty of tripped-out colour schemes, tree decorations (you'll see) and loud explosions. It's serviceable, and the make-up FX is decently projected with a spooky looking phantom witch. It's those eyes! There are modest performances by the likes of Dennis Lipscomb, Guy Boyd, Rebecca Stanley and Kathleen Crockett in a very contemplative turn.Fascinatingly offbeat, if meandering and jaded mystical spook flick.

This is a wonderful find for any horror film buff who can appreciate the slow-build of the typical "giallo" film, to which it compares stylistically, with a good dose of Gothic influence. Rather than load all of the budget toward the effects and skimp everywhere else, the film-makers opted to use the relatively unknown and overlooked talents of the best low-budget effects and pyrotechnics person in the business, Tassilo Baur. (I personally witnessed him put together special effects on a USC student film in 1981, on a budget of about $100 that looked like thousands. If you look carefully at the effects here, you'll see how well-realized they are for such little money.) Anyway, the effort in this gem was well-placed in the story, the direction and the acting. Overall good production values make this look as good as most studio stuff, and it's much more thoughtful. Great eerie locations and soundtrack add to the atmosphere. Fans of horror films that offer more than violence only for the sake of violence will appreciate this find. Recommended!

I finally watched EYES OF FIRE and I have to say that it was good. Not great. Just good, certainly for a low budget independent movie. The story, about a bunch of quirky people cast out of an uptight colonial town and decide to live in a cursed area of the forest, was really captivating in some part, while slightly laughable in other parts. The project has a "Shakespeare in the Park" kinda feel to it. I'll let you decide whether that's a good thing or not. Speaking of Shakespeare, the dialogue was pretty good (the words and expressions used sounded authentic). Some of the horror elements in EYES OF FIRE now look like something from your average MIGHTY MORPHIN POWER RANGER episode, which is unfortunate because the rest is fairly good (acting, location, mood...). The really creepy moments in EOF was the woman finding the place with all the feathers. And the shots of the little indian girl with the "eyes of fire". But, in the end, if the nudity was removed from EOF, this would basically be a kid's film, which doesn't necessarily mean it's a bad thing but EOF is certainly not in the same league as the grueling Canadian backwoods slasher, RITUALS. The only really bad thing in EOF is the ending (I don't think they had any idea how to end it) and the "surprised ending." Geez!Thinking about EYES OF FIRE, I'm shocked to see how much of William Friedkin's THE GUARDIAN owes to this small budget horror film. In EYES OF FIRE, the evil element is a tree (sculpted with human faces on it, like a totem), guarded by a creature who looks like a walking tree, and who controls the spirits of the people it killed/possessed (shown as naked actors). The tree/devil tries to get the group's kids. This is basically the story in THE GUARDIAN, except that it takes place in modern times.If you're into obscure horror films, like I am, make sure to check out EYES OF FIRE. It's an interesting, if not all too successful, atmospheric period horror film.