Poor artist gets eye gouged out while committing a robbery. When his eye heals, he goes on a killing spree and cuts out women's eyes with a spoon.Poor artist gets eye gouged out while committing a robbery. When his eye heals, he goes on a killing spree and cuts out women's eyes with a spoon.Poor artist gets eye gouged out while committing a robbery. When his eye heals, he goes on a killing spree and cuts out women's eyes with a spoon.
Mildred Hinkley
- Old lady
- (uncredited)
Larry Hunter
- Harry Silver
- (uncredited)
Mary Lamay
- Mrs. Silver
- (uncredited)
Linda Southern
- Blonde Prostitute
- (uncredited)
- Director
- Writer
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
Hahahaha! This film is great. If you are looking for low-budget crap from the early 70's, check this grade Z film out. No budget, horrible editing, some atrocious acting, and eyeballs.
The plot is so simple, even a 10 year old could have thought of it. A struggling artist decides to rob a woman's apartment in the middle of the night so he can afford to keep his shop open. In the process of the robbery, the woman wakes up and scoops his eyeball out with a spoon. He gets away, only after screaming "MY EYE! AHHHAHHH my eyeeeee....." over and over again. This whole event changes his life and he decides to start killing woman, remove their eyeballs and use them to further his art career.
This movie is so bad, but I really enjoyed it. The beginning of the movie is possibly one of the funniest moments I have ever seen in a movie. When he gets his eye removed and starts screaming about it, the sound editors decided to loop his scream over and over again, looping it about 6 or 7 times. You just have to see it to really understand.
The gore in the film is hilarious. There isn't a whole lot of it, but there are a few scenes noteworthy. If anything, it is far more bloody then it is gory. Don't expect HG Lewis here, though.
If you like this stuff, it is worth a watch. I thought it was great, but that is just my opinion. 7/10
The plot is so simple, even a 10 year old could have thought of it. A struggling artist decides to rob a woman's apartment in the middle of the night so he can afford to keep his shop open. In the process of the robbery, the woman wakes up and scoops his eyeball out with a spoon. He gets away, only after screaming "MY EYE! AHHHAHHH my eyeeeee....." over and over again. This whole event changes his life and he decides to start killing woman, remove their eyeballs and use them to further his art career.
This movie is so bad, but I really enjoyed it. The beginning of the movie is possibly one of the funniest moments I have ever seen in a movie. When he gets his eye removed and starts screaming about it, the sound editors decided to loop his scream over and over again, looping it about 6 or 7 times. You just have to see it to really understand.
The gore in the film is hilarious. There isn't a whole lot of it, but there are a few scenes noteworthy. If anything, it is far more bloody then it is gory. Don't expect HG Lewis here, though.
If you like this stuff, it is worth a watch. I thought it was great, but that is just my opinion. 7/10
Whoa! This low-budget experiment in horror was directed by me, Kent Bateman, and with few funds, we did the best we could. Obviously, it wasn't fitted with enough blood and gore for the distributor, so the producer, Ron Sullivan, added some scenes. I only wish to make a comment on the assertion of a reviewer who erroneously referred to me, Kent Bateman, as aka Henri Pachard. Mr. Ron Sullivan, the producer of the film, aka Henri Pachard, producer of over 300 porno films, took my director's cut and added footage I never wrote or directed. This is just to set the record straight. Kent Bateman is not HENRI PACHARD. Please refer to my own IMDb listing. If you go to Henri Pachard's IMDb listing, you will see that he doesn't even list Headless Eyes as one of his films.
My eyes! AAOOOAAAUUUGGHH! My eyes! That's what I screamed myself after watching this atrocity of a film. No gore, no effects, no acting, no sense. The movie opens with a guy robbing a woman's apartment while she sleeps, and when she wakes up and screams, he tries to silence her by getting on top of her and smothering her mouth and nose. Fortunately she grabs a nearby spoon on the nightstand and slides it along the intruder's temple no wait, she actually penetrates his eye socket with it!?! With his eye popped out and dangling by its nerve, the man stumbles out of the apartment, out the hall, down the fire escape and crawls to a stop in the alley. The entire time howling the ever-looped line "My EYE! My eyyyyyye!" In case you miss him hearing it during this opening credit sequence, don't worry. It's played and replayed every 7 minutes for the rest of the film. During which time we see the main character (who happens to be a failed artist of some sort) finally get his comeuppance by cutting out the eyes of women and "freezing" them in blocks of ice (?) as art.
The highlight scene has to be the news report in front of the apartment of one of the killer's first victims. First of all (as someone else has pointed out), nobody shows the first hint of suspicion about the creepy-looking guy with the eyepatch being at the crime scene where the victim had her eyes cut out. Secondly, since when are funeral services held at a person's apartment building, complete with coffin being carried down the steps into the street? And lastly, you gotta love the reporter's interview of the folks. He asks one woman what she knew about the murdered, and her answer is pricelessly generic. Perplexed at the woman's response, the reporter realizes he has lost track of who the actor with the scripted line is amongst the crowd and openly calls out the improvised line, "I understand one of you knew the victim quite well" to find the proper response. Obviously, whoever it was that had the all-important line for the scene was stuck in traffic when it was filmed, because we don't get any good answer for the poor reporter.
Oh, and about the guy who plays the "eyeball killer". He's a lot of fun to watch. I always wondered what it would be like if a burned-out community theatre director played a C-horror serial killer. Now I know. With hilarious monologues and delicious overacting, he hams up everything beautifully in what can best be described as Shakespeare's "Othello" meets Lustig's "Maniac". From victim to victim to potential admirer to the incredibly lame finale, we know this guy's insane because he keeps rambling to himself that he's "got to finish" something or other. My guess is there's only about 15 copies of this movie left in existence. It needs to get snatched up quick and given the DVD treatment, so that low-budget horror fans everywhere can take it home and give it the MST treatment. It is indeed that bad.
The highlight scene has to be the news report in front of the apartment of one of the killer's first victims. First of all (as someone else has pointed out), nobody shows the first hint of suspicion about the creepy-looking guy with the eyepatch being at the crime scene where the victim had her eyes cut out. Secondly, since when are funeral services held at a person's apartment building, complete with coffin being carried down the steps into the street? And lastly, you gotta love the reporter's interview of the folks. He asks one woman what she knew about the murdered, and her answer is pricelessly generic. Perplexed at the woman's response, the reporter realizes he has lost track of who the actor with the scripted line is amongst the crowd and openly calls out the improvised line, "I understand one of you knew the victim quite well" to find the proper response. Obviously, whoever it was that had the all-important line for the scene was stuck in traffic when it was filmed, because we don't get any good answer for the poor reporter.
Oh, and about the guy who plays the "eyeball killer". He's a lot of fun to watch. I always wondered what it would be like if a burned-out community theatre director played a C-horror serial killer. Now I know. With hilarious monologues and delicious overacting, he hams up everything beautifully in what can best be described as Shakespeare's "Othello" meets Lustig's "Maniac". From victim to victim to potential admirer to the incredibly lame finale, we know this guy's insane because he keeps rambling to himself that he's "got to finish" something or other. My guess is there's only about 15 copies of this movie left in existence. It needs to get snatched up quick and given the DVD treatment, so that low-budget horror fans everywhere can take it home and give it the MST treatment. It is indeed that bad.
There's a lot to be said about this grisly extreme low budget thing, much of it not too good so far, however it is a precursor to the Henenlotter style, not a copy of such, as was implied by another commenter. It's not hard to imagine that Henenlotter, Abel Ferrara and maybe even Scorcese caught this at a midnight screening or something when they were younger. If viewed being mindful of its year of production (released 1973 but production started around 1970-71), it comes on the heels of the angst-ridden French New Wave and borrows much from that style. Every independent film "artist" was familiar with the French New Wave, especially New Yorked based ones
There are actually moments that are quite unnerving watching this eye-stealing serial killer move in and out of a psychosis and stalk his prey. Not as nicely done as Michael Lerner's eye-obsessed maniac in ANGUISH, but still effective. It's hinted that he may have two personalities, but it really seems more like schizophrenia. (No, they are not the same thing!) The gore effects are poor to adequate for the time and budget, they would be considered lame by modern standards. As typical for horror films of this period, it's reflective of the bloodshed and violence of Vietnam that was consistently broadcast over television, and of the dread regarding the effects of the war on returning veterans. This is a common theme, that has become more visible as time passes, in horror and other films of violence of the time
While the main character, the killer, has nothing to do with the war, the mental anguish and violence are sure themes of this period. You won't like this much if you must have super-realistic gore effects and hyper-intense action with cardboard characters, but for those horror fans who lived through this period and those who are interested in studying the horror films of the time, this one is worth the few dollars you can buy it for on VHS on Amazon, less than what it costs on ebay, where it's available on bootleg DVDs. With a wonderfully eerie soundtrack as well and a nicely done understated ending. Nice to view on a double-feature with THE SEVERED ARM.
There are actually moments that are quite unnerving watching this eye-stealing serial killer move in and out of a psychosis and stalk his prey. Not as nicely done as Michael Lerner's eye-obsessed maniac in ANGUISH, but still effective. It's hinted that he may have two personalities, but it really seems more like schizophrenia. (No, they are not the same thing!) The gore effects are poor to adequate for the time and budget, they would be considered lame by modern standards. As typical for horror films of this period, it's reflective of the bloodshed and violence of Vietnam that was consistently broadcast over television, and of the dread regarding the effects of the war on returning veterans. This is a common theme, that has become more visible as time passes, in horror and other films of violence of the time
While the main character, the killer, has nothing to do with the war, the mental anguish and violence are sure themes of this period. You won't like this much if you must have super-realistic gore effects and hyper-intense action with cardboard characters, but for those horror fans who lived through this period and those who are interested in studying the horror films of the time, this one is worth the few dollars you can buy it for on VHS on Amazon, less than what it costs on ebay, where it's available on bootleg DVDs. With a wonderfully eerie soundtrack as well and a nicely done understated ending. Nice to view on a double-feature with THE SEVERED ARM.
My review was written in March 1983 after a Greenwich Village screening.
"The Headless Eyes" is a 1971 gore thriller so obscure that no credits or details about it are listed in comprehensive horror encyclopedias. It is reviewed here, finally, for the record.
Set in New York, picture opens with lead Bo Brundin robbing a woman in her apartment to raise his rent money (he's a struggling artist). Defending herself with a teaspoon, the victim pokes his eye out, setting of Brundin's grisly mania of killing women and gouging out their eyes with a spoon of his own.
Generically related to the familiar mad sculptor/wax museum films, story has Brundin creating plastic artwork incorporating the eyes. Plentiful blood and adequately simulated gore account for the picture's X rating, awarded by the MPA A in 1973.
Technical quality is extremely poor, with a grainy blowup from 16mm lensing.
Director Kent Bateman did an about-face by helming the G-rated "Land of No Return" starring Mel Torme. "Eyes" is interesting for the earnest overacting of Brundin, who later moved up to a leading role opposite Robert Redford in "The Great Waldo Pepper".
"The Headless Eyes" is a 1971 gore thriller so obscure that no credits or details about it are listed in comprehensive horror encyclopedias. It is reviewed here, finally, for the record.
Set in New York, picture opens with lead Bo Brundin robbing a woman in her apartment to raise his rent money (he's a struggling artist). Defending herself with a teaspoon, the victim pokes his eye out, setting of Brundin's grisly mania of killing women and gouging out their eyes with a spoon of his own.
Generically related to the familiar mad sculptor/wax museum films, story has Brundin creating plastic artwork incorporating the eyes. Plentiful blood and adequately simulated gore account for the picture's X rating, awarded by the MPA A in 1973.
Technical quality is extremely poor, with a grainy blowup from 16mm lensing.
Director Kent Bateman did an about-face by helming the G-rated "Land of No Return" starring Mel Torme. "Eyes" is interesting for the earnest overacting of Brundin, who later moved up to a leading role opposite Robert Redford in "The Great Waldo Pepper".
Did you know
- TriviaLarge portions of the soundtrack are taken from the LPs "TVMUSIC 101" (France 1969) and "TVMusic 102" (France, 1970) by Cecil Leuter (aka Roger Roger) and Georges Teperino.
- Alternate versionsThe Blu Ray released by Code Red omits the title card
- ConnectionsFeatured in Video Nasties: Draconian Days (2014)
- How long is The Headless Eyes?Powered by Alexa
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content