A centuries old urn is discovered in a coffin buried in 1815. The seemingly innocuous artifacts in the urn hold the powers of an ancient evil. The historians who open it succeed in unleashing the once buried evil back in to the world. Within the contents of the urn is the secret behind The Mother of Tears.
This is the third entry in Dario Argento’s Three Mothers Trilogy and it is unarguably the weakest. Mother of Tears lacks many of the elements that made the other two films great. Suspiria and Inferno both featured bold display of color and violent, yet tastefully done effects. Argento casts aside the visually delightful use of color for his third entry. Also, he crosses the taste boundary in Mother of Tears. It’s not enough for us to simply see a woman being torn apart in the opening seuence. We are subjected to watching her intestinal tract torn out of her midsection. That is too much. Argento has always been known to push the envelope, which I appreciate, but he crossed over in to territory that I see as below his, usually refined, taste level in Mother of Tears.
The films’ plot line is interesting. The pacing isn’t bad. The movie held my interest. The gore effects, although overly gruesome are well done. I think that, taken as its own piece, Mother of Tears might even be a decent film. But, when you hold it up to films like Suspiria, there is just no comparison. What really bothers me is that Argento had decades to complete the Three Mothers Trilogy. He had ample time to think about and realize a masterpiece. Instead, we got Mother of Tears.
I didn’t hate Mother of Tears. I was just disappointed that it didn’t turn out to be more than it was. After all the years of waiting, I felt that Argento owed his fans more than what we got. It’s important that Argento fans see Mother of Tears for closure on the trilogy. But, make sure to keep your expectations low, and maybe you won’t be too disappointed.