Don't listen to the Hype. It's awful

It's easily one of the freshest, sharpest and most enjoyable films of this year.

This is a coming of age storyline that you've seen in one form or another for decades. It takes a truly unique voice to make yet another one worth watching.

This is a dark and sometimes deeply uncomfortable drama

The 1955 film is an abstract expressionist take on a dark and disturbing subject. Not for all tastes, but I find it entrancing. A masterpiece. The original sound track is brilliant, with music that was composed by George Antheil, an American avant-garde composer who lived from 1900 to 1959.Then some knuckleheads bought the rights to the film and decided it needed some histrionic narration thrown in here and there. The narration is a distracting annoyance and detracts seriously from the film. Many people on archive.org complained about this and despaired over what could be done. Several people claimed the narrator is Ed McMahon, the intro man for the old Johnny Carson show. I don't know how they came to this conclusion. One enterprising person created his own electronic musical soundtrack, but that eliminated all the original audio. So how can you watch it with the original soundtrack but without that imbecilic narration? I found a way.I ported the video file to an audio WAV file (using freeware tools) and opened it in Audacity, a wonderful tool for audio editing, also available as freeware. Whenever that annoying voice appeared, I selected that portion of the audio stream and set it to silent. Then I copied a nearby portion of sound from the original sound track equivalent in time and pasted it over the silent portion. I used VirtualDub (more freeware) to apply the modified sound track to the video. The resulting sound track is narration free! We have the original Dementia back! Find it at archive.org.

Caught this on TCM last night. I stayed up to watch it because I have a soft spot for these kinds of pictures: Low budget campy productions with brief flashes of style and genius.Daughter of Horror is a great surprise. A really odd discovery; the cinematography is some of the best from the 1950's. Perhaps that was the point of the whole thing;because there isn't any dialog and the story,well hey the movie is called Daughter of Horror! Most of this experiment is truly cinematic;some really striking stuff in the middle of the dreary nonsense. But that aside, I'd love to see this in a cinema. And I'd love to see another effort by the director. This man is something else!Check it out for yourself.

DAUGHTER … is an old curiosity—conceived as a foray into a crazy woman's mind. The approach is impressionist, i.e. a boosted POV. It is impressing and pertinent. A surrealist exercise, In one of the previous comments here, I spoke about the poems as a cinematographic species of the silent movies.It predates the Quays; on the other hand, my surrealist dish is more like Fellini and Bunuel. DAUGHTER OF HORROR pertains to the same species, as an ambitious, averagely daring, ingenious ,overrated yet intriguing try; it predates the Quays, which means, again, surrealism in bolus.In the epoch, there was some controversy; but IMDb offers already this sort of historical tips, I believe.

The movie is about a day in the life of a woman who is going insane. To show that she is mentally ill, she overacts a lot and the narrator tells us she's "going mad". Along the way, she goes out with a fat guy who looks like he could be Orson Welles' brother and he later takes a header off a building in one of the only interesting moments in the movie.This is a strange little film that is very cheaply made--and it sure shows. The film was shot without sound (probably using 8mm or some other cheap type of film) and had some sound effects and an overbearing narration added later. In fact, the narration was the most obtrusive and unintentionally hilarious I have ever heard and it is said in such a silly and over-the-top manner you'd just have to hear it to believe it. As a result of these cost-cutting actions, it's not surprising that the film is bad, though the idea of trying to make this sort of film was pretty original. Plus, it's VERY hard to make it through the entire film.