I COULD SWEAR I ALREADY DID THESE BUT I CAN'T FIND THE DAMNED THINGS SO HERE'S THE GOOD, THE BAD AND THE UGLY - ALL THREE 'HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL' MOVIES...






House On Haunted Hill (1959)
House On Haunted Hill (1999)
Return To House On Haunted Hill (2007)

Wow, I must really have lost my mind because I swear I looked everywhere for my review of these movies and could not find them. AT ALL. I looked everywhere. It started when I got interested in an article about the type of gun the original movie used, and the way people in the movie took them and just waved them around everywhere like they were just, well, props. Plus there was a story problem with the remake I wanted to make sure I pointed out.


The original of course was the best, although very dated (duh, 1959). People have often gotten it confused with the Haunting of Hill House, a novel by Shirley Jackson, written in 1959. I have read more than a couple of people complaining that the movie "wasn't even close to the book". Well, duh. Can't really blame 'em though - when it comes to titles, that era seemed rife with similarities - House On Haunted Hill, The Haunting (based on Jackson's novel), The Haunting of Hell House (based on Richard Matheson's classic Hell House) - my conclusion is that their confusion was inevitable. So.

House On Haunted Hill (1959): One of William Castle's creations (Acclaimed The Super-Shocker Of The Century!) this spook fest was also chock full of stars - most notably Vincent Price as the cuckolded husband of a cold beauty. We've got Richard Long and Elisha Cook and several charactor actors with very long resume's.


In this version the story is superior, although the main dialogue of the women seems to be annoying, piercing screams. Just watch it for five minutes - you'll need to turn the volume down, guaranteed. However, it is still a blast to see Vincent overact, the cheap (but effective) special effects, and the schlocky horror story of a scheming woman getting what's coming to her.

Why did I even start looking? I happened to run across this sweet looking gun, a Colt Model 1903 Pocket Hammer. I wasn't looking FOR guns, just happened to see an article about the original movie and it showed this gun (and how actors in the movie would wave the damned things around in people's faces or swing it all over to emphasize words, fingers always on the trigger) and that got me looking for my movie review... these 'toys' that Vincent passes out to his guests now range anywhere from roughly $700 (if you want a piece of junk) to $2,500.00 and up...



House On Haunted Hill (1999): This remake was panned horribly by critics and yeah, I've got some major problems with it, but it hasn't prevented me from enjoying some of the silly little moments and it is in regular rotation in my movie watching list. But shit somebody dropped the ball (many, many times) while making this movie...

There are so many continuity, logic, factual, and (enter your preference here) errors that it's laughable. There are boom mics visible in a couple of scenes, Chris Kattan empties an already empty scotch bottle (twice), and the guns...

For this movie they used as 'party favors' the SIG-Sauer P228. As soon as one is picked up, it is noted that the magazines have been 'welded shut'. Hmm... would YOU want to put that kind of heat next to live ammo? The purpose was, of course, so that no one would know if they were really loaded with live ammo or blanks. Pfft... eject one, dummy, and you'll know.


From the silly beginning of the 'rollercoaster of the future' starting '20 stories at the top' (today's tallest in America is the Kingda Ka coaster at Six Flags in Jackson, NJ which starts at a staggering 45 stories) with a cameo of Lisa Loeb (singer and wife of Dweezil Zappa) and James Marsters (Buffy's 'Spike'), to the house (which in this version is actually an abandoned mental asylum of course) being the one who 'invites' the guests to the birthday party, this is pretty corny at best.

Geoffrey Rush, whose character was named Stephen Price as an homage to Vincent Price (although it is spelled as 'Steven' on the bank drafts and poster), actually tried to make his look to resemble Ed Wood but instead the combination of his look plus the mustache gave him an eerie resemblance to Vincent as well.

The story is really, really stupid but I still love it. We've got a great cast - Famke Janssen, who I'll watch in just about anything,  Taye Diggs, Peter Gallagher, Chris Kattan who was more hilarious trying NOT to be hilarious, Ali Larter (Final Destination, Resident Evil) as the strong female lead who did NOT scream thank you very much, and of course our main baddie, whacko doctor (because every insane asylum has one) Jeffrey Combs as Dr. Richard Benjamin Vannacutt.

The stakes go up thanks to inflation - where the guests were to receive $10,000 in the original version, this time they are offered $1,000,000 - if they live of course. Since they were really pushing paranormal stuff, this time the house is in control, somehow putting the idea of a party at the house in Evelyn's (Famke Janssen) head, having Price (Geoffrey Rush) agree to it, and have him make the invitations on the computer so the house could erase the list and make its own guest list and get the people it wanted.


This was about revenge. In the 30's, Vannacutt (Jeffrey Combs) was busy ripping people open. When they rebelled, setting the place on fire, he tripped a mechanism that sent the whole place into lockdown, with only five people escaping. The house wants those five - well, their descendants anyway. Duh. The fact that one is a phony and another was adopted doesn't seem to matter...

The 'party' starts with Marilyn Manson butchering a song by the Eurythmics as the guests go to their doom. Yes there are major tactical and logical problems with this story. See, Mr. and Mrs. Price, plus the three guests were picked by a computer to be there. But Blackburn (Peter Gallagher) was not. How did he get an invitation? The wife didn't choose or see the invites, and neither did Price. Duh.


Also a major point that bugged me - the strong female character Sara (Ali Larter) was passing herself off as Ms. Jenzen, one of the descendents. She told one person about it, and he wasn't even around to hear it, yet for the rest of the movie, everyone knew her by her real name. So either they cut out a whole scene, or they were just being lazy.

The freakouts are obvious, the special effects aren't bad, and there's enough gore for a '99 horror film. Again, despite everything, I love this movie. But...

Return To House On Haunted Hill (2007): This straight-to-video abortion is just awful. But I watch it anyway. Despite eight years in between movies, Jeffrey Combs returns as Dr. Vannacutt, and looks exactly the same. The only other names I recognized were Erik Palladino (Dead And Breakfast, 666 Park Avenue) and Andrew Lee Potts (lots and lots of stuff). So. There were several different types of guns and I wasn't particularly interested, sorry.

Even for CGI this is... just sooo awful...

Sara (because she didn't want to come back in another movie) has killed herself so her sister tries to find out why. Why bother when she never paid attention to her anyway, who cares? Sara, despite having millions (she and Eddie got all the money when they survived the first movie), lived in squalor, becoming obsessed with the asylum and the over-used mythology of Baphomet and has somehow gotten hold of Vannacutt's journal to try to 'find the evil' in the house. Umm, again, why? She's out and never has to go back, right?

But they wanted a movie so they slapped some bits from here and junk from there and pretended they were using the same 'house' (which, to be fair, didn't exist anyway). It had been assumed that Mr. Price had thrown a party, then massacred the guests - a hard story to prove since there were no bodies but...


To try to make it interesting (yawwwwn) they have two groups - one who wants the statue of Baphomet for a museum who are, uh, I can't even say good people - they just weren't as evil as the other group who wants the statue to sell, I guess. Sara's sister Ariel is roped into the search which shows more of the 'house' than the previous movie (not impressive in the least). 


To 'explain' things and keep the movie going, a former patient's spirit keeps showing Ariel the icky stuff that happened and how to stop it. Goodie. She's also there to get revenge for her sister Sara who was actually killed by Desmond (Erik Palladino).



Even getting to see Jeffrey Combs in this drek isn't enough to really hold your interest. They up the violence and gore of course, but the story and ending are so dumb that if this thing had a lot of errors, I couldn't pay close enough attention to tell you what they were. And I've seen this thing over a dozen times. Just the masochist in me, I guess.

AAAUUUGGGHHH! I just finished my review and was sorting through the pictures and guess what I found? You got it - I KNEW I'd done this before. Oh well, the original is dated 6/19/12 (since I can't even remember what I had for breakfast yesterday I'm not too surprised I couldn't remember) but I did notice it's pretty bare so if you wanna, check it out but you really don't have to...

                        

And Now For Something Completely Different

Tim Forston vs. Shoy Mohr



It's funny, I've been thinking of being able to do a dual review of a movie we've both seen but I hadn't had a chance to ask him about it yet. I started to message him this morning... and found this. Cool! That boy is not only smart, but intuitive. Now saying this is a him-versus-me kind of thing I guess is a little misleading, but who knows? There may be a point or two we don't agree on - small chance, but maybe. Anywho, enjoy yet another great review by Tim of a movie that should have been great (the book, a 1954 novel I am Legend by Richard Matheson, one of my favorite writers was absolutely terrific) but... well, let's get started. Let the fun begin...




The Last Man on Earth (1964)


This movie has been made and re-made as The Last Man On Earth, The Omega Man, I Am Legend and I Am Omega..

Tim: The last two movies I have reviewed were so horribly bad they made my ears bleed. Now that I am fully healed I feel it's time to review a movie that I absolutely love, whether Shoy likes it or not. Which really means I am going to write this whether she likes it or not, but if no one ever reads it then I will know the answer was not. 

Shoy: You underestimate yourself Tim. Your stuff is great and I would never ignore you. You absolutely loved this? I loved the book, true but I felt this movie had some major flaws. And filming it in Italy but setting it in the United States was kind of weird. But let's continue.


Tim: If you have ever asked yourself, "Where did George Romero get his inspiration for Night of the Living Dead?" read I Am Legend cause that’s the answer. To anyone who is a fan of the novel this movie is pure gold. It opens with wide views of a dead American city. Nobody is anywhere, empty roads, buildings - it is a dead world. Then we meet Robert Morgan (Robert Neville in the novel played by Vincent Price the KING of 60's horror) just waking to his day. 

He believes that the only reason he is immune is because when he was stationed in Panama he was bitten by a bat, so magically he was immune. The year is 1968 it's been three years since the world ended. A virus spread around the world that turned the populace into zombie-like, vampiric creatures, with Morgan being there only remaining survivor.

Shoy: I did like this angle - you don't hear of vampire zombies and even though it seems like an oxymoron it works.

Tim: His days are very mundane and stressful, attempt to contact other possible survivors, make stakes to kill the infected, eat, burn the infected that he kills, drink until he passes out and repeat. One thing that this movie does say which the book really goes more into detail on, Christian vampires fear crosses, Mohammedan (yes I guess that’s what they called Muslims in the sixties) vampires fear a crescent moon, Jewish vampires fear a Star of David, Atheists don’t fear any religious shapes. It really makes a lot more sense than the run of the mill crucifix and holy water mess.


Shoy: Amen to that. I thought how come no one else figured this out in subsequent vampire flicks, but then again, Hollywood is bankrupt with ideas so... we're stuck with Catholic vampires.

Tim: All is going normal for Morgan until he notices steel spears staked through dead bodies during one of his searches of the city. He does not use steel stakes, which would of made a lot more sense to me compared to making wooden stakes every morning but oh well. The importance of this to Morgan is unparalleled, there are other survivors somewhere. He finally meets a girl, Ruth, who seems to be as scared of seeing him as she is of the vampires stalking outside at night. 

She tells how she and her husband survived until now, but she recently lost her husband to the virus. He doesn’t trust her, believing she is infected. He shoves garlic into her face, to which she turns away and vomits. This is instant proof to Morgan that she is infected, because one of the side effects of the virus is an allergy to garlic. Then later on he discovers her injecting herself with an antidote that stops her from turning. She explains how the vaccine works, and that she is with others who are trying to rebuild the world. The people she is with are the next evolution of man in the world. 

He is the past, they have been watching him terrified because several of the vampires he has killed sleeping during the day have been their friends and neighbors, including her husband. They are planning on capturing, and executing him as far as they are concerned he is the monster, who is only awake in the day and murders innocent people in their sleep. They were planning on killing him that very night.


Shoy: We're skipping ahead but it's mostly backstory of how Morgan lost his daughter to the disease, the huge fire pits they were burning bodies in, how he desperately tried to get there before they burned his daughter, and his wife's subsequent death. Also these vampire/zombies are perfectly intelligent, they talk and everything but move really, really slow like zombies. In the subsequent remakes they became much faster... but let's keep skipping ahead.

Tim: Morgan attempts to flee while Ruth tries to explain that he is not a monster but just thought that everyone that he was putting down was already dead. But no one heeds her warning. I did leave a lot of the movie out of this review because it is just too good to ruin it for anyone who has not seen it.

Shoy: Whoops. That's me, the killjoy. Oh well.



Tim: It is definitely a Vincent Price classic. This movie has been remade three times. The Omega Man (1971) starring Charlton Heston, which was FAR different from the original and the novel. The far more well known I Am Legend (2007) starring Will Smith, which does keep some of the original story, even if not much. And a completely horrid abomination known as I Am Omega (2007) Starring Mark Dacascos, who would be a good candidate for an 'I know who that is, but no idea what his name is' article if he doesn’t already have one.

Shoy: Not yet, didn't recognize him from anything but I'll definitely work on that.

Tim: I Am Omega regularly airs on the SyFy channel, enough said, and was only made to make a few bucks off of the hype from the Will Smith remake. All in all I firmly believe the Vincent Price version is the absolute best, but I suggest you check them all out (with the exception of the last one I wouldn’t suggest that to a dog) and decide for yourself. I will say they would all be a little better if they would use the final line from the book. Robert Neville's last words, "I am a new superstition entering the unassailable fortress of forever. I am legend."

Tim, signing off.




Shoy: While I didn't think this was as great I agree they took a complicated story, an unlikely hero, and made a pretty darn good movie out of it. The main differences from the novel: The protagonist of the novel is named Robert Neville, not Robert Morgan. The movie also changed the protagonist's profession from plant worker to scientist. 

The film's vampires are almost zombie-like, whereas in the book, they are fast, capable of running and climbing. The dog that shows up on Neville's doorstep is timid in the novel, and comes and goes as it pleases. The relationship with Ruth also slightly differs from the novel, and no transfusion takes place; a cure seems implausible, even as Neville hopes he will find one. 

Ruth escapes after Neville discovers that she is infected. He is not captured until many months later, and even then he barely fights. The book ends shortly before Neville is to be executed: Ruth returns to give him suicide pills, and finds it ironic that he has become as much of a legend to the new society as vampires once were to his (hence the title). 

The novel implies that the vampire plague resulted from a biological disease. The origin of the disease is not explained in The Last Man on Earth, and is altered in the subsequent adaptations.

Thank you once again Tim, this was cool and a lot of fun and we look forward to seeing a lot more of your reviews (and hopefully of some movies I've already seen).




                        

PARTY DOWN AT THE HOUSE ON HAUNTED HILL









House On Haunted Hill (1959 & 1999)
Return To House On Haunted Hill 2007

A William Castle classic and among my most favorite of horror movies. A rich man has a birthday party for his wife in a mansion, offering (in 1959 money) $10,000 to each guest if they spend the night. And of course, mayhem ensues. This was a smart story and the ending was satisfying. Vincent Price could make any film look good, and in this one he didn't have to try too hard.

The remake of 1999 updated the story of course. An owner of amusement parks has a birthday party for his wife in a former insane asylum, this time the offer being a million each to the guests who stay the night. The circumstances and story is twisted around a bit and a new back story is added to 'explain' why the House is supposedly haunted and evil. 


Again mayhem ensues, and the ending is still satisfying. Famke Janssen is always fun to watch, a good supporting cast gives the movie some fun to go with the horror. SNL alum Chris Kattan plays a good role, does NOT try to be funny, ends up being funny anyway (my fave line of his - "This house... is.... PISSED!"). 

And of course I couldn't describe this flick without mentioning the good doctor (new back story) Richard Benjamin Vannacutt, a real nasty piece of work but since Jeffrey Combs, the actor playing him is one of my favorite character actors, I didn't think he was in the movie enough. Ah well, it holds up well and is worth a look.

For some reason in 2007 they decided on a sequel, which still had Dr. Vannacutt (Jeffrey Combs even manages to look exactly the same, considering it's eight years later) and another assorted group of doomed people, this time with a thin premise of finding an idol, the supposed reason the good doctor went bonkers and the house became evil. 

The characters are not as well written, the execution is not great, some scenes are just copies of the 1999 version and the ending? Well, for some reason Hollywood just can't let a good movie stay good, they have to try to copy it for that extra buck. 

That's the feeling you get with this movie - it was made for the money, hopefully riding the coattails of a good horror flick, even though it IS eight years later. It wasn't necessary, it doesn't make much sense, and if you miss it... well, you're not missing much.