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...

                        

OH FREAKING HELL! THIS MOVIE JUST KEEPS GOING AND GOING AND GOING...




Devil's Due (2014)

Well, as usual, I feel horrible. The weather has been very unstable - it's been one day hot, one day cold, one day hot, then cold, cold, cold, I usually can only take my painkillers and go straight to bed. But I decided to man up (even though I am a woman) and do what I thought I wanted to do. Part of this great and wonderful disease is that in the mornings, my mind is massively mush while I have some physical energy, and at night I am just freaking exhausted but my mind is racing a hundred miles an hour, with all those witty things I wanted to write that morning.

No symbol here...

Miss Mayhem wanted to do a column of her own, but I thought she should get used to the idea of trying to find humor in horror first. She asked me what movie she should watch. I handed her my copy of Zombie Ass: The Toilet Of The Dead (no joke, that's a real movie - I reviewed it Tuesday, July 9, 2013). She took one look at the cover - her face went white. Then she flipped it over. I swear I saw her age at least 5 years right in front of me. 

So, for now, I have sent Miss Mayhem into safer waters, and she presently is working her way through the MST3K catalog. I figured that would be a great way to get her used to bad horror as well as the concept of being able to make fun of it at the same time. I hope it works, but I realize not everyone has my twisted sense of humor.

Closer but no cigar...

Can you tell that I'm really trying to put off doing this review? I am. When I first saw the previews for this movie in 2013, I remember saying to myself 'Goddammit they've made another Rosemary's Baby'. I hated Rosemary's Baby. Yeah yeah, it was shot beautifully, it was a classic. It was William Castle's last film, and directed by a pedophile (who then fled the Country), but that's okay because he's famous, right? But it was so incredibly boring! And it was long. Very, very long. Maybe when it was made it was considered a very classy as well as creepy horror movie, considering you had diminutive little Mia Farrow as the tragic damsel in distress, but I was just bored to tears. THIS film was actually made by 20th Century Fox - WTH?

So.

This is what they use... whatever the hell it's supposed to be...

I actually looked at other reviews 'cause I thought I was being too harsh on this movie's, uh, contradictions? I mean this is about a Catholic couple, who have to be true to the church and yet they slept together before being married, they use birth control, they rarely step foot in the church - and so it is said by some that this is a prejudiced film against Catholics. Well, where there are movies about possession or devils or antichrists, there are Catholics. This is a Hollywood thing, not a me thing, so if some of this offends, well, it's just like every other movie and has nothing to do with my personal opinions. Just keep that in mind, 'kay?

First a scripture out of the Bible about antichrists is shown on screen that, of course, is misapplied. A perfect start. The circle with two lines is something I could NOT find anywhere - and I looked at a ton of different demonic and antichrist symbols - which was NOT a thrill. Not. Even. Close.

We start with a bloody man in a police station. He is apparently going to narrate this turkey. Oh goody. And here's his story (and get ready for a massive headache 'cause this is 'Rosemary's Baby' on a handheld camera): Zach and Samantha are a day from being married. Everything will be on a handheld camera 'cause Zach wants to start a 'family history'. Samantha likes this idea, since she has no family. She says her childhood is 'a blank'. Apparently she lost everyone in a car crash and yet-to-be-born Samantha was cut out of her mother. THAT is a VERY OBVIOUS CLUE by the way, keep it in mind. So they get married.



They go to what is described as the Dominican Republic for their honeymoon. I guess saying they went to the Caribbean is out of style or something. Either that or no one Country wanted to be named in this film for which I can't really blame them. Anywho, these two idiots, because of course to get this stupid script to work they have to be idiots, get stinking drunk in a city during a celebration of some sort. 

Then in the natural course of stupidity, the new wife wants to see a psychic (which Catholics are not supposed to do). The woman grabs her arm, telling her she's born 'from death' and they're waiting for her. She won't let go. After finally pulling away from her, they quickly leave.

They decide to go back to their hotel room. A cab drives up to them, and the man inside offers them a ride. Now – when you're in a strange country, cabs aren't necessarily cabs. I've never been out of the States, but even I know that. But these two idiots get right in as the cab driver promises to take them to a great party.

This stupid prank in New York was the
only good part of the movie - and it wasn't in the movie...

After winding through dark dirty streets they get to an even darker, dirtier building. And these two stupid people go inside and yes, there is a party. They do shots and get even drunker - and apparently drugged. And their handheld camera does NOT have night vision so not only is it wobbly, but it's so dark you can't see the DUH in the room at all. That means you get blurry, shaky shots of these two idiots and also that means we are going to see stuff recorded to tapes that they're not even going to bother to look at until the plot tells them to.

Sure enough, things get weird. The camera picks up distorted images, cuts out, and we get a brief and confusing look at some kind of ritual. You know, we get the chanting, the torches, flashes of bright lights, Samantha is probably getting raped (we don't get to really see that - so calm down) and nothing that makes any sense. The next scene is of our two stupid people waking up in their hotel room, having no idea of how they got there. Do they look at their camera? No. MASSIVE DUH ALERT...

They go home and we skip ahead a few weeks when they discover that Samantha is pregnant. Massive duh again. Yup, we're knee-deep in Rosemary's Baby. Samantha is a bit upset about this, she is nowhere near ready to have a child. This is one of those 'but we used contraceptives religiously' type of pregnancies. If because they're Catholic you're getting mad at me, look at the paragraph above - or maybe just skip the movie and/or review all together. Now if you look at the wiki, which I do to keep my facts straight, comparing them to my notes, the wiki says she's overjoyed. My notes say that she was pissed off.

But she plays happy mommy for a while, even though strange physical things are happening to her. She's having nosebleeds, weird bruising, and other physical symptoms that aren't usual with pregnancy. And she wants to eat meat. Yes, our two idiots are vegetarian. In fact, we get a very prolonged, very unnecessarily slow scene of Samantha in a grocery store in the meat aisle looking at different packages. We see this through the stores security camera since everything is handheld or security or CCTV. Which brings up another massive duh moment. This movie is comprised of footage from many cameras in several different places - who put them all together?



She moves very, very slowly. She picks up a package, very, very slowly. She opens the package, very, very slowly. She finally start eating the raw meat. By this time I was practically biting off my fingernails. Not because I was frightened or grossed out, but because more than anything I just wanted this moment to end.

Even though Zach's wife is acting very strangely ever since the honeymoon, he still doesn't bother to look through the footage. Wouldn't you want to look at your honeymoon footage when you got home? Of course you would. You're smart. Finally both notice that they see strange people that are appearing to be watching them from across the street, public places, etc. 

One of those people appears to be none other than the cab driver who took them to that interesting little party in the first place. When it becomes evident that Sam is uncomfortable with having the child and may hurt it (again, if offended... well, you know), someone places tiny hidden cameras in the idiot's home to make sure the two take care of their bundle of hell... uh, I mean joy.

The movie finally picks up a little when Samantha is in her eighth month. Now her baby has been growing large and the first doctor she had has been replaced by a strange doctor who tells her that she cannot see her regular doctor anymore (what did they do, look through Rosemary's Baby's script and just pull out what they wanted to use?). These two idiots have a nice location where they are, complete with a small wooded area where a family of deer live. They made sure we knew that at the beginning of the movie. Why?



Three kids are out wandering through the trails in that wooded area with, say it with me - saaaaaaaaaay itttttttt - a hand held camera. They come upon the gutted carcass of a deer. Being kids, they decide to poke at it and do the disgusting things that kids do. Then they hear a noise. Turning around, they see a woman bent over another deer. Thinking she is trying to help it, they approach her. Of course, we know what's going on and were praying that they just get on with it. It is Samantha, covered in the deer's blood, eating its guts.

The kids (two guys, one girl) attempt to run, and we get our only interesting effects of the whole movie. One (the girl) is thrown high into the air, one is dragged through the brush and the last manages to make it to his car, only to be thrown high above it, and come crashing down through the windshield. This effect was lessened by the fact that you see nothing but his camera POV and when he smashes onto his car, we only see a hand come through the broken windshield.



The two idiots attend holy Communion. While watching the priest, the priest sees Samantha and starts to violently cough up blood, sending people screaming into the streets. Our massively duh father-to-be finally gets the idea that maybe he should be looking at his camera footage for some clues as to what the hell is going on. Then he sees that, yes, the same man who drove them to that strange party has been following them around, even to the church. He then looks further and finds what happened to them during their honeymoon. And he notices a symbol.

The symbol appears all through the movie. And no, it's not an upside down cross. In fact, looking up this particular symbol I couldn't find it anywhere and I found a lot more than I ever wanted to see. It's some sort of voodoo schmoodoo symbol that he sketches and takes to the priest in the hospital. What there's only one priest in this whole freaking city? This one priest's got to be the guy Zach bothers - the person whom his wife made violently ill? Massive duh. That's when he finds that, of course, the symbol is related to the antichrist (at least according to this movie). It can't just be about a little monster – hell, at this point I'd accept Milo, the nasty little intestinal monster. But no.



Now for some reason, I guess just for something for Zach to do, he sees a couple of these people on his street and reasons that they're probably hiding out in an abandoned house. He breaks in, because that's what law-abiding people do, right? Inside of course he finds all of the close captioned video of his house and his wife, and he realizes that they are in deep shit. The people come for him, he escapes, and runs back to his wife.

Too late. After a pack-all-the-action-into-four-minutes type of tantrum where she psychically destroys the house, she throws her husband against the wall. Okay, this whole movie is from placed or held cameras. So how did they get the view from her on the floor to him on the wall - and vice versa? It keeps going back and forth and... there's no freaking way since neither is carrying a camera.



His wife now lays on the floor with a silver knife she received anonymously at her shower. She cuts herself open and there's a blinding flash of light. Now let me define what just happened for you who don't watch horror movies very often. This is the big scene, the payoff, just like in Rosemary's Baby. Now, quick quiz my lovelies: Did anyone ever see the actual baby after it was born in that movie? No, of course they didn't. That would have cost way too much money.

So, since this is basically following the pattern of Rosemary's Baby with a little bit of Paranormal Activity/Blair Witch/Every Freaking Handheld Camera Movie There Is, they don't want to reveal anything here either. They've already spent their budget, haven't they? They don't have anything left to show a big special effect of what an antichrist might look like. We just see Samantha die.

The 'doctor' and the cab driver come and take the baby that we didn't get to see. The police show up immediately afterward and Zach is arrested. While he finishes his story we get our last scene of another young couple, on their honeymoon in Paris, where the same cab driver from the beginning of the movie offers them a lift.

Apparently they're collecting all these babies for.... I don't know..... Antichrists On Ice?

https://www.facebook.com/dumbandboringmovies

MOVIES THAT ARE TERRIFIC NO MATTER HOW MANY TIMES THEY ARE REMADE








13 Ghosts (1960)
Thir13en Ghosts (2001)

Once again a movie I thought was an original idea and smarter than the average horror movie has turned out to be a remake of yet another William Castle film. Now I've got to try to find the original, I'd love to see how they set it up. And on 6/28/12 I was given that chance (please see below).


                       

This movie had another one of Castle's famous gimmicks: He filmed it in 'Illusion-O' which meant the movie goers were given glasses to watch the movie. If the ghosts scared them too much, taking off the glasses kept you from seeing them. Funny!. The premise: When occultist uncle Dr. Plato Zorba wills a huge ramshackle house to his nephew Cyrus and his impoverished family, they are shocked to find the house is haunted. 

Their new furnished residence comes complete with a spooky housekeeper, Elaine, plus a fortune in buried treasure and 12 horrifying ghosts. His family soon discovers that these spirits include a decapitated man, a fully grown lion, a wailing lady and a flaming skeleton, who are held captive in the eerie house and must find an unlucky thirteenth ghost to free them. 

                          

This movie, considering the time it was made and the budget they had was superior in storyline than the remake, although the high-budget remake may have had better effects and more complicated plot. Oh, this is a beauty of a film and I highly recommend it. Look closely at the housekeeper, Elaine Zacharides. Throughout the film she is called a 'witch' by the boy and in her severe black dress and pulled back hair one can see why. 

Look even closer and you will realize that this is yet another bit of Castle's genius. You see, the housekeeper, who at the end of the movie picks up her broom and smiles knowingly at the audience is actually Margaret Hamilton. You would know her instantly if you've ever watched The Wizard of Oz (1939). Pure comedic genius! Thank you Tim for letting me get the chance to enjoy this wonderful piece of Castle lore - I highly recommend it if you can find it.





                                        

In the remake, Tony Shalhoub, who was absolutely terrific in this film plays to pretty much the same plot with a few changes, and no doubt better special effects. The plot is slightly different: Ghost hunter Cyrus Kriticos (F. Murray Abraham) and his psychic assistant Dennis Rafkin (Matthew Lillard) capture twelve ghosts, Kriticos for his own nefarious reasons, Dennis just for the money.


                        

Kriticos is killed and his huge, glass covered house is given to his nephew Arthur Kriticos (Tony Shalhoub). Since the death of his wife in a house fire has left the family broke and broken-hearted, they decide to move in. The movie basically follows the same patterns except the ghosts are different (and one is revealed to be Arthur's deceased wife) and behind protective glass with 'containing spells' printed on them. 

The main room contains a huge machine with endless mechanics and strange runes. The family is safe until the machine adjusts and then the maze in the house shifts, opening one glass and closing others, trapping Arthur and his family in the house, and releasing a ghost or two.

They spend a bit of time separating (as usual in horror flicks) and don't realize the danger until they find glasses that allow them to see what is truly around them. The ghosts themselves on the DVD version have a complete backstory for each but you don't want to read it all here.




                           


Meanwhile, Cyrus is revealed to be alive, having faked his death (which is a little weird, considering it has to be almost a week since his 'death' yet he's wearing the same bloody clothes and supposed fake wound). He has captured Kathy and Bobby (Arthur's two children) so that Arthur will become the 13th ghost, which will trigger the activation of a machine built to, I guess, open the gates of hell. 

Arthur arrives at the main hall of the house and witnesses all 12 ghosts standing around a rotating crest of metal rings, his children at the center. Arthur and Cyrus have a violent confrontation and Cyrus overpowers Arthur. The ghosts become free of their trance. They grab Cyrus and hurl him into the rings, slicing him to pieces. 

Dennis' ghost (he had sacrificed himself to save Arthur) then appears, telling Arthur that it is not over and to go to his kids. Waiting for a break in the rings, Arthur safely leaps to his children. The machine continues to malfunction and the walls of the house shatter, freeing the ghosts. The ghost of Arthur's wife, Jean, appears before the family and tells them that she loves them before vanishing. Dennis is then seen smiling at Arthur now that he had saved Kathy and Bobby and also vanishes.



                       

Smarter than your usual 'get 'em together and slaughter them one by one' movie, this is definitely worth a look in both versions.

Update: If you'd like to see the background story on each ghost used in the remake, the short videos appear on February 8, 2015.

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.