The Conjuring

The Conjuring

Directed by: James Wan

Horror, 112 min

USA, 2013

James Wan is the king of mainstream horror! That is FACT! Gone are the days of the independent sleazy exploitations flicks that I grew up with. Films today try too hard, and if they are sleazy they always end up being pornographic, if they are horrific they usually tend to go over the top and settle up for a hand of god bogus fix in the last act, if they are violent, they more than often tend to be brutally nihilistic and dark and end with a funny ironic tune as the credits roll. Nothing is naïve and inventive anymore… it’s all preprogramed and calculated and formulated… at least in the mainstream.

But, James Wan get’s in there and does his thing. Yes, the films may be considered mainstream and feel somewhat predictable, but Wan goes his own way, reinvents his shock tactics and keeps delivering, and I’m surprisingly excited way above expectation when watching his stuff. That’s just the way it is. Rack them up, SAW, Dead Silence, Insidious and now The Conjuring. Blam, Blam, Blam, three damned effective horror shows that have left an impression. (Even if Insidious had a somewhat dud ending, but I’m holding out for the sequel to see if they bring it all round full circle) All of them films that gave you precisely what you wanted. Heart stopping scares; freak out moments and an entertaining story told in a somewhat new fashion. There’s a reason James Wan’s films spawn imitators, cash-ins and multiple sequels. They are highly efficient pieces of horror cinema that will make you choke on your popcorn, and then go back for more.

The Conjuring bases its tale upon the real life characters of Ed and Lorrain Warren (played by Vera Farmiga and Patrick Wilson). Now if you don’t know of them, they where American investigators of the paranormal and their biggest claim to fame were investigating the Amityville Horror case. The Conjuring tells the story of the foregoing case; one where the Perron family are up against a sinister entity that only the Warrens can save them from. As you see, The Conjuring is basically classic haunted house/possession turf. All done with the ever-deceptive, slight of hand, smoke and mirrors trickery of shock meister James Wan.

The way the story moves is traditional storytelling 101. First off, establish the threat through a smart initial attack. In its short form, the opening shares the story of haunted Raggedy Annabelle, a dolly inhabiting an evil spirit. Now this is a cunning way to establish the force of antagonism, as it introduces us to the fact that ghosts exist and at the same time the story is told to the Warrens, hence introducing them. The world famous demonologists, paranormal researchers, and exorcists, Ed and Lorain Warren. With all this established, key the titles, run the old “True story” card and get things started.

The wraparounds, as in the opening story of Raggedy Annabelle and the final lines of dialogue referring to the Amityville case, give credibility to the tale of the Perron’s. The two cases are “actual” cases and therefore there’s no reason to doubt the main narrative either. If you are anything like me, you’ll do some research straight away when hearing that “the conjuring is based on true events”. The first two cases you’ll come up with are Amityville and Raggedy Annabelle… a smart way to convince sceptics that the story was a real one.

The Perron family (with Lili Taylor making a great return to genre as mother Carolyn Perron) move into their new house, or rather mansion, and the moment their youngest daughter April finds a musical box hidden away in a tree we are miles ahead of the story - because that’s partially what that opening scene and the information that the “Doll was a vessel for a demon” dialouge was all about!

The hauntings start that same night as family dog Sadie is snuffed by unseen forces. Slowly, slowly the tension builds –rooms are cold, funky smells are experienced, hidden basements are disclosed and a cute childish game of clap and seek is used to give some serious scares. Wan begins to manipulate the audience into vulnerable territory as he sets us up for scare after scare! Reintroducing the Warren’s into the piece, their everyday life and profession as demonologists is intercut with the events in the Perron house. Eventually the Perron family is left with no other alternative than to contact the church about the strange events in their house, which in turn leads to the Warrens and how they come face to face with the case so haunting and disturbing that they have it secret until now…

But what really fucks you up with The Conjuring is that Wan sets you up for the shock moments all according to the book of convention, but never guarantees that he’ll deliver on that tension! Yes, it may sound flakey, but it’s terrifyingly effective and I shit you not when I say that a good damned half of the scares and wind-ups in The Conjuring are all your own doing. Wan only moves his camera, dollies in, set's you up and builds an expectation. Now and again he’s got something up his sleeve to scare you stiff, others he’s going to make you get all wound up just because he can! Less is more, and The Conjuring is creepy as hell!

The Conjuring builds an amazing tension, delivers some really great scares and once again confirms that James Wan is a fear-monger to rely on! Opens on Cinema screams everywhere on Friday the 6^th!

Night of the Demons

Night of the Demons

Directed by: Kevin S. Tenney

USA, 1988

Horror, 90min

Distributed by: Anchor Bay 

I really like Night of the Demons, REALLY! I’ve had a real soft spot for it since the very first time I saw it a long, long time ago. Yeah, it’s one of those eighties flicks that I hold as a classic, and I held on to that old VHS tape for an eternity. It’s schlocky, creepy, fun and intimidating, just in the right way, it plays out almost like the first time you rode the ghost train. The first time around it was scary and fun, the second time you knew the beats and came prepared, and every time from there on, you just took the ride for the sheer fun of it. I can’t really say why this one became a fave more than any other title, but at the time Steve Johnson FX where buzzing, Linnea Quigley was THE scream queen and the flick had one of the best Bauhaus songs ever on the soundtrack.

A bunch of kids gather at Hall House, an infamous haunted house, where Angela has invited them to a Halloween party. The party starts and fun get’s rollin', until they decide to hold a séance. Disturbing images are seen in the mirror, which shatters into a thousand pieces releasing the demons of Hull House, which start possessing the youngsters one by one…

Basically Night of the Demons is a pretty straightforward generic horror that takes place on Halloween night. Gender roles and stereotypical characters are all introduced within the first ten minutes as the bunch of kids attending Angela’s party are introduced.  Judy [Cathy Podewell – who went on to became a regular on Dallas, as J.R’s second wife Cally, her date Jay [Lance Fenton], Sal [William Gallo], the bad-boy, with a crush on Judy. Their friends Max [Philip Tanzini] and Frannie [Jill Terashita], Angela [Mimi Kinkade] shop lifting while Suzanne [Linnea Quigley] – who only want’s to look good for the boys, bends over way to deep distracting the clerks with her pink panties… and in classic Quigley style, there’s more to come. Punk rockers Rodger, [Alvin Alexis] Helen [Allison Barron] and Stooge [Hal Havins]… and finally the Hull House, where the events of the night are about to unfold.  All of their traits are rapidly presented and we get a crash course into their personalities… and knowing genre conventions you know exactly where they are going to go during the movie. When jock type Jay get’s irritable that Judy won’t put out – after all he’s “heard the rumours” of her and Sal – he ditches her in the dark room and she’s left to her own devices.

Archetypes displaying their traits in the classic way, and from that moment on you know that the good girl virgin, Judy is gong to be this movies “Final girl”. Hey, it’s no coincidence that Judy’s wearing an Alice in wonderland dress, as Alice is a symbol of innocence, a metaphor for virginity… I’ve discussed how Alice in Wonderland is a goldmine for genre filmmakers – such as Jay Lee’s Alyce 2011, and this is yet another example of how it common it is in popular culture, and specifically the horror genre.

Oh, and notice that splendid character shift, where the unfortunate old man taunted by obnoxious teenagers turns into sinister old man about to hide razorblade in apples… That’s the kind of two-sided comedy/darkness I love about The Night of the Demons, and he’ll be back for the wraparound in a final blood drenched Steve Johnson effect.

It’s kind of silly, but the genesis of the haunted Hull House is told through corny dialogue bringing us up to speed – obviously it concerns someone in the Hull House going insane and slaughtering the entire family, and the underground stream, which the house supposedly was built on, that traps the evil spirits inside the old creepy house.

Being such a piece of eighties pop culture, and generic formula, the kids obviously have a few brew’s, dance around to some new wave rock, and then kick up a séance, which releases the evil forces. Buckle up, shits about to get wild, and Steve Johnson’s about to unleash a shit load of amazing special effects upon you as Demons walk the world.

False scares, conventional build-ups, traditional horror ploys, but also some very original moments that still stand out today. You can’t argue with Steve Johnson's spectacular eighties special effects, the eye gouging, possessed faces, burn victims, trauma injuries - still spectacular today  - or that gory climax! Who can ever forget the image of Linnea Quigley pushing her lipstick info the flesh of her nipple. An iconic moment of generic horror that still stands the test of time. The lipstick into the breast scene is still an awesomely impressive effect, and is in many ways an epitome of sex and horror colliding, creating a discomfort within the audience.  First it get’s you all excited then it freaks the hell out of you, but that’s nothing compared to the seductive little dance Suzanne gives Jay later; lifting up her skirt, showing him some muff, straddling the expectant lad, and then turning into a demon only to gouge out his eyes… awesome stuff, and definitely a head fuck in the best possible way.

Night of the Demons was followed by two sequels – Brian Trenchard-Smith’s Night of the Demons 2, and Jim Kaufman’s straight to Video Night of the Demons III (written by Tenney) - all starring Amelia Kinkade as Angela. It was also source for a remake in 2009 Adam Gierasch Night of the Demons, to little success, despite Edward Furlong (Who's arm I grabbed and snarled "Watch it Kid!" at, at a convention in Stockholm a few years back, after Furlong stumbled out of a booth in the bathroom, bumped into my then seven year old, and snarled "Watch it kid!"), Shannon Elizabeth, a Quigley cameo, and an almost blueprint replica of the original movie – including lipstick gag. The contemporary take on old-school generic horror fails miserably as it lacks the enthusiasm, fines and passion of this original gem with it’s almost perfect tongue in cheek mix of scares, cark comedy and sexual allusions, and ironic wraparound story.

Night of the Demons is a movie that I love so profoundly that I have no trouble revisiting it over and over again. On a list of 20 desert island titles, I'd take this one with me. Despite being rather conventional and a universally generic horror film, it has some fantastic effects by Steve Johnson – who finally got to showcase his work on his own and not as part of a team, a great new wave soundtrack and an original score by Dennis Michael Tenney, and a cast and crew, who obviously are having a great time. I elevate it above the most other generic flicks of the time, because there’s something magical about the demons in Hull House. 

The Innkeepers

The Innkeepers

Directed by: Ti West

USA, 2011

Horror, 102 min

I find that I quite enjoy the movies of Ti West, or at least I think I do. I have not seen all of them; I have not even seen half of them. I saw The House of the Devil 2009 and thought it was an awesome example of mimicking a style long gone, and done in a way that wasn’t exaggerated and stale, as many of the grindhouse pastiche movies have become… (Yeah, Hobo with a Shotgun 2010, was fun, but not much more. One-liners should come naturally, not forced out with each line of dialogue.) What West did with The House of the Devil was so skilfully perfected, that if someone had sold me it under the premise that it was a long lost late seventies, early eighties flick, I would have believed it.

Needless to say, I really enjoyed The House of the Devil, and hold it amongst the best of the last decade. Mood, atmosphere, visuals, approach, narrative and storytelling aspects, it’s my kind of movie. Which obviously means that I had a lot of anticipation brewing before catching The Innkeepers.

Claire [Sara Paxton, who I hated in the Last House on the Left 2009 remake, but totally believe here] and Luke [Pat Healy] are two twenty-something’s who are the keeping an eye on the Yankee Pedlar Inn as it slips into its last week in business. There’s only a few residing guests left in the building and even the owner, Rob, has taken off. Luke has an obsession with acclaimed hauntings that are supposed to have taken place at the Yankee Pedlar Inn and runs a webpage dedicated to the legend of Madeleine O’Malley. Clair in an approach that is almost as if she is humouring Luke, helps out to record ambience sounds in various rooms during her night shifts. A fun pastime until she actually records someone playing the piano in the entrance hall… a room she knows is empty.

Much like The House of the Devil, West smoothly approaches his topic with a method similar to that of a crocodile stalking blissfully unaware prey in the waterline. Instead of jumping in head over heels, he builds the tension slowly and merely hints at strange activities in jump scare moments or shorter scene climaxes. Just like The House of the Devil, when it’s time to peak with the culmination, it comes fast and without messing around. Tension has been built up, tweaked and teased for such a long time that the payoff is inevitable. Inevitable, terrifyingly effective and once again, leaving the audience with a bitter pill to swallow. Bitter in the best possible way that is, as the storytelling and the narrative does its job effectively. When that all clicks, you know you are in for a good time. And by then there's no backing out.

Getting there is an entertaining ride. Just as West approached the Satanic Cult in The House of the Devil, there’s several curveballs tossed and sharp turns laid out in the narrative of The Innkeepers too. The legend of Madeleine O’Malley is the main subplot, the ghost story that drives it forth. Luke really want’s to make contact with O’Malley, and even claims to have encountered here in the dark hallways of the hotel one night. Claire is more restrained and doesn’t really believe in it. Regular readers will go aha – the sceptic! - and you are absolutely right. Claire is the sceptic of the movie, as she doesn’t really believe, although through slow delicate transitions she moves into the world where hauntings are possible, and as we identify with her, we go right with her. Claire is a really empathetic character, shown through her gentle approach to things, even apologetic to rude residents, and her total geek vibe when her favourite actress Leanne Rease-Jones [Kelly McGillis] checks into the hotel and the time she spends listening to the love problems of the barista [Lena Dunham] next door – time Claire doesn’t really have, all build our empathy for her. The fact that she’s an asthmatic, tells ghost stories with a flashlight under her face, is really kind of dorky – watch how she reacts when she realizes that she’s in her underwear in the reception area – and somewhat of a slacker, all make her a much more likeable character for me, as she goes against stereotypes.

Oh, one more thing on bringing the audience into the unnatural world. There’s that excellent use of the Internet viral video, which Luke shows Claire early on in the movie. She watches the spartanly furnished room, through the web camera footage, waiting for a ghost to appear and when the feed cuts to a shock screaming face, Claire falls for it big time. This happens four minutes in and set’s a tone for the movie, which stays with me throughout. We understand that she and Luke play these kind of pranks on each other, although where Luke really does want to believe, Claire still only thinks it’s a laugh. Which is why when she straps on the equipment and starts recording ambience audio in the hotel at night, at Luke’s request to help him prove that there’s something else there but them, we start to empathise with her. And it’s through her – the sceptic – which we start to move into the world where a haunting could be possible. Again the viral video and the nightmare shock play into the hand of the sceptic. Not real, but tricks or imagination it gives us the same mind-set as Claire. When Claire starts to hear sounds on the recordings and see things in the dark, we too accept them as we now realize that this is no prank, or a dream. It’s really happening.

A second sceptic is used to manipulate the audience into believing, and that’s what the Leanne Rease-Jones character is for. She’s a healer who doesn’t believe in the ghost either, so when she starts acting weird and more or less orders Claire to get her stuff and get out of the Inn, you know that shit is going to happen.

There’s an everyday geeky kind of humour in the movie, which reflects the characters well. At times it’s almost as if Claire overacts on purpose to prove to the people she’s talking too that’s there’s a ghost in the hotel. Or possibly because there is supposed to be a playful attitude within the movie, even looking at the advance art - above - I can sense a tongue in cheek approach to the movie. Because that is one of the traits that I like with the flick. It’s playful, and joyful and doesn’t take it’s self all too serious. I like that in a genre movie and at time it helps sell me the movie a lot more than the regular tricks of the trade. This is also reflected in the soundtrack, which, in the first half at least, has something of a matineé-ish tone to it. Definitely not what I would have expected from a horror flick at least. Perhaps West want’s us to watch The Innkeepers as a fun, light-hearted film as this makes the flip at the back end so much more harsh, because the laughs will stick in your throat when the horror kicks in and scares that smile off your face.

Endings. Again, like The House of the Devil - which I'm constantly comparing to as it's such an awesome movie - The Innkeepers somewhat challenges its audience. Did it really happen? I know of people who read the ending of The House of the Devil as a possible “dream state/imaginary” space as to say that the movie never really happened… strange yes, and I do not really agree with it either, but at the same time, I definitely feel that The Innkeepers does pose similar questions. Did it really happen or was it in the state of fear and confusion that brought it all on? The last shot lingers on for an eternity before presenting the answer. And I also find that last scene to be part of the intelligent narrative that West uses in The Innkeepers. It's not to unlike the viral video that was seen earlier. He builds to a climax with the exact same tricks that the viral video does. And this is a motif that I find runs vibrantly though the movie. Is it real or all just a trick? During the last half hour, I wouldn’t have been surprised to see a scene where Claire wakes up and it all had been a dream. Now this doesn’t happen obviously, but in some strange way there’s a feeling that it could have happened in the last act.

Scares. Yeah, there’s a bunch of them and they get more advanced as the movie goes along. The first being that viral video within the first couple of minutes through the hilarious “I’m standing behind you and don’t want to scare you…” moment, to the atmospheric mood that seeps in when they start to explore the basement, the really effective in-camera tricks, to the straight out grotesque moments which the movie culminates with. Yeah, West does deliver the scares, the shocks and the uncomfortable moments once again… and you know what, the second viewing is more so as you start to add together things you picked up in the first viewing with events in the second.

It’s my humble opinion that this movie will find it’s own audience and will generate a certain cult following. It’s a well-told tale with characters – well mainly Claire - that are totally believable, empathetic. Despite some of the scares being somewhat artificial – and the ghost of O’Malley does look kind of generic – they still get the job done. The power of the story takes over and the magic of storytelling sweeps me into the dark and I find myself fumbling for the light switch. Nothing is as powerful as the suggestive less-is-more approach that makes this a fantastic trip to Scareville.

I like it and I definitely will return to Ti West’s The Innkeepers as I’m convinced there’s so much more to read and explore in that great little movie.

Terror

Terror
Directed by Norman J. Warren
Horror, 1978
England, 79min
Distributed by: Studio S. Entertainment

Bad horror movies are the ones that make all those ignorant folks who only like shitty action films that demand nothing from them but chewing popcorn, laugh you right in the face when you say that you like horror films and genre oriented movies. Unfortunately Norman J. Warren’s Terror falls into the category of a bad movie in my book. Not that that necessarily is a bad thing, but this movie did nothing for me. I have a fair guess what that depends on and it’s probably because I’ve seen and cherish the movies that inspired this one way too many times, and even tough I can laugh at the homage’s, it feels lazy and aggravated when the tributes become sloppy rip-offs. Never the less this movie was a modest success at the time of its release and even reached number one at the UK box offices.

Tired of the ole’ Hammer Horror scene and wanting to revitalise the UK horror genre, Warren set out to break new ground with this movie and his previous one, Satan’s Slave 1976 – which ironically holds a Hammerish aura to it. And you have to hand it to them, they did indeed make an impression back in 1978 when Terror just like it’s predecessor became a rather decent success in the UK, and somewhat in the USA. In hindsight it’s perhaps due to the fact that their films, unlike the Hammer movies focused on a detail most important for the youngsters they wanted to see the films; the casts where in their twenties-thirties and not grand old men of the genre like Peter Cushing and Christopher Lee, allowing their audience to easier identify with the casts. Also I’m certain that the lack of knowledge of what was coming out of other countries at the time made this movie look a lot better than really it is. I'll forever be grateful that I was at the exact right age when the video boom hit and low quality movies where up for grabs in the regional video rentals.

We mustn't forget that the independent low-budget studios have always had the opportunities to get in there ahead of the bigger studios and try out new fields, so when there is no other main competition you end up with a hit on your hands. Even if that often stated “Number one in England” hit, in fact only was for one single week.

The movie is obviously, sometimes painfully, inspired by the Euro horror’s of Italy - Dario Argento’s Suspiria 1977 being the main influence, as Ivor Slanley's crazy jamming soundtrack screams and howls like the Goblin tracks to Dario’s surreal horror masterpiece, the lighting goes all red, yellow and green, as the witch goes about her deadly haunting, and there’s ironically enough even a rather decent smashed windowpane decapitation scene much like the one that would be found in Argento’s Inferno 1980 two years later.

Sure it’s a decent way to kill 80 minutes if you can stay awake for that long, as the movie does have a bunch of fair enough scenes and D.P. Les Young's compositions are interesting to say the least. But it’s obvious that Warren with writers Moira and Les Young (who also shot the movie) and David McGillivray (Who wrote Frightmare, and House of Whipcord, both 1974 with Pete Walker) quickly wanted to get in on the Argentoesque style. It's all about atmosphere, arty deaths and a hot sexy cast, the plot being close to nothing. A mistake often made when watching Gialli.

A movie producer James Garrick [John Nolan] and his mate Philip [James Aubrey who actually starred as Ralph in Peter Brooks Lord of the Flies 1963] have made a very Hammerish movie about Lord and Lady Garrick who attempt to burn the village witch back in the dark ages, but obviously they fail and the witch instead kills the both of them instead. Not surprisingly the chicks at the party think that the movie is scary and even so James cousin, Ann [Carolyn Courage]. James then proceeds to tell them that the movie is based on true events and that there’s been a curse on his (and Ann's) family ever since then. Moment’s later strange shit starts to happen after Ann is hypnotised by Gary leading Ann to attack James with the prop sword, which apparently isn’t a prop but the real deal. After being slapped awake, she runs from the house into the woods. That’s the cue for the murders to kick in, and they do. Carol [Glynis Barber], the actress to star in Garrick’s next movie is chased out into the woods and killed in a very Gialloesque manner. Fast edits keeps the killer and victim separated in each frame - knife hacking in one - screaming bloodied victim in the next coming together in the final rapid orgasmic knife penetrates female flesh clips. After the second murder it apparent that the movie is trying to use Giallo traits to keep the audience in the dark which kind of works, as both James and Ann are our prime suspects and possible protagonists for quite a while. The killings add up to a fair amount of victims in various deaths, crushed and burned by falling a light, garrotted, impaled and ground to mincemeat in a dustbin truck grinder, decapitation by windowpane, and frantic Gialli stabbings. As the movie comes to it’s climax it ends just as abruptly and sudden as the ending snuck up on us. If you are expecting a decent build and a release for that anticipation, then you won’t be finding it here. The final victim has hardly finished drawing breath when the end credits smash onto the screen signalling that its time to go home, or wake up cold in front of the telly again.

All right I can respect what they have tried to do here, and in all fairness I have probably judged the film too hard, but the movie feels rushed, the acting is very varied, some are good and some a pretty bad which make the rift painfully obvious. Then there’s the biggest problem I have and that’s that they don’t really decide what kind of movie they want to be - apart from a pale, watered down Suspiria rip-off that it indeed comes off, even down to the Dolores Hamilton’s Theatre Girls Hostel…

First, there are too many daft red herrings that make me feel stupid for all the wrong reasons. Suspecting the wrong character is not the same as building up the most suspenseful sequence of the film only to deflate it like a whoopee cushion as the man stalking Suzy [Sarah Keller] asks, “Did you want a mechanic?” Yeah it’s great that Peter “Chewbacca” Mayhew actually stared in something else besides that god awful (in the worst way) Star Wars Holiday Special for American TV in ’78, but it’s a complete waste of space as it takes a whole load of focus off the main narrative. Wait wasn't Chewie a mechanic too? Oh no! I hope Mayhew doesn't get stuck typecasted as a mechanic...

Also I find it annoying that they start off by poking fun at the Hammer movies with their kitschy period piece, and then go into thriller/Giallo area only to crash back in the supernatural horror and reveal the witch from the “movie” at the start. It’s kind of silly and annoying, just like those fake red herrings. And if they hadn't used all that fog machine smoke from the campy opening, I wouldn't reflect upon the climax in the same inferior way that they opening tries to poke fun at. I’m sure that one could argue and point out that Suspiria mixes Giallo traits with supernatural ones. Yes it does but there’s no frigging smoke, matte painting lightning and BBC archive sound effects in that movie are they. I used those sound effects on my first feeble horror films shot on video back in the eighties too, and they still sound like crap. The witches in Suspiria are the real deal, not the levitating, laughing, shoddy one of Terror. It just doesn’t work and that quick chop bastard witch from hell, ending is pathetic because it’s almost as if they realised halfway through that they forgot the witch who was supposed to be responsible for the murders, and chucked her back in… even though the murder subjects have fuck all to do with the curse.

Second, I feel that the writing team are confused concerning who they want to be the protagonist. Should I give a damn about Ann or James, because the two of them at the same time get too little time on screen or character development to indicate which is the more important? As mentioned earlier, the sequence with Suzy (does that name ring a bell?) is by far one of the best, and if you are going to use Ann’s roommate as a red herring, invest in it instead of just dropping her after that dark night, meeting Chewie without his furs scene.

If they had only stuck to keeping it pure Giallo, just a thriller, even a good old slasher, or only the supernatural, then I’m sure that I would have enjoyed it more than I did now. But never the less Terror is a cult favourite among genre fans and it has a reasonably large following.

Another confusing thing about this movie is that when it was first submitted to the BBFC back in November of 1978, it had a running time of 87m 9seconds. Cut’s where made, but there are no details of the trims made to the film, and the next time the film was submitted for release on DVD and/or Video in 1997 the runtime was 79.25. One could only imagine what may have been shown in those exorcised clips, as eight minutes are a fair amount of film to remove.

There are a some amusing points of trivia in the movie worth pointing out; the blue movie being shot in James studio, is a joke on Warren's behalf, as his first feature was a sexploitation flick, Her Private Hell 1968, regarded as the first English sex film. (What does that make George Harrison Marks Naked as Nature Intended 1961?) Posters to Warren’s previous film Satan’s Slave 1976 and Bo A. Vibenius Thriller - a cruel picture 1974 are hanging on the wall of James office and the multitude of celluloid that engulf Phillip are supposedly prints of Saturday Night Fever 1977, that’s probably true as there also is a few Saturday Night Fever posters (well the logo at least) in the girls changing room behind the nudie bar they all work extra at.

But all is not lost, and even though I didn’t quite get into this movie, Warren still holds an important part in British horror as he and Pete Walker make up the New Wave of English Horror and on a good day the movies he has directed to date still do entertain, and Warren is a regular featured guest at Fantastic Film Festivals around the UK.

Even though I have some fairly harsh opinions on the film, I still recommend that you check out the movie if you get the chance, it is entertaining considering that they certainly don’t make movies like this one anymore… wait the do, but making it as a “first” in the UK thirty years ago is way better than still copying the movies of yesteryear today. When will they ever learn, the movies of the seventies-eighties worked because they where innovative, new and interesting, they also where made for a less cynical and educated audience than the ones that watch the genre today.

Image:

1:1.85 (4x3)

Audio:

Dolby Digital 2.0 Mono. English Dialogue, Swedish, Finnish, Norwegian and Danish subtitles are optional

Extras:

A bunch of trailers for other Studio S titles, a French Theatrical Trailer, bio and filmograhy for Norman J Warren, and two trivia texts.

The Legend of Hell House

The Legend of Hell House
Directed by: John Hough
Horror, 1973
UK, 95min
Distributed by 20th Century Fox

There are bad haunted house horror films, good haunted house horror films and there are really great haunted house horror films. The great ones know the secret trick, it’s about the people who visit the haunted house, their development and keeping the audience's imagination running rampant - not the shallow characters struggling for survival, the cheesy slamming door effects, superimposed spooks or CGI lurkers in the dark.

John Hough’s The Legend of Hell House is such movie. It presents a range of interesting characters, not stereotypes, which he sets together inside the haunted house of the house they are in is just part of the story.

Just as Robert Wise’s 1963 fantastic movie The Haunting is based on Shirley Jackson’s book The Haunting of Hill House published in 1959, The Legend of Hell House is also based on a book. This one by the masterful Richard Matheson [I Am Legend 1954, The Shrinking Man 1956, Stir of Echoes 1958, - a truly genius writer of horror and mystery books in his own right too] and, it’s his novel Hell House published in 1971 that supplies the base for this movie adaptation. Matheson also wrote the screenplay for this movie, which could explain why it stays quite true to the source material. [Terrence Fisher’s The Devil Rides Out 1968 and Dan Curtis’ Dracula 1973 just to name a few of his screenwriting credits. Not forgetting the three movies based on his I Am Legend novel – The Last Man on Earth 1964, The Omega Man 1971 and I Am Legend 2007] In some ways it unfortunate that the more graphic violence and sexual activities found in the book have been toned down, but instead they have hosen to favour a more sinister and brooding tone which fits the movie like a hand in glove.

The movies focuses on group of individuals sent out to investigate the notorious Belasco House, more known as Hell House by the locals. Or the Mount Everest of Haunted Houses as head researcher Mr. Lionel Barrett [Clive Revill - who supplied he voice of the Emperor in Irvin Kerchner’s The Empire Strikes Back 1980] tells his wife Ann after first receiving the task by the wealthy Mr Deutsch [Roland Culver]. The band of rouges to take on the house is a splendid combination of self-assured characters, sceptics and scared personalities. But that’s just the defining titles if you what to slot them into some sort of archetypal arrangement, it’s what’s underneath the characters, the traits they hide beneath and are forced to expose during the course of the movie, by their own will and as they are forced by the ghosts living on the premises. They all host a wide range of dark secrets that will be used against them during their week in he Belasco house.

Much like Ivan Reitman’s Ghostbusters 1984 (without the gag’s and contemporary pop soundtrack) The Legend of Hell House sees man trying to battle the supernatural with the aid of science. Barret gets the assignment in a pre-title sequence from Mr Deutsch who has bought the house so that they can research it as the Belasco family sealed it up after “what happened the last time…” The fee one hundred thousand pounds, the quest: prove the facts behind survival after death. The team sees Barret, an arrogant physician, his wife; Ann Barret [Gale Hunnicut, who had a parts in Alberto De Martino’s 1976 Poliziotteschi, Blazing Magnums and the inferior ghost house movie The Spiral Staircase 1975] She’s obviously sexually frustrated because of the age difference between them and his pobsession with his research. There’s the cautionary medium, Florence [Pamela Franklin - who has yet to go up against real dark forces, and then there’s the traumatised evangelist Benjamin Franklin Fischer, the sole survivor of the last expedition into the Belasco house, played ever so gently by Roddy McDowall most known for playing the friendly chimp Galen in the 1974 Planet of the Apes TV serial and his part as TV Host / Monster killer Peter Vincent in Tom Holland's brilliant Fright Night 1985.

Obviously there is no power in the house, so the first thing for them to take care of after an eerie mist filled presentation of the house is find the reserve generator. As they start to grasp each other and find their place in the group they wonder upon how wealthy Mr Belasco could have been when he died… “Died….?” says Franklin, setting the tone right away for a series of vibes and premonitions of the entity living in the house as they search the cellar for the generator. At the same time they wander though rooms and locations that will reappear later on. It’s a grand way to setup the interior of the house and show us the magnitude of the location.

The lights come back on and they find a gramophone with a strange recording of Mr. Belasco greeting the investigators to the house, obviously a recording made for previous investigations, but it gives Hough yet another chance to have Franklin, the survivor of last time, chance to blurt out some important exposition about Mr Belasco and his mysterious powers to move among the living even though he’s supposedly dead. It’s also his knowledge of Belasco that allows him to tell of Belasco and the sinister events that have taken place at the house; Belasco’s wife’s suicide, sexual orgies with humans and animals, dark rites and uncanny happenings. That paints up a nice tableau for the audience anticipation doesn’t it?

With this exposition out of the way the first night sees them start their inquests; first out the naïve medium Florence attempt to make contact with Belasco. Based on what she knows after Franklin’s tales she moans, groans and says that the house is an evil place… The others stare at her and give the impression that she’s full of it. But then her voice changes as the strange voice threatens to kill them all if they don’t leave the house at once! The mental medium Florence has become a physical medium – the first transition is at play. But Barret, the man of science still believes that it was Florence who made the pounding noises and not a ghost. Neither does he believe Florence or Mr Franklin’s tales.

this initial encounter with the spirits and first establishing of characters Hough starts winding up his audience. Florence encounters an entity in the privacy of her own room, an entity calling itself Daniel. Barret goes about his experiments, examining ectoplasm he’s gathered from Florence second séance. Daniel the ghost, continues to manipulate Florence and attacks Barret when she claims Belasco’s son has visited her and he rejects her claims as ridiculous. Next up is Barret’s wife who starts seeing the erotic statues cast explicit shadows on the ceiling during the night. She finds a selection of fine spirits among the kinky books Belasco has hidden in a cupboard and soon finds herself returning to the bottle for comfort. This leads her to ventilate her sexual frustrations with Franklin who she also tries to seduce big time in her drunken ecstatic stupor.

Now as I mentioned previously, some of the more visual and sexual elements have been left out in this adaptation, and I feel that it in some ways is a shame, but at the time quite good because the sexual stuff is quite complex and relates to Ann Barret’s alcoholism and sexual frustrations, inner thoughts and feelings that would have been complicated to get across on screen with out it being corny or odd. In the book they are wonderful and it gives an grand portrait of a confused and sexually frustrated woman possessed by something that makes her take matters into her own hands. In the movie it’s not as obvious, but Hunnicut makes the most of it and she brings life to one of the books most empathetic characters.

Back to the movie, Florence searches the cellars as she tries to find Daniel and discovers a corpse chained to the wall. After burying the corpse she hears Daniel talking to her and has a midnight visit from the black cat that has been streaking around all those exterior shots of the house. A cat that attacks her with such a fury that she ends up a crying, torn up mess in the bathroom she’s locked herself in. Cat attacks are never easy scenes to shoot believable, but this is among one of he better ever attempted. Mr. Deutsch high-tech machinery arrives to the joy of Barret who now feels that he has a chance at explaining the scientific elements behind the last few days’ happenings. Florence is convinced that Belasco is holding the other entities prisoner in the house and using them as soldiers against the investigators. Ann makes a second attempt at seducing Franklin, but realises that it’s the spirits (the ghostly ones, not the liquid ones) that are forcing her to her dirty deeds. Barret starts to recognise that something is askew in the house. Franklin is attacked by something and tries to persuade Florence that they have to escape before it’s too late, as he’s convinced that they will die if they don’t escape. But Florence holds her ground and tries to assure him that Daniel wishes them no harm. Franklin reveals the horrible tales of how the house and forces within killed and maimed each and every one of the members in the last investigation he was part of. Later that night the entity has sex with the innocent Florence who still thinks that she’s communicating with the friendly ghost Daniel, an act that she soon regrets as she realises that it’s not Daniel at all and leaves her scared, frail and possibly possessed as she shows a more aggressive attitude towards the others.

Barret is convinced that their investigation will be over as soon as he activates his strange machine. He’s moved from the sceptic that he once was to a man who demands that his science proves him right or else his world will shatter, Ann is a wreck and stays behind Barret as not to fall back into her drunken erotic frenzies again, and Florence tries to sabotage Barret’s machine, an action that Barret takes as a sign that he’s on the right track “she had to destroy my beliefs before they destroyed hers!” – Franklin is still the only one who hasn’t changed. He’s still the same silent and scared man that entered the house at the beginning. Florence takes action in the only way she knows and goes to the chapel in a search for Daniel, partially to warn him about Barret and prove his existence. Instead realises she’s been fooled and meets her doom, but not before leaving an important message for the others written in her own blood. The others find her dead in the chapel and Barret claims that it’s time to activate his machine. They all leave the house as it produces such an immense force field, and he flicks the switches that will rid the house of ghosts once and for all and gather the evidence he so desperately needs. The house moans, groans, creeks and aches, as the remainders of the team stand patiently outside. They go back in and Barret taunts Franklin to try feeling the atmosphere for entities. He assures that there will be none left. At first Franklin doesn’t feel anything and it looks like we’re moving towards an anticlimactic ending; “Is it really over Lionel? Yes, done, finished!” Now there's a red herring if there ever was one. Even Franklin now believes in the machines abilities. Ann goes for a rest and Barret starts to go over the readings from his successful action. But… and there’s always a but, as he starts reading his documents the gauges on the machine spring back to life exploding in his face. Franklin comforts Ann, and when she asks him to take her out of there, he answers that he’s going back into the chapel… Franklin is going to step up to the table here and finally take some action and reveal Mr. Belasco’s secret once and for all.

Without a doubt in my mind I’ll claim that this is one of the best British horror films of the seventies, (outside the hammer outlet that honestly was getting quite fucking lame at the time.), and is easily a real counterpart to Robert Wise masterpiece of the genre, The Haunting.

One of, if not the main ingredients that make this movie so splendid is the restrained use of effects and visuals. Much like The Haunting, a lot of the action is driven by audio and delicate camera work, leaving much of the haunting to the minds of the audience. A trick that forces us to summon up the most disturbing images that we can, images that never would have had the same impact on screen. It’s a wonderful way to work and the kind of trick that differs the psychological horror films from the embarrassingly silly ones. The gimmickry of William Castle and Roger Corman is swell, but it sure aint scary.

The reveal at the ending, which explains why Belasco can’t be beaten, is dazzling and once again proves of Matheson’s brilliance. It leaves nothing more to be asked for and the movie wraps up nicely.

The original music by Delia Derbyshire and Brian Hodgson is noteworthy and was produced by the company Electrophon Ltd. As the name indicates that they where early users of electronic instrumentations which bring an added eeriness to the movie. Another amusing fact about these two is that they have both have worked on the sound production on cult UK sci-fi horror serial Doctor Who at various times.

Producer James H. Nicholson originally co-founded and worked as a producer for American International Pictures together with Samuel Z Arkoff. A.I.P., the legendary Grindhouse / Drive-in company that released many of those fascinating Euro Horrors State side, earning them the legendary status that those movies hold today. The Legend of Hell House was the second of two movies he produced after departing A.I.P. and unfortunately he died from a brain tumour before the was released.

Director John Hough had already dabbled in the horror genre, with the 1971 Twins of Evil for Hammer, and returned to the genre several times with really good entries, like the very creepy and almost forgotten Disney flick The Watcher in the Woods 1980, the rough entity/rape movie Incubus 1981, and one I’m kind of fond of American Gothic 1987. And don’t forget his boyhood fantasy actioneer Biggles from 1986, Hammer Icon Peter Cushing’s last ever film.

If you still haven’t seen The Legend of Hell House you really need to track it down and give it a watch, it’s great stuff that will leave you very content and pleased you spent ninety five minutes watching this classic piece of horror history.

Image:

1.85:1 aspect Ratio

Audio:

English dialogue, Dolby Digital 2.0 surround. Optional Norwegian, Danish, English for hard of hearing, Finnish and Swedish subtitles available.

Extras:

Well it’s definitely a sparse version as all that there is available from the extras is a rather shoddy theatrical trailer giving away the key moments of the movie.