La Maison du Diable

Perhaps this is a movie that appeals only to certain people. Perhaps it has to be viewed at a particular moment in life. Perhaps it's just too dated for many to get into it. In any case, it's disappointing to see how many simply find it a waste of time.

I saw this under special circumstances. I was about 12 years old and my parents were out for the evening when it came on TV. I didn't know anything about it but considered myself quite the connoisseur of horror and sci-fi shown at the small local theater. I figured it would be along the line of Universal monsters and Roger Corman fare, nothing particularly notable.

It scared the absolute daylights out of me. Sitting alone the in house at night with the creepy sounds and images emanating from that little B&W screen got to me badly. Even after my parents were home and I went to bed I found myself looking for faces in the plaster walls of my room and imagining every creak as an approaching but invisible malevolent force.

I still get it out every couple of years on a dark dreary night, and though the lines of dialog sound more stilted to my now elderly mind I can still remember the effect it had on me so many decades ago.

I had an even more intense reaction from Hitchcock's "The Birds" and I've noticed the commentary about that film to be similar to this. Perhaps you just had to be there.

After finding this gem at the public library's VHS section, I finally received the chance to watch the 'better' version of The Haunting. With what I could recall from reading the original novel (after seeing the modern version), I found this cinematic version infinately better and denser in character exposition than the 1999 version. In this 1963 version, the ending stayed closer to what happened in the novel and that was the definitive moment of The Haunting. I can't say much for the modern version, other than it was an effects film.

What I found original in this 1963 version is that there were some clever uses of lensing effects to heighten the strangeness of Hill House. By adjusting the props in the sets so that they are off by a few degrees, it helps to unsettle the viewer.

I'm hoping for a dvd release so that I can own both versions of the film. In the meantime, read the novel. There were a few details left out.

There's a house that sits atop an elevation, 90 years old, riven with cold, crooked damnation, uninhabited by the living, but surrounded by misgiving, not really sure, what's behind doors, but there's suspicion.

A curious anthropologist researching the paranormal gathers three souls who are sensitive to such things and envelopes them in surroundings simmering with the supernatural in the form of a haunted house on a hill (what more do you need). The cinematography is spectacular, all the performances outstanding, but you may struggle to keep your eyes off Claire Bloom in her prime. Watch it on a stormy night, on your own, with the lights out - if you dare!

ABC broadcast this film as a Sunday Night Movie in, I believe, 1965. I watched it with my best friend at his house, which happened to be next door. After the movie was over I was afraid to walk home. Thirty eight years later, this movie is still the scariest movie I've ever seen.

It's hard to put into words why this movie triggers such an emotional response. There is no blood and gore, no creatures or monsters in plain sight. In fact, there is very little physical presence in this movie that should evoke such a fear reaction. True, there are multiple angle exterior shots of the mansion that make one feel as if the house is watching them all the time. And there are loud unexplained noises, bulging wall panels, and door knobs that turn by themselves. All-in-all, the physical evidence is pretty tame, especially by today's standards.

The fear reaction lies not in the physical form, but in the psychological sense. For example, as Theo and Nell cling to one another as wall pounding draws closer to their room, only to stop and dead silence replaces the noise. Later in the movie, Nell and Theo are again in their room when Nell grabs hold of Theo's hand as noise begins to build outside their bedroom door. Finally, unable to stand the noise any longer, Nell begins to scream which awakens Theo, who happens to be halfway across the room, and thus not close enough to be holding Nell's hand. So the question is "who or what was Nell holding?". There are many scenes that are similar to the above.

This film was directed by Robert Wise who made me believe there was something lurking around every corner, or there was something that was going to happen, but you just didn't know quite when. This is the type of directing that has given this movie the classic status it so richly deserves.

So, if you are more into the physical style of a movie, go see "Texas Chain Saw Massacre", but if you are ready for a genuinely scary movie, go rent or buy the 1963 version of "The Haunting".

Robert Wise's recent passing brings "The Haunting" to mind. Less of a horror movie than a psychological thriller, it has Eleanor Lance (Julie Harris) coming to old house with several other people invited by Dr. John Markway (Richard Johnson). This is no ordinary house; it has a very disturbing history. And the answers to the creepy incidents that have taken place may be closer than anyone realizes.

What makes this movie so good is that it relies on camera angle (rather than gore and special effects, as usually seems to happen now) to create the horror. You literally can't tell when something is going to happen. The only thing that gives the movie a slightly silly feeling is the presence of Lois Maxwell (aka Miss Moneypenny in the James Bond movies) as Dr. Markway's wife Grace. Still, it's a horror classic. The 1999 remake, as far as I could tell, was deliberately trying to be silly; if so, then they sure succeeded, because that was a poor excuse for a movie. This one is the real "Haunting".