The Legend of Doom House

That's what the title means;or at least,that's what the priest explains to Matthieu Carrière.The subtitle is overkill and was added for commercial reasons,probably unbeknownst to the director."Doomed house" is a stupid title:are we so sure it's the story of a house? Isn't it rather the story of a mind? of a fantasy? of a folly?

This poesque subtitle is not suitable for Jean Ray's world,who keeps a certain logic inside a nightmarish swarming of monsters,werewolves,Gorgons and mad scientists.Some of his obsessions surface here:the Gorgon,turning mortals into stone,the taxidermist working on alive bodies,are topics we find not only in "Malpertuis" but also in "the adventures of Harry Dickson" ,his favorite hero (he wrote dozens of stories of this detective and his pupil Tom wills)Prometheus recalls here how suffering and sadism were haunting the Belgian writer.Because Belgian,this definitely is.Kummel's closest relative is none other than his compatriot André Delvaux who quoted Jean Ray in his masterwork "un soir,un train".I urge the users who have liked "Malpertuis" to try "Un soir ,un train".It's the same kind of atmosphere,simply it's more mastered,the emotional power -cruelly lacking in Kummel's work- is increased tenfold .

"Malpertuis" has a dream of a cast:Orson Welles-in a short part,but he makes every of his word count-,Matthieu Carrière ,"Der Junge Törless" wunderkind,Susan Hampshire,Two Chabrol favorites (Michel Bouquet and Jean-Pierre Cassel,both in "la rupture" some months before),and,most amazing thing,French singer Sylvie Vartan and in a cameo(uncredited) her then-husband ,Johnny Hallyday.

The plot may be hard to swallow for horror buffs.It's a film "à tiroirs",and the ending has in store at least three unexpected twists.The last picture leaves the spectator bewildered.Hampshire and Carrière seem unreal,and the world that surrounds them is no longer a world in ruins,but a world that forgot he's in ruins.And what kind of world is it?

I saw an english spoken version with 110m informed on the video box, but really 95min in video band. I remember, a long time ago, I saw this film in cinema with more as 110m. A lot of scenes disapeared: The face from Alecta, two times that the antiquaire appears in the film. I remember it was another end too, or maybe I'm wrong? Was ever the last scene a close of Jan's eye? Where is a complete copy of this film? It's very sad this cutting of scenes.

My hopes were high for this film. I'd seen Kumel's Le Rouge aux levres/Daughters of Darkness, the most stylish vampire/kinky sex movie ever made, and I love its sly wit and arresting visuals. Malpertuis is not as effective, alas, and I put that down to an overly-complicated story weighed down by too many classical references taken from the novel. Lampernisse, standing in for Prometheus, just doesn't work as a character. Why introduce the Erinyes, the three women who punished offenders against blood kin, when they don't advance the story? It's not an easy thing to watch a movie with a handbook of classical mythology by your side.

Having said this, I will add that it is wonderful to watch film that shows a great visual sophistication (crowd shots that evoke an Ensor painting, or that wonderful twisting staircase in the house) and never needs F/X. We have lost a great deal by the subservience to CGI today.

Having seen this film some years ago on television in a dark, dubbed and cut print, I had all but forgotten it. Yesterday I saw Kumel's restored cut in his own Flemish language, running 124 minutes, and my reaction was "brilliant". The picture was actually originally made in English, French, German and Dutch versions and then hacked to bits in the various markets. This film is a "must-see" for any serious film fan with its fabulous photography, stylish composition and surreal overtones - Magritte too was Belgian. It's more than a horror film as it has often been tagged, but a series of dreams or perhaps nightmares with all the illogic of dreams. I am fairly certain that Welles did his own Flemish dialog and that too makes it a must for the connoisseur.

Not even Orson Welles succeeds in lifting this film from a level of morbidity to any quality, although it is esthetically well made and interesting with a fascinating scenery throughout. The problem is the story. It's like a turgid novel by Balzac, all the relatives waiting for the old man to die to seize on their inheritance as soon as he is dead, while all they do while he still lives is to long for his death. That's when the interesting part of the film ends, and the rest is more or less just nonsense, as if Welles was the only pillar supporting the film. The conclusion has pretensions to be ingenious but is a disaster and just leads the film to a dead end of artistic bankruptcy. This is no film I could recommend to any audience, and although it was not a mistake to watch it, I will certainly never watch it again.