A recently widowed writer rents a haunted house in which to write his latest novel and is soon beset by the various ghosts in the house bent on claiming him as their next victim.A recently widowed writer rents a haunted house in which to write his latest novel and is soon beset by the various ghosts in the house bent on claiming him as their next victim.A recently widowed writer rents a haunted house in which to write his latest novel and is soon beset by the various ghosts in the house bent on claiming him as their next victim.
- Directors
- Writers
- Stars
- Directors
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Featured reviews
From the first seconds you know that this is going to be a low budget flick. The quality isn't exactly what we call superb. But being shot on video I was surprised that the opening was a shower scene with close ups of the girl her breasts so gratuitous nudity for. But then the trouble starts. You could see the cheap effects, just watch the lightning.
The haunted house as for effect they used negative colours to gave it a ghost feeling. That's so cheap and that works sometimes but not throughout the whole flick. Just after the opening credits it do has some cheap gory effects, supposed that the kid decapitated the victims and again some gratuitous nudity from a stripper.
Once that part is done the flick actually starts when a writer is searching for a haunted house. Really bad acting takes you through this possessed flick but not only that, it is rather boring from there on. Well, maybe the stripper returning is the most important thing to look forward to.
Gore 0/5 Nudity 0,5/5 Effects 0,5/5 Story 1/5 Comedy 0/5
The haunted house as for effect they used negative colours to gave it a ghost feeling. That's so cheap and that works sometimes but not throughout the whole flick. Just after the opening credits it do has some cheap gory effects, supposed that the kid decapitated the victims and again some gratuitous nudity from a stripper.
Once that part is done the flick actually starts when a writer is searching for a haunted house. Really bad acting takes you through this possessed flick but not only that, it is rather boring from there on. Well, maybe the stripper returning is the most important thing to look forward to.
Gore 0/5 Nudity 0,5/5 Effects 0,5/5 Story 1/5 Comedy 0/5
Sweet Jeezus i was hoping this craptastic waste of space wouldn't even be on this site. I saw The House that Screamed when i was in high school, about 5 years ago, with a friend of mine. Little did we know the horror that actually awaited us when we started the blasted movie up. I honestly didn't think people could actually sell movies that badly done, ooooh boy was I wrong. I could see a group of 10 year olds make a better movie without trying. I swore to myself i would forget what i saw when i started watching this movie, if for no other reason than i don't want to have to claw my eyes out, but i cant do that. I would be less than human if i saw this listening and didn't voice how incredible bad this festering pile of dog droppings is. Lets put it this way if there were rating below -10 i'd give that to this movie without a second thought.
This movie has made my top 10 worst movies ever made. Nothing about this movie is good.
" A waste of electricity" a friend of mine said.
I could not say it any better. This movie is a waste of time, money and dvds/tapes. They reused so much footage that it seems like they had like 30min of film for this 78min movie. Some parts were repeated in the same scene. Not only was the acting really bad, the fact that some people must have had the mic about 2 inches away form there face. Making it so the basement TV I watch this one, was booming bass, and I could feel there voices during normal talking. They had tons of horror elements in the movie, but all done wrong. The best actors were the kids.
This movie is only good if you feel like you want to die a little bit inside.
" A waste of electricity" a friend of mine said.
I could not say it any better. This movie is a waste of time, money and dvds/tapes. They reused so much footage that it seems like they had like 30min of film for this 78min movie. Some parts were repeated in the same scene. Not only was the acting really bad, the fact that some people must have had the mic about 2 inches away form there face. Making it so the basement TV I watch this one, was booming bass, and I could feel there voices during normal talking. They had tons of horror elements in the movie, but all done wrong. The best actors were the kids.
This movie is only good if you feel like you want to die a little bit inside.
A ghastly stupid and dull haunted house story. Oh, you Polonia brothers when will you ever EVER learn, you silly boys. If you love something, no matter how much if you're just not good at it, then let the dream die. When I was growing up for a brief time I wanted to be a basketball player, I had three things going against me. I was white, short, and no hand eye cooridination, so I let that dream, albeit fleeting as it was, pass on. OK, not the greatest example, but my point is this, you boys can't make turd after steaming turd and still remain serious in you commitment to film. You may be the LAST people to get the joke, but you will. And on that glorious day, you'll both take up a trade that you're good at. Plumbing perhaps...maybe singing telegrams.
My Grade: F
My Grade: F
This has got to be one of the stupidest movies I've ever seen, right up with Troll 2. Still, it's fun to watch with some friends. Some notable elements of stupidity include:
-utterly pointless nudity (what was the point of the shower scene or the woman in red underwear?)
-the goofy flashbacks Marty has. Notice how his wife burnt down the house (which had no walls inside evidently) with a burnt out cigarette, and that his son died in the fire without any burns or even getting dirty
-the Grim Reaper playing with the doorbell
-the "ghostly circle" not extending to cover a the actor's arm
-drowning the plastic doll to kill the ghost inside
-Marty's "famous" novels: Feeders 1-3. The same guys who did this made Feeders 1&2, and they were really awful.
-the ridiculously low-budget makeup. The blind guy looked like he had fruit roll-ups over his eyes, and the blood hitting the window looked suspiciously like a tomato being thrown too late after the gunshot
I could go on & on on how stupid this movie is. Only see this to make fun of it.
-utterly pointless nudity (what was the point of the shower scene or the woman in red underwear?)
-the goofy flashbacks Marty has. Notice how his wife burnt down the house (which had no walls inside evidently) with a burnt out cigarette, and that his son died in the fire without any burns or even getting dirty
-the Grim Reaper playing with the doorbell
-the "ghostly circle" not extending to cover a the actor's arm
-drowning the plastic doll to kill the ghost inside
-Marty's "famous" novels: Feeders 1-3. The same guys who did this made Feeders 1&2, and they were really awful.
-the ridiculously low-budget makeup. The blind guy looked like he had fruit roll-ups over his eyes, and the blood hitting the window looked suspiciously like a tomato being thrown too late after the gunshot
I could go on & on on how stupid this movie is. Only see this to make fun of it.
Did you know
- ConnectionsFollowed by Hellgate: The House That Screamed 2 (2001)
Details
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content