Rating: 
Summary: CAN YOU SAY: SPECIAL EFFECTS?
Review: Special effects. Yes, that's what this movie is all about: showcasing those marvelous special effects that are so carefully calculated to horrify us! I admit, I was a bit disappointed by this movie. I expected it to be a lot creepier; after all, the premise itself is creepy enough to work with, (which is that all the guests have to stay in this "haunted house" over night - and if they can LIVE through the night, they will each receive a million dollars). However, even though the plot is intriquing, the movie just doesn't work. It's incredibly disjointed with this weird insane asylum twist thrown in; the acting is mediocre at best, and it seems as though the creaters were just counting on the special effects to pull it through! Unfortunately, though, they're not enough. In some ways, despite it's campiness and corniness, the original version was a lot creepier; whereas this new, remade version, is more like a bad drug trip. My opinion? If you're just into watching a bunch of really weird special effects, then rent this movie. It's mildly entertaining. It's a little bit gross. Just don't expect THIS House On Haunted Hill to be ANYTHING like the first one!
Rating: 
Summary: An incredible PURE Horror flick!
Review: This was without a doubt the best horror flick I have ever seen. The plot had more twists and turns to it than an Indy 500 race course. It was freakish and bizzare, suspenseful & terrifiying, compelling and unpredictable. The story, imagery and cinematography were incredible. I mean, this guy makes Steven King look like an amateur at times. Not for the faint of heart. The only downsides are that there was one mildly predictable element about this movie that I can't explain without spoiling the movie, and the characters were a little weak. But to be perfectly frank, this movie could have gotten the job done with almost no character development whatsoever. As a pure horror flick, I HIGHLY reccomend this movie, and also a warm and fuzzy comedy (of your choice) to watch afterwards, or you won't be getting much sleep that night.....
Rating: 
Summary: COULD OF BEEN BETTER
Review: OK LETS GET IT STRAIGHT.. THE PLOT OF THE MOVIE IS REALLY COOL THE STORY OF A BROKEN DOWN INSANE ASILUME WITH A MURDEROUS GHOSTLY TOUCH.. BUT THE MOVIE COULD OF BEEN 50% BETTER! IF U LIKE THIS ONE YOU WOULD PROBABLY LIKE THE HAUNTING ANOTHER MOVIE ABOUT A SCARY OLD HOUSE..
Rating:
Summary: Lame movie, lame story, lame effects
Review: I bought this DVD because I am a horror fan, and I'm usually not dissapointed, but this movie plain old sucks. I waited 3 days for my new sound system to come in so I could enjoy the soundtrack along with the video and I waited for nothing. I am not going to detail but here are some of the few highlights: (possible spoilers) 1) They filmakers kept using the SAME room over and over. 2) There are too many characters that you really don't care about any of them except the 2 main characters & the bad guys, but even then, you can't remember their names. 3) For a scary movie, there are no original death scenes AT ALL. 4) The special effects suck (and why wasnt that shot of the painting's hand coming out of the wall in the trailer NOT in the movie? That was a creepy shot). 5) At the end, I was going, "There has to be more than that, oh please don't end, please don't end!" and then it ended. Oh, and the director's commentary sucks. He just repeats whatevers on the screen throughout the WHOLE movie. That was the lamest commentary I have EVER heard. If you REALLY have to see it, RENT IT, because it's not worth owning.
Rating: 
Summary: A PRICE-less Classic
Review: Having read so many lousy reviews of this remake of William Castle's 1959 schlock classic, I felt I had to set the records straight. The 1999 House on Haunted Hill is a much better movie than any of us could expect. In true Castle tradition; it has equal parts gore and humour and a superb cast that hams up the proceedings perfectly (Geoffrey Rush plays the Vincent Price role with relish). But this time, however, we have a masterfully paced script (that is as knowing and 'post-modern' as anything from the pen of Kevin Williamson,) with genuine twists (on the original) and shocks aplenty, beautifully lit Bauhaus style interiors, and the best use of colour since Don't Look Now. The FX are not at all gratuitous (like so many scare flicks) and are simply quite astounding. We have the most creepy CGI apparitions imaginable [an animated monochrome Rorschach of lost souls], vibrating headed demons [a la Jacob's Ladder] and a 'saturation tank' mirage of monsters and ghosts - actually, a cleverly realised montage of black and white/sepia images with occasional vivid bursts of reds. The DVD is a superb widescreen transfer and is crammed full of extras - Director William Malone's commentary, 18 minute documentary and effects catalogue. Prepare yourself for a white-knuckled, roller-coaster ride of a movie.
Rating:
Summary: Great, in its own way
Review: I've actually seen Creature, William Malone's other feature film, and from watching that movie and this one I can sum up his directing abilities in five words: horrifying imagery but really bad characters. The characters and plot in "House on Haunted Hill" provide nothing more than an avenue for Malone to unleash the demons of his nightmarish visual sense; particularly rewarding are the demise of of the control center guy and the barrage of atrocities that Geoffrey Rush endures inside that insanity chamber. But then they blow everything at the end. Come on, guys, we don't want to see another fake-looking computer-animated ghost! That's exactly what made The Haunting one of the worst movies of the summer! One of the deleted scenes would have served as a slightly better way to end the film, but it was cut out because it wouldn't have made sense without another scene which had to be cut for pacing purposes; even with the additional ending footage, though, the movie unquestionably takes a dive towards the end. If you like this film, though (and it does have its charms), wait until the very end of the credits for some cool bonus gore.
Rating:
Summary: A guilty pleasure.
Review: We all knew what this movie was going to be like. Bad Acting, funny dialogue (although this movie is pretty scary at parts), and a cheesy story...Who Cares! This movie is fun, and it's scary. I wasn't expecting a deep a moving epic, I just wanted to be scared, and I was most of the time. The sets are wonderfully gloomy, which adds to the effect of the movie. And the insanely bad dialogue provides comic relief. The DVD has a nice slew of extras as well. Don't take this one seriously, it's not a Best Picture nominee. Just have fun and be scared. A lot scarier than another movie about a "HAUNTED" house that came out a year ago, I think it was called....
Rating: 
Summary: STOP! DON'T BUY THIS MOVIE! IT'S NOT TOO LATE!
Review: I have to admit that the premise was promising enough: five people are given the opportunity to win one million dollars each. The catch? They have to spend one night in a haunted house and live to tell about it. Geoffey Rush, who reprises the role originally made famous by Vincent Price, plays an amusement park owner who manages to convince these poor souls into the agreement. Didn't this guy win an Oscar a few years ago? It's unfathomable to understand why such a good actor has reduced himself into such a poor career choice. With this movie and Mystery Men, it doesn't look too good for Mr. Rush. Taye Diggs, who was so charmismatic in When Stella Got Her Groove Back, is thoroughly wasted in such a one dimensional role that basically called for him to run around. Chris Kattan, the geek from Saturday Night Live and A Night At the Roxbury, plays a neurotic weasel which is basically the same persona he adopts in his acts. There's nothing new here. In terms of the film itself, it seemed as if the director was more interested in going for visual shocks rather than a fluid plot. Scenes seem to be curiously missing and there were plot holes big enough to drive a truck through. For instance, why were the five characters chosen to participate in the contest? This was never clearly explained. For a Friday night rental, this movie is probably two times scarier than the average B-movie horror flick, but you know what two times nothing is... TRIVIA: For you horror movie buffs, try to recognize who the maniacal surgeon is during the first few scenes in the movie.
Rating:
Summary: House On Haunted Hill
Review: I will simply list the reasons I thought The House on Haunted Hill was one of the worst movies I've seen in quite some time. 1. Bad acting. 2. Bad Effects. I could do better on my iMac. 3. Not very scary. A horror movie with no surprises. 4. Poorly written. The potential for some interesting twists were there. They could have added to the original. This movie wasted 1 1/2 hours of my life.
Rating:
Summary: Excellent quality DVD...
Review: If you saw this film during its theatrical run you don't need me to tell you how much fun it is. If you missed it, you may want to check it out before buying it. If you enjoy horror films and are looking for a good one amidst all the frightless crap(read: Blair Witch Project, The Haunting) being released recently, it's a pretty safe bet. The DVD has plenty of extras. Three deleted scenes are probably the highlights, but you don't really notice them missing from the film. The "Zombie" one is barely noticable(if you've got one hell of an eye for detail and have watched it five times). William Malone's commentary is kind of a mixed bag. It's interesting to hear how certain shots were done and such, but it actually left me with more questions than I went in with. All of those had to do with background info. Malone mentions that the script gave more history on Pritchett's family and the house after the fire. Overall, the only thing I thought was missing was the actual, unabridged screenplay. Everything else is done perfectly. Picture and especially sound are preserved in all their eerie glory. Enjoy!
|
