Powerful

Good story, Not enough for a whole film

Beautiful, moving film.

The acting in this movie is really good.

A writer struggling to complete his second novel retreats to a remote cottage in Essex and hires a pretty typist to assist him in completing the book, but soon discovers that he should be more careful about who he employs in the future...Exposé's closing credits only lists six cast members, but what a cast it is: crazy-eyed Udo Kier as best-selling author Paul Martin; gorgeous Linda Hayden as his sexy typist; big breasted softcore queen Fiona Richmond as Paul's lusty lover; 'Brush Strokes' star Karl Howman and legendary stuntman Vic Armstrong as a pair of rapist scumbags; and UK TV regular Patsy Smart as the housekeeper (OK, I've never actually heard of Patsy until now, but it seemed unfair to not mention her).With this excellent line up, plus plenty of steamy sex and several nasty scenes of violence (highlights being a double shotgun killing and a bloody knife attack in a bathroom), director James Kenelm Clarke delivers a sleazy, slow burning psychological thriller guaranteed to keep any fan of exploitation movies more than happy for the duration. Cult favourite Kier is his usual reliable self, and Richmond adds a certain novelty factor (this was her first major role outside of soft porn), but it is the delicious Hayden who steals the show, at first appearing all sweet and innocent, but soon revealing her true colours as she regularly stops work to masturbate, murder, and eventually get it on with Richmond in an eye-popping lesbian clinch. Whew!

Intended as a cheap sexploitation/horror film, made for only £50,000, it's interesting to discover what became of Expose - and consider what it might have been. The plot is good - better than an average episode of The Avengers, anyway. A writer (Udo Kier) rents a detached farmhouse in Essex and hires a secretary (Linda Hayden) to type his somewhat improbable manuscript.There are low ceilings, claustrophobic surrounds and a small ensemble of performers including Fiona Richmond, who, as Kier's girlfriend, stimulates him so much that during intimacy with her, he feels the need to wear latex gloves. It all augurs well, the soundtrack's good too and I was pleased to see a vignette from talented Karl Howman, who I first saw in the exceptional National Youth Theatre production of Zigger Zagger.The sex isn't outrageous by today's standards - though not quite the sort of thing you'd come across in Last of the Summer Wine. Funnily enough, I first discovered this film due to an innocuous appearance of Linda Hayden in another sitcom, Some Mother's Do 'Ave Em.Her role in this is not dissimilar to that of Susan George in Straw Dogs; on one occasion, as she towers over her drunken employer, lying on the floor staring up at her, panic-stricken, I felt distinctly uneasy. Coming from Stanmore, near to where I grew up, she might at least have considered towering over me, after an evening of inebriation in a pub near the end of the Northern Line. Charlotte Rampling, a fellow actress from the neighbourhood, who appeared in The Night Porter, amongst other things, became a much bigger star. Linda could - and perhaps should - have emulated her. She was apparently disappointed Fiona Richmond enjoyed star billing on the posters and that the film was advertised as a skinflick. Fair enough, but perennial masturbation was not depicted so much in mainstream films in those days (these days, it's almost compulsory, although most associated with American boys in teenage coming of age movies).Suffice to say, with a little bit more suspense, erotica and sensuality rather than sex and perhaps one more twist, this could have been a Witchfinder General or Wicker Man. Perhaps. As it is, it's interesting, worth a look and in the end, hangs together rather well.

Writer Paul Martin (Udo Kier) is holed up in his house (on Straw Hill) and needs an assistant to type his dictation. So he hires Linda Hindstatt (Linda Hayden), who seems pleasant enough. But Linda is a strange character, and her motives might not be as legit as they seem.I really enjoyed this film, and I want to make that clear up front. It wasn't a fantastic horror story, the plot wasn't very strong and it wasn't even that thrilling. But it's purpose was never any of these things: it was exploitation, and I think the writer/director did a marvelous job in achieving this kind of production.There's dirty sex (including latex gloves for some unexplained reason), plenty of nudity, females who enjoy their own bodies, a scene that may or may not be rape (the victim doesn't seem to mind). I don't know if this is art, but it made for a film that can hold your attention.The tone is somewhat darker than your average film, but not too dark. The copy I watched came on a videotape with a preview for "The Stuff". After that, I was thinking this might be a rather cheesy or b-grade film, but that is not at all so (although some of the blood has an unusual orange tint).The theme shouldn't be new to anyone who's seen plenty of movies. The "writer in solitude" theme is pretty standard -- "The Shining", "Misery", "Secret Window" all instantly come to mind (and those are just King films). There are two additional characters -- harassers and possible rapists -- who really add a new flavor to the piece. Their motives are unclear and they are so one-dimensional that it seems they've come from a comic book. One of them is wearing a shirt that seems to say "I am a vampire" (though I couldn't make it out clearly).This is a good movie if you crave some exploitation. Don't expect an amazing plot, and don't try to impress your girlfriend with it (unless she's really odd). There seems to be some clamor online calling for a nice DVD transfer of the film, and I support them on that. I would happily own the DVD of "House on Straw Hill" (as my copy is titled). Kier's finest since "Mark of the Devil".

Expose (aka The House on Straw Hill) is extremely graphic. The sex is graphic, with gloating scenes of love making, masturbation and a scene near the end which looks suspiciously like anal sex. The violence is graphic too, with a fair bit of spilled blood and sadistic detail during the running time.Udo Kier gives an OK performance as a novelist who murdered a colleague in order to steal his latest manuscript. He is now working on a new book, with young secretary Linda Hayden to help him, but he can't seem to shrug off uncontrollable hallucinations about the crime he has committed.The director indulges in some flashy film-making techniques, but for all this pomp and circumstance there is no hiding the fact that this is pure exploitation fodder. I believe that this may well be the most heavily censored and graphic British film ever made, so it worth seeing for that dubious distinction (especially if you can track down the uncut 117 minute version.... very rare though). However, it's not really a very good movie and once you've experienced it, it is unlikely that you will want to watch it again. Footnote: If you're a fan of British sex siren Fiona Richmond, you'll be pleased to know that she spends most of this movie stark naked.