Highly Overrated But Still Good

It’s an especially fun movie from a director and cast who are clearly having a good time allowing themselves to let loose.

This is a must-see and one of the best documentaries - and films - of this year.

Strong acting helps the film overcome an uncertain premise and create characters that hold our attention absolutely.

Of course, it's terrible but then what would you expect coming from William Castle. It's also camp fun in a terrible kind of way but again what would you expect from a movie with Vincent Price in the lead and a ham-fisted cast that includes Carol Ohmart, Elisha Cook (at his hammiest) and Alan Marshall. The premiss is simple; a group of people have to spend the night in a haunted house and if they survive they each earn $10,000 and the movie does exactly what it says on the tin, though it's never actually frightening despite ticking all the boxes. Like most Castle films it was perfect drive-in material and actually lead to a much more expensive remake which I have managed to avoid. Terrible then, but tolerable.

Along with many other reviewers, I first saw House on Haunted Hill as a kid. It took me a long time to shake its spooky feeling off, convinced as I was that certain elements (Price's wife appearing at Nora's window, the rope curling around Nora's feet) could not have been faked.OK, so it's just a movie, and those incidents were faked. Anyway, having seen it a few times recently, I'm intrigued by the plot. Price's character running the show; he runs two shows really: the ghost gambit with his guests,and the murder mystery. It's impossible to know what he's really up to until the last few scenes in the cellar.It's established early on that Price and his wife can't stand each other; Price mimics shooting her with a candlestick. Still, the murder mystery lurks in the background while the ghostly presences manifest themselves. We are left wondering--who/what is behind these machinations: Price? Pritchard? Price's wife? or, are they supposed to actually occur of their own volition? The revelations at the end bring both plots together.The only loose end is Pritchard. He frames the movie by introducing the characters and plot, and summing it up when it's played out. But he's really in his own world; he fits into the atmosphere of the house, even as he's repelled by it. He also establishes that none of the characters are what they seem to be. The guests are all needy/greedy. Nora has the most legitimate reason for wanting the money, but she's soon manipulated to the point that she becomes an hysterical loose cannon.The movie never lets us off the hook; will murders continue at the house? Since Pritchard owns the place, he should be the best informed. Obviously, like all the other characters, he's not a reliable witness either. This leaves the question: who's story is it? In other words, does the murder mystery explain everything else, or are we to believe that Pritchard's world of ghosts is the arbiter of fate?Even after all these years, and being a bit more skeptical than Pritchard, the caretaker's wife still scares me, and Price's genteel ghoulishness remains disarmingly.

The laughs and chills come a mile a minute in this tongue in cheek haunted house film so filled with gimmicks that you can't imagine the writers not laughing as they put it all down on paper. Vincent Price, a horror film legend, joins forces with Elisha Cook Jr., a film noir legend, along with Price's obviously gold digging wife (Carol Ohlmart), host a party at the house owned by Cook and rented by Price. Richard Long and Carolyn Craig, two of the guests, search the house, and each of them have frightening moments, but never when the other one is around. The funniest one is spotted by Craig, a floating witch like creature who appears out of nowhere at the most inopportune moments. Those of the chosen guests who make it through the night alive get $10,000 from Price, not without objection from the greedy Ohlmart. You have to watch this straight through without interruption in order to find all the thrills. They pop up unexpectedly, resulting in a sudden scream followed by laughter in response. At least that is how I rescued, certainly not the characters, especially scream queen Craig. Price takes the part seriously with a glint in his eye revealing that he's having a blast making it. Cook, insisting that there have been brutal murders even long before he was given the house, is pathetic looking and thus fantastic as the horror increases.But this is a William Castle film and thus is filled with delicious gimmicks. This was the first of his films to utilize this tactic, perfected in "The Tingler" and "Thirteen Ghosts". It's obvious from the start who the guilty party(s) are/most likely are, but certain details are dropped that will keep you guessing. While the exposition gets a little talky at times and slows it down, it's never for long. And in regards to the leading man, where there's Vincent, you know that the Price is right!

A millionaire invites five strangers to stay the night in a haunted house, with a pot of $50,000 to be split among those who manage to survive till morning. But his wife doesn't approve of the plan.Oh, I wasn't expecting this - strictly for fans of cheese. The plot is nonsense, the script is appalling, the characterisation and motivation unbelievable, direction stodgy, effects hilariously bad, and the music is clichéd. Above all it misleads the audience in the cheapest way. It would be unfair to say anything about the actors, because there's simply nothing they can do with the rubbish the writer/producer heaped upon them.I can understand people having affection for this production, but the rest of us should be warned - it truly is a bad film.