Truly Dreadful Film

Plot so thin, it passes unnoticed.

People are voting emotionally.

Excellent and certainly provocative... If nothing else, the film is a real conversation starter.

I think it's fascinating (and sort of sad) that a movie like "It Follows" (while not terrible, but very tiresome for those who grew up in the 70's and 80's and can call every one of its myriad influences that it flat out rips off.).gets rave reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and then a film as influential, terrifying, and so well made as this 1979 shocker (yes, even with its complete tonal shift into character study in the mid-portion) gets a 6%? Everything about this film is first rate, and I firmly believe the first 20 minutes is arguably the closest thing to a nightmare caught on film in the medium's long history (along with Chainsaw 74').The film requires patience. Younger reviewers who find the film tame and "not scary" have to be reminded of the time period that this film was released. Child killers like Gacy, and a dozens more were at their peak in the 70's, which is why Carpenter's Halloween, and "Stranger" resonated so much to the movie-going public. When a Stranger Calls may indeed be based on an urban legend, but do some extensive research on the horrors taking place in 70's suburbia, and "Stranger Calls" starts to look like a fairy tale in comparison. Again, it's all about context; on one hand, one must consider that "women in peril/stalker films" were a new sub-genre. Long before Jason, American Horror Story, Saw, etc. we had very few horror films that reminded audiences that horror wasn't just set in outer space, old creepy castles, rural wastelands, or even creepy motels. They literally could be one house away. For the sake of time, I want to recommend this really thought-provoking piece that had me seeing this 1979 mini-masterpiece in a brand new light: it's called "Giving When a Stranger Calls Another Shot" in a 2014 issue of BirthDeathMovies. IMDb won't let me post the link here, but I strongly recommend taking a look!

Acting: 17/20 Writing: 31/40 Directing/Editing/Production/Etc: 27/40Overall: 75/100 CReview: Carol Kane did not really prove why she deserved to be in Hollywood with this performance. There were a couple scenes where she really hit her mark and did a good job, but all of her other scenes were the opposite: very mediocre and unconvincing. The rest of the cast did a great job though.*Spoiler Alert!*I'm not quite sure why Carol Kane is billed as the star of the film as she's hardly in it and isn't very good in it. I suppose at the time this film came out, it was a twist that the film would follow the "private detective" and the murderer more than the babysitter and the murderer etc. That being said, she did do a better job playing the mother at the end than she did the babysitter in the beginning - particularly the scene in the restaurant on the phone.The real star of this film, was Tony Beckley as the psychotic murderer. He genuinely captured an insane man and portrayed him in a way that was much more realistic than the more common Hollywood route of showing people who are insane. The way they showed his descent back into madness after experience "shock-therapy" a total of 38x over 6 years was actually very realistic and compelling. From the writing to the acting to the way it was shot, all of the scenes involving this character were very well-done, particularly where he was being reborn into the "monster" that he had been.Charles Durning as the officer-turned-private detective/hit-man, also did a great job playing his character. It wasn't outstanding but it was very convincing, the second-best performance in the line- up.Colleen Dewhurst as the potential victim and/or romantic-interest of Curt Duncan did a decent job as well. Nothing great but still better than Carol Kane's performance in some scenes.Sort of like the acting, the writing had some extreme highs and extreme lows. The originality and creativity if the writing of this film needs to be commended. I went into this film expecting the entire thing to be about the original Babysitter-Caller legend yet it was only about the first 20 minutes of the film. Taking this route actually made the film even more exciting, as well as bringing it back full-circle to Carol Kane's character as the mother out for a date instead of being the babysitter.The fact that the film went so much into the character of the psychotic killer and followed his descent into madness - along with the ex-cop trying to hunt him along the way - was very riveting.Unfortunately, there were a few plot holes that really took away from the quality and consistency of this film. The idea that Curt Duncan was able to find the babysitter at the end of the film - as well as wanting to, almost out of nowhere instead of having that desire the entire time - was not very credible. Jill Johnson was supposed to be married with kids now, so she presumably changed her name so how could Duncan have known what that name would be to be able to find her? The edit to this didn't explain anything about how he found her which is a shame because it could've easily been done. For example: Durning was already going after Duncan and knew he was loose. It would be reasonable for Duncan to start stalking Durning, since he knows he is trying to kill him and Duncan's already a stalker. If Durning got into contact with Jill Johnson to see if she had been contacted at all by Duncan, it could've been the perfect way for Duncan to have found Jill, through following Durning.Furthermore, the fact that Duncan didn't try to stalk and kill Durning after he knew that Durning was after him, was illogical as well. It's odd that he just ran away from Durning and randomly decided to go back after Jill Johnson. In addition, the fact that Duncan went after Jill and her husband before her kids was also inconsistent with his character. I think a more accurate and even more frightening ending would've been if Jill Johnson had come back completely full-circle to find her kids slaughtered by Duncan with the babysitter running out - just as she had before.*End of Spoiler Alert!*The film did a great job of keeping the suspense building and creating a very suspenseful atmosphere with the right pace, etc. However, there were some scenes that were very characteristic of B- movies. A fight scene where fists obviously weren't making contact and blood randomly appears out of nowhere with inconsistent injuries, along with a shooting scene that doesn't match up when taking in the angles and positions into account, were some classic production mistakes. The music had some great moments of adding to the film but there were also some moments that it wasn't so great and took away from the scenes just a bit. Overall this film was very suspenseful and original - despite being based on a common urban legend. It's not one of the best films ever done but it's definitely still worth a watch, especially if you're a horror or movie fan in general.

I came upon this via a slasher list, but it isn't quite that. It starts out that way in the first part, though, and makes perfect use of a house, a babysitter, a telephone and a creepy caller, with a particularly nasty outcome. Then, onto part two (six or seven years later): the cop who showed up at the end of part one now is a P.I. who learns that the culprit of part one has escaped. Here, we also get to know the killer in the setting of a big city, and he meets up with an older attractive woman. The P.I. wants to kill the killer. This whole part reminded me of an atmospheric character study like 'Henry: portrait of a serial killer'; not thát good, but close. Then, the final chapter, in which we return to the babysitter, who is now a career woman, married and with two children. Another strange twist, which makes this a special film, no matter what you'll think of it. For me, it gets a little too much 'out of hand', even if it's still a more than decent final chapter.All in all, I'm still not quite sure what to think of it. The particular slasher / thriller elements seem out of place with the elements of gritty drama which are also there... For now, I'm going to say it doesn't réally work for me, but perhaps another viewing in the future may persuade me otherwise.6 stars, I'd say, but the spot on acting and atmosphere deserve more; 7 out of 10.

A deranged man harasses a babysitter late at night in 'When a Stranger Calls'. A teenage girl named Jill who is babysitting two children gets obscene phone calls, each time the person asking "have you checked the children?". She calls the police who eventually put a tap on the phone to see who is harassing her. They tell her the calls are coming from inside the house she is in! The man's been upstairs the whole time! It's revealed that he killed the kids... We then go seven years into the future. The killer has escaped from a mental institution and the police officer who was on the case years back John Clifford (now retired) has been hired to find Duncan and kill him. After stalking a woman he meets in a bar, Duncan eventually finds Jill who now has a husband and children. The conclusion is a shocker!'When a Stranger Calls' is like two movies put into one. The first fifteen minutes are some of the most intense and terrifying moments in horror movie history! It's pure horror. But the middle frame feels much more like a cop crime/drama. It basically follows Clifford trying to find Duncan in order to kill him for what he did all those years ago. Duncan falls for a woman who lives in the city, and it's basically him stalking her while Clifford stalks him. Then we get to the conclusion which is just as good as the first fifteen minutes of complete terror.I had nothing wrong with the middle frame of 'When a Stranger Calls', it was well written and acted.. it just wasn't as intense as the first part of the film with the babysitter getting the calls. IT fell flat when compared to the beginning. The acting was good all around, from Charles Dunning and Carol Kane to Tony Beckley as the psychopath Curt Duncan. Overall this is a horror movie that should be seen by all. Despite a bit of a slow middle frame, the beginning and ending are must see! 8/10