Prime Time: House Of The Long Shadows (1983)

Despite the cast, I was never in a rush to watch this horror movie, the final feature directed by Pete Walker. I knew I would get to it eventually though. It's old-fashioned, creaks under the weight of the baggage being moved across every wooden floor, and also has a ridiculous framing device. I couldn't bring myself to dislike it though.

Desi Arnaz Jr. plays Kenneth Magee, a writer who makes a bet with his agent (Richard Todd) that he can hole himself up in dark and isolated house for 24 hours and come out with a novel akin to something produced by the Brontë sisters. It's handy for Magee that his agent has a key to such a location, and the bet is on. The house ends up being populated by a strange mix of characters though. Sheila Keith and John Carradine appear, claiming to be the housekeeping staff. Julie Peasgood appears, claiming to want to keep our lead from danger. Then along come Vincent Price, Peter Cushing, and Christopher Lee. It's a veritable cornucopia of horror movie legends.

Based on a novel, "Seven Keys To Baldpate" by Earl Derr Biggers, which had also been adapted into a successful play by George M. Cohan, the screenplay here, from Michael Armstrong is really just an excuse to make room for the many iconic actors to interact with one another here. This doesn't make for a great movie, necessarily, but it's impossible to watch this as a horror fan and not get some pleasure from it. And I'd argue that any scene involving the bigger names is better than any scene that focuses on Arnaz Jr. (who isn't terrible, but never feels like a good enough leading man).

Walker directs without any real relish, instead seeming to take on the role of mediator responsible for ensuring that all of the performers get their individual moments to shine. The film is about familiarity and comfort ahead of any actual scares, although there is some enjoyable atmosphere created by the central location. Will you care about the actual plot, or what dangers crop up around our "hero"? I doubt it, but that's not really the point anyway.

If you have read this far then you know why you will want to watch this. It's all in the second paragraph. This film allows you some time with some true genre greats, and that's the main thing going for it. Cushing may have to work with a strange speech affectation that stops him from being at his best, but he's still Peter bloody Cushing, a legend and a damn fine actor. Lee is as calm and quietly menacing as he so often could be, and Keith, Carradine, and Price all enjoy delivering an endearing helping of ham. Peasgood is decent enough, and Louise English and Richard Hunter turn up in time to provide more potential victims as the titular house aims to reveal some deadly secrets.

I was hoping this would be a bit better, but I was also aware of it not being beloved by many. It's a decent enough way to kill 102 minutes though, especially if viewed (as it should be) as a loving tribute to a number of the main cast members.

6/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews
Or Amazon is nice at this time of year - https://www.amazon.co.uk/hz/wishlist/ls/Y1ZUCB13HLJD?ref_=wl_share 

Prime Time: The Haunted House Of Horror (1969)

Dated, groovy, and mildly diverting fun, The Haunted House Of Horror is a film I have seen more than once, mainly because I always forget exactly how things play out. Once the finale unfolds, and the end credits start to roll, I then remember that there is good reason for this being so forgettable. It’s not that good.

But it is a Tigon film, and I always have a soft spot for Tigon (who gave us a couple of British horror greats, as well as a few more like this).

A bunch of lively young things decide to head to an allegedly haunted house and get up to what can only be described as shenanigans. That is all well and good until things take a dark turn when someone ends up dead. One of the group must have committed the murder, or maybe someone else joined them in the house, just waiting for their perfect moment to strike.

A whodunnit that doesn’t even bother about getting viewers invested in the solving of the mystery, The Haunted House Of Horror is best watched as a fun curio piece, especially when you consider that the cast features a main role for both Frankie Avalon and UK sitcom stalwart Richard O’Sullivan (a combination I don’t think is ever recreated in any other film).

Director Michael Armstrong, who also wrote the screenplay that was rewritten by Gerry Levy, seems to be more interested in allowing his cast to have fun than he is in creating any atmosphere and tension. Okay, the death may feel like an interesting “twist”, but the reactions of the other characters, who simply want to distance themselves from the corpse and hope to eventually find out who did it, makes everything feel much more relaxed and unimpactful (a word? it is now) than it should.

It doesn’t help that the cast isn’t full of great performers. Avalon may have been a successful pop star, but he doesn’t really work when placed in this particular film. O’Sullivan fares a bit better, the film making use of his easygoing and cheeky persona. Mark Wynter is slightly annoying in his role, but that is down to his character more than his performance, George Sewell adds potential threat as an older man obsessed with a young woman he has had a very brief affair with, and Julian Barnes is there to look sweet and soulful for many of his scenes. Jill Haworth, Gina Warwick, Carol Dilworth, and Veronica Doran generally do a bit better than their male counterparts, perhaps because they don’t just become one homogenized mass of swinging youngsters (as most of the men do).

I will never hate this film, I just can’t do it, despite knowing how much of it doesn’t really work. The two main songs on the soundtrack are irritating, the score by Reg Tilsley is even more forgettable than the murky visuals, and the slow pace is another nail in the coffin. As a horror movie, considering the lack of atmosphere, blood, and/or tension, it is a complete failure. But as a small slice of 1960s UK grooviness, I can still find enough to keep me amused and entertained.

5/10

If you have enjoyed this, or any other, review on the blog then do consider the following ways to show your appreciation. A subscription/follow costs nothing.
It also costs nothing to like/subscribe to the YouTube channel attached to the podcast I am part of - https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCErkxBO0xds5qd_rhjFgDmA
Or you may have a couple of quid to throw at me, in Ko-fi form - https://ko-fi.com/kevinmatthews

Adventures Of A Private Eye (1977)

The second film in the trilogy of "Adventures" movies, Adventures Of A Private Eye is less overtly cringe-inducing than the film before it, yet also feels less entertaining at the same time.

Christopher Neil takes the lead this time, playing Bob West, a young man who works for a private detective (Judd Blake, played by Jon Pertwee). When his boss goes on holiday, Bob decides to pretend he is the main man, taking on a case involving a beautiful woman named Laura (Suzy Kendall), an inheritance, some blackmail, and even murder.

Once again directed by Stanley A. Long, with a script this time from Michael Armstrong, Adventures Of A Private Eye is what you might call perfunctory, at best. Although following the template of the previous film, in a way (the main narrative is interspersed with a number of comedic "sketch" moments), this feels altogether more fragmented and messier. The film is better than the one preceding it, in some ways, and yet worse, because of it just being surprisingly dull.

You do get, as expected, some nudity and random sexual encounters, but the focus here is more on Bob trying, and often failing, to make himself appear like a skilled and smart detective. Which would all be well and good if the case at the heart of things was in any way interesting. Look, I'm not daft (well . . . not all the time). I know what the film is aiming for. But when the plot ends up being built around a mystery element then that element should be strong enough to make up for the times when those seeking titillation and giggles are not getting either of those things.

Neil isn't too bad in the main role, he tries hard to be charming enough to everyone around him while also hoping to cover up his incompetence. Kendall is as lovely as ever, although her performance is quite flat for most of the runtime, and it would have been interesting to make her a more intriguing character with the potential to be a lot less innocent than she appears. The rest of the cast is a great mix of familiar faces from this time, from the charismatic Pertwee to Harry H. Corbett, from Adrienne Posta (returning to the series in a completely different role) and Angela Scoular (same as Posta) to Anna Quayle, Irene Handl, Liz Fraser, and the wonderful Willie Rushton (who gets far too little time onscreen).

After weighing up the good and the bad, I have ended up rating this just below Adventures Of A Taxi Driver. Although it may seem unlikely, this feels more clumsy in how it is plotted and put together. It will kill an hour and a half, it's another film of interest to anyone who enjoys digging in to explore the variety of British cinema releases over the year, but it's an oddly childish tale without any truly satisfying set-pieces.

3/10

Screamtime (1983)

It's amazing what you end up revisiting in your adult life because of childhood memories. I remember somehow being allowed to watch Screamtime when my parents rented it out and I was entertained and thrilled by it. It had everything; fleeting nudity, bloodshed and tension. Of course, I was about seven or eight years old when I saw it and I didn't realise how bad the acting was and how hokey the whole framing sequence was.

Things start off in New York. Basically, there are one or two establishing shots and then we see two men robbing a video store to get themselves a few free movies for the evening. I'm not sure if such videotape "hit-and-run" robberies were commonplace in the early '80s, but I doubt it. The men then visit some woman in her flat (just after she's had a shower - gratuitous nudity about two and a half minutes into the movie = good sign) and then watch the movies. The movies all happen to be British, which means that the footage shot in America was probably filmed in the space of a few hours. The first concerns a Punch & Judy man (Robin Bailey) who is getting a very hard time from his wife and an even harder time from his stepson (played by Jonathon Morris, probably best known to most UK viewers of a certain age for his portrayal of Adrian Boswell in TV sitcom Bread). The second story is all about a couple who move into a lovely home, but it's all spoiled when the wife (Yvonne Nicholson) starts experiencing disturbing visions that start to fray her nerves. Last, but by no means least, we get a tale in which two old, twinkly-eyed ladies (Dora Bryan and Jean Anderson) hire a young man (David Van Day, best known in the '80s for being one half of Dollar and inflicting this song upon us all) to take care of their house and garden. The old ladies talk fondly about their gnomes and fairies at the bottom of the garden, but the young man takes no notice of this talk when he decides to rob the house. Silly boy.

This movie is just silly from start to finish. Thankfully, it's enjoyably silly and not silly in a way that will make you roll your eyes and go to sleep. Michael Armstrong wrote the script and he also co-directs with Stanley A. Long. Would you be unsurprised to hear that this was their last directorial feature (Long did direct a TV mini-series, but nothing else)? The acting is terrible from almost everyone involved, with the exception of Bryan and Anderson, the script is laughably bad at times and there isn't enough gore on display to make up for the low budget, bad editing and framing and strange penchant for showing people being killed by small men wearing pointy, red hats (you'll need to watch it to see what I mean). The soundtrack is also pretty bad, but if it was good it would be jarringly out of place so I don't hold that up as a major criticism.

Some people will be able to laugh at the performance from Jonathon Morris. Some people will be able to laugh at the performance from David Van Day. Some people will be interested to see the original tale that was remade and developed into the film Psychosis. Some people will enjoy seeing Kim Thomson in a small role long before she landed a plum, recurring role in Emmerdale. And then there will be the people like me, the people who either saw this movie in their youth and couldn't quite shake it out of their memory banks or have just heard about how dire it is and want to see it for themselves. Those are the people who will, hopefully, get the most enjoyment out of it. Just as I did.

5/10

Here it is for free on YouTube - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7ke71OzfQlw - though it is marked as a 1983 release, I have had some trouble narrowing down the year. IMDb has it as 1986 but then has the US release date as 1984, many VHS copies are sold as 1985 and I've seen some others claim that it's from 1982. I think 1983 is correct or, at the very least, close enough. I'd LOVE to put a link here to purchase the movie on DVD so please let me know if it ever becomes available.