MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #78 HOUSE OF USHER 1960 & PIT AND THE PENDULUM 1961

HOUSE OF USHER 1960

Crimson Shadows and Haunted Walls: A House Built on Sorrow: The Gothic Spell of Corman’s House of Usher

There is a peculiar chill that settles in the bones when one first glimpses the House of Usher, rising like a fever dream from the ashen wasteland- a mansion not merely built of stone and timber, but of lurid memories, madness, and ancestral rot, and a portrait of decay and destiny.

Roger Corman’s House of Usher (1960), the first and perhaps most iconic entry in his celebrated Poe cycle, stands as a masterwork of American Gothic cinema- a feverish, color-drenched torrid vision of decay, madness, and familial doom. Corman, drawing inspiration from Edgar Allan Poe’s 1839 story “The Fall of the House of Usher,” and working from a screenplay by Richard Matheson, transformed Poe’s atmospheric tale into a lush, psychologically fraught chamber drama, setting the template for a series of films that would define his career and leave an indelible mark on the horror genre.

Where the House Remembers: Roger Corman’s Fever Dream of Poe

From the opening frames, Corman’s vision is clear: this is not a world governed by natural law, but one ruled by the logic of nightmares and the tyranny of the subconscious. The film’s art director, Daniel Haller, crafts the Usher mansion as a living, breathing entity- its walls festooned with grotesque portraits (painted by Burt Shonberg), its corridors warped and claustrophobic, its very structure creaking and groaning as if in sympathy with the tortured souls within.

The lurid poetry of the landscape surrounding the house is a blasted wasteland of dead trees and swirling mist, shot on location using the charred remains of a real forest fire, and rendered in lurid Eastmancolor by cinematographer Floyd Crosby. Crosby’s camera bathes the film in sickly reds, bruised purples, and funereal blues, heightening the sense that the house and its inhabitants are trapped in a perpetual twilight between life and death.

It stands at the edge of a tarn, its reflection wavering in black water, as if the house itself is uncertain of its own reality. The air is thick with the scent of decay and the unspoken dread of secrets too heavy to bear. In Roger Corman’s vision, Poe’s haunted estate is not just a setting, but a living character-a mausoleum of sorrow, its corridors echoing with the footfalls of the doomed and the sighs of the dead.

To enter this world is to surrender to a waking nightmare, where color itself seems infected with fever, and every shadow hints at a legacy of suffering. The Usher name is a curse whispered through generations, and within these walls, time coils and unravels, trapping its inhabitants in a dance with oblivion. Here, Vincent Price’s Roderick wafts as gently as a sigh, his voice trembling with the weight of prophecy, while Madeline’s beauty is as fragile as the last rose of summer, doomed to wither behind velvet drapes. The house watches, waits, and remembers- its every crack a testament to the sins of the past, its every tremor a warning that no one, not even love, can escape the fate that festers at its heart.

It is into this world of spectral grandeur and suffocating dread that we descend, following Corman’s fevered imagination through halls lined with haunted portraits and rooms thick with the perfume of ruin. House of Usher is not merely an adaptation; it is an invocation- a Gothic lament rendered in crimson and shadow, inviting us to linger at the threshold of madness and bear witness to the final, fiery collapse of a dynasty cursed to remember, forever.

The story unfolds with the arrival of Philip Winthrop (Mark Damon), a determined young man who journeys from Boston to the Usher estate to fetch his beloved fiancée, Madeline Usher (Myrna Fahey). What he finds is a mansion on the brink of ruin, presided over by Madeline’s brother, Roderick Usher (Vincent Price, in one of his most iconic performances), and their loyal but haunted servant, Bristol (Harry Ellerbe).

Roderick, with his spectral white hair, crimson robes, and whispery voice, is the embodiment of Poe’s fallen aristocrat: hypersensitive to sound, light, and sensation, he claims the Usher bloodline is cursed, plagued by madness, disease, and a fate inextricably bound to the house itself. He drifts from room to room, an echo in his own home, each word barely disturbing the silence. A ghost among the living, he haunts the corridors, his voice little more than a murmur in the gloom. His solitary musings ripple faintly, barely catching air, all of it laced with dread and fatalism. His pale features and haunted eyes suggest a man already half in the grave. Price reportedly altered his appearance or the role, dying his hair and losing weight to evoke the “wasting elegance” of Roderick Usher.

Price’s performance leads with a brilliant flair of controlled hysteria. Price inhabits Roderick Usher with a spectral grandeur that is both mesmerizing and deeply unsettling, and his every gesture is a flourish of doomed aristocracy and trembling sensitivity. With his shock of bleached hair and pallid, haunted features, Price glides through the decaying halls like a living ghost, his words silken threads weaving between melancholy and menace.

He plays Roderick as a man both tyrant and victim, suffused with an exquisite fragility, flinching from the world’s harshness, yet burning with a feverish conviction that the Usher bloodline is cursed beyond redemption. In his hands, every line is weighted with sorrow and sinister intent; he radiates a theatrical intensity that borders on the operatic, yet never loses the tragic humanity at the character’s core. Price’s performance is a baroque tapestry of fear, obsession, and longing, so vivid and flamboyant that the very walls seem to tremble in response, making Roderick Usher unforgettable-not merely as a villain, but as a soul consumed by the darkness he cannot escape.

His scenes with Damon’s Philip are electric, as Roderick alternates between pleading for his sister to stay and warning Philip to flee before the house’s curse claims them all.

Myrna Fahey’s Madeline is both delicate and determined, torn between her love for Philip and her brother’s suffocating protection. She is not merely a passive victim; her struggle to break free from the Usher legacy is palpable, and her eventual fate- buried alive in the family crypt, only to rise again in a frenzy of madness- remains one of the most chilling sequences in Corman’s oeuvre. Harry Ellerbe’s Bristol, meanwhile, provides a note of tragic loyalty, his every action shaped by decades of servitude to a doomed family.

Key scenes abound, each suffused with Corman’s signature blend of baroque style and psychological horror. The first dinner, where Philip is forced to don slippers so as not to disturb Roderick’s hypersensitive nerves, sets the tone of stifling ritual and decay. The portrait gallery, with its haunted visages of Usher ancestors, becomes a visual motif for the inescapable weight of the past.

The distinctive, haunting portraits featured in Roger Corman’s House of Usher (1960) were painted by Burt Shonberg. Corman specifically commissioned Shonberg, an artist known for his mystical and otherworldly style, to create the ancestral portraits that fill the Usher mansion and visually embody the family’s cursed legacy.

The house itself seems to conspire against Philip: a chandelier nearly crushes him, the bannisters groan and threaten to give way, and the very walls crack and bleed as the family curse tightens its grip. The most harrowing sequence comes after Madeline’s apparent death from catalepsy. Roderick, convinced she is doomed by the family curse, entombs her in the crypt. Philip, suspecting foul play, descends into the tomb and discovers the truth- Madeline has been buried alive, and her return is a scene of Gothic terror as she staggers through the burning house, her white dress stained with blood and madness.

The climax is a conflagration of both body and soul: as Madeline, driven mad by her ordeal, confronts her brother, the house itself erupts in flames. The siblings perish in each other’s arms, the house collapsing into the tarn as if the very earth is reclaiming the cursed bloodline—only Philip and Bristol escape, bearing witness to the annihilation of a family and its legacy.

Corman’s House of Usher is as much a triumph of style as of substance. Les Baxter’s brooding score weaves through the film like a funeral dirge, amplifying the sense of doom. Daniel Haller’s sets, Floyd Crosby’s cinematography, and Burt Shonberg’s paintings combine to create a world where every detail is charged with symbolic meaning, mirroring the psychological fissures of the characters themselves.

The film’s success launched a cycle of Poe adaptations that would become Corman’s greatest achievement, each exploring the interplay of repression, desire, and death with a visual and emotional intensity rare in American horror.
Ultimately, House of Usher is a film about the inescapability of the past, the rot at the heart of privilege, and the terror of the mind unmoored. It is a haunted house story in the truest sense- the house is not merely a setting, but a living embodiment of the Usher family’s curse, a place where walls remember, and the dead do not rest. Corman’s vision, Price’s unforgettable performance, and the film’s lush, claustrophobic beauty ensure its place as a cornerstone of Gothic cinema, a nightmarish reverie, a mind-bending fantasy from which neither its characters nor its audience can ever fully awaken.

PIT AND THE PENDULUM 1961

Pendulums and Paranoia: Roger Corman’s Cinematic Descent into Madness in Pit and the Pendulum (1961)

Roger Corman’s Pit and the Pendulum (1961) is a delirious descent into tempestuous Gothic terror, a film that transforms Edgar Allan Poe’s slender tale into a lush, waking nightmare of guilt, madness, and the inescapable grip of the past. Corman, working from a screenplay by Richard Matheson, expands Poe’s premise into a labyrinthine story of family trauma and psychological torment, set within a Spanish castle whose very stones seem to pulse with dread. The result is a work of visual and emotional excess, where every corridor hides a secret and every shadow threatens to swallow the living whole.

From the opening moments, the film envelops the viewer in its somber, candlelit world. Art director Daniel Haller’s sprawling, multi-level castle set, assembled ingeniously from scavenged studio backlots and dressed with gallons of cobwebbing, becomes a character in itself, a mausoleum of memory and menace. Floyd Crosby’s cinematography is a study in color mood lighting: the castle’s interiors are rendered in bruised purples, sickly greens, and funereal blues, with the camera gliding through passageways and chambers in long, unbroken takes. The sense of claustrophobia is heightened by Crosby’s use of low-key lighting, particularly in the film’s second half, where the darkness presses in and the only relief is the flicker of torchlight or the glint of steel.

The story unfolds in 16th-century Spain, as Francis Barnard (John Kerr) arrives at the Medina castle to investigate the mysterious death of his sister, Elizabeth (Barbara Steele). He is greeted by Nicholas Medina (Vincent Price), a man haunted by grief and guilt, and by Nicholas’s sister Catherine (Luana Anders), whose quiet concern hints at deeper family wounds. Nicholas claims Elizabeth died of a blood disorder, but Francis is unconvinced, especially as strange occurrences- a harpsichord playing by itself, Elizabeth’s ring appearing on bloodied keys- suggest that she may not rest easy. Dr. Leon (Antony Carbone), the family physician, offers little comfort, and as Francis digs deeper, he uncovers the castle’s true horror: Nicholas’s father, Sebastian Medina, was a notorious agent of the Inquisition, whose brutality left Nicholas traumatized and the castle forever stained by violence.

Vincent Price delivers a performance of operatic intensity and tragic grandeur – his Nicholas is a man unraveling at the seams, by turns gentle and tormented, his voice trembling with fear as he recounts childhood memories of witnessing his mother’s torture and his uncle’s murder at the hands of his father. Price’s transformation in the final act, from haunted widower to raving madman who believes himself to be Sebastian, unleashes his full flamboyance and emotional power. He stalks the castle with wild eyes and trembling hands, his descent into inherited madness both terrifying and deeply pitiable. Barbara Steele, though her screen time is brief, leaves a spectral impression as Elizabeth, her wide, haunted eyes and ethereal beauty making her both victim and avenging spirit. John Kerr’s Francis is a forceful presence, his skepticism and determination anchoring the story’s wildest turns, while Luana Anders brings a quiet resilience to Catherine, the last hope for the Medina line.

The mood of Pit and the Pendulum is one of relentless dread, heightened by Les Baxter’s swirling, romantic score, which swells from mournful strings to shrieking crescendos as the story careens toward its climax. The set design is pure Gothic excess: cavernous halls, secret passages, and, at the heart of it all, the torture chamber- a museum of medieval cruelty, dominated by the titular pendulum. The pendulum set, a marvel of practical effects, occupies an entire soundstage, its eighteen-foot blade suspended from the rafters, swinging lower and lower with every tick of the infernal clockwork.

That swinging pendulum scene in Pit and the Pendulum is pure, nerve-rattling suspense—the blade gliding lower with every swing, making my heart race like I’m the one strapped to the table about to be cut in two. Even after all these years, it’s a nightmare that keeps me teetering right on the edge, half-expecting that razor-sharp arc to come for me after John Kerr!

Key scenes are etched in the memory: the exhumation of Elizabeth’s tomb, where her corpse is found twisted in agony, confirming Nicholas’s greatest fear-that she was buried alive; the storm-lashed night when Nicholas, haunted by voices and visions, wanders the castle’s corridors, his sanity fraying with every step; and the final revelation, when Elizabeth, very much alive, emerges from the shadows, her apparent death a ruse concocted with Dr. Leon to drive Nicholas mad and claim his inheritance. The film’s finale is a tour de force of Gothic horror: Nicholas, now believing himself to be his own father, hurls Elizabeth into the iron maiden and straps Francis to the stone slab beneath the descending pendulum. The blade swings closer and closer, its metallic hiss underscored by Baxter’s shrieking score, until Catherine and the loyal servant Maximillian burst in, saving Francis and sending Nicholas plunging to his death in the pit below. The final, chilling image- Elizabeth, still alive and gagged inside the iron maiden, her eyes wide with terror as the chamber is sealed forever- lingers like a curse. Steele’s enigmatic eyes, her steel gaze fever-bright and fathomless, seem to reach from the abyss, freezing time as they lock onto yours through the iron maiden’s cruel opening.

Corman’s Pit and the Pendulum is a triumph of style and atmosphere, a delirious nightmare rendered in velvet shadows and lurid color. The film’s production design, inventive camerawork, and bravura performances- especially those of Price and Steele- combine to create a world where the past is never dead, and where the sins of the fathers are visited upon the living in the most terrifying ways. It is a film that lingers long after the final scream, a Gothic hallucination from which it is deliciously difficult to escape.

#78 down, 72 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey, formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

Paths to Liberation: Personal Transformation Through Connection in Now, Voyager 1942 and Baghdad Cafe 1987

A common thread between Now, Voyager 1942 and Baghdad Cafe 1987 is the theme of personal transformation and self-discovery through unexpected relationships and environments. In Now, Voyager, Charlotte Vale undergoes a profound journey of liberation from her oppressive mother, gaining self-esteem and independence through love and her own inner strength. Similarly, in Baghdad Cafe, Jasmin’s arrival at the quirky desert Baghdad Cafe and Motel leads to her own transformation as she builds a surprising friendship with Brenda and its quirky inhabitants and finds a sense of belonging in an unfamiliar place. Both narratives highlight how stepping outside one’s comfort zone, be it on the ocean or in the desert, and forming connections can lead to empowerment and fulfillment.

Both Now, Voyager and Bagdad Cafe use clothing as a visual language for personal transformation: Charlotte Vale’s journey from drab, constricting dresses to elegant, self-assured ensembles mirrors her emergence from repression to confidence, just as Jasmin’s shift from tight, hausfrau attire to flowing, colorful garments signals her gradual liberation and blossoming in the desert. In both films, the evolution of each woman’s wardrobe becomes a powerful outward sign of inner change- a metamorphosis from invisibility and constraint to self-expression and possibility.

Where Now, Voyager begins like a deeply penetrating melodrama about maternal abuse and struggling identity, Baghdad Cafe unfolds like a hazy dream. Both women, Charlotte and Jasmin, take a journey toward awakening.

Now, Voyager 1942

“Don’t let’s ask for the moon! We have the stars!”

The iconic American melodrama that inspired the 1942 cult classic film starring Bette Davis. “Charlotte Vale is a timeless and very sophisticated Cinderella.”—Patricia Gaffney, New York Times bestselling author.

“I can think of no better account of the woman’s picture’s central role in American culture. At least we have the stars.” (Patricia White- Criterion essay We Have the Stars)

Here is a passage from David Greven’s Representations of Femininity in American Genre Cinema: The Woman’s Film, Film Noir, and Modern Horror (Palgrave, 2011) that specifically discusses Now, Voyager and Bette Davis’s performance:

“Bette Davis plays Charlotte Vale, and one suspects that what drew Davis to the role was the opportunities it gave her to perform a feat at which she excelled: onscreen transformation from one physical and emotional state into another. While several Davis films showcase her singular talent for such onscreen transformations, they are far from a unique event in the genre of the woman’s film, a prominent Hollywood genre for three decades, from the 1930s to the 1960s. Women frequently transform, either at key points in or over the course of cinematic narrative, sometimes on a physical level, sometimes in more abstract ways, as if in homage to Shakespeare’s Cleopatra and her ‘infinite variety… In her classical Hollywood heyday, Bette Davis made an onscreen transformation her signature feat. In film after film, Davis transforms, usually on a physical level but often emotionally as well. Typically, this transformation is grueling on several levels, ranging from the woman’s social situation to her bodily nature to her psychic state. As I will be treating it as a central issue here, transformation in the woman’s film genre, as Bette Davis’s roles evince, is a traumatic experience.”

Bette Davis and Paul Henreid in “Now, Voyager” 1942 Warner Bros.** B.D.M.

No matter how many times I watch Now, Voyager, I find myself weeping all over again-whether it’s Bette Davis’ profoundly moving performance or Max Steiner’s lush, aching score, the film doesn’t just tug at my heartstrings, it plays them like a symphony of bittersweet heartbreak; it’s more than a tearjerker-it’s a true weepjerker, and I surrender to its beauty every single time.

Now, Voyager, as in so much of her work, Davis’s theatricality becomes a conduit for something deeply authentic, reflecting an existential honesty. She lays bare the raw feelings at the heart of her characters, offering us glimpses of their essential truths. Acclaimed American playwright, actor, screenwriter, and drag performer Charles Busch describes Davis, and writer Ed Sikov sums it up:

“What I find interesting about her is that while she’s the most stylized of all those Hollywood actresses, the most mannered, she’s also to me the most psychologically acute. You see it in Now, Voyager in the scene on the boat when she starts to cry, and she’s playing it in a very romantic style. Henreid says, ‘My darling- you are crying,’ and she says, ‘these are only tears of gratitude – an old maid’s gratitude for the crumbs offered.’ It’s very movie-ish, but the way she turns her head inward, away from the camera, is very real.”

“In that instance, Busch so perceptively describes and appreciates Davis’s use of her melodramatic mannerisms and breathy, teary vocal delivery as well as her seemingly spontaneous nuzzling into Henreid’s chest to express the undeniable legitimacy of self-pity. It’s not a pretty emotion, but Davis somehow makes it so. Through Davis’s elevating, sublimating stylization, this woman’s secret shame becomes beautiful.”– Ed Sikov – Dark Victory: The Life of Bette Davis

Few films from Hollywood’s Golden Age have endured in the cultural imagination quite like Now, Voyager (1942), a sweeping romantic drama that transcends its era through its nuanced exploration and psychological portrait of transformation, female autonomy, and the complex bonds of love and family. Tracing the journey of Charlotte Vale, a woman suffocated by her domineering mother and her own internalized sense of worthlessness and self-loathing, as she emerges into independence, self-acceptance, and a bittersweet love.

Kino. Reise aus der Vergangenheit aka. Now, Voyager, USA, 1942 Regie: Irving Rapper Darsteller: Bette Davis, Paul Henreid. (Photo by FilmPublicityArchive/United Archives via Getty Images).

Continue reading “Paths to Liberation: Personal Transformation Through Connection in Now, Voyager 1942 and Baghdad Cafe 1987”

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #73 The Haunted Palace 1963

THE HAUNTED PALACE 1963

The Haunted Palace (1963) is a swirling mist of Gothic horror and cosmic dread, a film that finds its haunted heart in the dual performance of Vincent Price and the eerie vision of director Roger Corman. Though marketed as part of Corman’s celebrated Poe cycle, the film is in fact a bold adaptation of H.P. Lovecraft’s The Case of Charles Dexter Ward, with only a Poe poem lending its title and a sense of poetic doom.

This fusion of literary titans sets the stage for a story where the boundaries between sanity and possession, past and present, are as porous as the fog that curls around the cursed village of Arkham.

Vincent Price commands the film in a bravura dual role as both the gentle Charles Dexter Ward and his ancestor, the warlock Joseph Curwen. His performance is a dark waltz in transformation between menace and melancholy: with a mere shift of posture or the glint in his eye, he glides from kindly innocence to fiendish malevolence.

Price’s energy is magnetic yet controlled, never tipping into parody, and his voice, by turns silken and sibilant, makes the supernatural possession feel chillingly plausible.

Watching Price, one marvels at how he can summon both sympathy and terror, often within the same scene. The film’s most unsettling moments come as Charles, standing before Curwen’s portrait, is slowly overtaken by his ancestor’s will – a psychological duel rendered with nothing but Price’s expressive face and the camera’s hungry gaze.

Corman, ever the resourceful auteur, brings a starker, surreal visual palette to Lovecraft , aided by the atmospheric cinematography of Floyd Crosby. The muted blue and brown hues, drifting ground fog, and looming sets evoke a world where the past refuses to stay buried.

Daniel Haller’s art direction, honed on earlier Corman films, gives the palace itself a brooding, labyrinthine presence, its secret passageways and shadowed corners as much a character as any of the villagers. Ronald Stein’s score, lush and occasionally bombastic, heightens the film’s sense of mounting dread and otherworldly pull, like a tide tugging at the edge of reason..

The supporting cast is a gallery of horror icons and character actors: Debra Paget brings both vulnerability and resolve to Anne Ward, the wife caught in the crossfire of ancestral evil; Lon Chaney Jr. is memorably sinister as Simon, Curwen’s loyal henchman, his mournful eyes masking monstrous intent; Frank Maxwell, Elisha Cook Jr., and others round out the cursed townsfolk, each bearing the weight of Curwen’s vengeance.

The story unfolds with the precision of a nightmare: in 1765, Joseph Curwen is burned alive by Arkham’s villagers for his occult crimes, but not before cursing them and their descendants. Over a century later, Charles Dexter Ward inherits the palace and is inexorably drawn into Curwen’s legacy. As Charles succumbs to possession, the film becomes a study in psychological horror. Curwen’s revenge is visited upon the villagers through a series of grotesque murders, while Anne desperately tries to save her husband from the grip of the past.

Ted Coodley’s makeup effects deliver the villagers of Arkham to a state of grotesque deformity, transforming their faces and bodies into unsettling, crumbling statues of Curwen’s lingering curse. Visages warped by ancestral sin. Masks of suffering, their features melting like wax, twisted by generations of Curwen’s retribution, they wander the mist-shrouded streets with faces warped and features askew, their bodies bearing the tragic poetry of nightmare-living testaments to a legacy of unnatural evil.

Joseph Curwen’s dead mistress, Hester Tillinghast- played by Cathie Merchant- is resurrected by Curwen (in control of Charles Dexter Ward’s body) and his fellow warlocks. Once revived, Hester joins Curwen and his followers in their sinister rituals and is present for the climactic attempt to sacrifice Anne Ward to the creature in the pit, making her an active participant in the film’s final horrors.

Key moments linger in the mind: the torch-lit mob scene where Curwen, defiant to the end, promises vengeance “until this village is a graveyard”; the hypnotic power of Curwen’s portrait, a silent sentinel of evil; the chilling sequence where deformed villagers surround Charles and Anne, their presence a living testament to the curse; and the final conflagration, as the palace burns and the boundaries between the living and the dead dissolve.

The climax of The Haunted Palace erupts in a frenzy of fire and supernatural reckoning. As the villagers, torches in hand, storm the cursed palace to end Joseph Curwen’s reign once and for all, Anne is chained and offered as a sacrifice to the monstrous Lovecraftian creature lurking in the pit below. In the chaos, Dr. Willet and Anne discover the secret dungeons and are ambushed by Curwen and his resurrected cohorts. The villagers set the palace ablaze and, crucially, destroy Curwen’s portrait, breaking his hold over Charles Dexter Ward. Freed from possession, Charles rushes to save Anne, urging Dr. Willet to get her to safety as the inferno consumes the palace. Though Charles and Willet narrowly escape the flames, the film closes on an unsettling note: a glimmer in Charles’s eyes and a sinister tone in his voice hint that Curwen’s evil may not have been vanquished after all.

The Haunted Palace stands as a bridge between Gothic melodrama and cosmic horror, its atmosphere thick with dread and its themes as old as original sin. With Price particularly mercurial, Corman at his most atmospheric, and Lovecraft’s shadow looming over every frame, the film is a haunted house of the mind, where the past is never truly dead, and evil waits patiently for the door to be opened.

#73 down, 77 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

MonsterGirl 150 Days of Classic Horror #58 The Exorcist 1973 & The Omen 1976

THE EXORCIST 1973

Writing a simple overview of one of cinema’s most transformative films is like trying to thread a needle in a storm; A film like The Exorcist demands more than a cursory summary—it calls for careful observation, thoughtful analysis, and a deep engagement with its layers of meaning and influence. To do justice to its complexity, I need to take the time to revisit its images, its sounds, and its impact, allowing insights to develop gradually. For now, a true reckoning with its significance is something that’ll come further down the road at The Last Drive In. I might even try to talk to Linda Blair, who is doing incredible work rescuing dogs; she’s gone from Scream Queen to Savior. I had the amazing experience of meeting Linda at the Chiller Theater expo a few years ago. She is one of the most down-to-earth people and is passionate about her sacred mission. As a person who does serious rescue of cats, I can tell you how deeply that resonates with me.

The Exorcist (1973), directed by William Friedkin and adapted from William Peter Blatty’s novel, is a film that defies the confines of genre, merging psychological horror, theological inquiry, and visceral terror into a work that reshaped cinema. Its legacy lies not only in its ability to unsettle audiences but in its profound exploration of faith, doubt, and the human condition. Set against the backdrop of 1970s America—a time of cultural upheaval, waning trust in institutions, and existential anxiety—the film taps into primal fears while interrogating the tension between modernity and ancient belief systems. At its core, The Exorcist is a story of possession, but its true horror emerges from its unflinching examination of vulnerability: the vulnerability of a child’s body, a priest’s faith, and a mother’s love.

Friedkin, known for his documentary-style realism in The French Connection 1971, brought a raw, almost clinical precision to the film. His direction eschewed the gothic excess of earlier horror, grounding the supernatural in the mundane. The Georgetown townhouse where much of the film unfolds becomes a claustrophobic battleground, its ordinary details—a child’s bedroom, a winding staircase—transformed into sites of cosmic struggle.

Cinematographer Owen Roizman’s (Roizman’s filmography includes several landmark films that helped define the look of American cinema in the 1970s including The French Connection 1971, The Taking of Pelham One Two Three 1973, 3 Days of the Condor 1975, The Stepford Wives 1975, Network 1976) work is essential to this effect. His use of cold, naturalistic lighting and disorienting angles amplifies the unease, while the decision to refrigerate Regan’s bedroom to subzero temperatures to capture visible breath added a tactile, almost suffocating realism. The prologue in Iraq, shot by Billy Williams, contrasts starkly with the Georgetown scenes: the sun-baked ruins of Hatra, where Father Merrin unearths the Pazuzu amulet, evoke a timeless, mythic evil that will later invade the modern world.

The performances anchor the film’s emotional weight. Ellen Burstyn’s Chris MacNeil is a portrait of maternal desperation, her rationality crumbling as she confronts the unthinkable. Linda Blair, just 12 during filming, delivered a physically grueling performance as Regan, her transformation from sweet child to profane vessel achieved through Dick Smith’s groundbreaking makeup and Mercedes McCambridge’s guttural voicework. Jason Miller’s Father Karras, a psychiatrist-priest grappling with guilt over his mother’s death and his own crisis of faith, embodies the film’s central conflict: the struggle to believe in a world where suffering seems arbitrary. Max von Sydow’s Father Merrin, introduced in the film’s haunting opening, serves as a weary but resolute counterpoint—a man who has stared into the abyss and returned, only to face it again.

The film’s religious implications are as provocative as its horror. Blatty, a devout Catholic, framed the story as a “sermon” about the reality of evil and the necessity of faith. Yet The Exorcist is no simplistic morality tale. It juxtaposes Catholic ritual with scientific skepticism, as seen in Regan’s futile medical tests and Karras’s initial dismissal of possession as psychosis.

The demon Pazuzu weaponizes doubt, taunting Karras with his mother’s voice and exploiting his guilt. As film scholar Joseph Laycock notes, the film “connects the worlds of science and religion through their individual responses to the seen and unseen, and the known and unknown.” This ambiguity unsettled religious audiences: the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops condemned it as “spiritual pornography,” while evangelical groups paradoxically used it to critique Catholic “superstition.” Yet for many, like critic Deborah Whitehead, the film’s power lies in its “exploration of the fragility of innocence and the battle between good and evil,” themes that resonated deeply in a post-Vietnam, Watergate-era America.

The film’s cultural impact is inseparable from its technical innovation. The exorcism sequence, filmed over four weeks in a freezing set, is a masterclass in sustained tension. Regan’s levitation, achieved through hidden wires, and her 180-degree head rotation, engineered with a mechanical rig, remain iconic. Yet the horror transcends spectacle. The infamous crucifix scene—Regan’s bloodied self-violation—disturbs not just for its graphicness but for its violation of sacred symbology.

Friedkin’s decision to use subliminal imagery, such as the demon’s face flickering in the shadows, preys on the subconscious, a technique Robin Wood likened to “the return of the repressed” in Freudian terms.

Music plays a pivotal role in the film’s dread. Rather than a traditional score, Friedkin employed preexisting compositions, most famously Mike Oldfield’s Tubular Bells. Its repetitive, minimalist piano motif becomes a sonic manifestation of creeping unease. Classical pieces, like Hans Werner Henze’s dissonant Fantasia for Strings, underscore the existential chaos, while the absence of music in key scenes—such as Regan’s spider-walk down the stairs—heightens the visceral impact. The sound design, from the demon’s growls to the bed’s violent shaking, immerses the audience in Regan’s disintegration.

Key moments linger in the collective psyche. The quiet horror of Detective Kinderman’s (Lee J. Cobb) visit, where he gently probes Chris about Burke Dennings’ death, juxtaposes bureaucratic routine with unspeakable evil. The “help me” scene, where Regan’s body contorts into a grotesque parody of crucifixion, merges religious iconography with body horror.

Yet the film’s most profound moment is its quietest: Karras’s final sacrifice. After begging the demon to inhabit him, he leaps to his death, a act of redemption that scholar Linda Williams interprets as “a vulgar display of power” giving way to “the terrifying voice of the primal self—an instinctual, unfiltered force that erupts from the deepest layers of the psyche, untamed by reason or morality.”

The Exorcist endures because it refuses easy answers. It is a film about possession, but also about the things that possess us all—guilt, grief, and the search for meaning. As Friedkin stated, “It’s not about a devil, but about the mystery of faith.”

Its influence permeates modern horror, like Hereditary’s familial trauma. Hereditary is a 2018 American supernatural psychological horror film written and directed by Ari Aster (Midsommar, 2019) in his feature directorial debut. The film stars Toni Collette as Annie Graham, a miniature artist and mother; Gabriel Byrne as her husband, Steve; Alex Wolff as their teenage son, Peter; and Milly Shapiro as their daughter, Charlie. Ann Dowd also appears as Joan, a mysterious acquaintance who befriends Annie.

Yet no film has replicated The Exorcist’s alchemy of technical virtuosity, philosophical depth, and raw emotional power. Half a century later, it remains a mirror held to our deepest fears: not of demons, but of the darkness within and the fragile light that struggles against it.

The Exorcist Curse: How a Horror Classic Became the Stuff of Legend

It has been written about endlessly, the legend of the “Exorcist curse,” which took shape almost as quickly as the film itself became a cultural phenomenon, fueled by a series of bizarre, tragic, and unexplained incidents that plagued the production and its aftermath. The combination of the film’s disturbing subject matter, its intense effect on audiences, and a string of real-life misfortunes gave rise to the belief that something sinister had attached itself to the making of the movie—a notion that persists in popular culture and horror lore to this day. I’ll dive deeper into these bizarre events and share more anecdotal wild stories about them in my future feature!

The curse narrative began during filming, which was beset by a remarkable number of accidents, injuries, and setbacks. One of the most famous and unsettling incidents was a fire that destroyed much of the MacNeil house set, where the story’s most harrowing events take place. The fire, reportedly caused by a bird flying into a circuit box, forced production to halt for six weeks and required the set to be rebuilt. What made the incident especially eerie was that Regan’s bedroom—the site of the exorcism and the film’s most disturbing scenes—was left completely untouched by the flames, as if protected or singled out by some unseen force.

Physical injuries were another recurring theme. Both Ellen Burstyn (Chris MacNeil) and Linda Blair (Regan) suffered significant back injuries during the filming of violent scenes, injuries that left lasting effects. Burstyn’s injury was so severe that her real scream of pain was used in the final cut of the film. Crew members were not spared either: a carpenter lost a thumb, a technician lost a toe, and other crew members reported strange accidents on set.

Perhaps most chilling were the deaths associated with the film. By some counts, as many as nine people connected to the production died during or soon after filming, including actors Jack MacGowran (Burke Dennings) and Vasiliki Maliaros (Father Karras’s mother), whose characters also die in the film.

Other deaths included Linda Blair’s grandfather, a night watchman, a special effects expert, the man who refrigerated the set, and the assistant cameraman’s baby. Jason Miller (Father Karras) lost his young son in a tragic accident during production. Mercedes McCambridge, the voice of the demon, suffered a personal tragedy years later when her son committed a murder-suicide.

The curse legend was further fueled by the involvement of Paul Bateson, an extra in the film who played a radiology technician. Years after the film’s release, Bateson was convicted of murder and suspected in a series of grisly killings in New York City.

Strange phenomena were also reported on set, such as objects moving on their own, including a telephone that repeatedly rose from its receiver and fell—adding to the atmosphere of unease.

The sense of dread grew so strong that director William Friedkin eventually asked the film’s religious advisor, Reverend Thomas Bermingham, to bless the set. While Bermingham initially refused, he later agreed to perform a blessing after the fire, hoping to calm the cast and crew.

The legend was amplified by the film’s unprecedented effect on audiences. Reports of fainting, vomiting, and even miscarriages during screenings were widespread, and some theaters provided barf bags or had ambulances on standby.

Evangelist Billy Graham famously declared that “there is a power of evil in the film, in the fabric of the film itself,” suggesting that the movie was literally cursed. During a premiere in Rome, a lightning strike toppled a centuries-old cross from a nearby church, further fueling rumors of supernatural involvement.

The “Exorcist curse” legend grew out of a perfect storm of real tragedies, eerie coincidences, and the film’s own terrifying content. The bizarre incidents—fatal accidents, mysterious fires, injuries, deaths, and even murder—blurred the line between fiction and reality, embedding the idea of a curse into the film’s legacy and making it one of the most notorious “cursed” productions in Hollywood history. You could say the film itself was ‘possessed.’

THE OMEN 1976

Few horror films have left as indelible a mark on cinema and popular consciousness as The Omen (1976), a chilling meditation on evil, fate, and faith that, like The Exorcist, transcends the boundaries of its genre. Directed by Richard Donner and written by David Seltzer (who was also uncredited for significant contributions to the screenplay of Willy Wonka & the Chocolate Factory 1971), the film arrived in the wake of The Exorcist and rode a wave of 1970s fascination with the supernatural and the apocalyptic. Yet The Omen distinguished itself through a blend of psychological realism, operatic horror, and a profound engagement with religious myth, delivering not only shocks but a lingering sense of existential dread. Coming out of the theater, my head was still spinning from the arresting imagery and implications of the existence of good vs. evil, and the presence of forces beyond our control. It was a dark, rainy night, and even the prospect of my ritual Diner coffee and cheesecake with my mom didn’t quell the anxiety I was now experiencing.

At the heart of The Omen is the story of Robert Thorn, an American diplomat stationed in Rome, portrayed with grave authority by Gregory Peck. In a desperate, morally fraught act, Thorn agrees to secretly adopt a newborn boy after his own child is stillborn, sparing his wife Katherine (Lee Remick) the agony of loss. Unbeknownst to her, the child, Damien, is not theirs; he was born of a jackal. And as the years pass, the Thorns’ seemingly idyllic life in London is shadowed by a series of increasingly sinister events. Damien’s fifth birthday is marred by the shocking suicide of his nanny, who, under the influence of a mysterious black dog, hangs herself in front of the assembled guests, uttering the now-iconic line, “It’s all for you, Damien!” This moment, both theatrical and deeply unsettling, signals the film’s ability to turn moments of domestic celebration into scenes of horror.

When she comes crashing through the window, her body swinging above the stunned crowd, it’s as if the party’s polite melody is shattered by a single, discordant note—a crescendo in a symphony of terror that ripples through every guest on the lawn. In that instant, celebration curdles into shock in the air and is replaced by a collective, shuddering gasp. I still have a hard time not looking away when that moment hits. It doesn’t just startle—it reverberates, echoing long after the scene has ended, and that image of her hanging silhouette burned into my memory like the final, jarring chord of a nightmare overture. Sorry for the musical metaphor, but that’s the musician in me.

As Damien grows, the signs of his dark, otherworldly nature become impossible to ignore. Animals recoil in terror at his presence, he reacts violently to churches, and those who attempt to uncover the truth—priests, photographers, and even his own mother—meet gruesome ends.

The film’s violence is never gratuitous; instead, Donner and cinematographer Gilbert Taylor imbue each death with a sense of inevitability and cosmic retribution. The impalement of Father Brennan (Patrick Troughton) by a lightning rod during a sudden storm and the decapitation of photographer Keith Jennings (David Warner) by a pane of glass are staged with a balletic, almost operatic precision, making them some of the most memorable set pieces in horror cinema.

The cast’s gravitas elevates the material, grounding the supernatural in the everyday. Peck, whose own recent personal tragedies lent an added layer of pathos to his performance, brings a haunted dignity to Thorn’s descent from rational diplomat to desperate father. The suicide of his son, Jonathan, which occurred just two months before production began, was a devastating loss that deeply affected Peck, and it is widely noted that his grief informed and intensified his portrayal of Robert Thorn, a father tormented by fear and loss.

Lee Remick’s Katherine is equally compelling, her growing terror and isolation palpable as she comes to suspect the truth about her son. Harvey Spencer Stephens, in his film debut as Damien, delivers a performance of uncanny stillness and menace, his cherubic features belying the evil he embodies.

His blank, pale face and doll-like black hair have etched itself into our collective psyches—a hollow, soulless stare from eyes – the void where all colors sleep – the black ink of oblivion – that seem not merely to reflect evil, but to channel its very essence, opening onto a void that is both the embodiment of damnation and a passageway to hell itself.

Billie Whitelaw’s turn as Mrs. Baylock in The Omen is the kind of performance that is the very definition of insidious terror—a presence that doesn’t just unsettle, but infiltrates, quietly taking up residence in the corners of your mind.

Whitelaw, already revered for her intense collaborations with Samuel Beckett, brought a chilling subtlety to the role of Damien’s nanny— who moves through the Thorn household with a calm, unwavering purpose, her menace never loud or showy, but coiled and patient. She arrives with a polite smile but quickly reveals herself as the embodiment of evil’s quiet persistence. There’s nothing cartoonish or overblown about her menace; instead, she radiates a calm, almost maternal authority that makes her devotion to Damien all the more unsettling. Her presence transforms domestic spaces into sites of dread, and her scenes crackle with an unnerving tension—she doesn’t need to shout or snarl to command the screen.

Whitelaw’s Mrs. Baylock is unforgettable precisely because she plays the part with such conviction and restraint, letting the audience sense the abyss behind her steady gaze. When she dispatches those who threaten Damien, it’s done with the efficiency of someone carrying out a sacred duty, not a crime. It’s a testament to Whitelaw’s skill that Mrs. Baylock stands as one of horror cinema’s most memorable antagonists: she’s not just a servant of the Antichrist, but a chilling reminder of how evil can wear the most ordinary faces. Whitelaw’s performance earned her international acclaim and an Evening Standard British Film Award, and it remains a masterclass in how quiet intensity can be far more terrifying than any special effect.

The film’s religious implications are profound and disturbing. The Omen does not simply pit good against evil; it interrogates the very foundations of Christian belief, suggesting that evil is not merely the opposite of good but its necessary counterpart. As one critic observes, “The Omen is discussing the moral dimension of evil as not something opposite to the values of Christian religion, but as this religion’s integral component.”

The film draws on apocalyptic prophecy, particularly the Book of Revelation, and popularized the “mark of the beast”—the number 666—as a cultural touchstone. The narrative’s logic is inexorable: the Antichrist has come not through the machinations of cultists or the failings of the wicked, but through the well-intentioned actions of a loving father, suggesting that fate and evil are inescapable, woven into the fabric of existence.

This theological ambiguity is mirrored in the film’s treatment of the clergy. Priests and exorcists are depicted as desperate, often unstable figures, whose warnings are dismissed until it is too late. The film’s most chilling implication is that God and Satan may be two sides of the same coin, their messages equally cryptic and their influence equally pervasive.

As Robert Thorn’s rational investigation leads him from Rome to Israel, from the ruins of a burned hospital to a graveyard filled with the bones of the innocent, the film suggests that the search for truth is itself a kind of damnation.

My favorite composer of all time, the unsurpassed Jerry Goldsmith’s Oscar-winning score, is integral to the film’s power. Departing from traditional horror music, Goldsmith composed a choral, Latin-infused soundtrack that evokes the solemnity of a black mass. The track “Ave Satani,” with its inverted liturgical chants, became an instant classic, imbuing the film with an atmosphere of ritualistic dread and grandeur. Goldsmith’s music does not simply accompany the action; it amplifies the sense of doom, making the supernatural feel both ancient and immediate.

Cinematographer Gilbert Taylor, known for his work on Dr. Strangelove and Star Wars, brings a cool, clinical eye to the film’s visuals. The stately English settings—manor houses, cathedrals, and windswept cemeteries—are rendered with a sense of both beauty and menace. Taylor’s use of natural light and shadow heightens the film’s realism, while his compositions often isolate characters within vast, indifferent spaces, reinforcing the themes of alienation and cosmic indifference.

Key moments in The Omen have become part of horror’s visual lexicon: the nanny’s suicide, the baboons’ frenzied attack at the safari park, Damien’s silent resistance at the church steps, and the climactic race to the altar, where Thorn, driven to the brink, attempts to kill the child he once called son. The film’s final image—Damien, now adopted by the President of the United States, turning to smile directly at the camera—offers no catharsis, only the chilling suggestion that evil not only survives but thrives, hidden in plain sight.

The Omen was a commercial triumph, grossing over $60 million in the U.S. alone, and its influence is still felt in the genre and beyond. It spawned sequels, remakes, and countless imitations, cementing the figure of the child Antichrist as a staple of horror. More than this, it tapped into a deep well of cultural anxiety: the fear that evil is not an external force, but something intimate, familial, and inescapable. As critic John Kenneth Muir noted, the film resonated in a time of Western malaise, when “the world or the West was in terminal decline,” and the signs of apocalypse felt not just possible, but imminent.

Ultimately, The Omen endures because it refuses to offer easy answers or simple comforts. It is a film that confronts us with the possibility that evil is both everywhere and nowhere, that it can wear the face of innocence, and that the struggle between good vs. evil, what’s right and what’s wrong, isn’t always a matter of grand, heroic efforts. Instead, it often plays out in quieter, more personal ways—through our own uncertainties, doubts, fears, anxieties, and the heavy burden of knowing things we wish we didn’t.

In its blend of artistry, intellect, and terror, The Omen remains one of cinema’s most transformative and haunting achievements.

#58 down, 92 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960) We All Go a Little Mad Sometimes

“It wasn’t a message that stirred the audiences, nor was it a great performance… they were aroused by pure film.” – Alfred Hitchcock told Francois Truffaut about Psycho, adding that it “belongs to filmmakers, to you and me.” Hitchcock deliberately wanted Psycho to look like a cheap exploitation film.

Upon release, Psycho1960 polarized critics. Bosley Crowther of The New York Times initially dismissed it as “sicko” but later included it in his Top Ten of 1960, praising its “bold psychological mystery.”

film critic Roger Ebert that captures the enduring praise for Hitchcock’s Psycho: “What makes Psycho immortal, when so many films are already half-forgotten as we leave the theater, is that it connects directly with our fears: Our fears that we might impulsively commit a crime, our fears of the police, our fears of becoming the victim of a madman, and of course our fears of disappointing our mothers.”

Critics like David Thomson dismissed Psycho as a “concession to slasher trash,” arguing that Hitchcock “lost interest” post-Marion’s death. However, film scholars Raymond Durgnat and William Rothman argue that Psycho’s second half intensifies its psychological depth, particularly as Norman Bates spirals further into his fractured psyche. The chilling climax, revealing “Mother” as a mummified corpse, forces audiences to confront the unsettling reality of dissociative identity —a theme Hitchcock explores with meticulous rigor and haunting, unsettling intimacy.

From the very first jarring notes and the fractured lines that slice across the screen, spelling out “Psycho” in stark relief, we’re warned that we’re stepping into a story where nothing is as it seems. A ripple of unease builds, echoing the rising strings, as Hitchcock draws us into a world stitched together from secrets, betrayals, and broken minds. Joseph Stefano’s adaptation of Robert Bloch’s novel doesn’t just give us a tale of stolen money and shadowy murders—it peels back the wallpaper of ordinary life to reveal deeper questions about who we are and what we desire. Beneath its surface, Psycho is a mirror reflecting the anxieties of a society obsessed with appearances and haunted by what lurks beneath: the pull of forbidden wants, the tension between who we pretend to be and what we can’t admit even to ourselves. The film quietly warns us that when people are forced to hide or deny their true selves, when identity and desire are locked away, darkness finds a way to seep through the cracks, and the most shocking horrors can wear the most familiar faces.

Before Psycho, most of Hitchcock’s films focused on building suspense and tension between characters, often using color and rarely diving deep into truly deviant or taboo subject matter—aside from a few exceptions like Shadow of a Doubt and Strangers on a Train. Hitchcock himself was known around Hollywood as a bit of an oddball: a perfectionist, sometimes difficult on set, and with a reputation for being both controlling and flirtatious. What’s fascinating is that, right as the 1960s were about to shake up society, Hitchcock decided to reinvent himself as a director with Psycho. Working with Joseph Stefano’s daring script, he delivered a film that shocked audiences with its sexual undertones, glimpses of nudity, and that now-legendary, brutally intense shower scene, pushing boundaries in ways he never had before and helping to usher in a new era of psychological horror.

Hitchcock shot Psycho on a modest $800,000 budget, using the crew from his television series Alfred Hitchcock Presents rather than his usual feature film team. Filmed in black and white, with long stretches of silence and minimalist sets, the Bates Motel and looming Bates house were constructed on Universal’s backlot. In its raw, visceral style, Psycho shares more with gritty noir films like Detour than with Hitchcock’s polished classics such as Rear Window 1954 or Vertigo 1958.

No other Hitchcock film left a greater impression or such a powerful impact on its audience.

The runaway success of Psycho took Hitchcock aback so much that he reached out to the Stanford Research Institute to investigate what made it such a phenomenon. The film was a stark departure from his earlier, more polished, and high-budget productions, which made its impact all the more surprising to him. What truly astonished Hitchcock was how deeply Psycho connected with audiences in ways he hadn’t fully anticipated. Its unique blend of extreme terror and dark humor created an emotional rollercoaster unlike anything he had achieved before, leaving audiences with a strange mix of both terror and his sardonic sense of humor.

According to film scholar Linda Williams, “Genre study has sometimes been the one place in film studies where repeatable audience pleasures…have been scrutinized” (“Discipline and Fun” 359).

“I was directing the viewers,” the director told Truffaut in their book-length interview. “You might say I was playing them like an organ.”

Hitchcock announced, “The late-comers would have been waiting to see Janet Leigh after she had disappeared from the screen action.” For its original audience, it was the most shocking film they had ever experienced. Hitchcock insisted, “Do not reveal the surprises!”

Janet Leigh pays for Anthony Perkin’s psychosis. Molly Haskell, in From Reverence to Rape makes an observation about the treatment of the Hitchcock woman “She must be punished, her complacency shattered; and so he submits his heroines to excruciating ordeals, long trips through terror in which they may be raped, violated by birds, killed. The plot itself becomes a mechanism for destroying their icy self-possession and their emotional detachment…

… Like Norman Bates ‘mother’ in Psycho, who might, by a stretch of the Oedipal complex, be categorized among the brunettes, they are inclined to be possessive and even a little sticky. The Hitchcock protagonist is attracted to the girl he can’t have, and the misogynist in Hitchcock invests the character with poisonous personality traits to punish her for rejecting him. If Hitchcock’s women must be tortured and punished, his men are fully implicated in the deed — and the more detached they seem, the more guilty and morally responsible. “

The ads proclaimed it loudly, yet no audience could have foreseen Hitchcock’s shocking twists—the brutal murder of Marion Crane (Janet Leigh), the apparent heroine, just a third of the way into the film, and the chilling revelation of Norman Bates’s mother. Psycho was marketed with the flair of a William Castle exploitation thriller, heightening its sensational impact. “It is required that you see ‘Psycho’ from the very beginning!”

Slavoj Žižek examines the unsettling narrative shift in Psycho following Marion’s death. The first third of the film highlights how it transitions from her story to a murder mystery centered around Norman Bates. Žižek notes that both Marion’s and Norman’s arcs could function as complete narratives on their own, yet Hitchcock disrupts this structure, creating a jarring effect that reorients the audience’s focus. This deliberate fragmentation underscores the film’s innovative storytelling and its ability to challenge traditional cinematic conventions.

Hitchcock’s decision to kill off Marion Crane in the first part of Psycho shattered the framework of storytelling, transforming the film from a crime thriller to a psycho-sexual shocker and destabilizing audience expectations. This bold move shifted the focus onto Norman Bates, the deeply troubled motel owner whose fractured psyche became a defining template for psychological horror. Hitchcock didn’t stop at narrative shocks—he layered the film with visual cues like mirrors and high-angle shots to evoke voyeurism and duality, drawing viewers deeper into Norman’s disturbed world. And then there’s Bernard Herrmann’s iconic score: among the film’s most indelible elements, and perhaps its most evocative hallmarks, are the shrieking violins during the shower scene, which contrast sharply with the eerie silence of Norman’s final stare, leaving audiences haunted by both sound and stillness.

“The first part (Marion’s story) could well stand alone: it is easy to perform a mental experiment and to imagine it as a thirty-minute TV story, a kind of morality play in which the heroine gives way to temptation and enters the path of damnation, only to be cured by the encounter with Norman, who confronts her with the abyss that awaits her at the end of the road — in him, she sees a mirror- image of her own future; sobered, she decides to return to normal life […] The film’s second part, Norman’s story, is also easy to imagine as a closed whole, a rather traditional unraveling of the mystery of a pathological serial killer.” (Žižek)

Although the twists in Psycho—Marion Crane’s shocking murder and the truth about Norman’s mother–  are now common knowledge, the film remains a chilling thriller. This enduring impact lies in Hitchcock’s skillful crafting of two less obvious elements: Marion’s story setup and her complex dynamic with Norman Bates. Hitchcock treats these early moments with meticulous care, as though they will carry the entire narrative, making their eventual subversion all the more unsettling.

Alfred Hitchcock, Anthony Perkins, and Janet Leigh on the set of Psycho 1960.

Anthony Perkins and Janet Leigh, who played Norman Bates and Marion Crane, respectively, had a license to improvise their parts in Psycho to some degree. Hitchcock gave them free rein within scenes, as long as their ad-libbing didn’t change the angle required for a shot.

The film’s screenwriter, Joseph Stefano, would later describe one piece of improvisation by Perkins as his “most magical moment” in the film. It was the actor’s own decision to have Norman chewing on candy corn, nervously watching on as Marion’s car descends ever-so-slowly down into a swamp.” – (Source – during the scene where Norman disposes of Marion’s body – according to Guy Howie’s article published Mon, 25 March 2024, 11:00, UK from FAR OUT).

The setup revolves around a recurring Hitchcock theme: the guilt of an ordinary individual ensnared in a criminal act. Though Marion Crane steals $40,000, she remains emblematic of Hitchcock’s archetype—an otherwise innocent person caught in the web of wrongdoing.

This is not unlike Hitchcock’s Marnie (1964), in which he revisits his fascination with women on the run and the symbolic significance of their possessions, particularly their suitcases. In the film’s opening scenes, even before we meet Marnie herself, we are introduced to the items she has acquired: a bright yellow handbag containing stolen money, a new suitcase, freshly purchased clothes, and gifts for her mother. These objects are meticulously packed into her suitcase, reflecting not only Marnie’s compulsive need for control but also her attempts to construct a new identity.

Marion Crane’s introduction is far from glamorous—a clandestine afternoon in a dingy hotel room with her divorced lover, Sam Loomis (John Gavin), whose alimony keeps marriage out of reach. Enter $40,000, courtesy of a sleazy real estate client, Mr. Cassidy (Frank Albertson), who all but implies that Marion herself might have a price. Ironically, her crime is born of love, and her victim is hardly worth pity—a slimy opportunist who practically invites his own downfall.

Unveiling the Layers of Madness: Hitchcock’s “Psycho” and the Birth of Modern Horror:

Let’s face it: Anthony Perkins’ Norman Bates is an enigmatic anti-hero. Similarly, in Shadow of a Doubt (1943), Joseph Cotton’s Uncle Charlie’s chilling monologue about widows deserving death is framed from his niece’s horrified point of view. This juxtaposition of intimacy and menace creates both empathy for her fear and fascination with his charisma. By fostering empathy for antagonists, Hitchcock challenged traditional notions of good versus evil in horror storytelling.

Alfred Hitchcock’s cinematic virtuosity with his seminal psycho-sexual thriller, Psycho, has elevated the film to an unparalleled status in the history of cinema, rendering it instantly recognizable and profoundly influential. And let’s face it, what Jaws did for swimming in the ocean, Psycho did as the first horror movie that took away the safety of taking showers in your own home!

With his adaptation of Robert Bloch’s 1959 pulp novel of the same name, Bloch conjured Norman Bates, his mysterious and elusive mother, and the Bates Motel, helping it become a landmark in film history, renowned for its masterful direction and psychological depth. But his conjuration had its roots in the deeply disturbing, grim reality that defies the realm of myth and fantasy.

Continue reading “Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960) We All Go a Little Mad Sometimes”

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #52 Deathdream 1974

DEATHDREAM 1974

Deathdream (1974): A Haunting Reflection of Vietnam’s Ghosts and Familial Fracture

Bob Clark’s Deathdream (1974) is a film that pulses with the raw, unhealed wounds of the Vietnam era, a horror allegory as much about the rot within the American family as the literal decay of its undead protagonist. Released in the shadow of the war’s bitter end, the film—co-written with Alan Ormsby (Clark’s collaborator on Children Shouldn’t Play with Dead Things 1972)—reimagines W.W. Jacobs’ The Monkey’s Paw through a lens of existential dread, blending traditional horror tropes with searing social critique. At its core, it’s a story of grief, denial, and the toxic masculinity that festers beneath the surface of suburban normalcy, all wrapped in a shroud of supernatural unease. Heads up for animal lovers, there is a horrid scene where a little dog is killed.

Richard Backus (well known for his work in daytime television, notably as Barry Ryan on Ryan’s Hope (for which he received a Daytime Emmy nomination) plays Andy Brooks, a soldier who returns home to his family after being killed in Vietnam, after his resurrection granted by his mother Christine’s (Lynn Carlin – an Oscar-nominated actress best known for her powerful debut in Faces (1968), who went on to a thoughtful career playing complex wives and mothers in acclaimed films and television throughout the 1970s and 1980s) desperate wish. Backus’ portrayal is a profound exercise in understated horror: his Andy is hollow-eyed, eerily detached, and physically deteriorating, yet somehow still recognizably human. His slow-burn transformation from a sullen veteran to a bloodthirsty revenant is both tragic and terrifying, a metaphor for the psychological toll of war that feels agonizingly personal during the time of the film’s release. John Marley ( prolific, Oscar-nominated character actor best known for his roles in Faces (1968), Love Story (1970), and The Godfather (1972), whose long career spanned stage, film, and television, with memorable performances as complex fathers, industry moguls, and authority figures across decades of American cinema and TV, as Andy’s father Charles, embodies the patriarchal expectation of stoic masculinity, his initial pride in his son’s military service curdling into shame and rage as Andy’s behavior grows increasingly aberrant. The family’s dynamic—a mother clinging to denial, a father grappling with emasculation, and a sister (Anya Ormsby) caught in the crossfire—becomes a microcosm of a nation struggling to reconcile the myth of heroism with the reality of trauma.

Clark’s seamless direction infuses the film with a dreamlike bleakness, using shadow-drenched cinematography and claustrophobic framing to mirror the family’s spiraling despair. Key scenes linger like open wounds: Andy’s first appearance as a spectral silhouette in the doorway, his mother’s candlelit prayer dissolving into the headlights of the truck carrying his corpse; the gruesome murder of a truck driver, shot with a handheld rawness that feels ripped from a snuff film; and the chilling sequence in a doctor’s office, where Andy’s rotting face is revealed under fluorescent light, Tom Savini’s early makeup work rendering him a grotesque fushion of Karloff’s Frankenstein and a war-torn G.I. The film’s climax, set in a cemetery where Andy’s corpse writhes in a shallow grave, is a gut-punch of nihilism, rejecting catharsis in favor of desolate silence.

Deathdream’s impact on 1970s horror cannot be overstated. Arriving six years after Night of the Living Dead, it redefined the zombie not as a mindless horde but as a solitary, sympathetic monster—a precursor to George Romero’s Martin (1977) and a direct challenge to the era’s exploitation-driven war narratives. By framing Vietnam as a domestic horror, Clark and Ormsby exposed the lie of the “noble sacrifice,” instead presenting a generation of soldiers as collateral damage in a war that left families broken and souls unburied. The film’s unflinching focus on psychological decay over cheap thrills influenced the rise of character-driven horror, while its critique of toxic masculinity and suburban complacency echoed in later works like The Stepford Wives 1975 and Halloween 1978.

Yet Deathdream remains singular in its despair—only a mother cradling her son’s corpse in a smoldering car, whispering, “Andy’s home.” In that moment, Clark captures the irreparable cost of war and the fragility of the American dream, making Deathdream not just a horror classic but a requiem for a generation.

#52 down, 98 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #50 The Dunwich Horror 1970

THE DUNWICH HORROR 1970

The Dunwich Horror (1970) is a film that feels like a fever dream conjured from the depths of both H.P. Lovecraft’s imagination and the psychedelic haze of late-60s cinema. Directed by Daniel Haller—who had already dipped his toes into Lovecraftian waters with Die, Monster, Die!—the film is a swirling, hypnotic adaptation of Lovecraft’s 1929 short story, but with a distinctly surreal and sensual 1970s twist. Haller, working under the watchful eye of producer Roger Corman and with a screenplay co-written by a young Curtis Hanson, crafts a movie that is still as much about mood and atmosphere as it is about cosmic horror.

Haller was indeed the art director and production designer for Roger Corman on his celebrated Edgar Allan Poe film series. Haller designed the sets for several of Corman’s most iconic Poe adaptations, including House of Usher (1960), The Pit and the Pendulum (1961), The Raven (1963), and The Masque of the Red Death (1964).

His opulent, atmospheric set designs were a crucial element in establishing the lush, gothic visual style that defined Corman’s Poe cycle and are widely credited with elevating the films’ production values despite their modest budgets.

Daniel Haller’s set designs for Corman’s Poe cycle are nothing short of opulent and atmospheric, layering every frame with lush, visually poetic style that became the series’ trademark. Haller’s work didn’t just set the mood for Corman’s stylistic reflections—they practically oozed Gothic grandeur, making those crumbling mansions and shadowy corridors feel both exuberant with pagentry and dreadfully claustrophobic. Even with the famously tight budgets, Haller’s creativity elevated the films’ production values to a level that felt lavish and immersive, giving the Poe adaptations a visual richness that’s still credited with defining their enduring appeal.

For me, it’s impossible not to feel the chills that are triggered when the eerie soundscape, saturated colors, and theatrical flair of one of Corman’s Gothic horror odysseys come alive on screen.

The story revolves around Wilbur Whateley, played with eerie, soft-spoken intensity by Dean Stockwell. Wilbur is not your average small-town weirdo—he’s the scion of a family with a dark, eldritch secret, and he’s got his sights set on the legendary Necronomicon, an ancient conjure book housed at Miskatonic University. Enter Sandra Dee (in a career-defining detour from her wholesome Gidget persona that set off the wave of Beach party movie craze of the 1960s), as Nancy Wagner, a graduate student who finds herself drawn into Wilbur’s orbit. There’s a hypnotic quality to their first encounter, and it’s not long before Nancy is lured back to the Whateley estate in the fog-shrouded hills of Dunwich, where reality begins to slip, and the boundaries between dream and nightmare dissolve.

The supporting cast is a treat for genre fans: Ed Begley as Dr. Henry Armitage, the academic who suspects Wilbur’s true intentions, while Donna Baccala and Lloyd Bochner round out the cast as Nancy’s concerned friends and colleagues. Joanna Moore Jordan (Bury Me an Angel, 1971, A Woman Under the Influence 1974) is memorable as Lavinia Whateley, Wilbur’s mother, whose own tragic fate is woven into the film’s legacy of generational dread.

What makes The Dunwich Horror so memorable isn’t just its plot, though the story of ancient rituals, monstrous twins, and the threat of Lovecraft’s infamous “Old Ones” returning to our world is pure Lovecraftian gold, but the way it’s told. Richard C. Glouner’s cinematography is a kaleidoscope of saturated colors, swirling mists, and disorienting camera angles. The film leans hard into the psychedelic, with dream sequences and ritual scenes that feel like occult acid trips, all underscored by Les Baxter’s full-bodied, eerie score. The opening title sequence alone, with its morphing silhouettes and deep blue palette, sets a tone that’s both stylish and unsettling, a nod to the graphic design innovations of the 1960s and the shadowy grandeur of classic horror.

The Dunwich Horror doesn’t shy away from some pretty provocative concepts—dabbling in forbidden rituals, cosmic ancestry, and the kind of archaic, old-world fears that feel both ancient and yet strangely contemporary and vivid. There’s a simmering sexual innuendo running through the film too, with hypnotic seductions and ritualistic overtones that sharpens the knife, carving out a deeper sense of tension and taboo.. What makes it all the more striking is how distinctly different this role is for Sandra Dee; after years of being cast as the wholesome ingénue, here she dives headfirst into a world of occult danger and adult themes, even flirting with a touch of sultry reveal, marking a bold and memorable turn away from her earlier screen persona. It’s a film that’s not afraid to get weird with its ideas, even as it leans into those shadowy, timeworn themes that Lovecraft fans like me know and love.

Key moments linger in the mind: the locked room in the Whateley house, where Wilbur’s monstrous twin lurks; escaping into the landscape, throwing off sparks.

Visually, the creature is rarely shown in full during the surreal moments as he roams the countryside. He’s more a suggestion of monstrous presence than a clearly defined figure, rendered through swirling, psychedelic effects, distorted camera angles, and flashes of unnatural movement. The cinematography leans into a hallucinatory palette: colors pulse, the air seems to shimmer, and the camera itself seems to recoil from what it’s showing, as if the lens can barely contain the horror. It’s an effect that works well for the film.

Wilbur’s twin is depicted as a writhing, amorphous mass—sometimes glimpsed as a shadowy, tentacled blur, sometimes as a rippling distortion in the landscape, always accompanied by an uproar of inhuman sounds. The creature’s passage is marked by chaos: doors splinter, trees shudder, and terrified townsfolk flee in his wake. Animals panic, and the very air seems to crackle, warp, and tremble as he moves, leaving a trail of destruction and fear.

The ritual atop the windswept cliffs, with its eye-catching set -laid out with Wilbur’s sacrificial altar and flamboyant cult followers, where Wilbur attempts to summon the Old Ones (YOG-soh-thoth!) with Nancy as his unwilling offering; the climactic confrontation, where lightning and fire bring the Whateley line to a spectacular, apocalyptic end.

The film’s special effects are more suggestive than explicit, relying on editing, sound, and color to evoke the presence of cosmic horrors just out of sight—a choice that, whether by budget or design, only adds to the film’s dreamlike power.

At its core, The Dunwich Horror is a love letter to Lovecraft’s world of forbidden knowledge and ancestral terror, but it’s filtered through the lens of a time when horror was as much about sensation as story, that’s to Daniel Haller’s artistic touch.

It’s a film where the boundaries between the real and the unreal are as thin as the veil between tenuous worlds and where every color-tinged shadow might conceal something ancient, hungry, and waiting. For fans of the weird, the surreal, and the hypnotically eclectic, it’s a cult classic that still casts a spell, and as far as I’m concerned, for an early adaptation of Lovecraft, it holds its own.

#50 down, 100 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #41 Dead and Buried 1981

DEAD AND BURIED 1981

SPOILER ALERT!

Dead and Buried (1981), directed by Gary Sherman (British horror film Death Line 1972, gritty crime thriller Vice Squad 1982), is one of those underrated horror gems that’s equal parts creepy and captivating. Released in the early ’80s, the film blends small-town mystery with gruesome horror, creating a very unsettling experience as you get deeper into the story. With a screenplay by Dan O’Bannon (who directed cult classic horror-comedy The Return of the Living Dead 1985) and Ronald Shusett—the same team behind Alien 1979 —you can expect something dark, twisted, and unforgettable.

The story takes place in the foggy coastal town of Potter’s Bluff, where Sheriff Dan Gillis (James Farentino) investigates a string of bizarre and brutal murders. Tourists and visitors are savagely killed by the townsfolk, only for their corpses to mysteriously reanimate.

The sinister twist: the victims don’t stay dead. Instead, they somehow start walking around as if nothing happened. As Gillis digs deeper into the mystery, he discovers horrifying truths that the town’s mortician, Dobbs (Jack Albertson), isn’t just preparing bodies for burial—this creepy old embalmer has developed a technique for working his magic on the dead and bringing them back to life as part of his macabre “art” like the Greek myth of Pygmalion, recounted in Ovid’s Metamorphoses.

Dobbs sees himself as an artist using corpses as his canvas, blurring the line between creation and destruction in fascinating and horrifying ways. And the role works so well because Jack Albertson comes off like a harmless old-timer—until you realize he’s turning the town into his own creepy art project. The film also plays with ideas of control over life, death, mastery of existence, finality, and human order.

Things get even more disturbing when Gillis realizes his own wife Janet (Melody Anderson) is one of Dobbs’s creations—and so is he. The shocking final twist leaves you questioning everything you thought you knew about life and death.

Jack Albertson stands out as Dobbs, bringing an unsettling charm to his role as the eccentric mortician obsessed with his mastery of the dead. Albertson steals the show, delivering a performance that leaves you never quite sure whether to admire him or fear him.

James Farentino plays Sheriff Gillis with determination, vulnerability, and disbelief as he unravels the town’s horrifying dark secrets, and Melody Anderson keeps you guessing as the increasingly bizarre wife Janet. Horror fans will also appreciate seeing Robert Englund in an early role before he became iconic as Freddy Krueger.

Gary Sherman’s direction is slick – creating an all-consuming atmosphere of dread. Steve Poster’s cinematography perfectly captures Potter’s Bluff as a mist-enshrouded, desolate place while emphasizing its sinister undercurrents. Close-ups and shadowy lighting enhance the sense of unease, making even mundane moments feel ominous.

Even during quiet moments, there’s an unshakable feeling that something isn’t right. And when it comes to gore, Dead and Buried doesn’t hold back. The film opens with a photographer being lured into a trap by locals who beat him and set him on fire—a brutal introduction to Potter’s Bluff. Later, he is killed in his hospital bed when a nurse plunges a needle into his eye—a moment both shocking and unforgettable. I have a thing about eyes! There’s also a sequence with acid melting someone’s face, a woman’s head crushed off-screen, and the discovery of decomposing hands—all contribute to the film’s reputation for graphic horror. They are all gruesome moments that are shocking yet serve the story rather than feel gratuitous. The more people suffer their fates, the more beautiful the art, I suppose.

Though overlooked upon its initial release, Dead and Buried has since gained recognition as a cult classic for its unique blend of slow-burn narrative paired with shocking set pieces, grueling suspense, and graphic horror. This is a perfect exercise in classic horror if you’re into atmospheric films that mess with your head and don’t shy away from unsettling visuals.

#41 down, 109 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey, formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #34 Children Shouldn’t Play With Dead Things 1972

CHILDREN SHOULDN’T PLAY WITH DEAD THINGS 1972

Children Shouldn’t Play with Dead Things (1972) stands as a seminal work in the evolution of 70s horror cinema, a quirky, influential, and enduringly entertaining blending macabre humor with low-budget ingenuity to create a cult classic that saw its influence spread to future indie filmmakers.

Directed by Bob Clark (credited as Benjamin Clark), who would later show off his diverse talents with holiday favorites like the beloved A Christmas Story 1983 and the end of the spectrum of holiday movies with his darkly sinister Black Christmas 1974, this early foray into horror showcases Clark’s versatility and willingness to push boundaries.

Shot on a shoestring budget of $50,000 over just 14 days, the film follows a troupe of hammy actors led by the insufferable Alan (played by Alan Ormsby, who also co-wrote the script and designed the eerie corpse makeup) as they venture to a cursed island cemetery for a mock séance. The cast, which was primarily composed of Clark’s college friends, lends an authentic if amateurish, charm to the proceedings, with many actors using their real first names in a quirky nod to budget constraints. All this seems to contribute to that bit of personal flair the film possesses. The actors include: Valerie Mamches as Val, Jeff Gillen as Jeff, Anya Ormsby as Anya ( I met Anya at Chiller Theater a while back. She was lovely), Paul Cronin as Paul, Jane Daly as Terry, Roy Engleman as Roy, Robert Philip as Emerson, Bruce Solomon as Winns and best of all… Seth Sklarey as Orville Dunworth – Alan’s favorite dead guy!

Cinematographer Jack McGowan transforms Florida’s swampy landscapes into a gothic playground of shadows and mist, creating an atmosphere of creeping dread that adds to not detracts due to the film’s limited resources. This visual style is complemented by Carl Zittrer’s score, which oscillates between carnival-esque whimsy and spine-tingling unease, perfectly capturing the film’s tonal balancing act between horror and dark comedy.

I can’t overstate this enough: Children Shouldn’t Play With Dead Things serves as a bridge between the voodoo zombies of early cinema and George A. Romero’s flesh-eating ghouls that stalked the streets of Pittsburgh in his Dead saga;  in Clark’s film introducing the concept of occult-summoned undead. This innovative approach to zombie lore and Ormsby’s gruesome yet inventive makeup effects laid the groundwork for future indie horror productions, proving that creativity and passion could often overcome a lack of funding. These movies always tend to be the most compelling!

Moreover, Children Shouldn’t Play with Dead Things helped establish the horror-comedy subgenre that would later flourish with films like Sam Raimi’s The Evil Dead 1983. Its blend of slapstick humor, occult themes, and genuine scares created a template for future filmmakers to explore the intersection of laughter and fear.

As the zombies set sail for Miami in the film’s audacious finale, viewers are left with a sense of the absurd that perfectly captures the movie’s charm.

#34 down, 116 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey, formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!

MonsterGirl’s 150 Days of Classic Horror #28 The Changeling 1980 & Ghost Story 1981

THE CHANGELING 1980

“[A] visually classy chiller… aided by stunning film locations in Seattle and
Vancouver, this one’s more attractive than most.” — Edwin Miller, Seventeen,
April 1980, page 75.

“The most noteworthy traditional ghost movie of the last fifteen years or so … a chilling and undeservedly obscure film … a first-rate Gothic gooseflesher, with excellent performances…” — Bruce Lanier Wright, Night Walkers: Gothic Horror Movies, The Modern Era, Taylor Publishing Company, 1995, page 158.

“[A] classy picture made by people with some sense of suspense, and performed by people with a cast headed by two of the best – George C. Scott and Melvyn Douglas…. This is not a movie with ghosts jumping at you to elicit fraudulent screams. This is creepy, stealthy suspense.” – Gene Shalit, The Ladies Home Journal, July 1980, pages 24, 28.

According to Roger Ebert’s review of The Changeling, “This…is a scary movie with taste.”

https://thelastdrivein.com/2016/01/31/the-changeling-1980-how-did-you-die-joseph-did-you-die-in-this-house-why-do-you-remain/

The Changeling is a stylish and exquisitely envisioned 1980 Canadian supernatural horror film directed by Peter Medak. It stars George C. Scott, Trish Van Devere, and Melvyn Douglas. I saw this atmospheric and, at times, jarring ghost story during its theatrical release. Like the pounding John Russell hears at night, my heart almost jumped out of my chest, and still does, actually, during the scene with the menacing wheelchair hunting Trish Van Devere throughout the winding hallway, chases her down the stairs and, ultimately, crashes into her.

The Changeling is perhaps one of the most effectively creepy ghost stories. This is partly due to John Coquillon’s edgy and intensely focused cinematography and production designer Trevor Williams, who helps create the oppressive and isolating environment.

The movie also showcases a sentimental piano score, including the music box melody written by Howard Blake, which adds to the moody atmosphere.

Director Medak and cinematographer Coquillon employ a masterful technique of fluid, low-angle tracking shots that serpentine through the mansion’s expansive rooms and corridors. This approach creates an ethereal perspective, as if the audience embodies the restless spirit itself, observing the world from its incorporeal vantage point. Such camera work not only heightens the sense of supernatural presence but also accentuates John Russell’s isolation within the sprawling, haunted domain.

In a particularly striking composition, the film utilizes a high-angle shot that cascades down the grand staircase, diminishing George C. Scott’s normally commanding presence. This visual strategy inverts the actor’s typical on-screen authority, rendering him small and exposed against the mansion’s imposing architecture. The result is a palpable sense of vulnerability, underscoring the powerlessness of even the most formidable individual when confronted with otherworldly forces.

The film follows the lonely John Russell (Scott), a grief-stricken composer who moves to Seattle after losing his wife and daughter in a tragic accident. His pain acts as a conduit for the supernatural events that follow. Somehow, the personal events of John’s life and the specter of the little boy who is drawn to him are inextricably connected. His fate acts as a whisper of revelation that beckons John from the depths of his grief-induced isolation, offering a renewed sense of purpose that illuminates his path forward.

After John Russell breaks open an old storeroom, he uncovers a secret stairway that leads to a creepy space that begins to reveal the horrible history of the house and its ghostly inhabitant, the dark secret of a little boy’s cruel death, and the terrible truth about prominent senator Carmichael’s (Melvyn Douglas) origins. John rents a sprawling, imposing mansion that hasn’t been occupied in over a decade from Claire Norman (Van Devere Scott’s real wife), an agent of a local historical society. Soon after moving in, he experiences unexplained phenomena: Loud banging every morning, water taps turning on by themselves, a red stained glass window shattering, and the apparition of a drowned boy in a bathtub. John discovers a hidden attic room containing a child’s belongings and a music box that plays a tune he has just composed; it is not a coincidence.

These events lead him to investigate the house’s history, uncovering a dark secret involving Senator Joseph Carmichael. In one of the powerful scenes of the film, a medium conducts a séance, trying to discover the identity of the ghost, revealing the tortured spirit of a murdered boy named Joseph—the little boy who drowned in the tub.

One of the most chilling scenes involves Joseph’s cobweb-covered wheelchair appearing at the top of the stairs, creaking back and forth on its own, and chasing Van Devere down the great steps of the house. John witnesses the apparition of the drowned boy Joseph in the bathtub. The desperate pounding on the tub’s sides unleashes a thunderous, haunting cadence that echoes through the silence; the aural torment is akin to the pounding in Robert Wise’s The Haunting 1963. There is also disembodied crying, much like Shirley Jackson’s ghost story. John also hears the ghost’s voice on a recording, revealing how the boy died.

There’s also a frightening moment when his dead daughter’s little red rubber ball slowly bounces down the grand stairway. The unsettled John flees, frantically casting the spectral ball off the bridge into the abyss of the churning sea below. But when he returns home, the veil between worlds proves permeable; the sea-wet ball materializes once more, slowly bouncing down the staircase with an otherworldly persistence. This stunning, haunting image elegantly sums up the tenuous threshold separating the physical realm from the world of the dead and the liminal space where the laws of nature bend to accommodate the unfinished business of restless spirits. Something so simple can be so terrifying. The ball was seen in the beginning in John’s apartment in New York while he was packing up his family’s things and getting ready for his move to Seattle.

The Changeling received positive critical reviews and was an early Canadian-produced film to achieve major international success. It won eight inaugural Genie Awards, including Best Motion Picture, and was nominated for two Saturn Awards. The film is considered a cult classic and one of the most influential Canadian films ever.

The movie’s strength lies in its effective blend of traditional haunted house elements with a conspiracy thriller, creating a unique and compelling narrative. Its subtle approach to horror, relying more on atmosphere and psychological tension than graphic violence, has contributed to its enduring appeal among us horror fans.

GHOST STORY 1981

Ghost Story (1981), directed by John Irvin and based on Peter Straub’s novel, is a chilling supernatural thriller that intertwines past and present, guilt and revenge. The film boasts an impressive cast of Hollywood veterans in their twilight years, including Fred Astaire, Melvyn Douglas, Douglas Fairbanks Jr., and John Houseman, alongside younger talents like Craig Wasson and Alice Krige as the mysterious beauty who comes into their lives and creates a current of supernatural dread.

Set in a snow-covered New England town, the story follows four elderly men who form the Chowder Society, gathering regularly to share ghost stories. Their comfortable routine is shattered when one member’s son dies mysteriously, triggering a series of supernatural events that force them to confront a dark secret from their youth. Through haunting flashbacks, we learn of their encounter with the enigmatic Eva Galli, whose death they’ve concealed for decades.

As the vengeful spirit returns to exact her revenge, the film builds tension through Jack Cardiff’s atmospheric cinematography, which masterfully captures both the eerie present and the golden-hued past. Jack Cardiff’s most influential cinematography works include A Matter of Life and Death (1946), Black Narcissus (1947), and The Red Shoes (1948). These three films, directed by Powell and Pressburger, established Cardiff as a legendary cinematographer. His work on Black Narcissus earned him an Academy Award for Best Color Cinematography.

From shocking deaths to spectral appearances on snowy bridges, Ghost Story is one hell of a horror film that culminates in a climactic confrontation at Eva’s decaying house and her excruciating death.

The narrative structure of Ghost Story plays a crucial role in creating its eerie and suspenseful atmosphere. The film employs a non-linear storytelling approach, interweaving past and present events to gradually reveal the dark secret that haunts the protagonists. The dual timeline structure, the present focusing on the members of the Chowder Society and flashbacks to their youth, reveals their dark secret connected to the enigmatic Eva Galli.

The film’s strength lies in exploring how past sins haunt the present, both literally and figuratively, creating a ghost story that is as much about psychological torment as it is about supernatural scares.

#28 down, 122 to go! Your EverLovin’ Joey, formally & affectionately known as MonsterGirl!