House on Strawhill

I may be on my own with this one, but if you ask me; The House on Straw Hill is an excellent little film. Considering that it's a thriller, the film doesn't feature a great deal of tension or suspense - but the action is kept engaging by the way that it sets up the storyline. The film moves slowly, but in doing so is allowed time to let its characters grow and the plot to build. The film is set mostly in a house surrounded by a cornfield. I'm not sure why these sorts of films always have to take place in distinguished houses, but this location actually provides a good base for this story. The field in which the house is situated ensures that the action always feels isolated from society, and there's something sinister about farm houses in the country anyway. The plot follows a paranoid writer (played Udo Kier) who is about to write a new book. He hires a beautiful blonde to be his secretary to aid with the writing, but this turns out to be a big mistake as the young woman has more of interest in the man than just helping him to write a book.

This film was included on the infamous 'Video Nasty' list back in the eighties under the title, 'Exposé'. Like a lot of films on the list, this one doesn't feature a great deal in the way of gore and it's a wonder why it ever got banned. House on Straw Hill does have a handful of bloody sequences, but nothing enough to warrant it's banning in my opinion. Udo Kier takes the lead role and delivers another of his bizarre, paranoid performances. It's debatable as to whether or not Kier actually has any acting talent, but he certainly has screen presence and for that reason alone, his films are always worth seeing. He is joined by a distinctly feminine cast, which includes Linda Hayden in the role of the secretary and seventies sex symbol Fiona Richmond as Kier's girlfriend. You'll no doubt be glad to know that the two 'hook up' in one of the movie's central scenes. House on Straw Hill pulls off a great double bluff with the identity of the maniac, and this provides the film with its main backbone. It has to be said that the conclusion is a bit silly, but it's one of the few suspense sequences in the film and you can't expect a film like this to be without silly moments. On the whole, I can see why this isn't widely liked; but I'm definitely a fan.

Kier is a fine, photogenic actor, but he's miscast (his voice is dubbed although this could've been intentional) in this otherwise suspenseful psychological thriller playing a deeply insecure and frustrated novelist whose next book is proving challenging to write, leading to the employment of Hayden as his typist. Hayden is initially a lot more relaxed but this soon changes when she begins to exploit her employer's fragile mood and psychological weaknesses.

Well photographed on location with a taut narrative and minimalist dialogue, first time director Clarke cultivates a general unease that's gripping but sporadically distracted by the superfluous titillation which seems to have no genuine plot justification other than for commercial purposes (note Richmond's appearances, most of her dialogue consists of moaning).

Mysterious and sensual it's also extremely bloody (burgundy not claret as Kier insists) with well-paced tension and a few decent shocks at regular intervals to hold the wandering attention. There would've been a dozen different ways to resolve the plot, and whilst it answers most of the lingering questions, it's not the most satisfying conclusion ever conceived. Better than average, but never really reaches its full potential.

As others have said this is the only British-made film to have been banned in Britain during the "video nasty" scandal. Ironically, all the other films that the British government tried to ban are extremely popular today in Britain , even though most of them are completely worthless dreck (i.e. "The Dorm that Dripped Blood", "Forest of Fear"). But this film, while popular in Britain, is virtually unknown outside of the UK unfortunately--the idiot British censor only really managed to effectively ban one of the halfway-decent "nasties" from the rest of the world.

The movie features Udo Kier as a weird neurotic writer who wears rubber gloves (but apparently not a condom) during sex. Linda Hayden plays a psychotic secretary he hires, who seems to have some very dark ulterior motives. Kier is always pretty good, even if this isn't one of his best performances. Hayden though is GREAT. She has often expressed regret about this role, perhaps because for a RADA-trained actress, she spends a lot of time naked and/or masturbating. She also takes a lesbian roll in the hay with Kier's statuesque girlfriend (Fiona Richmond), and gets raped "Straw Dogs"-style by two local yokels (perhaps this might partly explain the alternate title), but right afterward she turns into Camille Keaton in "I Spit on Your Grave" (although this movie was actually made before that one). It's kind of hard to complain though that the lovely, lovely Linda Hayden would appear in such sexually graphic role, but really any number of actresses could have done THAT. None of them, however, could have equaled her performance here as a scary psychotic minx.

Strangely, the original British release of this was called "Expose" and prominently featured Richmond, not Hayden or Keir, in the promotional material, even though she is barely in the movie and couldn't act to save her life. At least, her hot sex scenes with Hayden and with a be-gloved Udo Kier are memorable. (Hell, today, in America at least, they'll take some talent-free pin-up queen like Richmond give her a much bigger part in a much more lame movie and then NOT have her even take her clothes off, so everyone will "take her seriously as an actress". Baaah!) This isn't a great movie (and I prefer the alternate title "House on Straw Hill"), but it's definitely a very decent Brit exploitation film and one of the few "video nasties" that really DESERVES to be seen outside the UK.

Before conducting any research I automatically assumed this film would be a blatant rip-off of the contemporary popular Rape & Revenge exploitation movies. Especially considering the alternate and much more savory-sounding title "House on Straw Hill", I honestly thought it would be a cheap and even sleazier rehash of both "Last House on the Left" and "Straw Dogs". Wrong …though not entirely! Basically, this IS some sort of sex and revenge movie, but not one that is playing in the same type of 70's league. "Exposé" is a more stylish, psychological and ambitious variant on the retaliation-theme, with a slow atmospheric building up and a lot of attention given to decors, locations and choreography. Makes sense, actually, as this is a prominent British production with a decent budget and proper cast including cult B-movie legend Udo Kier ("Flesh for Frankenstein", "Blood for Dracula") and Linda Hayden ("Blood on Satan's Claw", "Madhouse"). Paul Martin is a struggling writer, who's put under a lot of pressure to deliver a second novel because his debut novel was such an unexpectedly immense hit. Paul moved to a quiet and isolated countryside mansion for inspiration, but still struggles with writer's block and personal issues like nightmarish hallucinations when he makes love to his girlfriend. His agent arranges for a typist to come over and help him, but there's something dark and dangerous about this girl. Linda masturbates practically all the time and seems to have come to Paul Martin with a personal vendetta to settle. Try and avoid reading synopsis's around here on the website, as most of them bluntly reveal Linda's intentions and motivations. The story of "Exposé" is simplistic yet highly effective and compelling – albeit a little predictable – and it's an astonishingly beautiful movie to look at. Quite surprising fact that is, seeing the film got included in the infamous list of Video Nasties at one point. The settings and scenery are delightful and James Kenelm Clarke's direction is much more sophisticated than you would expect from this type of cinema. Certain sequences literally ooze with suspense, like when Paul drives his malfunctioning car down a mountain at high speed whilst the mysterious Linda seduces his girlfriend back at the mansion. The body count is rather limited, but the few moments of carnage are quite gruesome. The sex footage is lewd and gratuitous but nothing too extreme. Udo Kier is one handsome looking dude and Linda Hayden is one indescribably hot looking cult siren. Together, they form a fantastically enticing duo. Naturally, there also are a couple of obvious defects and shortcomings, like the underdeveloped character of Suzanne and the disappointing anti-climax in the cornfield.

EXPOSE, aka THE HOUSE ON STRAW HILL, is a one-time video nasty now consigned to be forgotten by the weight of years. The truth is that it's a grotty little low-budget thriller that borrows some of the rape-revenge material of STRAW DOGS and turns it into a unique but only semi-successful tale of madness and murder.

The tale features a dubbed Udo Kier playing a writer who retires to his remote country home in order to work on his latest novel. While there, he must contend with the antics of his randy mistress Fiona Richmond (a one-time softcore starlet) and youthful secretary Linda Hayden (BLOOD ON SATAN'S CLAW).

Nothing much actually happens in this movie, and the expected bloodshed and sexual material is relatively tame by modern standards; certainly it has been eclipsed by far more explicit stuff in the past couple of decades. It's hard to see what all the fuss was about, really. Saying that, the film does boast a good performance from Hayden, at least, and it contains curios unique to its era: cameos from future stars Karl Howman and Vic Armstrong, and a genuinely sleazy, unsettling atmosphere straight out of the 1970s. No classic for sure, but well worth a look for fans of the material and the era.