Violence en sous-sol

Surprisingly, upon watching this, I found that I had never seen it before and that it was most enjoyable, if a little distasteful. The locations, shops and house and pub interiors are most evocative and if some are sets they are very good ones. Joan Collins is also surprisingly good but then she really only has to play at being a barmaid. Gripping from the start, this is a really well paced and intelligently told thriller. Things lurch a little two thirds in but by then we have bought into the rather lurid tale and it was always going to leave something of a bad taste anyway, with little girls being taken on their way to school, so what harm a little incest along the way. Just as the film seems to be loosing pace we have a surprisingly and confrontational ending that leaves you wondering just who the intended audience was for this. Well worth a watch for the open minded.

This was originally called simply "Revenge" but the title was probably changed to avoid confusing it with other films so named, including an American film released the same year.

There is nothing American about this tale of revenge though, rather this is a typical low budget English drama that was quite common in especially the 1960s, albeit with a slightly unusual theme.

The principal characters are the loved ones of a young girl who has been murdered by a sexual predator, a local man believed to be responsible for at least one similar crime. The film begins with this man being released from police custody, apparently against the weight of the evidence.

Obviously this does not go down too well, so our misguided heroes follow him and their brief, distant interaction convinces them he is indeed the killer, so they decide to kidnap him and beat a confession out of him. What could go wrong?

A lot of things, naturally, and there is not one but two twists in the tale. One warning though - don't try this at home Or anywhere else.

When it comes to horror/cult cinema, yours truly is a sucker for two things, namely long & lurid sounding titles and grisly looking vintage film posters! Half of my watch-list exists of films that are purely selected based on these two criteria, and in many cases I never really bothered to properly read what the actual plot is about. Thanks to the title and the poster, this particular movie stood extremely high on my must-see list. Admittedly the official title is the colorless and dull-sounding "Revenge", but there are the two awesome alternate titles "Terror from under the House" and "Inn of the Frightened People", and who could resist the filthy green movie poster with the image of a guy with glasses screaming and plenty of catch words and phrases like "be ready to scream!" or "you may never dare go in the basement again!" Of course I assumed this was a full-blooded horror movie, also because director Sidney Hayers already made a few great ones like "Night of the Eagle" and "Circus of Horrors", but actually this is a stern melodrama dealing with some harrowing themes like pedophilia, grieving over lost children, the hunger for justice but the lack of courage to actually kill, etc.… The film opens dramatically with the Radford family mourning at the funeral of their young teenage daughter. We learn she was killed by a child molester, but the police had to let him go due to lack of evidence. Together with another grieving father and his furious son, Jim Radford kidnaps the slimy and eerie SOB after having observed how he lives like a hermit and stops at the local elementary school to peep at the children. They beat him – Seely – up beyond recognition and keep him stashed in the basement underneath Jim's pub. The situation puts a lot of pressure on the entire family. They don't dare to release him, but neither do they dare to dispose of him for good. Meanwhile, the impact of hiding a pervert in the basement begins to have strange effects on the family relationships, notably between Jim's second wife and her stepson, and then suddenly it's not even sure anymore if Seely is really culpable. This may not have been the horror movie I expected, but it was definitely an uncomfortable and very confronting film to watch. The scenes at the beginning of the film, when the men are stalking the suspect and observing his bizarre behaviors from within the car, are eerily suspenseful and make you wonder (especially if you're a parent as well) how you would react. There are a couple of more powerful sequences, like when Seely awakens from his beating while the pub is full of customers or when Mrs. Radford has to prevent a scheduled beer delivery from happening. The acting performances are astoundingly good as well. Although one of the least flattering roles of her entire career, Joan Collins gives away a stellar performance as Carol Radford; - Jim's second wife. James Booth and Ray Barrett are terrific too, as the vengeful but petrified fathers, but Kenneth Griffith also definitely deserves to get mentioned here. Not only is his role as child molester suspect a very courageous one, he also manages to come across as simultaneously pathetic and weak and yet menacing and dangerous! Unfortunately "Terror from under the House" doesn't remain compelling throughout. The script loses a lot of its pace and impact in the second half, since the story doesn't develop. The lead characters don't make any decisions; in fact, the only thing they keep repeating when asked how to deal with their problem is: "I'll think of something". If you do manage to struggle through the disappointing second half, you'll be rewarded with a more or less strong climax but still you are left behind with the feeling that the film could have been a lot better overall.

Suspected paedophile child-killer Seely (Kenneth Griffith) is released by the police due to insufficient evidence. Pub landlord Jim (James Booth) and Harry (Ray Barrett), the fathers of two of the murdered children, decide to abduct Seely and force a confession from him. Together with Jim's son Lee (Tom Marshall), they bundle the man into their car and take him to the pub, where they push him into the cellar. Things get out of hand, however, and Seely is beaten up by Jim, Harry and Lee, and then strangled by the publican. The men presume Seely to be dead and try to figure out how to dispose of the body, but it later turns out that their victim is still alive, leaving the abductors with the problem of what to do next. Meanwhile, Jim's wife Carol (Joan Collins) discovers the man in the cellar, as does Jim's young daughter Jilly (Zuleika Robson), the situation spiralling more and more out of control.

Revenge starts off in great style, with the tense abduction, brutal beating and apparent killing of Seely, but once this part of is over, the film rapidly runs out of steam, as though the writers didn't know where to go next (at least until the conclusion). The script treads water for a long time, with the characters arguing amongst themselves about how they should handle the problem, whilst trying to keep a couple of pesky policemen at arms length, all of which gets rather repetitive. Perhaps the most interesting aspect of the film is the question of Seely's guillt: is the man in the cellar really a child-killer, or have they got the wrong man? This eventually comes into play in the final act, when Jim comes to believe that Seely is innocent and tries to make amends... at least until he leaves the man in the pub alone, and Jilly's pretty friend Lucy comes a-calling...

Moderately violent, with some cheap titillation from Collins (the actress appearing in her underwear), Revenge is a passable piece of British sensationalism/exploitation, but I couldn't help but feel that director Sidney Hayers could have pushed the boat out further with the overall grittiness.

"Revenge" (also called "Inn of the Frightened People") is a rather limp thriller. It had the makings of a very good film but muddled writing and irrational characters made this one tough going.

The story begins with a young lady being raped and murdered. Despite the family being pretty certain who it was, the police release the man for a lack of enough evidence. So, a group of friends decide to take the law into their own hands....though these are bumblers who really don't have a plan...especially when it comes to what to do with the guy after they kidnap him. Once he was taken into the basement of a local inn, one of the kidnappers beats the snot out of the guy...but doesn't quite kill him. In fact, here's a problem...no one has the stomach to finish the job....so they leave him locked up down there and hope he just dies on his own. They did NOT tie him up nor gag him....because, after all, they are all idiots.

A few days pass...and during that time the kidnappers all are emotional wrecks. Now this leads to a completely inexplicable portion...the wife of the man who beat the alleged killer/sex offender is raped by one of the gang....and she apparently likes it. And, they do it in front of the injured man in the basement. Why? I have no idea...and that brings me to the biggest problem with the film. They never seemed to have a clear idea where it was all headed...both the cast AND the screenwriter. The ending was very good....but it came way too late and seeing the captors being this stupid and disorganized just didn't make a lot of sense. A miss...and a film that should have been a lot better.