NOTE IMDb
5,4/10
1,5 k
MA NOTE
Ajouter une intrigue dans votre langueA paranoid writer is unable to get started on his second novel. He hires a secretary and then his troubles really begin.A paranoid writer is unable to get started on his second novel. He hires a secretary and then his troubles really begin.A paranoid writer is unable to get started on his second novel. He hires a secretary and then his troubles really begin.
- Réalisation
- Scénario
- Casting principal
Avis à la une
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Writer Paul Martin has scored a massive hit with his first novel and has retreated to a remote cottage in the heart of the English countryside to concentrate on his follow up.He's accompanied by his new secretary Linda Hinstatt,a housekeeper Mrs Aston and occasionally his lover Suzanne.However there is something strange about Linda and soon the bodies begin to pile up."Exposé" along with "Xtro" was classified as a video nasty in the UK.Admittedly it has a few sex/nudity scenes and a little bit of bloody violence,but there is not enough exploitative elements for my liking.Udo Kier is decent as a highly unlikeable writer and Linda Hayden is excellent as his secretary.She openly masturbates few times and has a great lesbian encounter with Fiona Richmond.The violence is quite tame except for the bathroom murder scene which is pretty nasty.The direction is lifeless,the characters are unpleasant and the film is slightly dull.Still I enjoyed it and you should too,if you like exploitation cinema.7 out of 10.
Sleazy and sordid little British melodrama does have a following, and it's easy to see why. It's an erotically charged film with enough atmosphere, mood...not to mention lots of nudity and sex...to make it pleasing to watch if the potential viewer likes their sleaze. It does feel padded, even at a mere 84 minutes, but it's still quite amusing and has some very memorable sequences.
Star Udo Kier certainly gives it his all. Even when dubbed by another actor, as he is here, he's fun and interesting as always. He plays Paul Martin, a hotshot yet unstable author who lives in seclusion and who's having trouble getting through his latest work. So what he does is hire a typist, Linda (delectable Linda Hayden of "Blood on Satan's Claw" fame), to assist him. But the seductive young woman only makes things worse, even coming on to Pauls' posh lady friend Suzanne (softcore icon Fiona Richmond) as part of the deal.
Any fan of this film would be advised to purchase the Blu-ray & DVD combo pack from the Severin company as it shows the film in its entirety, including scenes of Hayden pleasuring herself, both in bed and in a field. Hayden and Richmond show off the goods to great effect, and Hayden delivers a pretty good performance in the bargain. In one scene, Pauls' discovery of Lindas' private possessions is intercut with scenes of her being raped by two local creeps, one of them played by the legendary stuntman Vic Armstrong. Things are further spiced up with some bloody mayhem. It's not hard to see why this would have been labelled a "Video Nasty".
There's not a whole lot of story here, in the screenplay written by director James Kenelm Clarke, but it does have a decent revelation in the end as to Lindas' motivation.
Very sexy stuff, overall.
Eight out of 10.
Star Udo Kier certainly gives it his all. Even when dubbed by another actor, as he is here, he's fun and interesting as always. He plays Paul Martin, a hotshot yet unstable author who lives in seclusion and who's having trouble getting through his latest work. So what he does is hire a typist, Linda (delectable Linda Hayden of "Blood on Satan's Claw" fame), to assist him. But the seductive young woman only makes things worse, even coming on to Pauls' posh lady friend Suzanne (softcore icon Fiona Richmond) as part of the deal.
Any fan of this film would be advised to purchase the Blu-ray & DVD combo pack from the Severin company as it shows the film in its entirety, including scenes of Hayden pleasuring herself, both in bed and in a field. Hayden and Richmond show off the goods to great effect, and Hayden delivers a pretty good performance in the bargain. In one scene, Pauls' discovery of Lindas' private possessions is intercut with scenes of her being raped by two local creeps, one of them played by the legendary stuntman Vic Armstrong. Things are further spiced up with some bloody mayhem. It's not hard to see why this would have been labelled a "Video Nasty".
There's not a whole lot of story here, in the screenplay written by director James Kenelm Clarke, but it does have a decent revelation in the end as to Lindas' motivation.
Very sexy stuff, overall.
Eight out of 10.
Le saviez-vous
- AnecdotesThis was the only British made film to appear on the original DPP 72 list of video nasties and even made the final 39.
- GaffesWhen Martin picks Linda up from the station, the place where he parks the car is different to where it is when viewed from the pedestrian bridge.
- Versions alternativesThe film was slightly cut when first released back in 1975. The recent reissue had almost 1 minute removed. Australian release was uncut
- ConnexionsFeatured in Video Nasties: Moral Panic, Censorship & Videotape (2010)
Meilleurs choix
Connectez-vous pour évaluer et suivre la liste de favoris afin de recevoir des recommandations personnalisées
Détails
- Date de sortie
- Pays d’origine
- Langue
- Aussi connu sous le nom de
- Exposé
- Lieux de tournage
- The Street, Hatfield Peverel, Essex, Angleterre, Royaume-Uni(Exterior of paper shop)
- Société de production
- Voir plus de crédits d'entreprise sur IMDbPro
- Durée1 heure 24 minutes
- Mixage
- Rapport de forme
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuer à cette page
Suggérer une modification ou ajouter du contenu manquant