La Maison de l'horreur

The similarities between William Castle's campy 1959 original and this typical Hollywood remake are kept to a minimum. We have the premise of 5 people who're offered a million $ if they survive spending a night in 'the house' and Rush who brings tribute to Vincent Price (who played the lead role in the original). Other than this, Malone just follows the routine remake-standards meaning bigger, louder and more spectacular. If you're not too harsh, this actually is a pretty enjoyable movie and – at times – a successful mixture between an old-fashioned 'haunted house' chiller and a modern special effects playground. Thanks to some sort of miracle, Malone managed to cast class actor Geoffrey Rush and a more than decent supportive cast. Rush is talented enough to make his performance of eccentric impresario Steven Price look like a homage to Vincent Price instead of doing a lame impersonation. To me, however, the absolute star of this film is Jeffrey Combs (Re-Animator) who plays the small role of the demented Dr. Vannacutt. As usual, Combs' character is the cause of all horror and his grimaces are more diabolical then ever. He's an amazing horror icon and I simply can't get why he isn't enjoying an immortal success-status. Until about 5 minutes before the ending, the use of CGI is imaginative and not irritating at all. The finale is overly fake and kinda ruins the film. If you're not too demanding, The House on Haunted Hill guarantees a lot of fun and a few scares. Definitely a better remake than Jan De Bont's The Haunting and Steve Beck's 13 Ghosts.

i really dig castle, and of corse, vincent price. you just can't go wrong with vincent price for sheer menace... and camp!

the remake has changed a few things. it's set in an insaine assylum instead of a house. (i am sure this is to utilize f/x and freak-scares as much as possible.) the opening credits had this we-really-want-to-be-a-Seven-kind-of-movie feel to it, but when you get in to the actual film about 5 minutes the freaky feeling is gone and it's just another new-hollywood horror film.

there is an association between the guests and the house to tighten the story up more, and the f/x are really groovey.

don't get me wrong, i LIKED the film. it just didn't keep up on the creepyness it promised to have in the opening credits and only hinted at throughout the film. if you want to see a good scary film-see this,if you want to get the creeps-see the original in w/s in a dark room...

I've never seen William Castle's original from 1958,but in my opinion 1999 version isn't completely bad.Director William Malone creates some atmosphere and suspense during the first hour,but everything is almost completely ruined by awful ending.There's some good gore,striking visuals and atmospheric sets,but the conclusion is absolutely lame(the CGI effects look really fake!).If you like horror movies give this one a look,just don't expect something impressive.

... in that pieces of the plot are borrowed, but there is quite a bit of original material added including background information , and I'd say this version is much scarier than the 1959 William Castle film. The only thing the original had that this one lacks is the irreplaceable Vincent Price, and this 1999 version does a bit of homage to him by naming the wealthy man Stephen Price who hosts a birthday party for his wife in a supposedly haunted house.

As in the original ,the Prices are hostile to each other, but Mrs. Price is staying because she gets no money in a divorce but gets it all if Mr. Price dies. Also, as in the original, there are five guests who get - in this case - one million dollars each if they stay the entire night. Anybody who leaves forfeits their money to the others. What's different? Well the road the plot takes from there is different, and the beginning of the film details the origins of the haunted house. It was originally the Vannacutt Psychiatric Institute for the Criminally Insane run by the sadistic Dr. Vannacutt. In 1931 the inmates manage to free themselves from their cells and start a fire that kills all of the patients and all but five of the staff. The house has meant death or tragedy to anybody who lived in it since.

So the five guests who arrive are not who Price invited. His wife doesn't know them either. And after everybody is inside it turns out that turning chicken and wanting to leave would be futile because the house shuts itself down, sealing every window and door. It was a feature when the place was an insane asylum in case of escape.

So at this point wouldn't it be wise just to sit in the civilized renovated upstairs portion of the house, all in one little group, and wait out the night? But no. This group goes down the fateful but familiar path of "Some malevolent force is out to get us so let's split up and explore the basement", which is the original insane asylum part of the house. Downstairs interesting frights and discoveries about exactly who the guests are await them, and I'll just let you watch and find out what happens. It does rely quite a bit more on suspense and less on gore than most modern horror films. I'll just say this thing scared me to death when I saw it in the theater years ago, and the William Castle/Vincent Price version was eerie and psychologically interesting, but I have never found it all that frightening.

Okay sure this movie is a remake and obviously not as good as the original. but its actually a really well done movie, definately deserves a better rating than 5.6. i really enjoyed it!