उपयोगकर्ता समीक्षाएं

"Visiting Hours" has Lee Grant as an outspoken and controversial feminist journalist who becomes the prime target of women-hating serial killer Colt Hawker (Michael Ironside). After being viciously attacked by Hawker in her home, she is taken to the hospital where she learns she will have to undergo surgery for her wounds. Unfortunately, that's the least of her worries, because Hawker hasn't let her go as prey, and she can't leave the hospital.

Underrated as a thriller and overblown as a "slasher," "Visiting Hours" is one of the stronger and lesser-seen killer thrillers of the 1980s, but there is plenty in it to be admired. Although it's often classified as a slasher film, it's really more of a psychothriller under the guise of a slasher, laboriously meditating on the killer's disturbed, misogynistic psyche, and taking more stock in sequence buildups and moments of true suspense than actual splatter. The real kicker in this film is the setup in which Grant's character finds herself quite frankly trapped in the hospital; not only is she injured, but the hospital staff cannot legally let her leave, rendering her (and the rest of the hospital) a sitting duck for the malicious Hawker.

For being filmed in 1981, the film has a surprisingly fresh and considerably modern look to it. Whereas many horror films of this era suffer from poor aging, this is one of a rare few that seems to have retained a contemporary edge. Slick cinematography and impressive acting from Lee Grant and Michael Ironside help maintain an unusually classy standard. Linda Purl is great as the likable nurse who falls prey to the madman, and William Shatner's presence is welcome as Grant's stubborn boss. Thrown into the mix is a confused albeit interesting social commentary angle on non-violence, and Grant's moxie-filled character punctuates the film's time period and the social landscape of second wave feminism.

Overall, "Visiting Hours" is one of the classier horror films of the early '80s, and has a much more mature feel to it. With the contemporary edge it possesses, it's still surprisingly accessible to a modern audience, and the performances and elaborate sequence buildups really make it stand out among its peers. It is at times admittedly plodding at some points, but it's a small misgiving in an otherwise above-average thriller. 7/10.

Visiting Hours is the film I saw, more than once in movie theater. Having opportunity to get it on DVD I didn't know what to expect. Very few films from my childhood "at the movies" stood the test of time, but the ones that made an impact then, are forever implanted in my film taste. Same thing happened with this film. It is untypical - typical horror film, that looks like traditional 80's slashers but different in all the key points. I never looked at any of Michael Ironside's roles without seeing the deranged psychopath he portrayed in this one.

It's qualities for me, are shortcomings for the majority of horror picture fans. It doesn't have new body spraying buckets of blood every two and a half seconds. It doesn't have freaks with masks and buzzin' chain saws, severed heads and body parts flying around. It has a story of deeply disturbed character, and his rampage through the world around him that he hates deeply and profoundly. Not just the women. He hates them all, and with passion. It has character actors, not bunch of nobodies that are only there to supply bodies for the count. They are not in their best dramatic roles, and the movie could have been better, but it's not half bad either, and it surely doesn't deserve such low rating.

This movie has something in it that's still there all these years. It aged well and you can't say that for many of them. It's different in it's usualness and that is the catch. Look for it, even if you don't like horrors. It won't give you nightmares, it will make an impression.

This is yet another slasher that despite the negative reviews from rotten tomatoes more than doubled it's money at the box office. The story was good. the acting was decent. The kills were good and the killer was OK. Just another fun popcorn movie for a one time watch was good enough for me.

There's nothing spectacular about this Canadian-made slasher flick, but it still provides a few jolts, a bit of the creeps and a few unintentional laughs. Grant plays a strong-willed TV host who's crusading for the rights of a woman accused of murdering her husband (following years of abuse from him.) Unfortunately, this ticks off loose cannon Ironside and he decides to shut Grant up...permanently. His first try doesn't quite do the trick, so he has to infiltrate her hospital to finish her off, hence the title. Purl plays a Florence Nightingale in waiting who's devotion to Grant makes her another target of Ironside. Shatner has a thankless role as Grant's producer/lover. Grant turns in her usual committed, thought-out performance, but it's for naught in a routine thriller like this. Ironside is convincingly slimy and treacherous. His almost wordless performance is effectively creepy. Purl is likable and solid in an impossibly idealized role (the lady works overtime at the hospital and volunteers at the free clinic while trying to raise two kids all with a smile on her face!) Shatner fans will be pleased to see him looking rather handsome and tan, but he doesn't get to do very much. The film has a very unsettling tone throughout, aided by an eerie score and claustrophobic settings. It also features many cliches of the genre (absence of logic in the characters, unrealistically deserted settings, sluts being punished for their sexuality, etc...) Still, it's creative enough and occasionally unpredictable enough to hold interest. Some of the acting in minor roles (notably the nurses) is weak, but Zann does a pretty decent job as a slutty date of Ironside's and the leads hold the film together (as much as they can with the somewhat contrived script.) Grant's conviction to her role and Ironside's steely determination go a long way to saving the movie.

I started watching this film with somewhat low expectations. I mean the video box cover looked like some typical slasher film from the 80's with its cover containing a skull embedded over a weird looking hospital. After five minutes my expectations rose, because this film is a rollercoaster ride for all one hour and forty-five minutes. It is not-stop action as we, the audience, watch both victim(Lee Grant) and murderer(Michael Ironside) cope with being prey and predator respectively. The film has some loose holes in plot and believability, but the action and pace of the film more than amply make up for its shortcomings. Lee Grant does a fine job as a somewhat older female lead, but it is Ironside's performance which is truly impressive. He is one dark, mean, cruel killer. Apparently as a child he saw his father disabled by his mother, and then grew up with this hatred of strong females(of which Grant is one as a media celebrity). His flashback sequences are abstract and never fully explained, but Ironside really conveys the hate, fear, and emotional void with a thorough performance. Most of his role is done with little speech. Linda Purl(lovely as ever) gives a nice performance too. Oh!...William Shatner has a role in this too. His part is pretty useless, as is his performance. Credit must also be given to director Jean-Luc Lord and his wonderful ability to pace and use hackneyed plot contrivances and horror cliches with an amazing freshness. A scary, disturbing film!

What starts as a decent slashers, quickly turns in to a boring snail of a movie with moments of interest sprinkled throughout. It should also be noted that it's a type of slasher where we see who is the killer at the very beginning of the movie and follow him along other main characters, while we learn about his troubled past, and that for me eliminates a lot of the suspense and scares. Speaking of scares (if you can even call them that), they mostly come from jumpscares. There is some decent acting, but there's also a laughable death scene and overall length of the movie. It's so unnecessarily long that I just wanted it to end. And then the interesting part comes. And then it's boring again. It does have what is probably one of the cutest nurse portrayals in a movie ever though. In the end, it's just a mediocre psychological thriller (so much for looking up to "Halloween 2") you will probably forget about very soon after you watch it. I give it 6/10, and do note it's barely a 6, because I would have given it 5, if it weren't for some interesting parts. Horror movie fans, do what you must, and the rest of you; avoid it.

"Visiting Hours" is a movie I have wanted to see for years, due to... well... its cool poster. I admit it. I was a kid when it came out on video, and I thought the picture of the hospital at night with the image of a skull appearing in the matrix of the lighted rooms was just the coolest thing I'd ever seen.

When I finally got around to renting it this past weekend, I was quite disappointed.

The basic plot is that an outspoken tv host (Lee Grant) criticizes a guest on her show because he defended a known criminal in court. Soon, Grant is attacked by a psycho in her own home, played by Michael Ironside, perhaps best known as Daryl Revoc in "Scanners". Grant manages to defend herself so that she is not killed, yet injured, so she is sent to the hospital to recover. Ironside follows. Along the way, we meet a young nurse whom decides to "watch over" Grant's character. Okay. That all seems typical for a slasher, but so much is missing.

Grant simply goes through the motions in her role. At the end of the movie, I felt neither sympathy or compassion for her character, and frankly, didn't care what happened to her. I did enjoy the performance given by Linda Purl as Shiela Monroe, the caring, young nurse who puts her life on the line for her patient. However, just when it seems that Purl will be the heroine, she is taken out of commission! HUH? WHA?!?!

Ironside is good as the psycho, but has very few lines of dialogue. We do get to see some flashbacks, to attempt to explain/justify his violent behavior. This is an interesting change from most slasher films that either don't explain a killer's motives, or do it by exchanging dialogue between other characters.

William Shatner has a small role as the producer of the tv show that Grant works on. His acting is not the expected "Captain Kirk" style, but more subdued, and is a nice surprise.

The gore effects are scant, limited to very brief glimpses of slicings and stabbings. There is a nice effect when the killer smashes his arm down on some glass shards, but that's it.

I am a fan of horror, and some of my favs are Creepshow, Alien, and the Friday the 13th series, but all things considered, "Visiting Hours" just didn't gel for me.

This definitely should be on the video nasties list "NOT". Visiting hours is a well made non-exploitative and non-graphic slasher that is actually more of a thriller than a slasher flick. A lot of the times the censors banned films like Day of the Woman (I Spit on Your Grave) and The Witch Who Came From the Sea because of graphic content while totally ignoring the artistic value and symbolism behind the brutality and just labeling them as cheap exploitation but with Visiting Hours its the exact opposite.

The story is pretty much what it seems like and there isn't much going on in the background. Its just a guy with a knife chasing a woman but there's practically no gore and not even boobs so I dunno what they were thinking. By these standards every hammer Dracula film should be a video-nasty.

Anyway as a film Visiting hours is a forgettable 80s slasher but its one of the better ones and keeps your interest till the end of the film.

I will Admit that visiting hours keeps some solid elements that makes for some suspense. But the film lacks formula and try's to make its own type of "slasher" that fails to attempt its own success. Micheal Ironside performance was good..... but nobody else really stood out.

"Visiting Hours" is a forgotten slasher film which stars Michael Ironside as a murderer stalking TV journalist Lee Grant.The film is pretty slow,but there is enough violence to satisfy fans of horror cinema.Ironside is pretty believable as a misogynistic serial killer,the rest of the cast is also impressive.The film is pretty scary and suspenseful,so fans of slasher movies won't be disappointed.It was made the same year as similar "Halloween 2".Overall,I enjoyed this one and you should too,especially if you like slasher movies.My rating:8 out of 10.

Unsuccessful in killing an outspoken television reporter, a cleaner continues to stalk his victim in hospital in this thriller from Canada. The film begins well, full of voyeuristic hand-held camera-work that places us in his shoes, eerily sharp sounding record and moody music. The attack at lead actress Lee Grant's house is effectively drawn out too as we experience her terror for minutes on end. Subsequent scenes also come with bite as he pretends to be a hospital orderly and even a surgeon, yet the film derails in its final hour as focus awkwardly shifts away from Grant's overwhelming fear and paranoia. Michael Ironside as her stalker ultimately gets more screen time. He is sinister enough, but it is not a juicy enough character to sustain the film alone. Linda Purl as Grant's nurse gets more screen time than her too. Again, this seems great since she is fantastic and has quite a complex character in between raising two kids while in a lesbian relationship. The fact that Ironside suddenly takes to stalking her rather than Grant never makes sense though; same goes for all the others he kills since he actually has a reason for wanting Grant! That said, everything culminates in a fantastic silent, protracted face-off between Grant and Ironside and the film remains atmospheric even when the plot derails. This is, however, a film for which the promotional poster is arguably better than the movie itself.

I remember seeing this playing at a number of cheapy schlock houses in the early '80s and thinking the premise had to be a bore. After finally getting around to streaming this 30 years later, I find I'm right, and that makes me sad.

Michael Ironside lends the only bit of variety to this otherwise by-the-body-count slasher. It's not completely abysmal since there are scenes early on in the picture that evoke genuine suspense. The problem is that none of the characters except the villain come off as plausible or interesting.

I usually like Lee Grant but I found her performance here to be so wooden, strident, and annoying that I was actually hoping for Ironside to finish her off in the end. And as interesting as Ironside's character is he is given little to work with in terms of back story and NOTHING in terms of dialog (are all psychos mute or illiterate....apparently).

Linda Purl is out of her league on film (as usual) and Bill Shatner is just there, as pretty much usual --- this is way before they were allowing him to have a personality....too bad. Visiting Hours could use a big dose of just that.

To cap the misery off, this film runs about 30 minutes longer than it should. Yes, it is similar in that regard to Halloween II, which I also believe is a massive misfire and no way in the same category as its precursor. It's a template for a badly-made Canadian cheapy...doesn't even merit as a time-waster, in my book.

Michael Ironside certainly wasn't the type of guy you wanted to add to your list of enemies back in the early 80's! He spontaneously caused people's heads to explode in "Scanners" and he's an even bigger monster here in "Visiting Hours", as he gives image to a reticent yet malevolent & misogynistic killer who can't accept that one of his target victims survives in the hospital. The victim we're referring to is Deborah Ballin; TV-show hostess and strong activist for women's rights everywhere. Following another one of her much talked-about shows, Colt Hawker perpetrates the house and assaults her, but he doesn't finish the job properly. Then, despite of the huge police and media attention given to the case, he goes to the hospital and kills everyone who stands between him and Deborah, including nurses and unfortunate patients. "Visiting Hours" is a peculiar 80's slasher that doesn't get much appreciation from either critics or regular horror fans. Personally, I have no idea why because this movie is extremely creepy and director Jean-Claude Lord professionally spreads the suspense throughout the entire film even though we instantly know about the maniac's identity and what his motivations are. The screenplay spends quite a lot of time enlightening us about Hawker's private life and childhood traumas through brief flashback-sequences, making "Visiting Hours" some sort of crossover between John Carpenter's "Halloween" (with a knife-wielding maniac butchering innocent people) and no less than Martin Scorsese's "Taxi Driver" (with the complex sociopath background of the culprit). This combination isn't always successful or 100% plausible, but at least it provides a more or less original slasher setting since these flicks usually just involve high school teenagers or summer campers. J.C. Lord creates tension through eerie POV-shots and bone-chilling music (courtesy of Jonathon Goldsmith) and the murders are pleasingly bloody, albeit a bit mundane. "Visiting Hours" is probably one of the ONLY 80's slashers that is occasionally able to really scare you, so I'm more than willing to look past most of the flaws. And yes, there undeniably are some obvious flaws. Like some other reviewers righteously pointed out already, there's a problem with both the editing and continuity. The killer – as well as the other characters – seems to move from one place to another very fast. One moment he's observing a nurse in her backyard and the next he's walking around the hospital fully disguised in a doctor's coat. Also, the cops guarding the hospital aren't very useful since Hawker hasn't got the least problem of walking in and out of there without having to show identification. Finally, I'm not entirely sure what Sheila's (Linda Purl) profession is. Is she just a nurse covering night shifts or a fully degreed doctor? If she's a nurse, then where are all the doctors? Most of the film takes place inside a hospital – duh – yet there seem to be only two nurses working there. Then again, the acting performances are another good aspect. Ironside is excellent and genuinely petrifying as the silent psychopath and the two female leads (Lee Grant & Linda Purl) are very convincing in their roles of hunted preys. Oh, Captain Kirk also stars, but his character is about as useful as non-alcoholic beverages at a graduation party. "Visiting Hours" is a good horror film, check it out!

Visiting Hours has a fairly typical slasher premise, with an insane killer stalking a woman confined to the hospital after one of his attacks. It features many of the same tropes, such as characters making incredibly stupid decisions and a Freudian explanation for the killer. It turns out above average, though, based largely on Michael Ironside's presence.

Although this is clearly a B-movie with mainly stock characters, Michael Ironside treats the material with the same seriousness as a big budget thriller like The Silence of the Lambs. He brings his character, a misogynistic murderer, a depth and menace most slasher villains did not achieve, particular in 1982, when most were Michael Myers clones.

The film also engages with serious themes of misogyny, framing the killer's violence in terms of his hatred of women. Although many slasher movies deal in this theme, Visiting Hours brings it to the surface, making Lee Grant's protagonist an ardent feminist and featuring several strong female characters. It also points out the ugliness of misogyny with a graphic rape scene, which most likely led to the film's banning as a Video Nasty in the UK.

The film does have some flaws typical of the slasher genre. William Shatner's character is dull, in part because of his lackluster performance. (Luckily, although he has top billing, he actually has a small part.) However, Ironside makes this a film well worth seeing.

A crazed, women-hating killer (Michael Ironside) attacks journalist Deborah Ballin (Lee Grant). When he discovers that his attack did not kill Deborah, he comes to the hospital to finish what he started.

Is this a good film? Is it a good slasher? Is it a good Canadian slasher? Many people would say no to these, but I think this is a good one just for existing. Of course, I am a pro-slasher horror fan, so it may not take much... but throw in Michael Ironside and William Shatner and how can you go wrong? Director Jean-Claude Lord may not be well known, especially in the world of horror. Not only is he not a horror director primarily, but he is from Quebec, so much of his work is in French! Honestly, I am not even sure if I ever saw anything else he did.

Senseless and totally ordinary slasher thriller that seems to "pay homage" to "Halloween II", which was made one year earlier. It has all the customary elements down pat: the hospital setting, the maniac on the loose, terrified victims-to-be, knives that get bloody....But it shows such shameless disregard for logic and motivation that it's really hard for a viewer to stay interested for the whole (overly long) duration of the film. Michael Ironside was physically a right choice for his role, but because he is given no personality and no special traits, he becomes one of the least interesting villains of slasher films that you'll ever see. (*1/2)

The basic premise of Visiting Hours is that an unsuccessful serial killer decides to finish off the job at the hospital where his victim is being treated. There is about enough plot there to make a good TV episode or short film, but somehow Jean-Claude Lord's film has been stretched to an hour and forty five minutes. As you might expect, this leaves the film overlong and more than a little tedious as the majority of it is merely filler. Furthermore, neither the psychopath nor any of his victims are elevated above the very basic level of characterisation needed for this sort of film, and since this plot was done to (slightly) better effect a year earlier with Halloween 2, there really isn't a lot of reason to bother with this hospital slasher. Of course, the film did feature on the DPP 'Video Nasty' list back in the eighties, so it will always have something of a fan base as well as a list of people wanting to see it; but even as a Video Nasty, it isn't all that good as the scenes of gore mostly feel rushed and in true Halloween style, the murders aren't exactly imaginative.

The hospital setting ensures that the film stands out as hospitals are traditionally 'safe' places where the sick get better; whereas here we've got someone bumping off the patients. The setting isn't very well used, however, as the rooms mostly look like offices and the director doesn't do a very good job of building up the location. The acting isn't very good either, as while Michael Ironside may have a look of Jack Nicholson - he certainly doesn't have his talent, as his performance isn't charismatic or even interesting, and he's a lot like Michael Myers without the mask. Linda Purl and Lee Grant both give typical performances as typical female victims (although the film features no nudity) and William Shatner also has a small role. Basically, the problem with this film is that it uses up all of its energy in the first sequence. The first scene has suspense and terror (best shown in the laundry shoot), but after that it just fizzles out into an overlong boring mess. I'm not the biggest fan of slashers anyway, but there's far better one around than this; the Video Nasty list itself even has some better ones.

17 year-old me watched this on video in 1984. A couple of times. I liked it then and promptly forgot about it for over 30 years. I must have been more easily entertained back then. It didn't age well. But in fairness, neither did I.

One of the better Canadian killer-thrillers of the 80's is this solid shocker.

TV journalist is attacked by a maniac and taken to the hospital, now the obsessive creep is determined to make sure she doesn't get well soon!

Visiting Hours is a film that, like most slasher films of the 80's, has gotten a bad reputation from critics. However this film is much more than mere slasher garbage! Visiting Hours is a thriller that takes its time to build true suspense, a well-paced plot, and some believable characters. It's a film that, unlike most of the genre, focuses upon the warped character of its villain rather than on the would-be victims. The murder sequences are effectively disturbing, but not overly gory.

The direction of Jean Claude Lord, along with an unsettling music score, combine to make an atmospheric sense of dread through out the film. It manages to make even the sprawling corridors of the hospital setting into a claustrophobic maze. It makes for some nicely suspenseful attack/chase scenes.

The biggest highlight of this film comes from its cast though. Lee Grant is strong as the feminist TV journalist that becomes the target to the killer. Linda Purl does a good turn as a caring nurse, as does Lenore Zann as a street-wise teen. Greatest of all though is villain Michael Ironside. Ironside makes for a truly creepy and compelling murderer. He truly steals the show.

For those that are seeking a slasher film with a bit more of an intelligence to it, Visiting Hours is a fine choice. Don't listen to the critics on this one folks - it's a better film than you may have heard.

*** out of ****

Deborah Ballin (Lee Grant] is recovering in the hospital after being brutally attacked at home. But the twisted killer has returned to finish the job and Deborah doesn't stand a chance.

Co-starring the likes of William Shatner, Linda Purl and perennial heavy Michael Ironside, 'Visiting Hours' is a way out-of-date slasher. The seriously hokey script is punctuated by sorts of zany problems (no security, stupid staff, etc.) and topped off by Shatner's usual hammy performance. 'Visiting Hours' is pretty insipid even for a slasher but good for plenty of unintentional laughs. It may have benefited by the 'who's the killer' story but they blow that one within the first five minutes.

VISITING HOURS is a largely laughed-at serial killer flick starring Michael Ironside. I suppose many of the laughs generate from William Shatner being in the film, playing a concerned boyfriend. I've never understood the fixation with Shatner as a comedy figure. Shatner is OK in his role, playing it completely straight and not completely terribly. It seems in getting fixated on the (in my view, non-existent) laughs from Shatner, viewers seem to have a blind spot to a lot of good things that VISITING HOURS achieves.

Ironside is strong as the killer (Colt Hawker), whose desire to kill comes from a terrible childhood and an abusive father. He identifies with his father, and loathes women because his mother threw boiling water over his Pa's face. Seems a bit of a stretch, but it wouldn't be the first time sometimes chosen the abuser over the person they abuse.

Colt becomes a misogynist, and turns his attention onto Deborah Ballin, who speaks out against violence towards women. She's a little militant about it and annoys a few people, so it's hard for the cops to figure out that Colt is the one hunting her down.

Some of the kill scenes are genuinely affecting. Colt likes to takes pictures of his victims as they're dying, and one - where he pulls a breathing tube from an elderly lady - is harrowing. Don't forget that Ironside was great in STARSHIP TROPPERS and brilliant in TOTAL RECALL as the supremely slimy Richter, and he excels in a similar role here. It's pretty baffling why Ironside ended up in TV series/movie hell given his excellence in playing the bad guy. Just the luck of the draw.

But the main plus of VISITING HOURS is that it's incredibly well shot. It's wildly voyeuristic, with lots of uncomfortable close-ups and point-of-view shots... and lots of lingering on people's suffering. The director - Jean-Claude Lord - has made nothing else of note. Even his name rhymes in a comedic way. Lord started out in France, then ended up doing US TV movies. But VISITING HOURS has a slight Hitchcock vibe and the level of voyeurism that makes you feel a little grubby just watching the damn movie.

I'm not saying VISITING HOURS is a classic. It's not up there with HENRY, and it's not up there with the next rung of excellent serial killer movies... say something like ANGST or HIGHWAYMEN. The pacing is a little laboured, and there are passages of ropey dialogue. But VISITING HOURS is a very good movie. It certainly is stupidly underrated, and is definitely worth checking out for a well-directed slice of slimy horror.