Crucible of Terror

This movie is a certifiable stinker. I rented it out of the "horror" section, but it's about as scary as the elm tree in my front yard. I found myself fast-forwarding through most of it, after watching about 20 minutes normally and wondering when something would happen. I like a good horror movie (although most of them aren't really scary), which this isn't. It should likely be reclassified as "drama."

Well this is NOT the worst film I've ever seen - If you want a down right bloody awful film try "Hillbillys in a Haunted House (1967)". Crucible of Terror (1971) is not good but it's not all that bad either. The big let down is the ending.

The supernatural element in the film is revealed about 20 minutes into the movie by Michael Clare (Lacey) to John Davies (Bolam) about Chi-San (Lay) and this throws a hint about the ending BUT the ending is terrible.

I have to agree with other reviewers that the actors are a bit "wooden" but they are not all that bad either. And as far as the story goes it is somewhat interesting - can hold some people's interest until the very end (even if the ending is a bit corny).

Not a bad watch late at night if there is nothing else on TV that you care to watch.

6/10

It's a massive understatement to state the family, at the heart of this story, is dysfunctional:

You have a son who steals his artist father's artwork to support his love for alcohol.

A mother who dresses like her namesake from the Wizard Of Oz and feeds her stuffed doggy at the dinner table.

The father, a talented artist obsessed with capturing true female beauty... oh yeah, and infatuated with having intercourse with his models, even his daughter-in-law.

And the artist's best friend, who remains at the home, forgiving his friend's indiscretions because he's in love with his wife.

These factors alone should make an interesting story. However, they weren't enough for Ted Hooker (writer and director) and Tom Parkinson. They then throw a pinch of the supernatural into the mix. This is my favourite ingredient in the story. It isn't until the finale you realise how integral this portion is.

Unfortunately, the rest of the story is a mite hap-hazard. Hooker and Parkinson should have used the characters to drive the story. I felt the characters and their peculiarities were underexploited. It's this that weakens the story and the film the most.

It's further weakened by the actors and actresses portrayals of the characters. The artistic father, Victor Clare (played by Mike Raven), isn't dark or crazy enough. They needed to craft the mother, Dorothy (Betty Alberge), more thoroughly. She looks like Dorothy from the Wizard Of Oz and I would have played on that more - giving her a more solid delusion. The son, Michael (Ronald Lacey) is superbly acted. Lacey does "buzzed" well and even comes across nice and slimy with his fathers current model, Marcia.

Because the remaining characters are more ordinary, the actors and actresses have an easier time making them believable and realistic. Which helps maintain the stability and flow of the story and film.

I just wish Hooker had pushed the cast in his more unusual personas a trifle more. He could also have worked longer on the direction. He demonstrates how isolated the family is with some decent long-shots. He even has a few iconic and well-composed images. And the cellar furnace room is dark, though subtly lit with reds and oranges from the working forge and molten brass.

However, there's a lack of atmosphere throughout. It's not creepy or eerie. You don't feel unease, even though there are scenes where you should. For a film in the horror genre, this is a big regret. Had they addressed this, with the other disappointments, the film would have gained strength. It could easily have been a classic as it possesses all the right ingredients.

Therefore, I can only recommend this film to fans of the genre; should they have nothing better to consider. I enjoyed it, but I won't be watching it again soon... if ever!

Ratings: Story 1 : Direction 1 : Pace 1.25 : Acting 1.25 : Enjoyment 1 : Total 5.5 / 10

Transport yourself over to my Absolute Horror list and see where I ranked this cut-rate masterpiece. You may very well find your next favourite flick on the list awaiting your viewing pleasure.

Take Care and Stay Well.

Just rewatched this for the first time in about 30 years and it is every bit as good and bad as I remembered. It has so much going for it - some real heavyweight acting talent; fantastic settings and atmosphere; Judy Matheson at her most luminous in a substantial role; and, best of all, a really off-kilter story. The pieces are all there. Of course it often belies its low budget and while there are some great actors on display others may not be quite so top-drawer. But none of that reduces the enjoyment of Crucible of Terror. Like several other British horrors it succeeds because of its shortcomings rather than in spite of them. If you're a fan of the genre you owe yourself a viewing.

Artist, Victor Clare (Mike Raven), is wowing the art world with his life-sized, bronze sculptures of female nudes. We are shown in the first few minutes just why his pieces are so lifelike!

Gallery owner, John Davies (James Bolam), decides to visit Victor's home / studio, in order to secure further sculptures. What he discovers is a bizarre family with many problems and many more secrets. Predictably, multiple deaths occur. Will anyone survive the weekend?

CRUCIBLE OF TERROR is a slow-building, one might even say plodding, horror film, filled with oddball characters, mystery, murder, and a touch of the supernatural. If the pace was quicker, it could have been much more enjoyable. As it is, it's sort of a bleak version of Roger Corman's A BUCKET OF BLOOD, minus the humor and beatnik sensibility. Not to be confused with CRUCIBLE OF HORROR...