Comic Statues & Busts: Bowen Angel from Bowen Designs

11 1/4" x 8 3/4" x 3/4" - 161 oages

In need of money for a down payment on an apartment, college student Samantha Hughes (Jocelin Donahue) takes a babysitting job for an odd couple living out in the middle of nowhere. The situation becomes even more bizarre when the man (Played by veteran actor Tom Noonan) informs Samantha that they don't actually have a child, but rather the job entails her looking after his elderly mother. Not wanting to turn down the large sum of money offered to her, Samantha decides to take the job which turns out to be the biggest mistake of her life.

Being a huge fan of 80's horror films, 'The House of the Devil' really blew me away with it's retro 80's look. Everything about the film screams 80's cinema, whether it's the cinematography, music, fashion, etc.. There have been quite a few films in recent years that have attempted to duplicate the 80's era vibe, but Ti West's effort here is clearly the best that I've seen.

Without giving a whole lot away, I will say that the title of the film pretty much says it all. The film has a slow build up, leading to it's grand finale, which may aggravate those looking for a faster pace movie. I've seen quite a few people on the internet label the film as "boring" and "pointless". It did seem like there were a couple of "filler" sequences in the middle of the film, thrown in just to push it to a 95 minute run time. Overall the slower pace of the movie didn't bother me at all though as the characters are all well acted out and the locations bring forth a rather creepy atmosphere which will keep you glued to your seat...with a conclusion that is more than satisfying.

'The House of the Devil' relies more on tension and psychological horror than it does blood and gore...not to say that the film doesn't have it's fair share of that as well. I think fans of classic Satanic themed horror films such as 'The Omen' or 'Rosemary's Baby' will really enjoy what Ti West has created here. Younger, A.D.D. stricken fans of newer films such as 'Saw' or 'Hostel' may find it a bit boring. I, myself absolutely loved the film though and in my opinion 'The House of the Devil' is a definite "must own" for any true horror fan.


4.5 out of 5 stars

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED

Well okay, i'm gonna start off with, alot of people complain about it being slow, and i just wanna say that it is but it's done on purpose. The director does it on purpose so you build a bond or start caring for the main character. The movie has alot to like, it is a throw back to the 70's and early 80's period. I has very much so a haunted house feel to the movie. I would say more about the movie but i really don't wanna give anything away so you can enjoy it to the fullest. I just want to remind you that it is slow, but just watch it and get into the mood of the movie.

This is a nifty little horror flick. Shows what can be done with a little budget and a lot of smarts. The story revolves around a young female college student who gets hired to babysit only to find out she's a target/victim in a Satanic cult ritual.

There are only a couple of sets in the movie and while the cinematography is good the viewer can see they needed a few more dollars there. What does work in that regard is that the camera always seems to be in the right place. I didn't feel as though I were looking at a student or amateur film. Just very good sense in direction. The soundtrack was good and the editing was good for the most part. My guess is they spent much of the budget on the two main cast members, Tom Noonan and Mary Woronov. It was money well spent. They aren't in the movie a lot but they make an impression when they are. The lead actress, Jocelin Donahue, I've only seen in one previous movie, The Burrowers, but I honestly don't remember her because I didn't much care for the movie itself. She does a nice job here. She really gives off a cute, innocent vibe.

The movie is a bit on the slow side. The early scenes have a few too many filler shots for my taste. Long shots of Jocelin walking down various hallways or waiting on steps for an appointment that doesn't happen. It does help build up to the later climactic scenes. It's just a bit slow is all. When things key up to the climax they get pretty good. And the clues leading up to that point are nice as well.That being said, this is an exercise in good sense film making. I got the impression that there wasn't a lot of pork in the budget. A lot of directors try to make their mark with horror films and there are more misses than hits. This one is a definite hit.

I understand that some people like this movie, and I understand why. If you listen to these people, you'll hear comments about suspense, and slow burns, and atmosphere. "This is what you get when story takes a back seat to style," says one of the higher rated reviews on this site. It's a comment I completely agree with, although I don't think it has such a positive connotation.

That reviewer, and the other praisers of this piece, can only point to one element of the film that they enjoyed, and that is its glacial pace. To these people -- who often bemoan the short attention spans of horror audiences "these days" -- the only horror you really need in a film is the vacuum of suspense, the creepy feeling that something MIGHT happen. And this movie has that in spades. Tons of slow, trawling shots through a creaky and creepy house in the woods. Lots of slow pans as a babysitter walks slowly down hallways or clicks on bathroom lights. Dozens of poorly framed and unnecessary shots establishing that our lead is getting her backpack, or frustrated by her roommate's snoring, or a big fan of The Fixx.

Directors: if you're going to build tension, you must occasionally release it, or you threaten to warp that mood out of any usable shape. Pull a rubber band long enough, and it loses it's ability to bounce back. By the time this movie decides to release its tension (about fifteen minutes before the closing credits), it has already robbed itself of any spring or strength.

The story is a kick back to the 80's era Terrorized Babysitter tales, right down to its fuzzy cinematography and it's cheesy title card. This is done well, although it also feels like the producers' excuse for failing to do anything new or creative with its basic storyline. The opener of the film claims that the plot is based on "true unexplained events" having to do with Satanic cults, and if you know anything about Satanic cults, you could probably guess the entire story without much help. But don't worry! If you're cinematically challenged, the film gives you a few (horribly written and poorly acted and weakly contrived) televison news segments that conveniently hint at the movie's main motivation.

It's bad, folks. It's uninteresting, uncreative, and kind of an insult. As a move buff and a die-hard horror fanatic, it's frustrating and baffling that a movie would demand an hour and a half of patience, only to deliver fifteen minutes of weak cheese, stale dramatics, and laughable thrills. Too bad this house didn't actually have a devil in it. It would have been a whole lot scarier.

Rosemary's Baby meets the Sentinal and Burnt Offerings .... all movies I really liked. The slow burn works great in a good thriller, but in order for it to work, you need just a lil' bit more happening than happens here for a very long time. I loved the intent to make a throwback horror film, but I think this is just way too padded with ... nothing. No point at all in the opening where she finds a new apartment (but fun to see Dee Wallace(Stone))and lots of plodding scenes of sitting around. Always a hoot to see Woronov, though. This needed more of a kick-start to keep the tedium from setting in before the finale.