Reviews & Ratings for
House of Horrors More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Index

16 reviews in total

---

14 out of 16 people found the following review useful:
Rondo!!, 11 October 2005
Author: VicCasey from United States

Rondo Hatton is my hero. Who cares if he wasn't a classically trained actor?! As The Creeper he tugs the heart-strings like a pro! He's got heart! He's got soul! He's got courage! He's also damned likable! Rondo is also one hell of a hero. Rondo took the crummy hand that fate dealt him and played it magnificently. He became one of the most endearing and cool anti-heroes of all B-moviedom! To experience Rondo as The Creeper is to experience pure magic! I watched horror movies as kid and always loved "the monster". A good "monster" gets my vote every damn time. The Creeper fits that bill perfectly and better than most. The Creeper is one of my all time favorite fright flick anti-heroes. GOD BLESS YOU RONDO HATTON!

---

17 out of 23 people found the following review useful:
Lunacy abounds,,,, 30 September 2005

Author: rixrex from United States

Lunacy abounds...mostly amongst the few comments about this b-picture gem, but to that later. In this horror film, the lunacy of artist Martin Koslek directing the killer tendencies of Rondo Hatton to dispatch unfavorable art critics is inspired. It's quite a contrast to watch Koslek be wonderfully melodramatic while Hatton remains as flat as a board, which is perfect for his character. All this is done within the context of the period, and with all the elements mixing in a way to create, perhaps serendipitously, a chilling and vastly entertaining blend.

To the dimwits who have not been able to see beyond the constraints of their modern attitudes and mores, you are missing it. Rondo Hatton did not "intensely dislike" his brief career as a film fright figure, he was indifferent to it, and the prevailing common attitude towards working women in 1940s America was that they eventually would become married, stay-at-home mothers. The film isn't 'anti-feminist' at a time when the term feminist wasn't used, and when both men and women, not all but most, felt this way of life was appropriate.

So to you dunces I say, march onward, great re-writers of history, and make sure you burn Birth of a Nation, and continue to press Disney to never release Song of the South. Perhaps we ought to ban the Three Stooges, as well, for their insensitive, boorish portrayal of the common working man, and of course, to add insult to injury, they were also Jewish.

---

5 out of 6 people found the following review useful:
A real-life monstrosity in a luridly bizarre B horror film., 12 July 2006

Author: Dewey1960 from United States

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

HOUSE OF HORRORS (1946) comes at the very tail end of Universal's classic horror film cycle, following on the heels of 1930s box office blockbusters like Dracula, FRANKENSTEIN, THE MUMMY, THE INVISIBLE MAN and THE BLACK CAT. By the 1940s, however, the studio's established monsters had been relegated to a succession of sequels with mixed and varying results. Ultimately, as budgets shrank and the big stars like Karloff and Lugosi drifted off to other studios, Universal began producing very low budget (although generally very entertaining) B horror melodramas such as CAPTIVE WILD WOMAN, THE MAD GHOUL, and, most notoriously, HOUSE OF HORRORS. For many, this film was particularly repellent because its star, Rondo Hatton, suffered from a horribly disfiguring and ultimately degenerative disease called acromegaly. He appeared in a small number of cheap-jack horror thrillers, HOUSE OF HORRORS definitely being the best of the lot. In it he (again) appears as The Creeper, a deformed, deranged killer thought to have drowned in the East River after a police manhunt. He is, however, rescued by a suicidal sculptor named Marcel De Lange (wonderfully played by Martin Kosleck) who spots him in the river just as De Lange is about to take his own life. He brings the monster back to his skid row studio where he not only nurses him back to life but develops a strange, impenetrable bond with him. This bond extends itself into killing off a number of art critics (as well as sexy streetwalkers and models) who have denounced De Lange as a fraudulent disgrace to the art world by first strangling them then snapping their spines. Ultimately The Creeper and De Lange are outwitted and brought down by a girl newspaper columnist (Virginia Grey) and her pin-up artist boyfriend (Robert Lowery). A dim-witted cop (Bill Goodwin) provides little help at all. Despite the rather dismal reputation this film has, it is nonetheless an effectively atmospheric and peculiarly disturbing story, perhaps most accurately described as horror noir. Put aside whatever reservations you may have about this bizarre oddity and check it out.

---

2 out of 2 people found the following review useful:
For a 1940's movie, it's filled with clichés! Not a bad thing., 7 March 2010

Author: insomniac_rod from Noctropolis

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I'm talking about the famous cliché of trying to open the door but the doorknob gets stuck and the female lead cannot escape from the villain. This time it happened when the great Rondo tried to capture her!

This isn't the generic monster-chasing the heroine. In fact, there's an interesting plot that deals with a mad sculptor gone evil because his work isn't "understood". So he is aided by the infamous Creeper who almost died in the previous film.

The acting is solid and the fact that most of the situations center around The Creeper, demonstrate it that exploitation towards "strange" looking people has happened since "Freaks". Now, in the 40's it was considered as something "entertaining", "freak circus entertaining". Today it would be considered as something against good behaviors or something like that.

Rondo delivers a fine performance and I truly enjoyed his evil lurking and walking. For example, the way we see his shadow slowly moving was creepy. The Direction is fine and classy.

The low point of the movie happens when the events get kind of dull and hard to believe. Some corny dialogs and situations make it less entertaining and affect the suspense factor.

Nevertheless, this is an interesting Universalesque feature that if not considered as a monster feature, it has all the characteristics to make us believe that Rondo was the main reason to watch this movie.

The ending was very good. I liked how the bullet cracked the window and reached Rondo. Well, you have to watch it to believe it.

---

3 out of 4 people found the following review useful:
Generally uninspired B horror movie has its moments, 2 May 2008

Author: mlraymond from Durham NC

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

The peculiar charisma of Martin Kosleck brings a certain believability to his character of the frustrated artist. He imbues his dialog with an odd sense of realism, making the sculptor Marcel a convincing individual. The character manages to come across as a real person and not so much a typical B movie villain.

The story line is nothing to write home about, and many scenes are dull. What makes it work is the strange chemistry between Kosleck and Rondo Hatton as the Creeper. Kosleck's talkative, philosophical character is contrasted with Hatton's low key, monosyllabic approach. The character of the Creeper isn't developed much beyond a basic monster level, but Hatton suggests undeveloped possibilities and makes you wonder about his back story.

This movie was on Shock Theater a lot when I was a kid, so I have a certain nostalgic fondness for it. It's worth seeing once, anyway, for those who enjoy Forties horror movies.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following review useful:
Martin Kosleck's finest hour in Hollywood, 17 April 2011

Author: kevin olzak (kevinolzak@yahoo.com) from Youngstown, Ohio

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

HOUSE OF HORRORS (1946) was a staple of Pittsburgh's CHILLER THEATER, hosted by Bill "Chilly Billy" Cardille, no doubt because of its inclusion in the popular SHOCK! package of vintage Universal titles first released to television in the late 50's (broadcast a total of 7 times from 1965 to 1978). It was on the same Saturday night double feature that I first saw Martin Kosleck in 1962's THE FLESH EATERS, his ability to play cold blooded Nazi villainy on full display, although the actor himself fled the Hitler regime for America by the late 1930's. He achieved a kind of lasting stardom only at Universal, from 1944 to 1946, with this film in particular standing out as his finest hour in Hollywood. The so-called house of horrors (shooting title MURDER MANSION) is the dimly lit studio of starving sculptor/artist Marcel De Lange, so poor that he must borrow bread and cheese from a neighbor. When a potential sale of $1000 (for a statue called "Circes from Troy") is dashed by smug, self satisfied critic F. Holmes Harmon (Alan Napier), Marcel decides to end his life at the waterfront, only to rescue a drowning man later identified as The Creeper (the immortal Rondo Hatton), a dull witted fiend notorious for snapping the spines of his victims (usually pretty girls). Unconcerned about his newfound model's true identity, Marcel begins what he fittingly describes as his "deathless masterpiece," certain that the long overdue acclaim denied him will finally come his way. The morning after the Creeper stalks out into the night and murders a streetwalker (Virginia Christine), Marcel hardly bats an eye, surreptitiously planting the seeds of vengeance in the killer's mind, against the critics who routinely mock him as the laughingstock of New York art circles, with even the insufferable, smarmy girl newshound (Virginia Grey) referring to Marcel as a "harmless little screwball." This fairly decent buildup pretty much falls to the wayside a third of the way in, as the film shifts its focus from the 'villains' to the 'heroes,' about as thoroughly nasty a bunch of detestables as any viewer is likely to find. We soon start rooting for the bad guys to kill off as many of them as possible, surely not the intention of the filmmakers! The credits 'introduce' Hatton as The Creeper (September 1945), but the character had made one prior appearance in the 1944 Sherlock Holmes feature THE PEARL OF DEATH, and would make a third in THE BRUTE MAN, Hatton's final film, a prequel to HOUSE OF HORRORS, completed in November 1945 (the actor died February 2 1946, before either saw release). His physical presence is certainly impressive, but his delivery of dialogue far less so, but it must be said that the cringe worthy lines scripted here must rank with some of the all time worst. Listening to the nominal leads discuss thumb twiddling may perhaps be the absolute nadir, but Kosleck's Marcel is fortunately spared the indignity. Director Jean Yarbrough, best remembered for 1940's THE DEVIL BAT, and helming all 52 episodes of the Abbott and Costello TV series, does what may be his finest genre work, especially in regards to Marcel's pet cat, ever faithfully following him from kitchen to studio in scene after scene (quite an achievement considering what was probably no more than the usual 12 day shooting schedule). The climactic tussle has the artist trying to stop the killer from destroying his likeness, framed before the staircase, from which the cat comes charging down the steps, nestling in the hand of its now dead master. Cat fanciers rejoice! Martin Kolseck fondly recalled his work on the picture (and his happy times at Universal), never once crossing the line that would lose the audience's sympathy, and the touching opening between man and pet sets the proper tone for the duration of the film. A nice tribute to an actor who made a career out of playing Goebbels on screen, as well as other menacing Nazis.

---

2 out of 3 people found the following review useful:
Second outing for Hatton as The Creeper, 23 February 2005

Author: rosscinema (rosscinema@comcast.net) from Oceanside, Ca.

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Universal Studios wasn't making that many horror films by the mid 1940's and that's due to the fact that audiences tastes were starting to change but they were always keeping their eye open on the next popular character and they thought they could make some money from "The Creeper" but it just wasn't meant to be. Story starts with the starving sculptor Marcel De Lange (Martin Kosleck) who after receiving nothing but scathing attacks by art critics decides to attempt suicide but while at the river he finds a disfigured man near death and takes him back to his studio.

*****SPOILER ALERT***** Marcel nurses and befriends this brutish man (Rondo Hatton) in exchange that he sits for a sculpture to be made of his head but it doesn't take long for Marcel to discover that his model is actually "The Creeper" who's hobby is snapping the spines of women. Marcel also convinces him to kill the critics who have been so vicious in their critique and tells him that they are the reason that they have no money for food. Lt. Larry Brooks (Bill Goodwin) at first thinks the murders might have been committed by painter Steven Morrow (Robert Lowery) but his girlfriend (and another art critic) Joan Medford (Virginia Grey) knows this isn't true but her snooping leads to Marcel and the realization that he's harboring a murderer.

This film is directed by Jean Yarbrough who was a good and active director and while this won't exactly go down in the books as a huge success he did make a film that has become a cult favorite. There are many things to point out that don't make much sense but two stand out for me and the first would be the inappropriate title. Most of the film takes place in the studio and while I think this also serves as Marcel's living quarters it's definitely not a house. Marcel and The Creeper sit around hungry nibbling on old bread and potatoes and I thought...why doesn't The Creeper take the money from his victims? Is that beneath him in terms of morals? Marcel couldn't even feed his cat! Grey plays her character as forever chipper and annoyingly wisecracking but while she gloats about her job by the end of the film she's ready to give it up and get married. The film ends with The Creeper getting shot but his death is not announced and Goodwin shouts "Let's get this man to a hospital". It's obvious that Yarbrough and others at Universal wanted to keep this character available for sequels but only one was made (The Brute Man) because Hatton who suffered from the disease Acromegaly died shortly afterward. Hatton disliked intensely being exploited by the studios in this manner but he was a remarkable presence on film and in his own way made an indelible mark in cinema.

---

3 out of 5 people found the following review useful:
HOUSE OF HORRORS (Jean Yarborough, 1946) **, 23 January 2010

Author: MARIO GAUCI (marrod@melita.com) from Naxxar, Malta

This low-grade Universal chiller has just been announced as an upcoming DVD release but, intended as part of a collection of similar movies that I already had in my possession, I decided to acquire it from other channels rather than wait for that legitimate release. Which is just as well, since the end result was not anything particularly special (if decently atmospheric at that): for starters, the plot is pretty weak – even though in a way it anticipates the Vincent Price vehicle THEATRE OF BLOOD (1973)…albeit without any of that film's campy gusto. What we have here, in fact, is a penniless sculptor (Martin Kosleck) – whom we even see sharing his measly plate of cheese with his pet cat! – who, upon finding himself on the receiving end of art critic Alan Napier's vitriolic pen one time too many, decides to end it all by hurling himself into the nearby river. However, while contemplating just that action, he is anticipated by Rondo Hatton's escaped killer dubbed "The Creeper" and, naturally enough, saves the poor guy's life with the intention of having the latter do all the dirty work for him in gratitude! Although it is supposedly set in the art circles of New York, all we really see at work is Kosleck and commercial painter Robert Lowery (who keeps painting the same statuesque blonde girl Joan Shawlee over and over in banal poses – how is that for art?) who, conveniently enough, is engaged to a rival art critic (Virginia Grey) of Napier's! Before long, the latter is discovered with his spine broken and Lowery is suspected; but then investigating detective Bill Goodwin gets the bright idea of engaging another critic to publish a scathing review of Lowery's work (I did not know that publicity sketches got reviewed!!) so as to gauge how violent his reaction is going to be! In the meantime, Kosleck deludes himself into thinking that he is creating his masterpiece by sculpting Hatton's uniquely craggy – and recognizable – visage which, needless to say, attracts the attention of the constantly visiting Grey (we are led to believe that she lacks material for her weekly column)…much to the chagrin of both artist and model. Bafflingly, although The Creeper is fully aware of how Grey looks (thanks to her aforementioned haunting of Kosleck's flea-bitten pad), he bumps off Shawlee – who had by then become Goodwin's girl! – in Lowery's apartment and, overhearing Kosleck talking to (you guessed it) Grey about his intention to dump him as the fall guy for the police, sends the slow-witted giant off his deep end…even down to destroying his own now-completed stony image. Curiously enough, although this was Hatton's penultimate film, his name in the credits is preceded by the epithet "introducing"!

---

4 out of 7 people found the following review useful:
Routine Horror/Thriller with, how shall I put this, "interesting" casting., 31 May 2000

Author: DrSatan from The Land of Mortis

This is a typical late Universal Horror flick: its technically comptent, if by the numbers, with a cookie cutter plot and some serious overacting. The most interesting part of this film is its stunt casting of Rondo Hatton, a man with a bone disease as the film's "monster". Its sad to see this man exploited, but he probably made good use of the money they paid him. Hatton is less horrifying than the studio hoped, as I more often felt pity over fear or even loathing. Martin Koslack is on board as the film's mad artist, and he is very amusing in this part. I for one enjoy seeing Koslack in just about anything; for some reason the man amuses me. The only other part of the film that entertained me is the film's absurd take on the art world. Here we are shown evil art critics who revel in their ability to break artists; this is side by side with the film's male "hero" who is an "artist" who paints...get this...pin up girls. Somehow our hero's work is reviewed side by side with the villan's absurdist sculpture. Also amusing is the film's chief nasty critic, who at one point claims that he despises the hero's pin up art because "women like that don't exist" to which our heroine replies with an assurance that the critic just doesn't get out enough. Finally, there's a bit of a subplot about the heroine's (who is an art critic herself) domestication by the leading man....completely anti-feminist and ridiculous to witness. Overall this film is a rather mediocre picture with a few amusing elements.

---

The artists ' revenge, 23 January 2012
Author: dbdumonteil

More than "the creeper" himself ,the real monster is Marcel (a sculptor with a French name meaning "from the angel"!)Martin Kosleck is actually the stand out with his piercing eyes,his banal look and his aspiration for glory ;at the beginning he seems a nice guy feeding his pet cat and coming to a man's rescue.But further acquaintance shows this :he gradually goes nuts and the statue becomes a transparent metaphor for the monster he is creating (a Frankensteinesque relationship,which the ending confirms).

This is also a fierce attack on art critics "who judge works but do not know they are judged by them "(Jean Cocteau),a subject which "theatre of blood" will resume in the seventies.

---

---

Page 1 of 2:

[1] [2]

Add another review

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Ratings	External reviews
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user reviews
Your vote history