Gallery of Horror (1967) User Reviews

Gallery of Horror: Really is that bad

[Platypuschow · 3/10 · 14 November 2018]

Critically reviled Gallery of Horror stars Lon Chaney Jr, John Carradine and a slew of people who have absolutely no place being in the industry.

It's a 5 story horror anthology that isn't so much cheesy bad but old school plain bad.

Vampires, zombies, psychotics, witches and more are on display yet each story has a very familiar looking cast. Thats right, the same people play different characters throughout which prevent any chance of you becoming engrossed.

The plots are mostly silly, the sfx are genuinely laughable and Carradines narration segments are the absolute pits. It's not just his weak delivery or how much he comes across as if he's rambling without script but that background during such segments is head scratchingly dumb.

I like horror anthologys but this stinker has to go down as one of the worst.

The Good:

Lon Chaney Jr

The Bad:

Everything just looks so incredibly bad

Poor writing

Weak acting

Narration segments are the pits

Things I Learnt From This Movie:

Not every horror anthology can be a Creepshow (1982) or a Trick r Treat (2007)

1967 was simply the worst year in cinematic history

a deadly weapon

[jonathan-577 · 2/10 · 24 October 2009]

Hewitt's trademark is vaulting ambition approached with the scantest possible means, and when he applies himself to a horror anthology format the result is gruesome and calamitous, and kind of fascinating for it. The first story relates to a bewitched grandfather clock and just about the whole damn thing is shot from a single camera setup. The second tackles vampirism, first from a police HQ with the unmistakable acoustics of an empty warehouse, then from a streetside crowd scene almost entirely composed of offscreen murmurs; the louts who do wander into frame offer the most fascinatingly various and mangled British accents on record. Volume three mainly features the rantings of a corpse over some looped footage borrowed from Roger Corman, to whose bountiful resources Hewitt can only aspire longingly, with the added bonus of Rochelle Hudson (James Dean's mom in Rebel Without a Cause!) playing one seriously antiquated love interest. Lon Chaney Jr. stumbles on set for part four, a Frankenstein variant whose loutish flatness does actually take on a certain lovable aspect in this company, especially the two lab guys with their frat boy impersonations. Finally we return to the vampire theme in part five, accompanied by the dumbest twist ending of the lot, not to mention the most haphazard pan-and-scan job in a crowded field. Toastmaster John Carradine shows up once in a while and mumbles into his sleeve.

First seen on Pittsburgh's Chiller Theater in 1972

[kevinolzak · 4/10 · 3 December 2014]

What first began life in Sept. 1966 as "Dr. Terror's Gallery of Horror" evolved over the years with new titles for cinema ("The Blood Suckers") and television ("Return from the Past"), easily available today under the shortened title "Gallery of Horror." John Carradine had earlier garnered the title role in "The Wizard of Mars" for director/special effects maven David L. Hewitt, who here managed to corral Lon Chaney and Rochelle Hudson to add greater marquee value to what arguably appears to be his masterwork. Rather than science fiction, truly impossible on such chintzy budgets, we have traditional, old fashioned horror, an anthology film inspired (as one can guess by the title) by the 1964 Amicus feature "Dr. Terror's House of Horrors" (one character even named after Peter Cushing!). Conceived by CREEPY editor Russ Jones, an expert in short stories, Hewitt spent approximately $20,000 on a super fast 5 day schedule at Ray Dorn's Hollywood Stage that left the actors breathless, and audiences speechless (Al Adamson and John Carradine had just completed "Blood of Dracula's Castle" using the same studio facilities). Virtually all the stock footage is culled from AIP's Roger Corman Poe films (plus "The Terror"), its main musical theme cribbed from 1960's "The Hypnotic Eye." Carradine is the unnamed narrator, introducing on screen all five stories but only appearing in the opener, "The Witches Clock" (13 minutes), in which a young couple move into a New England castle that 300 years before housed a Salem witch, with an enchanted clock that revives the spirit of Carradine's Tristram Halbin (little characterization in just two scenes). Second, and perhaps weakest, is "King Vampire" (12 minutes), feebly depicting Scotland Yard's hunt for a vampire that supposedly has the face of a corpse, and how they've detained all suspects that fit that description! Next is another poorly executed story, "Monster Raid" (16 minutes), with Rochelle Hudson's adulterous wife getting her comeuppance from her dead husband, whose resurrection was made possible by his own curiously vague formula. Fourth, "Spark of Life" (15 minutes) casts top billed Lon Chaney as Dr. Mendell, the only mad scientist of his entire movie career, a colleague of Hamburg's Baron Erik Von Frankenstein, continuing experiments that involve bringing the dead back to life via electricity. His greatest mistake is in choosing the corpse of an executed murderer out for revenge, but Chaney really acts up a storm, running the gamut from elation to disappointment, deadly serious as he attempts to undo his success with predictable results. Last is "Count Dracula" (13 minutes), a seriously crippled rehash of "Dracula's Guest," featuring a woefully inadequate Mitch Evans in place of Carradine as Dracula. As bad as it undoubtedly is, this film remains ideal for younger audiences who favor harmless terror for late night viewing, which was how this monster kid saw it on Pittsburgh's Chiller Theater on four occasions between 1972 and 1978.

It must be seeen to be believed!

[16mmRay · 18 May 2001]

I've had a ball with this film since WPIX started running it on Chiller Theatre. This film has more great gaffs and laugh lines than ANY Ed Wood picture. To begin, John Carradine in his rented tux with crooked tie really sets the proceedings - especially with him standing in front of a blue screen that is only one-half matted with a still frame from a Roger Corman castle! After Carradine babbles for about 5 minutes, we get to the first Tale - Starring J.C. Roger Gentry as the husband and Vic Magee as "Doctor Varnsely Finchley" give performances that can only be described as indescribable. Soon we get to Chaney's scene. He is a medical professor in Scotland in the 1880's. Unfortunately, the Westrex desk phone rings, Lon looks at his wristwatch, and he rushes off to classes while Ron Doyle and Joey Benson contemplate reviving Murderous Magee (Old Vic), an executed killer. Don't let this one get away. And have a bottle of port handy. And a couple of cheap cigars.

Bad movie lovers of the world rejoice

[dbborroughs · 5/10 · 13 February 2006]

I don't know how to rate this (see below). Certainly this is one of the all time bad movies. A the same time its also unintentionally funny (I least I think so, but I'm not sure since several actors seem to be laughing on screen). This is one of those movies thats so enjoyably bad as to make you wonder why Ed Wood is king of bad movies when there are others more deserving of the title.

This film is a collection of five short horror film introduced by John Carradine. Each one runs about the same amount of time and ends with a twist ending.

The first is The Witches Clock and concerns a clock left in a castle a young couple has just purchased. Carradine appears in this story as a traveler who shows up at the castle when the clock is restarted.

King Vampire is about a vampire on the loose in Victorian London thats hunted by the police.

Monster Raid concerns a man who was fed an immortality drug returning from the grave to get revenge.

Spark of Life has Lon Chaney as a doctor trying to return the dead to life.

Count Dracula is a fast retelling of the Dracula story with a twist ending.

They play as if EC comics Tales from the Crypt or Vault of Horror became bad TV shows. Worse are the twists that end every story since they come at point not where logic would dictate they should be, but rather where a strict running time demands they be.

The acting is uneven and bad, with only Carradine the only one turning in anything close to a performance. The sets are dreadful as is pretty much everything else. Best of all (?) the movie was recently released on DVD in full widescreen so that the film can now be seen in its full cinematic glory (and I use the term lightly).

If you like bad movies this is a film to search out. If you want an actual "good" movie then I suggest you look elsewhere.

For Bad Movie lovers: 8 out of 10 For those who need good movies: 1 out of 10

The overall IMDb score of 2.1 it's not THAT good!

[planktonrules · 1/10 · 3 February 2011]

This is a terrible film and any star, other than John Carradine, would have been embarrassed to be in this mess. After all, that is truly horrible in every way. I am not exaggerating to say that it looks like a particularly bad local community theater had tryouts. Those who did not make the cut were then put in this film!! There are many actors attempting (horribly) English accents--some of which would be worse than if you had Jay Silverheels or Zha Zha Gabor try English accents!! And many could not even read their lines--annunciating the wrong syllables and badly reading the cue cards. In addition, while it's supposed to be a horror anthology, I think they really intended to make it a horrible anthology, as none of the stories are the least bit scary or ironic or intelligently written. I am NOT exaggerating to say that I think "Dr. Terror's Gallery of Horrors(?)" is every bit as bad, if not worse, than the worse Ed Wood film! Because of this, it might make great viewing by bad movie freaks--all others, however, should avoid it like the plague! the bottom line is that nothing about this film works and it is so completely amateurish and banal that it flabbergasted me! Why hadn't I heard about a film this bad sooner?!

Incredibly Awful!

[jmike · 1/10 · 18 June 2000]

Made to rip off Hammer Studios "Gallery of Horrors" this film really stinks. Its a series of short films sort of tied together with John Carradine's narration. Of course John Carradine would appear in anyone's film and did not seem to care how stupid or embarrassing he might look (there is something to be said for that I guess). Poor Lon Chaney, Jr. was said to be drinking a lot by the time he made this and he would need to be to get through this stinker! Drinking a lot might also help if you have to watch this movie!

The director is also responsible for The Mighty Gorga and Journey to the Center of Time, which are also pretty awful. You can torture people making them watch this film (and there is something to be said for that as well).

Stink burger!

[mjshannon · 1/10 · 24 May 2000]

Simply put, this is one of the worst horror films ever made! This is all the more surprising considering some of the talent involved. However, John Carradine, who narrates this mess, was well known to appear in just about everything he was offered, apparently without considering how horrible the final product could be and Lon Chaney,Jr was at the very end of his career and is therefore bloated, bleary eyed and barely conscious! The makers of this must have spent all of five dollars on the sets and script, both of which are so hollow and flimsy an episode of Scooby Doo would prove more challenging. Simplistic and plodding (at 82 minutes you'd swear it was twice as long)this isn't one of those movies that is so bad it's good--this movie is just BAD! Pop this dud in your VCR only if you want to end a date early or really do like watching paint dry.

Gallery of Horrible Movie-making

[carolynpaetow · 5/10 · 12 December 2014]

This queer quintet of intended black humor isn't funny in the way the creators apparently envisioned, but funny it is. And, if any of its five tales of the preternatural were a mere one-fourth as good as the intros by John Carradine indicate--well, the viewer could at least stop sighing long enough to allow a slight shiver of trepidation, if not a shudder of laughter. But the only impulse likely to replace the yearn to yawn is indeed the urge to cackle as the sorry scripting and stilted performances grow incredibly worse. The sets and sound quality are reminiscent of early soaps, and a couple of the reoccurring actors carry their early-sixties coifs into nineteenth-century roles. The dialogue at times isn't consistent with the direction, as when one character states that coffee is brewing while pouring it into a cup. (Maybe the director figured that the audience would notice nothing but the busty actress's increasing cleavage!) The accidental humor reaches a crescendo in a Frankensteinesque story in which Lon Chaney Jr. slips into near slapstick as the disjointed dialogue has his mad doctor character babbling like a senile sot. Satire and parody are utterly impossible to achieve when the script for a scene sounds as if it were formulated by two writers, independent of one another. But it does sometimes result in hilarity, as in this film.

Stupid fun

[BandSAboutMovies · 5/10 · 11 August 2021]

You may say, "This title sounds a lot like Amicus' Dr. Terror's House of Horrors." The studio and their lawyers felt the same way, as this movie was forced to change its title, which means that it played under the other names Return from the Past, The Blood Suckers, Alien Massacre, Gallery of Horror and The Witch's Clock.

It was directed by David L. Hewitt, who went from working in a traveling spook show to making movies like The Wizard of Mars, Monsters Crash the Pajama Party, The Mighty Gorga and The Girls from Thunder Strip. He wrote the script, basing it on stories by Russ Jones, who created Creepy. Jones also plays a man killed by a mob and a corpse back from the dead, even creating his own makeup.

"The Witches Clock" is the only story with lead actor John Carradine in it - he also narrates - and tells the story of a couple buying a Salem mansion with a haunted clock that has the power to bring the dead back to life. It has a pretty great conclusion, as the entire house and everyone in the story is set on fire, with Carradine's character coming back to start the cycle all over again with a new family.

"King of the Vampires" features Scotland Yard against a bloodsucker. There's a pretty forward thinking close here as well with the police unable to wrap their minds around the fact that the killer just might not be a man.

"Monster Raid" isn't as good as the first two stories, as it's a simple back from the dead to get revenge on a conniving wife story.

"The Spark of Life" lives up to its name, as Lon Chaney Jr. Is a scientist who gets two students to help him bring a man back from the dead. However, their experiment isn't a success because that man was a murderer and he may have been better dead.

"Count Alucard" pits Dracula against Harker (one of several roles in this movie for Roger Gentry), a vampire hater with a secret.

This movie does something amazing: it steals from Roger Corman, who usually steals from himself. There's footage from The Terror, House of Usher, The Raven and The Haunted Palace used in several places in this.

"So shocking it will sliver your liver!" That's a great tagline. This isn't a great film. But any movie that has Carradine as a narrator can never be hated.

Not That Bad 60's Horror

[gwnightscream · 4/10 · 12 September 2019]

This 1967 horror anthology film features John Carradine (The Howling) and Lon Chaney Jr (The Wolf Man) with Carradine hosting 5 eerie tales. The first involves a couple finding an ancient clock previously owned by a witch, The second tells of a killer roaming around London, The third features a scientist returning from the dead for revenge on his ex-wife and her lover turned husband, The Fourth features 2 medical students and their professor trying re-animate a cadaver and The Fifth tells of Count Dracula and his new business associate, Harker who learns his vampire secret. This isn't that bad, but legends, Carradine and Chaney are the only good actors in it and the film has some eerie and somewhat amusing qualities. If you're into the genre, you might like this.

I saw this under an alternate title on TV!

[bipcress · 10/10 · 28 March 2013]

I also saw this in the late 1960s and/or 1970s on Chiller Theater here in Pittsburgh (WIIC Channel 11 NBC affiliate). I only ever saw this on Chiller Theater - never anywhere else. The title it had when I saw it on Chiller Theater was "King Vampire". The title refers to one of the episodes. This film utterly amazed me in that it so completely had all the production values of a high school play! This thing makes Ed Wood look like a big-budget A-list director! I kept thinking that any minute Chilly Billy was going to break in and announce that the movie was a joke, a phony production slapped together by the Channel 11 guys. You have got to see this to believe it.

Don't Believe the 'So bad it's good' Reviews

[sbsnowbunny · 7/10 · 5 July 2018]

Based on others' reviews, I was prepared for something very schlocky. Yes, the acting is hit and miss. The special effects are basic. However, it's not bad at all! I enjoyed it in all its low budgetness. Not having a lot of money for production doesn't always mean a subpar movie. I got a kick out of the ways they compensated during killings, procedures, etc. Each story had its own feel and it was fun seeing some of the same actors playing totally different characters in the different segments. I will probably watch it again and recommend it for anyone who enjoys horror anthologies.

The absolute worst of the anthology horror genre.

[mark.waltz · 2/10 · 6 August 2018]

Certainly among five different stories within one movie, there must be something redeeming. It certainly isn't the use of the castle from American International's cheepy "The Terror" (1963), so different looking as far as film stock is concerned that it becomes jarring every time the castle is shown, or the sets used within the film itself which seemed to be recycled from the first sequence throughout the fifth. The first sequence is probably the best, featuring narrator John Carradine in his only acting part within the film, playing the man who pays a visit upon the newleyweds who have purchased an abandoned mansion with a secret, followed by two individual stories about vampires (one with the obvious and already used name of Alucard) that features a Van Helsing with a secret (slightly amusing). But the absolute worst has Lon Chaney Jr. delivering his usual lame performance as a scientist who interferes in the experiments of some of his students, and gets the wrong body for their attempts to bring a Frankenstein like monster to life. Carradine and Chaney only appear in one sequence each, and at least Carradine's narration is subtle, if not juvenile. However, the younger actors all play multiple roles and their acting is certainly not anything worth writing about.

So bad it is an epic masterpiece of great entertainment

[rufasff · 10 January 2002]

Look, I'll be brief. If you have ANY taste for the so-bad-they're-great classics (Plan 9, Robot Monster, Brain That Wouldn't Die), hunt down a copy of this, the most overlooked member of the club. Amazingly, this was put out in letterboxed form; but anyway you can find it, WATCH THIS MOVIE. It is fantastic

Only for fanatics of Carradine and Chaney.

[dasa108 · 4/10 · 19 December 2020]

Another film that takes advantage of the recipe of presenting different segments in order to present scare-based entertainment. In the 1960s, depending on your budget, you could reach a high level of visual quality. This is not the case, as unfortunately we are confronted with a film that represents the quintessence of the low-budget film. John Carradine, who already looked very old in this film, introduces us with long and unnecessary monologues into the stories that will appear. You know things come complicated when there are no outdoor shots and we have to wait until the final minute to find the twist that will surprise us. I like low-budget movies, and obviously this movie is much better than lame examples from the '90s to date. While there is no depth in the characters there is at least one attempt to visually honor the way a sinister cemetery should look where vampires lurk that won't last long. If you like low-budget cinema and need to see two horror movie history (John Carradine, Lon Chaney Jr) is an excellent choice. The things of life, the director then took care of the visual effects in Superman IV; was the ultimate z-movie ambassador.

Three Stars And I And I Am Being Generous.

[ladymidath · 3/10 · 9 November 2023]

Oh this is bad, really bad, Even Lon Chaney Jr and John Carradine cannot save this movie.

The segments are okay and the acting is finem in parts, but it is all so clunky, even for the 60s, I don't know what kind of budget this movie had, but it does not look like much. The set are so fake looking for even back then and the scenes that are supposed to be scary just...aren't, But I have a love for these films, they are so much a part if my childhood, This is one of the more entertaining ones with five interesting stories that would have been better if the acting and effects were better. This is a curiosity and fun to watch if you don't mind its faults.

PEANUT GALLERY OF HORROR

[mmthos · 3/10 · 6 December 2021]

Anthology of would-be scary stories tied together by their mutual location in a standard-order medieval castle, Done repertory style, with actors playing multiple different characters in different scenes.

Lowest-of-the-low budget. Largely badly acted hackneyed script and a score sounding like Batman 60's TV show, with the cartoon graphics that separated scenes to boot. Sound quality is equal to early home video mics, never mind the paucity of props and the fiberboard sets in a supposed stone castle. Faded name actress, and former WAMPAS Baby Star 1935 Rochelle Hudson suffers a similar degradation to Hollywood Golden Age leading ladies Joan Crawford ("Trog") et al. Having to play the wife of a handsome leading man 20 years her junior. Mercifully, it was her last picture, but what a way to see your star set.

Don't expect horror, do expect humor.

movie review

[hsisselman · 10/10 · 14 September 2005]

I found this movie interesting.particularly the tale of the witch's clock.I have always wondered if the idea of a clock being enchanted for this purpose was an idea of the writers or if it was taken from an existing magical practice. all of my delvings into writings on enchantment speak of love and other things.And those into necromancy speak mostly of mediums.I am an avid reader of the occult although i do not actually practice any rituals.I have rented many horror movies and find that references to actual demonology or witchcraft to be few.If anyone had any suggestions as to any sources (books or movies)that might be along the lines of my interest i would be happy to hear (recieve) them thank you

Actually can be quite a lot of fun

[phasedin · 6/10 · 28 November 2005]

I too originally caught this sometime between 1969-1971 on WPIX NY on Saturday night's "Chiller Theatre" as a youngster, where it played under one of it's alternate titles "Return From The Past".

The first time it aired that I recall was a few weeks before Xmas that year. Naturally, I had never heard of it-even being a big fan of horror movies and "Famous Monsters" magazine. At that young age I didn't notice the low budget sets and I did like the movie right off the bat, as well as already being familiar with John Carradine and Lon Chaney. Though I must say that there is something about this film I really enjoy still to this day, though it may be from my nostalgic memories of the time coloring my opinion. Now, this hasn't aired in this part of the country very much at all in the last 30-some odd years, so your chance of seeing it I guess is pretty slim. Yeah, there's no real action. Some of the acting is questionable. The castle used in all the tales is from a Roger Corman movie (as well as the horse drawn carriage scenes). The endings can sometimes be predictable (except perhaps the last twist of the last tale "Count Alucard"), but I still love it. "The Witch's Clock" tale which also has John Carradine starring,is actually a pretty good story (with the constant echoed tick-tocking of the old clock after it's re-started being very effective). This is certainly not for fans of newer post 70's films, but for us older fans perhaps horror from the 1940's to 1960's this can be enjoyable. I watch this film as if it's a stage play-the very minimal background sets certainly give off that feeling (especially in the Lon Chaney tale as well as the outdoor mob scenes in "King Vampire"). But, hell, it can be allot of fun if you're in the right frame of mind. I believe Lon Chaney only made one other movie after this-the truly awful "Dracula vs Frankenstein" by hack Al Adamson-if you think this THIS is bad, try watching that sometime (or any Adamson film, for that matter)! There's something odd about the mood of some of director David L Hewitt's better films that I quite like. "The Wizard Of Mars"-another film of his from around this same time with many of the same cast has a quite odd mood as well. I wish that would come to DVD. Hewitt's better know film-"Journey To The Center Of Time" looks a bit more like a mainstream movie, but I enjoy it less than these other 2 films of his. I wonder what ever happened to Mr Hewitt? Anybody out there know?

Anyway, my main reason for adding this at this time is because it's been announced that, yes, the DVD of this is finally being released Jan 17 2006, for those who care (and, yes, I have already pre-ordered my copy). I hope they use a good, restored print. I actually have 2 videocassette versions of this (one of them in widescreen that looks pretty decent). Certainly not a film for all. But for those who caught this in their youth and enjoyed it, quite a fun film.

The Cinema Art of David L. Hewitt

[madsagittarian · 16 October 2002]

Okay, there's one thing about the 80's that I miss. At 4AM, one used to be able to see Grade Z gems like this on TV. Now it's nothing but those rotten Infomercials. You could say that Ted Turner killed film culture, but I would argue that it was Anthony Robbins. In fact, during that golden hour of the day/night, one could see many films unleashed by the maverick no-budget director David L. Hewitt. THE MIGHTY GORGA, WIZARD OF MARS and JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF TIME used to tickle many a bad-film lover (or torture an unsuspecting insomniac) who tuned in.

This film, which I saw under the title RETURN FROM THE PAST, is a gloriously inept, amazingly miserable cash-in on the then-popular trend of horror anthology movies (in which a few short, separate tales of horrific irony are strung together by an onscreen narrator). All the hallmarks of Hewitt's unmistakable authorship are in abundance here.

First, there is the hiring of once-great, "anything for a buck" actors; in this case, John Carradine (naturally) and Lon Chaney Jr, in small roles which nonetheless gave the theater owners a name to put in the marquee. Secondly, Hewitt once again fills the cast with his oddball stock company of dreary, nasal-sounding "actors" (who is this Roger Gentry, anyway?). As well, the director's sterling use of half-finished sets, or plain black backgrounds (when there were none at all!) is such a feat that would even make Ed Wood blush if he worked under such insane conditions. Add to this, the surprisingly ambitious writing (for bargain-basement cinema, anyway) which paradoxes the miserable attempts at mise en scene. For such a bottom-of-the-barrel project as a Dave Hewitt film, one wonders why he bothered with such an adventurous screenplay (like WIZARD OF MARS or JOURNEY TO THE CENTER OF TIME, especially), when the insultingly bad production values would work against the ambition of the writing anyway. Thus, therein lies the strange dichotomy of Hewitt's work as a director. With a thrift-store budget, he really tried to make something out of nothing. Who can blame him if he didn't succeed?

Add some haphazard dubbing, some great juvenile cartoon blood dripping on the screen, and you have a truly beguiling piece of work. Anyone who insists on making tired, threadbare projects like this has to get a medal for bravery alone.

A generously cobwebbed Gallery of comic strip ghoulishness!

[Weirdling_Wolf · 8/10 · 8 November 2023]

This perfectly pulpy, Creepy-creaky vintage Horror anthology has its prodigiously Ed Wooden prose elevated by horror maestros, Lon Chaney and macabre Monkey Suit monologist, John Carradine. A deliciously absurd and grungily atmospheric compendium that feels like a sluggishly sexless Fumetti come to fuzzy analogue life. Trash-humping degenerates who venerate, Al Adamson's scintillatingly septic ouvre will manifestly get this, while others might not. Artlessly mounted, yet bizarrely engaging, David L. Hewitt's generously cobwebbed Gallery of comic strip ghoulishness delivers a murky menagerie of recklessly recycled Roger Cormanized Gothicry. A riotously entertaining 60s schlockfest that richly deserves a foggily retrograded V2000 edition to lowlight its distractingly dingy drive-In dramatics!

So Bad It's Good

[Rainey-Dawn · 7/10 · 29 October 2014]

"So Bad It's Good" yes it's one of those type of films. I have not a clue if the viewer is suppose to take the movie as a 'serious' horror film or if the filmmakers deliberately made this a tongue-in-cheek flick. Whichever it is, the movie is a bit camp. No it's not a good film yet it is a good film.

I think each story was better than the last - and the very last story is Count Alucard (Dracula spelled backwards) is quite comical. They really did save the best for last.

OK, so what if it's a bad film - it's great for those of us who love campy classic B-rated horror movies. I found the film quite entertaining.

7.5/10

Not as bad as its reputation suggests, really...

[InjunNose · 31 May 2004]

Of course "Dr. Terror's Gallery of Horrors" is no classic, but I'm fond of David Hewitt's films and everyone seems to be having fun here. John Carradine, in full evening wear, introduces five not-very-scary tales; he also stars in one, while Lon Chaney Jr. stars in another. Other familiar faces include Roger Gentry ("The Wizard of Mars", also directed by Hewitt and co-starring Carradine) and Joey Benson (Al Adamson's "Horror of the Blood Monsters" and "Blood of Ghastly Horror"). Among the highlights of the movie are Carradine's fantastic booming voice, the dreamy soundtrack, and the cheesy, $1.95 special effects. There are some unintentionally funny moments, too, like the extended scenes of a horse-drawn carriage barreling down a dirt road (very obviously taken from Roger Corman's "The Raven"), and the vampire who is trying his hardest to speak with a Hungarian accent but ends up sounding like a Mexican bandito from some cheap western. Every time I watch something like this, I can't help but wonder whatever became of the people who made all those no-budget horror flicks of the '60s and '70s. They worked under such primitive conditions, and I'm sure they would have been doing something else if they'd had their druthers, but they almost always turned out an entertaining product. Now they've disappeared. Mr. Hewitt, Mr. Gentry, Mr. Benson...where are you? :)

Enjoyable Garbage

[michle53 · 9/10 · 29 March 2020]

The acting is terrible. The scripted exposition is worse than Ed Wood's. It's fun to watch, though. There is a speeding horse and carriage used as filler with a voiceover. It's used as filler many times in one of the sketches. Helen in that sketch looks like Miss Kentucky 1935. Really odd movie.