Reviews & Ratings for
House More at IMDbPro »

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

26 out of 34 people found the following review useful:

Loved the Book, Liked the film.

Author: m_walker_731 from United States
9 November 2008

Ted Dekker and Frank Peretti are amazing authors, and their book 'House' is still one of my favorite, and one of the (if not the) scariest book I've ever read. The movie was... okay. The initial problem I saw was the fact they tried to fit five-six hours of reading into an hour and a half of film. After watching the movie, I also realized that if you didn't read the book, you'd have absolutely NO CLUE what was going on. None whatsoever. That's a problem. Because I read the book, I was able to keep up with, generally, what was going on, but the film did not do the fantastic book justice. But now onto the movie.

The acting was typical Christian-movie acting. There's an old saying in the Christian Film industry. 'We cannot take the able and make them faithful; we must take the faithful, and God will make them able.' This is no exception. The acting was second-rate, and sometimes not believable. The music was good, and the special effects were pretty great, too, but no 'A-movie' quality. The story, like I said, is non- sense and confusing to those who have not read the book.

Here's the bottom line. If you read the book, go see it. If you haven't, don't. You won't get anything from it.

33 out of 48 people found the following review useful:

It was a nice ride

Author: William Holttinen from Finland
23 October 2008

First of all I want to state that I do not have any strong feelings about Christianity or atheism and I have not read the book nor do I know who the guys directing the movie are, so my opinion of this movie is based only in what I did see on the screen.

And it was alright. Nothing special about this film, really. It's kinda like The Texas Chainsaw Massacre without any gore. People stuck in a house, people running around scared. A bogeyman, the occupants are weirdos etc. So you have seen this before if you're a horror fan. And even if you're not you still seen this before. I have to admit that I did not miss the gore, so the movie delivers somewhat without the gore.

What comes to the actors, it was a mixed mess. Some scenes were good and then some were so silly or so out of this world that you just had to cringe. I have to admit that I only stumbled to this movie because of Michael Madsen. And well, he is always gooood. At acting I mean.

All in all, this is nothing new. If it is a rainy day, you could rent this. But if you really dig horror you might as well rent something better. Like old-school classic "The Haunting" which is really a HORROR movie. This movie here is horror only for those who don't watch horror regularly. Oh, and if someone thinks that the ending is something special or it has some deeper meaning, well haha to you sir. It has been done several times in horror movie history. But maybe it's new to YOU.

Five stars because it's not a bad movie, but it's nothing special either. And the R rating is misleading.

25 out of 35 people found the following review useful:

Danger - Keep Out

Author: paras-5 from Chile
26 December 2008

- This House may cause death by boredom - OK, I watched this movie because the rating on IMDb was above 5 and that's, most of the time, enough for a Horror movie. I mean, come on! "Thir13en Ghosts" has 5 stars!!! it was awful, but at least it was fun!!! I don't expect much of a horror movie but, even so, "House" is a total disappointment.

Predictable, terrible plot, bad acting (even for the average Horror movie) and one of the silliest, worst endings I've ever seen. Even Michael Madsen couldn't save the movie, even when he is perfect for the character and his mere glance is enough to make one nervous.

I'm not going to bore you as this movie did to me. Let's say that if you are looking for a horror flick to watch on a Sunday afternoon, stay away from this one! it is simply boring and a waste of time.

I wish I had read some of the other reviews before giving a chance to this movie. It's sad to say but now I know I don't have to trust the ratings from this page. Go for the reviews instead! ;)

11 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

Cliché-a-palooza

Author: eyecandyforu from United States
8 May 2009

Let me first say I watched it so you don't have to. House seems to be a film geared to horror movie fans, surfing along on the bet that people are going to appreciate seeing reenactments of familiar scenarios. So familiar in fact that it has a rip off quality to it, which ultimately comes across as lazy. The plot, if there is one, is about four extremely attractive young people, stranded at the same time in a house in the middle of nowhere. When WILL these youngin's learn not to drive their classic cars down dirt roads in the boonies? There's a creepy family out there, just waiting to freak their freaks. The house in question IS pretty cool, I wouldn't mind owning it. It's big and lit with green lights and decorated with serial killer wallpaper. Its basement is enormous and there are serious plumbing problems. Absolutely nothing justifies the R rating, this could have aired on the Sci-fi channel without edits. Was there a bribe on the part of the producers? "Please sir, give us an R, that'll bring 'em in expecting shocks and gore". This movie has a Texas Chainsaw-lite family, suggestions of Satanism, little girl ghost, crazed killer, vaporous black smoke, Spielberg like whispy thingies, gravity defying water, a thunderstorm that appears right on cue, no cell phone signals, several twists, and Michael Madson cashing a paycheck. You'd think, that with all this, there would be something to watch, but no. It goes in many directions, only to switch to another direction with no point, purpose or resolution. Awful.

11 out of 13 people found the following review useful:

watch Steve Miner's 1986 cult classic of the same name instead

Author: movieman_kev from United States
9 April 2009

Jack and Stephanie, a bickering married couple on their way to couples' counseling, get stranded in the woods after two of their tires get a flat. They find themselves at an old hotel to get out of the pouring rain and possibly call for help. There they find another stranded couple, Leslie and Randy, who are the only other guests there. All four soon find themselves meeting the owner's of the hotel who seem slightly off somehow. They decide to make the best of a bad situation until a maniac known as "the Tin Man" who's outside gives them an ultimatum: They all have till dawn to kill one of the four or they all die. They each have to face their inner demons respectively if they wish to survive the night.

The juxtaposition of the term 'Christian Horror' has always struck me as somewhat peculiar as someone who grew up in the 1980's where a good many of the horror offerings had slightly religious morality: you had premarital sex, you died, you did drugs, you died, etcetera, etc. But I digress, this had something most of the self-monikered 'christian' films lacked, good production values. Making it only doubly sad that the film's saddled with such a cliché story, poor characterization, trite dialog, and mediocre acting. I've heard the book is better, as is often the case, but i'm not reviewing the book. And as a film, this ultimately fails.

My Grade: D+

DVD Extras: Trailers for Bella, & The Spirit. That's all, some director's commentary would've been nice but alas no

30 out of 53 people found the following review useful:

OK story. Unfourtunately, that's about it.

Author: Winston_The_Wolf from Sweden
22 October 2008

I was kind of looking forward to this movie as it looked like one of those that might make me not be able to sleep for a while. However, I just watched it and the story was interesting but I was not frightened at all.

The acting isn't very good. In most scenes where something intense is supposed to be happening, the actors just seem to overreact. In other cases they don't seem freaked out at all by what's going on. But the worst part about the acting is that the 'evil ones' mostly just make you laugh. It's like watching a comedy that spoofs horror films.

The sound effects also contribute to a negative part of this film. The voices you hear in the background are just too typical. For example, I could swear I had heard the 'laughing child' voice in at least 20 other horror movies.

I really hoped that this film would stand out. Unfourtunately, the story is the only part that's unique. I haven't read the novel but I think it's safe to say that this story is much better imagined than watched on the screen.

3/10 stars. Sadly, it's not worth the watch.

7 out of 8 people found the following review useful:

Underrated and Surprisingly Entertaining Horror Tale

Author: Claudio Carvalho from Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
13 September 2011

While driving through a secondary road for a meeting with a marriage counselor in Montgomery, Alabama, the estranged couple Jack Singleton (Reynaldo Rosales) and Stephanie Singleton (Heidi Dippold) ask for directions to a Police Officer (Michael Madsen) but they have a car accident with a metal part left on the road. Jack realizes that his Mustang has two flat tires and they see an abandoned Beamer parked on the road with the head lights on and flat tires.

Jack and Steph walks in the rain seeking for help. They see an inn where they meet the businessman and owner of the Beamer, Randy Messsarue (J.P. Davis), and his fiancée Leslie Taylor (Julie Ann Emery). Out of the blue, the weird owners Pete ( Lew Temple), his mother Betty (Leslie Easterbrook) and Stewart (Bill Moseley) welcome the guests and invite them to have dinner. Sooner they are chased by the owner and the maniac The Tin Man and they find that they are trapped in the evil house. Further, for surviving, they lean that they must kill one of them in accordance with The Tin Man's rules. But the mysterious girl Susan (Alana Bale) befriends Jack and advises that if anyone kills, he or she will definitely belong to The Tin Man.

The underrated "House" is a surprisingly entertaining horror tale. The creepy story is not a masterpiece, but I was misled believing that it would be another torture film and not a supernatural thriller. Leslie Easterbrook, in the role of Betty, and Lew Temple, in the role of Pete, are very scary and creepy. The plot is not a masterpiece and does not explain well the presence of Susan, but I liked this movie. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "Jogos de um Psicopata" ("Games of a Psycopath")

16 out of 26 people found the following review useful:

Not bad... not good

Author: potterbond007 from United Kingdom
28 October 2008

Well, as a guy who occasionally watches movies from the horror genre, i found this movie quite interesting. If you are a person who doesn't like too much gore and blood but need to get ur adrenaline pumping for sometime, then i would suggest you go for it. This is just one of the rare horror movies without all that. Shouldn't be rated R for sure, i feel that quite a few 15 - 17 year olds would also enjoy this movie. The 6 stars are for making a movie for the rare category of people who like horror movies with no gore.

I would have rated it higher but the story made no sense, some of the characters made no sense and i ended up kinda confused in the end with a lot of unanswered questions. Like some of the people commented, the movie does not suck and it isn't too good either. I would suggest watching it if you just want a few thrills without the nightmares that come with them

7 out of 9 people found the following review useful:

Had promise, but did nothing with it

Author: arime from United States
2 May 2009

I had been waiting for this movie since it was announced it would come out. I am a fan of the book which is just creepy and crazy. I always know that it is seldom that a movie is as good as the book, but this movie killed the book with bordom.

The movie lacked intensity, fear or surprise. The acting was subpar and the editing left many holes in the story leading to a confusing and preachy movie. The characters don't develop during the movie and you are left with a cardboard taste.

Most of the original story line was destroyed and viewers are left with a watered down version of an intense story. The preachy added in parts just took away.

19 out of 33 people found the following review useful:

Hmm...Lets see if I can explain this

Author: night_crawler1985 from United States
7 June 2008

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I actually saw this movie today at "The Gathering", a convention for Ted Dekker and his fans. What we saw today was the final cut of the film and what will be shown in Theaters later this year. To say that this film was a disappointment is an understatement, it was awful. Now don't get me wrong, I liked the book and I have most of what Ted Dekker has written, and even semi-enjoyed "Three", but this movie was just a joke.

We were warned that it had an R rating before the movie started, which is completely unjustified. There is no immense bloodshed, no hacking of limbs, not even realistic shotgun marks on a body. I am not an advocate for the slasher films by any means, but sometimes seeing violence in a realistic light is necessary. The editing was horrendous. The entire movie felt like a group of unrelated events all combined in a mish-mesh of a film. There are scenes in the film that start off in a panoramic view, zoom in for less than a second, then zoom back to the panoramic view which makes the audience feel more nauseous than entertained. The fast/slow movements of the camera via "300" were not well executed and were just simply cheesy.

I'm not going to spend long on this next section because I could write pages on it. The acting...the acting was sub-par at best. The moment the character of "Randy" appears on the screen, your internal "HE'S A SOAP ACTOR!!!" sensor starts to go off and it is very apparent the second his mouth opens. There is a reason most of those actors do not have huge careers, and it is very apparent why they don't in this movie.

The main thing about Dekker is his need and love to get the message of redemption and light across to the audience in his books. "House" the book did a great job at getting this message across. Every scene in the book which advanced the story and really started you thinking were completely cut from the movie...AND THE ENDING WAS CHANGED!!!! Needless to say I am so disappointed, even to the level of writing a review about it. Dekker needs more of a hand in the manuscript and casting to make sure his ideas are realized. I'm trying not to bash the movie, but it is very hard not to.

Page 1 of 7:

[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7]

Add another review

Related Links