"A creepy old house in the country proves to be deadly for anyone who rents it in this enjoyable quartet of horror tales. From the British Amicus output of anthologies in the 60's-70's, "House That Dripped Blood" boasts a superb cast and an interesting set-up of a Scotland Yard investigator looking for a horror film star who disappeared after being the last to rent the house. A cop and the strange Real Estate rep who rents the house tells the investigator the stories of the people who met their doom while living there. The tales include a horror writer whose latest murderous creation seemingly comes to life, Peter Cushing discovers that a weird Museum of Horrors has a Salome exhibit that seems to be still collecting heads, Christopher Lee's angelic young daughter turns out to be a voodoo practicing witch, and in the final tongue-in-cheek (or is that TOOTH in cheek) tale, the horror film star buys a vampire's cloak that still has chilling powers. Jon Pertwee is wonderful as the actor and the bosomy Ingrid Pitt is his seductive co-star---a REAL vampire. Great supporting cast includes Nyree Dawn Porter (from BBC's "The Forsyte Saga"). Very entertaining film that uses atmosphere and good acting instead of gore to get the job done. The DVD from Lion's Gate is a fine print in widescreen and features an interview with one of the producers, Max Rosenberg. This is another example of horror films that need to be on DVD. A great treat for Halloween and a collector's item for fans. Cut down the lights and enjoy."
Terror waits for you in every room...
cookieman108 | Inside the jar... | 11/04/2003
(4 out of 5 stars)
"Ahhh, another juicy Amicus film released by Lion's Gate Entertainment. With The House That Dripped Blood, we get five fearsome tales involving murder, voodoo, vampires, and generally bad mojo all around. The tales are centered on a large, old house located just outside of a small town in the English countryside. Seems a report filed on the disappearance of the most recent owner by the local constabulary has raised some questions within Scotland Yard, prompting a Yard investigator to make the trip for more clarification. On arriving, the investigator learns that the disappearance of the recent tenant was only the last in a long line of strangeness to come out of that house with regards to past tenants.
The first tale, Method For Murder, involves a horror writer, played by Denholm Elliot, whose most recent literary creation, a maniacal strangler, seems to have come to life, and is lurking in and around the house, being all troublesome and such.
The second story, Waxworks, stars Peter Cushing as a retired investment banker and mysterious goings on at the local wax museum. Seems one of the wax figures in the museum bares an uncanny resemblance to a woman he used to know. This one also has a young Joss Ackland, of whom I vaguely recognized until I remembered him as the head bad guy from Lethal Weapon 2.
The third story, Sweets to the Sweet, stars Christopher Lee in a tale about a child with unnatural abilities. To say anymore would give it away, though you will most likely be able to figure out what's going on before the ending is revealed.
The fourth story, The Cloak, star Jon Pertwee as an egotistical horror actor in search of a realistic cloak for an upcoming role in a horror movie. He does find what he's looking for, and much more. Also in this one is Ingrid Pitt, as his buxom co-star. This one had a twinge of humor throughout, while the others were more serious, straightforward horror tales. One part that stands out in my mind was when Pertwee is verbally thrashing the art and movie director for the lack of realism in the sets and in the wardrobe, and he relates the 'look' he's after to past horror movies for examples, citing Frankenstein and Dracula, "but the one with Bela Lugosi, not that newer one." in reference to Christopher Lee and his performances as the count.
The fifth story is basically an ongoing one between the other stories, involving the Scotland Yard inspector hearing each of the four tales, and then deciding to see this house for himself.
All stories seem to be credited to Robert Bloch, probably best known for writing the Hitchcock classic Psycho, but looking at the IMDb, it shows a couple of other writers had a hand in this movie, most notably Richard Matheson. The print used for transfer to DVD was quite good, especially when compared to an included trailer of dubious quality. The only other special feature is a psuedo interview with the producer, Max Rosenberg, whose prolific production career includes such movies like Scream and Scream Again (1969), Tales From the Crypt (1972), Asylum (1972), The Land That Time Forgot (1975), and The Incredible Melting Man (1977). Good directing, accomplished actors, a creepy house, and a haunting musical score all come together to create an overall enjoyable experience. The threads that tied the individual stories to the house were a little thin in some places, but that appears fairly inconsequential in the grand scheme of things."
Not A Drop In Sight.....
Bruce Loveitt | Ogdensburg, NY USA | 11/07/2003
(5 out of 5 stars)
"Don't be misled by the title. This is a movie that relies on atmospheric sets, solid acting, and mood-enhancing music to get the job done. As you would expect from a master of the genre such as Robert Bloch, all of the stories are well-crafted (unlike many anthologies, which toss at least one dud into the mix). I was very pleased with the transfer from VHS to DVD. The picture is bright and clear, and I was able to discover many details that were murky on tape. The sound is also crisp, which is especially important with this movie - the music and the odd sound effects are integral to maintaining the spooky atmosphere that permeates the film. The first three stories are serious in tone, but Mr. Bloch lightens-up the proceedings in the final story - where the rubber-faced Jon Pertwee and the buxom Ingrid Pitt are given a chance to camp things up a bit. This very enjoyable movie has thunderstorms, candlelight, creaking doors, shadows, and cobwebs.....but no blood. Let me provide some by giving this film a rating of...."A positive.""
House that dripped blood
douglas child | uk | 11/18/2001
(5 out of 5 stars)
"one of amicus films greatest anthologys. it has it all, spooky old english manor, vampires witches and not forgetting the presence of both christopher lee and peter cushing turning in superb performances. they are supported by a great cast too.
this film is very hard to find as it has been deleated since the eighties.i have an original but even a copy is a must inevery horror addicts video libary. it even attracts dr. who fans as jon pertwee plays the part of a horror actor who ,by mistake buys a real vampires cloak.ingrid pitt soon leads him to the darkside in a wity sendup of the vampire world. all in all see it for yourself its a great piece of fantasy genre. ENJOY !"
A Gruesome Delight
snalen | UK | 03/31/2004
(5 out of 5 stars)
"This is a collection of four short narratives with a link story about the mystery of the creepy old house where all are set. In the first, a writer of horror stories fears he is going mad when the lunatic murderer he is writing about suddenly appears in his life and starts to stalk him. In the second, a respectable retired unmarried stockbroker is thrown off balance when he comes across a waxwork of a young woman that reminds him of his lost love. In the third, a young woman is hired as a governess and is puzzled to discover that her employer has forbidden his sweet little girl to play with dolls... In the fourth, a hammy old horror movie actor goes off shopping for a vampire's cloak and gets more than he bargained for. His subsequent disappearance has brought a Scotland Yard detective sniffing around whose investigations are a basis for the slender linking story.Five stars first of all because of the title. If it isn't the best title of any movie ever, what on earth is? And you know you're into a treat when you watch the rest of the credits: Christopher Lee, Peter Cushing, Denholm Elliott, Joss Ackland, Ingrid Pitt... But my most vivid memory is still one of NOT seeing it. When it was released I was a wee boy of seven or eight, a good ten years younger than the certificate said I had to be to go and see it at the cinema. But I saw it advertised and was, I remember, desperately frustrated: a film with such a title could not possibly fail, my small boy's bloodthirsty imagination insisted, to be the most brilliant ever made. Older and perhaps wiser (and able to watch it as often as I like without troubling the law), I'll now concede it my well not be the most brilliant, or even anywhere near the scariest, film ever made. But I think my seven-year old self would not have been disappointed by these lovely gruesome little tales (and would not, I confidently conjecture have suffered significant psychological harm from seeing them). And even now, at my present relatively disenchanted age, I can watch it with unmitigated and not particularly guilty pleasure."