House of Horrors (1946)

I can't enjoy this one, no matter how many times I see it.Made in 1946, "House of Horrors" came at the tail end of the horror film genre.There is hardly any entertainment value and so boring.Everyone is just going through the motions without making much effort.Rondo Hatton is in one of his last films appearances before his sudden death in 1947.

A man crawls out of the Hudson River as another man contemplates jumping in. Seeing the face of the man crawling up, the suicidal man is inspired for his greatest work of art. Meanwhile, rumors of a serial killer named "the creeper" continue to travel as a prostitute is found with her spine snapped. A friendship of sorts grows between the two men. The artist is Martin Kosleck whose work has been panned by a snooty critic. The other is Rondo Hatton, a simple man of hideous looks and brutal strength who is quickly revealed to be "the creeper", and a tool of the vindictive Kosleck.One of the best later B Universal horror films, this is extremely well plotted, suspenseful and features a way above average script. Kosleck and Hatton are sort of the poor man's Bela Lugosi and Boris Karloff, with Kosleck getting more and more insane, and the pathetic Hatton sort of sympathetic for the child like hurt he feels for society's rejection for his "ugliness". Robert Lowery and Virginia Grey are feisty as an artist and model who are suspects in the critic's murder; Alan Napier, aka " Alfred the Butler" in the "Batman" series is the nasty critic who finds his snappy words the key to his separated spine, with Virginia Christine, the "Folger's" lady, as Hatton's first on screen victim.There's also a bit of comic relief with Bill Goodwin as the wise-cracking detective. Often, the mixture of horror and comedy is either ridiculously silly, an ingenious spoof, or off center in its Jekyll and Hyde personality. This is one film where it all works, causing me to highly praise it as being an excellent example of B films at their best.

Maybe it was because my expectations were low, but saw this on "Svenghoulie's" show and enjoyed it as an old black and white creepy movie from the late 1940s just as a Saturday night sort of thing. Not great but had some especially bright spots and a pretty decent cast and storyline, and kept you wondering what the outcome would be right up to the end. I kept expecting the story to fall apart at some point as it usually does in the ones shown on this show, but it kept continuing to be fairly engaging and had some cultural references to the art world that kept it fun to watch. I liked the portrayal of art critics and the art theme, and fun to see the actor who played "Big Jim Champion" on "Circus Boy" in a lead role, along with the monster dude who was an interesting character and had an interesting life story outside of the movie. All in all, fun to watch if you like old movies from the '40s and just want to see something not too deep or demanding that might remind you of a past era you find yourself able to get lost in.

In 1944, a strange looking actor (apparently as a result of an incident during The Great War in which his face was deformed) called Rondo Hatton made a film called The Pearl of Death (a part of the successful Sherlock Holmes series) where he played a murderer named 'The Creeper'. Apparently, Universal studios thought this character was too good for just a single outing and so obviously decided to make another film with the same actor playing the same character (and with a bigger role) and what we get is House of Horrors. The film features what would have to be described as a rather tame plot line; especially when compared to Universal's best films; such as Frankenstein and Dracula. The plot focuses on a sculptor who is dismayed by the way that critics lambaste his best works. His fortune changes one day when he rescues a man from drowning. He later discovers that this man just happens to be a murderer that the police are calling 'The Creeper', and he soon hatches a plan to have his new found friend murder his critics...The main standout of the film is undoubtedly the presence of Rondo Hatton; although the performance is rather tragic considering the disease he had that made him deformed. The role and the film really exploit this, which is rather sad. The lead actor is Martin Kosleck and he delivers a performance that doesn't quite fall short of ridiculous and its rather hard to take seriously; although it is at least entertaining. The plot is not played out with any real style and the film does feel a bit stagnant. Director Jean Yarbrough doesn't really offer much in the way of suspense and intrigue and as such we're left with just the plot to keep us interested; which the film doesn't always manage. It's always rather predictable where it's going and unfortunately the film doesn't offer much in the way of surprises. Universal horror will always be remembered as the creators of some of the best horror ever made; but I very much doubt that House of Horrors will get a mention next to their classic films of the thirties. The film is not a complete dead loss but it's not a classic either.