source: The Dunwich Horror

To be honest I really didn't hate watching this movie for its first half. Yes, it all was kind of slow but I thought that this was merely a build up to something great, exciting, mysterious, tense. But none of that was the case. The movie gets progressively worse and even reaches a point that it becomes almost a totally unwatchable one. This is a movie that just never takes off. Its story just goes nowhere and it is simply a ridicules one. The concept is just too dull for an horror. The only way this type of story could possible work out is if it has a good dark, mysterious atmosphere. Something that this movie just doesn't have. It's not the type of story that provides the movie with lots of blood, monsters or scary moments. It's more about its haunting atmosphere and mysterious story and characters, which this movie just doesn't know how to handle well. There is just nothing happening and when there is it's just too ridicules and far from interesting. You also often have no idea what is happening because of the messy, offbeat way the movie gets told. It's an early '70's movie but it already has a typical sort of experimental '70's style over it. This style already sort of started off in the late '60's, so it's not really a great surprise or something renewing or original for its time. But it was this style that still made the movie a good and interesting one to watch at times. It's about one of the only positive things I can say about this movie really. I just really started to loose interest in this movie as it progressed. Instead of developing, the story becomes only more and more simplistic, dull and just plain ridicules. It was written by the then still young Curtis Hanson, who would much later go on to win an Oscar for "L.A. Confidential". I also really feel that it was more the director's fault than the writer's that this movie turned out so bad and messy. After the halve way point it seems like they had no idea anymore what they were doing or what they were trying to create at all. The story itself got based on a short H.P. Lovecraft story but the fact that there still never have been made a good movie based on the story should already also tell enough. It's a story that might work on paper but just doesn't translate very well to the silver screen and doesn't make a good horror movie, or just movie in general, at all. The movie has Dean Stockwell, Sandra Dee and Ed Begley in it but still I can't say I was too happy about the casting. Perhaps the way Dean Stockwell was sexy back in the early '70's, though I highly doubt it. And he was supposed to be a very charming and seductive character, who completely got a girl like Sandra Dee in his grip. He just looked like an '70's * actor, without any charm or charisma. He was absolutely boring and miscast in his role. It's even more sad that Sam Jaffe is also in this, who I like very much as an actor. But due to the story, dialog and directing, all of the actors come across as '50's B-monster movie actors, that often act against nothing. They must have thought they would fix things in post-production but they just messed up big time with it. A boring, slow mess, that is lacking as an horror movie and just as a movie in general as well, at basically every department. 3/10 http://bobafett1138.blogspot.com/

I rented this movie today and went over to my sisters to watch it. She took out the movie that she was currently watching to check out what I had. I guess she was enchanted by CGI and dumb dialog because in mere disappointment, she said, "what is this old sh#%?!" when the opening scene was playing. By looking at my "you're a simpleton" stare, she was quiet and continued to watch the movie until it froze. Due to this being a very old CD that was used many times, it was dirty as hell and I had to take it out to clean it. Needless to say, once it was cleaned, the show was on and going and I had not heard another peep of disapproval from her because the story is a great one despite it's out of date dialog and mannerisms. I will not go into the story of this movie but rather just ask, who doesn't like a good 'ol HP Lovecraft story? I'm sure there will be many who will pick apart the movie because it's not up whatever standards that they hold but in defense of it, for its day (1970) it's pretty good. It doesn't matter if the blonde was dumb and oblivious to evil, or dean stockwell's fake mustache, or a semi, photo transparent, hologram monster, or old school 3D visuals of horror. I mean anyone here knows that in this day and age, if we're lucky to have a girl (purposely) stranded at our house for the night, we just don't offer them a nightgown, but hey, at one point, I guess that was what people did. But none the less (again) it's a good film for it's time and still decent enough to stand up to most of the crap that's coming out of the celluloid grinder.

This movie is so terrible it is difficult to find words to describe it, but I shall make an attempt. There is a severe lack of production values, including shots filmed at dusk, blatantly dropped into scenes taking place in the dead of night. Seeing people walk around with searchlights, where the light around them is brighter than that of the searchlight, is pretty darn silly. There are a few nightmare sequences in the movie, all of them terrible. It seems that Producer Roger Corman paid a few aging hippies to run around mostly naked and covered in body paint. Filmed with a vaseline smeared lens, the nightmare scenes would have best been filmed with the lenscap on. The same could be said for all of the oddly colored negative shots that are so indicative of a late 60's early 70's occult horror film. There is a fantastic cast to this film, but they are horribly wasted. Sandra Dee spends half of her screen time writhing about like a bashful pornstar (no wonder this was her last film) and Dean Stockwell seems almost ashamed of the horrible dialog that he is forced to spew forth. Oscar winning Ed Begley sleepwalks through this movie, uncovering the entirety of the truth with an ease that only a horrible script could provide.

I, a Lovecraftian fanatic, want my money back for ever purchasing the DVD--just watching the trailer made me want to throw it out the window! I suppose for its time it entertained people half-way, but today? I am insulted. Upon watching this, I cared more for the dignified soul of H.P. Lovecraft, that is if he ever had the chance of viewing this in the possible afterlife, since he himself was fascinated with film in the 1920s, and would have been honored to have this "classic horror tale" be displayed unto the screen--BUT NOT LIKE THIS!!! One good quality: the psychedelic sequences were interesting, and Elizabeth's death looked decent--that's all! I recommend to all who's fascinated to first read the short story "The Dunwich Horror" by Lovecraft, and then view it. You will be shocked--because this "loose adaptation" is missing the true qualities that make the story come to life. Wilbur Whateley was only 15 in the story, yet 9 feet tall, had the most revolting death sequence in mid-plot that's worth seeing cinematic ally, and "Nancy Wagner" along with her girlfriend were not characters within its 10 chapters. Once you understand that "The Dunwich Horror" is a prize-winning story, then you shall see how big of a let-down this movie is. I can say that Daniel Haller at least tried his best, but it's just damn surprising to think that this came out the same decade "The Exorcist" did, so what went wrong with this!? The screenwriter butchered the masterpiece that Lovecraft created. Daniel Haller made it a laughing stock. Dean Stockwell took some punches (literally, with a security guard), but did very little if no research in how to behave as a demonic hybrid, except growing a mustache and sideburns. Ed Begley did what he could. Sandra Dee didn't belong, but if she was aiming to pass off as a vulnerable, brainless blonde, then yeah she succeeded in putting the "*" in "horror," not that I'm saying she's a bad actress, just had a bad character. The only real feeling I get after getting done viewing it is that bitter taste in your mouth that vodka leaves in the back of your throat. At least in 1970 all the high school boys had a reason to take their girlfriends to the drive-thru, and were better off not watching it and making out in their back seats.

Another movie featuring Gothic horror that collides with late 1960's psychedelic/Hippie clothing, fashions, design, etc. It makes for a potent combination that is somewhat silly but great fun to look at. The rumor is that Peter Fonda was supposed to play the lead but Dean Stockwell stepped in at the last minute. It would have sure been a different movie with old Pete. Stockwell gives the role a creepy yet seductive intensity. Could Fonda have done the same? Not so sure about that. I tend to think that Peter Fonda would have been a little too "slick" for this role, that is, too much on the side of the sleazy seducer and too little on the side of the menacing necromancer. But, who knows, that's just my silly idle speculation, as Peter never did the role. This would make a great double feature with "Simon: King of The Witches," also currently available on DVD. Filmed shortly after this film, also has a warlock, and a lot of trippy psychedelic visual effects. Also great fun to look at and quite entertaining performance in the lead role by Andrew Prine.

As Sandra Dee got older her youthful virginal image did not play well in the 60s counterculture. The Dunwich Horror was an effort to save her career and break the typecasting. Sandra getting a little long in the tooth for a college student meets a rather strange Dean Stockwell who is looking a rare book that professor Ed Begley has. It contains some spells that will bring some creatures from another dimension and Begley doesn't want to part with it. Stockwell then steals it and returns home with Dee. Dean's got big plans for Sandra. She's to be part of a ritual that will open up the portals to another dimension. And he's got reason to want to bring these beings into our universe. The Dunwich Horror didn't serve the careers of Dean Stockwell or Sandra Dee very well. Ed Begley does well in a sympathetic role, one of his last. But I was singularly unmoved by it all.

This movie is a HOOT! Unintentionally, of course--which makes it all the better. Dean Stockwell moves through most of the movie like he's heavily sedated (or maybe in shock at finding himself in such a bad movie), only coming to life in the film's climax. Poor Sandra Dee--the eternal virgin--has to learn the hard way never to give strange young men a ride home from the library. Psychedelic "special effects" complete the experience...all of it taking place in the accursed hamlet of Dunwich...but I won't spoil the fun by saying any more. Let me just add that I am a fan of Lovecraft's & should have been miffed at this botched attempt...but I was too busy laughing.

I saw this movie when I was around 13 years old.I felt the movie seemed a bit like a "movie of the week". The only great thing about this movie was the intro at the beginning and the theme of the movie. The intro (beginning credits) was a scary cartoon done in shadow.In the cartoon you see a woman giving birth to a baby to be quickly taken away by the "devil" who then eats the baby! Very strange to say the least.I tried to get the soundtrack on CD but I had to settle on getting a 12 inch record. When it came on DVD,I bought it just for the intro!

The film boasts fairly good performances by some veteran Character actors. Ed Begley is a rock-like Armitage, and Sam Jaffe is an appropriately mangy (and deranged) Old Whately.However, it could have benefited from much better direction and a tighter script.It would also have helped to set it in the Twenties. Perhaps Tim Burton could do a remake. In fact a couple of Lovecraft's tales could stand retelling by Burton-or Lynch.