NekoHomey Purely Joyful Movie!

TeenzTen An action-packed slog

Donald Seymour This is one of the best movies I’ve seen in a very long time. You have to go and see this on the big screen.

Lucia Ayala It's simply great fun, a winsome film and an occasionally over-the-top luxury fantasy that never flags.

Kirpianuscus It is obvious than the work of Edgar Allan Poe is only a pretext for a film from that category. but the word pretext, in this case , it is less. first, for the plot reduced at ... nothing. second - for the awful performances. and, sure, for the worst dialogue. from beginning the expectations are not high but you believe to see a small sparkle or a symbolic connection with the text of Poe. but than is too much. so, a precise target and a reasonable end.and nothing more.

nzswanny Why is this even called House Of Usher??? It's barely got anything to do with the original! Being a fan of the original The House Of Usher movie, I decided to watch this remake, which I thought was going to be decent. But, oh my god, this was terrible! The dialogue was god-awful, the story barely had a connection to House Of Usher and there was too much scenes with men in their underwear that were completely UNNECESSARY! Those scenes wouldn't even be that bad if they were actually needed! But it's not really those scenes that are bad...it's the dialogue and acting that are terrible. These two things annoyed me so much through out the film, and their were no redeeming features to fix those two flaws. This film also had no scares, and I'm glad that it only got 1000$ at the box office.Overall, I'd rate this a 2.1/10!

Alfredzur I guess this is what you get when you cast underwear models as actors. Apparently they can't do both at the same time. I had no idea what to expect when I watched this. If it weren't for the very occasional nudity (rear, distant) and the (not very suggestive) suggestive scenes, it could go into a 10 worst movies of all time list. One positive note - it was on TV, so I didn't have to pay to see it. I noted that I am including a "spoiler" in this review, but, believe me, the concept was spoiled long before I put my fingers on the keyboard. Why waste the film? Why waste your time? Other than pretty faces, there's really nothing here. I can understand a new inexperienced director wanting to try things, but not at my expense.

Hubert I really enjoyed watching this film. It is both gay soft-core erotica & an intriguing horror film with minimal gore. This to me is a fresh approach, which gives erotica viewers a real plot, & horror viewers a rare gay take on a classic situation. If you like lots of gruesome makeup, instead of style & atmosphere, this may not be your film; I like the older Hammer & Universal films which relied on pacing, interesting camera work, & simple effects to suggest supernatural events & set a mood -- which this film does effectively IMHO. Believe it or not -- and this is aimed at the reviewer who hadn't even read Poe & still criticized the film for its lack of fidelity to the source -- it is a reasonable interpretation of the Poe story, down to plot elements, with a couple of additions. One is the explicit homo-erotic element: in the story, the narrator/visitor character and Roderick Usher are just "friends." I felt that the gay element was handled tastefully and well. The movie has some genuinely arousing scenes, but no nudity or explicit sex; the cast are uniformly handsome & flatteringly photographed; and they CAN act -- nobody stumbled over lines, or furniture, or lacked focus on their scene partners. The other added element is the twist ending, or epilogue, which is (spoiler) a tribute to the surprise ending of the great & influential German expressionist silent, The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari. If this sounds like the genre of film you like, it is well worth your time.