Don't Go in the House (1980)

The Worst Film Ever

Excellent but underrated film

if their story seems completely bonkers, almost like a feverish work of fiction, you ain't heard nothing yet.

There's no way I can possibly love it entirely but I just think its ridiculously bad, but enjoyable at the same time.

I like this movie, it grew on me a lot since I first ever saw it. The story is very blunt and straightforward and isn't what you'd call super-complex, but I found it to be a very focused direction and I ultimately found it a very solid and satisfying psychological horror movie and I think it might be one of the more underrated gritty gems from the "Video Nasties" era. I loved the starkness and the whole dingy and dull cinematic quality that it had that gave it a certain consistent feeling of unease throughout without there ever being a single drop of blood in it. It creates a strong sense of dread by letting the audience know early on that the main character is a complete batsh*t schizoid crazy who's fully intent on taking women back to his dead mother's mansion and roasting them alive in a specially made boiler room. The first burning of the beautiful flower shop woman, which is the only one that you really see, is the most horrific part of the movie for sure and is still quite shocking because it's so prolonged and shot in such a stark unflinching fashion that really puts you on edge. The visual effect is frighteningly convincing, it looks like she's really burned alive. The house that he lives in was such a fantastic setting, very grand and decayed, and it looked so striking from the outside, very similar to the domain of Norman Bates! And to say that fire is his method of killing the place looked noticeably freezing, a lot of the time you can see the actor's breath. Dan Grimaldi was very good and effective, his character kind of talked like an overgrown bashful kid and at first he's pitiable, but for me any sympathy towards him goes right out the window after he starts burning innocent women. At that point he's nothing but a heartless murderer who doesn't deserve to live a normal life and does very much deserve to rot in the hell that he's made for himself and to be dragged down into the fire by charred phantoms of his own making... I like the odd interlude where the film takes a pause and tries out a little levity when he goes to get a disco suit with some pointers from a flamboyant tailor! I didn't like all the schlocky disco crap though, not at all, even if it does kind of add to the charm in its way. The obnoxious excuse for a song that plays over the end credits is incredibly inappropriate! Speaking of bad impressions, they really should have stuck with "The Burning" for a title, "Don't Go in the House" is a silly-sounding lame B-movie title.. I wouldn't call it a slasher at all, it's not a roller coaster 'hold me I'm scared' popcorn type of picture, it's meant to be a sad disturbing character study of a man's sad descent, one that has some horrifically effective, especially for a low budget movie, fire effects. It doesn't glorify the violence like the Freddy or Friday the 13th movies do, and it doesn't create a power figure, he can't pick people up or stab them through a door - this person isn't fun to watch in action, he's a very sick twisted individual who has been tormented. Who would want to be this man? I know he's insane but the evil whispering voices made me wonder if there was meant to be some kind of supernatural element to the story, particularly at the end when they speak to another young child with an abusive mother, and potentially starting it all over again. But of course it's more likely just a statement on the nature of abuse and how violence can beget violence, and how monsters are always made by other monsters, and that's a pretty chilling message. Anyway it's not a very nice or uplifting movie but to me it's certainly a good one that has its place in time and deserves to be seen. Not burned but nicely toasted and very well done.

It's a great movie.. Just wondering why it's still banned in some countries?? If anybody knows can U please explain why.. Don't really understand why so many good movies like this get banned in countries.. I'am a die hard 70s-80s horror n gore fan.. Now all this movies have to much CGI it all looks so damn fake.. Somebody please tell me why this movie is still banned in countries.. I saw nothing in this movie for it to get banned anywhere.. Seems all the best late 70s n early 80s horror n gore movies get banned.. The best Gore came from these movies not all this CGI crap now!!! Anyways I haven't seen anything that comes close to any of the 80s horror n Gore movies now... Take away all the CGI n go back to the basics!!

Donald Kohler is having one of those days. First he sees one of his workmates seriously burned by an exploding aerosol can in an incinerator, then his boss calls him a faggot for standing there and not helping, and then he gets home to find his mother dead. Unlucky.Donald is far from downhearted though. After crying for a while, he starts hearing voices. Voices which tell him he can do things he wasn't able to before. He can stay up late, he can play his music loud, he can turn his basement into a fireproof death chamber and burn girls alive with a flamethrower. You know? Guy stuff.One of many '80s horror films with the word "Don't" in the title, DGITH looks at things from the loony's point of view, even making you feel a little sorry for Donald when you see what a vile old harridan his mother was. Of course, when he's onto horribly burning his third victim alive, your sympathy towards him does tend to wobble a bit.Nowhere near as shocking as it would want you to believe, DGITH is actually a very sombre, low key affair with a pretty good central performance from Dan Grimaldi (Patsy Parisi from The Sopranos), and a surprisingly effective first death scene. Although Psycho is a massive influence, it also looks as if in turn, DGITH managed to influence William Lustig's Maniac (also set in New York), most notably during the dream/paranoia sequences. A lot better than I expected. 6/10

The title here is VERY apt... unless you fancy being tied up before burnt to a crisp. Yes, it's yet another Norman Bates clone, who talks to his mother even though she's a corpse in the corner and is a pyromaniac to boot, too. Not to worry though... she'll soon have some company. You'd think they'd be some kind of care in the community fallback to people like this, but nope... government cutbacks strike again. Mind you though, it IS hard to fathom why no many girls would go home with someone who displays no social skills whatsoever. It's gotta be the shirt.The first murder is exactly what you'd want... shocking and merciless. Savour it... they'll only be two more in the duration, and both are off camera. What a swizz. Instead, we have to put up with such meaningless passages such as our bats**t crazy friend shopping for clothes to wear at a disco, or 'listening' to the evil voices in his head (which are barely audible). The final couple of scenes are a comeback of sorts, but they deserve to belong to a better movie. If a film feels overlong at 80 minutes, then its got a problem. 4/10