The Dungeon of Harrow (1964)

Absolutely the worst movie.

Fun premise, good actors, bad writing. This film seemed to have potential at the beginning but it quickly devolves into a trite action film. Ultimately it's very boring.

A lot of perfectly good film show their cards early, establish a unique premise and let the audience explore a topic at a leisurely pace, without much in terms of surprise. this film is not one of those films.

A movie that not only functions as a solid scarefest but a razor-sharp satire.

The Dungeon of Harrow (1962) BOMB (out of 4)Aaron Fallon (Russ Harvey) survives a shipwreck and washes up on an island. He wonders around before reaching a castle owned by Count Lorente de Sade (William McNulty) who is hiding some dark secrets about his family.THE DUNGEON OF HARROW is a really awful movie that has somewhat gained a cult following over the years. This was apparently a very popular film on television back in the 1970s, which means that a lot of kids would watch it and keep its memory alive through the years. Today the film is basically remembered for how bad it is and it really does deserve that reputation because there's really not too many good things you can say about it.The biggest issue with the film is that it's deadly dull to the point where most people aren't going to be able to stay with it. The film basically has the Aaron character narrating the whole thing so we have to hear his non-stop thoughts and there's no question that the screenwriter got a major workout because there's pretty much nothing but dialogue here. It's poorly written and the narration of it is so dull that it just kills the film even more.Another problem is that it's clear the director didn't know how to make a movie as scenes drag on for no reason, often times you feel as if you're watching an outtake and just take a look at the opening shipwreck! This here has to be one of the worst looking special effects ever used for a film. The performances are also just as bad but for some strange reason I think they're the best thing in the movie. Yes, they are quite awful but at the same time they're so numbing that you almost can deal with them.I will say that there are some "so bad they're good" looking make-up effects at the end but by the time they show up most people will be bored to the point where they've turned the film off. THE DUNGEON OF HARROW is a really cheap attempt at trying to make a Corman-Poe picture but it pretty much fails on every level.

"Dungeon of Harrow contains sequences so degrading that they surpass your worst nightmares"… Ha ha, right! Behold some of the lies and nonsense they dare to put on DVD boxes in order to lure unsuspecting horror fans. The only things "Dungeon of Harrow" contains are dreadfully overlong and boring sequences, practically inaudible dialogs, semi- processed sub plots and a budget so small the crew probably couldn't even afford cream in their coffees! This is seriously one of the most infuriatingly dull and incompetent movies I've seen in a large number of years, but for some incomprehensible reason, it still appears to have a modest cult-following. This is mainly because its writer/director Pat Boyette was also a comic book artist. I'm not familiar with his work, but I sure hope it's better than his filmmaking skills. The film opens with two men, an obnoxious aristocrat and a sea captain, washing ashore an island as sole survivors after their ship got wrecked in a storm. The island belongs to the utterly bonkers Count Lorente de Sade, who has overlong conversations with his evil persona whilst his wife is rotting away from leprosy in the basement. De Sade also has a couple of loyal servants, including a large black man with white hair and a cute brunette. The voluptuous blond illustrated on the DVD-cover naturally doesn't appear at all. Anyway, the castaways naturally run into conflict with the crazed count and end up in the torture dungeon. Sounds very exciting and all, but we actually don't get to witness any torture. Worse, in fact, the entire movie doesn't even feature a moment of suspense or a glimpse of morbidity. The only nice touch is the leprosy sub plot, but Pat Boyette doesn't even have the courage to properly exploit that controversial theme. The cast is an assembly of amateurish volunteers. The guy depicting Count de Sade shows a resemblance to Boris Karloff in that period, which is probably why he got the part. c

This movie tries to be more than it is. First of all, the acting is horrible. You have to get past the incredibly bad delivering of lines and terrible emoting. The plot is quite interesting. A shipwreck occurs (apparently because it was made out of strings and balsa wood), and a couple of guys find themselves on shore. If this weren't bad enough, some guy named Count de Sade is living there as well. He lives in fear of pirates and has gone utterly insane. Anyway, he has a large slave, a young woman, and some dogs. There's another woman who doesn't speak and his wife, who is a leper. Anyway, things get bad as these men have to deal with this nut case. He is arrogant and likes to pose and deliver lines. The rest of the movie involves an attempt to escape. It has an ironic ending which I won't reveal and it kind of rescues the film. I wouldn't bother if I were you.

This movie had its moments. Really the story wasn't too bad, and it wasn't like most other low budget movies where you can't follow the plot. The whole idea of a man following his leperous wife into the leper colony is touching. When you add in the fact that she goes crazy shortly there after it becomes quite tragic. I mean your not going to get the emotion from the actors, but at least the story was good.Low budget, absolutely no doubt about it, you can't even question it after the toy floating boat in the first 5 minutes of the movie. But when the star goes into the dungeon and meets up with the deranged bride . . . that was a creepy scene. Maybe the best low budget movie moment I've ever seen. For that scene alone I give it 6 stars, then add in a decent plot and you've got my 7.