Dead Ringer (1963)

Dead Ringer (1963)

Synopsis: 

In Dead Ringer, Bette Davis plays twin sisters who lead very different lives. One sister, Edith, is a successful and wealthy owner of a nightclub, while the other, the troubled and envious, is looking to escape her mundane existence. Consumed by jealousy, she kills Edith and assumes her identity. As she navigates this new life, she faces the scrutiny of a diligent police sergeant (Karl Malden) and a charming suitor (Peter Lawford), leading to a tense game of cat and mouse as her deception unravels.

Notable Actors:

Bette Davis as the twin sisters

Karl Malden as Police Sergeant

Peter Lawford as the suitor

Philip Carey as the nightclub manager

Jean Hagen as a supporting character

Trivia:

1. Bette Davis received critical acclaim for her dual role, showcasing her range as an actress.
2. The film was directed by Paul Henreid, who is best known for his role in Casablanca.
3. The film explores themes of identity, envy, and the consequences of deception.

Rating: 

The rating of ★★★★☆ (4/5) for Dead Ringer reflects its strong performances, particularly by Bette Davis, who masterfully portrays both sisters with depth and nuance. The film's engaging plot twists and psychological tension keep viewers captivated, as it explores themes of envy, identity, and the consequences of deception.

The direction by Paul Henreid adds to the film's noir atmosphere, effectively creating suspense throughout. The supporting cast, including Karl Malden and Peter Lawford, contributes to the tension and intrigue of the story. 

However, while the film is compelling, it may feel dated to some modern audiences, and certain pacing issues can detract from the overall impact. Nevertheless, Dead Ringer stands out for its strong character development and gripping narrative, making it a noteworthy thriller in its era.

Comparison: 

Dead Ringer shares thematic similarities with Gone Girl (2014), both featuring complex female protagonists who manipulate their identities to achieve their desires. While Dead Ringer leans more towards classic film noir with its psychological twists, Gone Girl offers a modern take on marital deceit and media manipulation. Both films effectively keep audiences on the edge of their seats with their suspenseful narratives and intricate character developments.

Strait-Jacket (1964)

 Strait-Jacket (1964)

Runtime: 1 hour, 33 minutes

Genre: Horror, Thriller, Drama

Rating: TV-14

Directed by: William Castle

Starring: Joan Crawford, Diane Baker, Leif Erickson, Howard St. John, John Anthony Hayes, Rochelle Hudson, George Kennedy, Edith Atwater, Mitchell Cox

Audio/Subtitles: English

---

Synopsis:

Strait-Jacket tells the chilling tale of Lucy Harbin (Joan Crawford), a woman who was institutionalized for 20 years after brutally decapitating her husband and his lover in a jealous rage. Upon her release, she is reunited with her daughter Carol (Diane Baker), who was a child at the time of the murders. Lucy struggles to reintegrate into society and rebuild her relationship with Carol, but things take a dark turn when a series of axe murders begin to occur, raising the question: Is Lucy falling back into her old violent ways, or is something more sinister at play?

---

Notable Actors:

Joan Crawford as Lucy Harbin: A legendary figure in Hollywood, Crawford delivers a powerful performance as the tormented, emotionally scarred protagonist. Known for her strong screen presence, Crawford brings depth to the role of a woman haunted by her past.

Diane Baker as Carol Harbin: Carol is Lucy’s daughter, who tries to help her mother adjust to life after her release from the asylum. Baker portrays Carol with a mix of love and suspicion, making her central to the film’s mystery.

Leif Erickson as Bill Cutler: Bill is Lucy's brother-in-law, who is concerned about her return to the family home.

George Kennedy as Leo Krause: A handyman who gets caught up in the mystery of the recent murders.

---

Trivia:

• William Castle's Gimmicks: Castle, the film’s director, was known for using gimmicks to market his films. For Strait-Jacket, audiences attending the premiere were given cardboard axes as souvenirs, adding to the film’s campy yet thrilling experience.
• Joan Crawford's Involvement: Crawford took her role in Strait-Jacket seriously and worked closely with William Castle to improve the script and production. She even made demands to change the casting, and some believe her presence elevated the film far beyond typical B-horror flicks of the time.
• A Nod to Psycho (1960): The film draws obvious inspiration from Alfred Hitchcock’s Psycho, particularly with the focus on psychological trauma and axe murders. The screenplay was written by Robert Bloch, who also penned the novel Psycho.

---

Rating:

4.5/5. Strait-Jacket delivers as a psychological horror with an engaging mystery and plenty of suspense. Joan Crawford's performance adds gravitas to the B-movie horror, making it a classic of the genre. The film's tension builds steadily, keeping viewers guessing until the shocking finale. The axe-wielding murders and the themes of sanity and guilt are classic horror tropes, used effectively to create an eerie, unsettling atmosphere.

---

Comparison:

Strait-Jacket is often compared to later psychological horror films like What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962), which also starred Joan Crawford. Both films explore the themes of madness, aging, and the tension between familial relationships. While Strait-Jacket is more straightforward in its slasher elements, it shares similarities with Psycho (1960) in its exploration of mental health and trauma.

More modernly, Strait-Jacket can be compared to the 2019 film Ma, starring Octavia Spencer, in which a woman with a traumatic past takes revenge on a younger generation. Both films depict women grappling with their dark histories while unraveling in psychological horror settings.

Tusk (2014)

 Tusk (2014)

Synopsis:

Tusk is a horror-comedy film written and directed by Kevin Smith. The story follows Wallace Bryton (Justin Long), a podcaster who travels to Canada to interview a recluse named Howard Howe (Michael Parks). After arriving, Wallace finds himself in a bizarre situation when Howard reveals his obsession with walruses and his intention to transform Wallace into one. As Wallace's friends, including his girlfriend (Genesis Rodriguez) and podcast partner (Haley Joel Osment), search for him, the film delves into themes of identity, isolation, and the grotesque.

Notable Actors:

Justin Long (Wallace Bryton)

Michael Parks (Howard Howe)

Genesis Rodriguez (Allie)

Haley Joel Osment (Teddy)

Trivia:

• Tusk was inspired by a real-life classified ad that Kevin Smith found, where a man offered free room and board in exchange for someone to dress up as a walrus.
• The film was part of a planned trilogy that includes Yoga Hosers and Moose Jaws, both of which are interconnected in a unique way.
• Michael Parks' performance as Howard Howe received significant acclaim, and he delivers a monologue about walrus transformation that stands out in the film.

Director:

Kevin Smith, known for his cult classic films like Clerks and Chasing Amy, takes a turn into horror with Tusk, blending dark humor and unsettling themes in a way that only he can.

Rating:

3.5/5 stars. Tusk is a polarizing film that embraces its absurdity, blending horror and comedy in a way that challenges conventional storytelling. The performances, particularly by Parks, elevate the bizarre premise, though its unique style may not resonate with all viewers. It offers an unsettling exploration of identity and transformation, leaving a lasting impression.

Comparison:

Tusk can be compared to The Human Centipede (2009) in its exploration of body horror and grotesque transformations. Both films focus on extreme scenarios that challenge the limits of human experience and morality. However, while The Human Centipede leans heavily into shock value and pure horror, Tusk balances its horror elements with dark humor and absurdity.

Additionally, the theme of a man’s descent into a horrific situation due to the whims of another person connects both films. While Tusk offers moments of levity and a quirky narrative style characteristic of Kevin Smith, The Human Centipede presents a more straightforward and disturbing premise. Fans of offbeat horror will likely find something to appreciate in both, but they cater to different tastes within the genre.

The House That Dripped Blood (1970)

 The House That Dripped Blood (1970)

Synopsis:

The House That Dripped Blood is an anthology horror film, split into four eerie stories centered around a mysterious house. Each segment delves into the lives of different tenants who experience supernatural events, often leading to terrifying consequences. The connecting narrative involves a police inspector investigating the strange disappearances of the house’s occupants. From cursed waxworks to a vampire in disguise, the film touches on various horror subgenres, weaving a chilling atmosphere throughout.

Trivia:

• This movie was produced by Amicus Productions, a British studio known for its anthology horror films in the 1960s and 1970s, in contrast to Hammer Films' more straightforward horror approach.
• Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing, both horror legends, shared the screen again in this film, adding to their long list of collaborations.
• Ingrid Pitt, the glamorous star of Hammer Horror films, is featured in one of the segments, bringing her signature charm and menace to the role.

Director:

• Peter Duffell directed this anthology, marking one of his most notable entries into the horror genre. This film is often seen as his standout work, though his filmography leans more toward thrillers and dramas.

Rating:4/5 stars. 

The House That Dripped Blood delivers well-crafted, atmospheric horror, with performances from genre icons. Some segments may feel uneven, but overall, it’s a haunting treat for fans of British horror anthologies. The House That Dripped Blood is a prime example of British anthology horror, blending mystery, supernatural elements, and psychological thrills. The film benefits immensely from its cast, with Christopher Lee and Peter Cushing delivering solid, often understated performances that anchor the film in its more serious moments. The segments have a subtle, creeping tension rather than overt jump scares, which adds to the film’s unsettling atmosphere.

While the structure of the anthology works well, some of the segments feel stronger than others. "Sweets to the Sweet," featuring Lee as a father hiding dark secrets from his daughter, stands out for its chilling psychological intensity, while "The Cloak," with Jon Pertwee and Ingrid Pitt, leans into a campier horror-comedy tone that might not sit well with all viewers. The variety in tone between the stories is both a strength and a potential drawback, depending on how much you enjoy this mix.

The film’s pacing can feel slow by modern standards, but it’s a deliberate choice that builds suspense rather than offering constant thrills. The gothic aesthetic, combined with the understated but effective special effects of the time, keeps it visually engaging. Overall, The House That Dripped Blood earns its 4-star rating for its atmosphere, performances, and its place as a significant entry in the 1970s British horror canon, though it loses a star due to the unevenness of the stories.

Comparison:

The House That Dripped Blood bears similarities to the more modern horror anthology series American Horror Story (2011–present), particularly in its ability to explore different subgenres within the horror umbrella while connecting them through an overarching narrative. Much like American Horror Story, this film keeps viewers on edge with a variety of unsettling stories that range from psychological horror to the supernatural. When comparing The House That Dripped Blood to American Horror Story (2011–present), the similarities lie in the anthology format and the ability to explore a wide range of horror tropes. Both properties embrace the idea of telling distinct stories with a shared thematic connection—in the case of The House That Dripped Blood, the ominous house, while American Horror Story often connects seasons with recurring actors and intertwined plots.

Much like American Horror Story, this film shifts between horror subgenres, from the psychological to the supernatural to the macabre. The main difference is in the delivery; where American Horror Story is often graphic, modern, and unafraid to shock with explicit content, The House That Dripped Blood relies more on implied horror, mood, and atmosphere, which was common in 1970s horror films. The more restrained, British sensibility contrasts with the bold, sometimes outrageous nature of American Horror Story, but both keep audiences engaged with the unpredictability of the anthology format.

Additionally, The House That Dripped Blood's segment "The Cloak" adds a meta layer to its storytelling, much like American Horror Story: Roanoke (Season 6) does with its commentary on horror media and performance. Both properties blend horror with humor or self-awareness at times, creating an interesting balance that keeps viewers off guard.

However, while The House That Dripped Blood feels more polished in its narrative cohesion across stories, American Horror Story tends to go for a more chaotic, visceral approach, with stories and visuals designed to shock. If you enjoy the methodical, gothic creepiness of The House That Dripped Blood, you might appreciate the early seasons of American Horror Story—especially Murder House and Asylum—which similarly focus on haunted spaces and psychological dread.

Both are anthology staples of their respective times, each leaving a mark on the horror genre by experimenting with style, tone, and narrative flexibility.

Parents (1989)

Parents (1989) is a dark comedy horror film directed by Bob Balaban. The movie blends suburban 1950s nostalgia with unsettling, macabre elements, offering a satirical take on the American family. 

Synopsis:

Set in the 1950s, the story follows 10-year-old Michael Laemle (played by Bryan Madorsky) as he begins to suspect that his parents, Nick (Randy Quaid) and Lily Laemle (Mary Beth Hurt), are not just your typical suburban couple. Michael's suspicions deepen when he realizes that the meat his parents serve for dinner may have a horrifying origin. As the film progresses, Michael’s paranoia grows, leading to a climactic revelation about the true nature of his family’s diet.

Additional Insights:

• Psychological Depth: One of the most interesting aspects of Parents is how it handles the psychological tension between a child and his parents. Michael’s growing awareness that something is wrong but his inability to fully comprehend it taps into the primal fear of trusting your guardians while sensing danger.

• 50s Nostalgia with a Twist: The film's visual style, with its 1950s décor and fashion, is ironically comforting, creating a juxtaposition with the dark events happening under the surface. This thematic contrast is one of the reasons Parents remains memorable—it subverts an era that’s often viewed with rose-tinted nostalgia.

In comparison to more modern films, Parents paved the way for stories that take seemingly perfect settings and inject them with horror or psychological unease. Films like Get Out (2017) also work with this concept, pulling back the facade of normalcy to reveal something much darker.

Notable Actors:

Randy Quaid (Nick Laemle)

• Career: Randy Quaid has had a long and varied career, excelling in both dramatic and comedic roles. He is best known for his role as Cousin Eddie in the National Lampoon's Vacation series, where his comedic timing and eccentric character became iconic. He also earned an Academy Award nomination for Best Supporting Actor for his role in The Last Detail (1973).

• Fun Fact: Randy Quaid is the older brother of actor Dennis Quaid. In recent years, he’s been involved in some legal troubles and has made headlines for various conspiracy theories.

• Other Notable Roles: Independence Day (1996), Kingpin (1996), Brokeback Mountain (2005)

Mary Beth Hurt (Lily Laemle)

• Career: Mary Beth Hurt has had a long career in film and theater. Known for her roles in films like The World According to Garp (1982) and Interiors (1978), she often plays characters with a sense of vulnerability or complexity. In Parents, she perfectly balances Lily’s housewife charm with an undercurrent of menace.

• Fun Fact: Mary Beth Hurt was married to acclaimed director Paul Schrader, who wrote Taxi Driver and directed American Gigolo. She has also been active on Broadway and has worked with prominent directors like Woody Allen and Paul Newman.

• Other Notable Roles: The Age of Innocence (1993), The Exorcism of Emily Rose (2005), Lady in the Water (2006)

Bryan Madorsky (Michael Laemle)

• Career: Parents was Bryan Madorsky’s first and most notable film role. His portrayal of Michael, the quiet and observant child who slowly unravels the mystery behind his family, is deeply unsettling. Madorsky’s performance is characterized by a cold, almost emotionless demeanor, which enhances the film's overall creepy atmosphere.

• Fun Fact: After Parents, Madorsky largely stepped away from acting and pursued a career in finance.

Sandy Dennis (Millie Dew)

• Career: Sandy Dennis was an Academy Award-winning actress known for her unique, often quirky roles in films and on stage. She won an Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf? (1966). In Parents, she plays Michael's concerned school counselor, bringing a strange but compassionate energy to the role.
• Fun Fact: Sandy Dennis was known for her unconventional mannerisms and nervous energy, which became her trademark as an actress. She also had a passion for animal rescue, and at one point, lived with over 30 cats.
• Other Notable Roles: The Out-of-Towners (1970), Up the Down Staircase (1967), Come Back to the 5 & Dime, Jimmy Dean, Jimmy Dean (1982)

Trivia:

- The film's unsettling tone is accentuated by its contrast with the idyllic 1950s setting, highlighting the era’s emphasis on conformity and the dark secrets that can lurk beneath a "perfect" suburban life.
- Director **Bob Balaban**, who is better known for his acting roles in films like *Close Encounters of the Third Kind* and *Gosford Park*, brings a unique sensibility to the film, infusing it with both humor and horror.
- The film explores themes of parental authority, childhood fears, and repressed desires, making it a cult favorite among fans of psychological horror.

Director: 

Bob Balaban’s direction focuses on visual storytelling and offbeat humor, giving the film its unique blend of eerie suspense and black comedy. Though primarily an actor, Balaban’s work behind the camera in *Parents* is often regarded as his most significant directorial effort.

Rating: 3.5/5 stars

Parents deserves credit for its unique combination of black comedy and psychological horror. While not a mainstream hit, it has earned cult status for the following reasons:

• Atmosphere & Tone (4/5): The film excels at creating a deeply unsettling atmosphere, where the facade of 1950s suburban perfection hides something far more sinister. The use of retro set designs and costumes adds to the eerie contrast between the innocence of the era and the film’s dark undercurrent.

• Acting (4/5): Randy Quaid and Mary Beth Hurt deliver standout performances as the unnervingly cheerful but strange parents. Their ability to embody both the wholesome charm of the era and a lurking menace adds to the film’s suspense. Bryan Madorsky, as their son Michael, conveys his growing paranoia and fear in a way that is both compelling and unsettling. His awkward, almost robotic performance adds to the film's surreal tone.

• Story & Pacing (3/5): The plot is straightforward but filled with psychological tension, as Michael's suspicions about his parents slowly unravel. However, the pacing may feel slow for some, especially in the middle, where the build-up takes its time before reaching the climax. The ambiguity of the film might frustrate viewers looking for a more concrete resolution.

• Rewatch ability (2.5/5): While the film’s quirky tone and dark humor will appeal to fans of offbeat cinema, it’s not the kind of movie that has mass rewatch ability. Its impact comes more from the initial shock and mystery, which may lessen on repeat viewings.

click if you dare

Overall, it’s a distinctive film with a bizarre charm that will appeal to fans of dark humor, psychological horror, and twisted takes on family dynamics. Its cult following comes from its off-kilter narrative and performances, but it may not be everyone’s cup of tea.

Comparison:

A more recent film that shares a similar vibe to *Parents* is **Vivarium** (2019). Both films explore the claustrophobic, eerie nature of suburban life and the unsettling dynamics of family relationships. Like *Parents*, *Vivarium* dives into themes of isolation, control, and the dark side of domesticity, making it a good contemporary comparison.

The Mad Room (1969)

The Mad Room (1969) is a psychological horror film that dives into the themes of mental illness, family dynamics, and paranoia. Directed by Bernard Girard, the movie is a remake of the 1941 film Ladies in Retirement but with a contemporary twist for the late 1960s.

Synopsis:

The story centers around Ellen Hardy (played by Stella Stevens), a young woman who works as a live-in secretary for a wealthy socialite, Mrs. Armstrong (played by Beverly Garland). Ellen's life takes a turn when her younger siblings, George (Michael Burns) and Mandy (Barbara Sammeth), are released from a mental institution after being accused of murdering their parents years earlier. Ellen tries to keep their troubled past a secret, but things spiral out of control when another murder occurs, raising suspicions about whether the siblings are truly cured or still dangerous.

Notable Actors:

Stella Stevens as Ellen Hardy

Shelley Winters as Mrs. Armstrong

Beverly Garland as Mrs. Racine

Michael Burns as George

Barbara Sammeth as Mandy

Trivia:

- Shelley Winters, known for her intense roles, adds tension to the film with her portrayal of the domineering Mrs. Armstrong.

- The film taps into the late 1960s fascination with psychological horror, following the success of Psycho (1960) and Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962).

Director:

Bernard Girard, whose filmography spans different genres, brings a slow-burn atmosphere to the movie, with heavy reliance on mood and character psychology.

Rating:

3/5 stars 

While the performances, particularly by Shelley Winters and Stella Stevens, are commendable, the pacing can feel a bit slow, and the plot predictable by today’s standards. However, it's a decent thriller for fans of vintage psychological horror.

Comparison to a newer TV show or movie:

If you enjoy The Mad Room, you might find similarities with the Netflix series The Haunting of Hill House (2018). Both deal with family secrets, psychological trauma, and the question of what’s real versus imagined. They focus on siblings with a troubled past and include elements of both psychological and supernatural horror, blending slow-burn tension with moments of genuine fright.

What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)

 What Ever Happened to Baby Jane? (1962)

Synopsis:

*What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?* is a psychological horror thriller centered on the dysfunctional relationship between two aging sisters, Jane and Blanche Hudson, both former stars in show business. Jane, a former child star, is now mentally unstable and holds a deep resentment toward Blanche, who was once a successful actress before a mysterious car accident left her paralyzed. The film follows Jane's increasingly erratic behavior as she holds Blanche captive in their decaying Hollywood mansion, leading to shocking and chilling outcomes.

Notable Actors:

- **Bette Davis** as Baby Jane Hudson

- **Joan Crawford** as Blanche Hudson

- **Victor Buono** as Edwin Flagg

- **Maidie Norman** as Elvira Stitt

Trivia:

- The real-life rivalry between Bette Davis and Joan Crawford added a layer of tension to their performances. Their feud became one of Hollywood's most infamous off-screen dramas.

- Bette Davis was nominated for an Academy Award for her role as Jane Hudson. The makeup for her character was deliberately grotesque, with Davis insisting on applying the makeup herself to create an unsettling, decaying look for Jane.

- The film revitalized both actresses' careers and is considered a landmark in the "Grande Dame Guignol" subgenre, where older actresses play roles in psychological horror films.

- Victor Buono, who played Edwin Flagg, was also nominated for an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor.

Director:

- **Robert Aldrich**, known for his work in various genres, including westerns, war films, and thrillers. His direction of *What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?* is one of his most acclaimed projects, cementing his legacy in the psychological horror genre.

Rating: 

4.5/5 stars

    *What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?* is indeed a classic of psychological horror, and this is largely due to its skillful blending of psychological tension, eerie atmosphere, and unforgettable performances by Bette Davis and Joan Crawford. The film thrives on the tension between the two sisters, both victims of their own insecurities and long-standing grudges. The decaying mansion they live in becomes a metaphor for their crumbling mental states, especially Jane's, whose behavior spirals further into madness as the story progresses.

The horror in *Baby Jane* is not based on gore or jump scares but rather on the deeply unsettling psychological torment Jane inflicts on Blanche. Jane’s grotesque appearance—her garish makeup, doll-like outfits, and erratic behavior—mirrors the decay of her mind. The film's atmosphere of dread builds gradually, as Jane's actions become more disturbing, trapping both Blanche and the audience in a claustrophobic nightmare. The sight of Jane serving Blanche a "special meal" of dead pets or performing a grotesque vaudeville routine adds a layer of dark, twisted humor that only heightens the sense of unease.

At its core, the movie is a character study of two women grappling with lost fame, envy, and bitterness. Jane's inability to let go of her past glory leads her to resent Blanche, who once eclipsed her as an actress, while Blanche, immobilized and vulnerable, becomes a tragic figure whose guilt and passivity render her powerless against her sister’s cruelty.

The performances of Davis and Crawford are central to the film’s lasting impact. Davis, in particular, delivers a fearless portrayal of Jane, embracing the character's grotesqueness and instability, while Crawford plays Blanche with a subtle dignity that contrasts with Jane's mania. The tension between the two actresses in real life infuses their scenes with a raw energy that makes their interactions all the more intense and uncomfortable.

The film's sense of "decay" extends beyond just Jane’s mental state and physical appearance. The mansion they live in is a crumbling relic of Hollywood's golden age, much like the sisters themselves. This physical and emotional decay creates a haunting backdrop for the unraveling of Jane’s fragile psyche, making the house feel as though it, too, is a living part of their tragic downfall.

In the tradition of psychological horror, *What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?* stands out for its emphasis on the internal horrors of guilt, jealousy, and the passage of time, making it a deeply unsettling experience that lingers long after the credits roll. The film’s ability to disturb lies not in what it shows but in what it implies, making it a masterclass in sustained tension, psychological manipulation, and emotional decay.

Comparison:

If you enjoyed *What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?*, you might find similarities in **Ryan Murphy's TV series *Feud: Bette and Joan* (2017)**, which dramatizes the behind-the-scenes rivalry between Bette Davis and Joan Crawford during the making of this very film. The series explores the complicated dynamics between the actresses, echoing the themes of jealousy and faded fame seen in *Baby Jane* itself.