House on Haunted Hill

House on Haunted Hill

Frederick Loren has invited five strangers to a party of a lifetime. He is offering each of them $10,000 if they can stay the night in a house. But the house is no ordinary house. This house has a reputation for murder. Frederick offers them each a gun for protection. They all arrived in a hearse and will either leave in it $10,000 richer or leave in it dead!

Eccentric millionaire Fredrick Loren and his 4th wife, Annabelle, have invited 5 people to the house on Haunted Hill for a "haunted House" party. Whoever will stay in the house for one night will earn ten thousand dollars each. As the night progresses, all the guests are trapped inside the house with ghosts, murderers, and other terrors. . You can read more in Google, Youtube, Wiki

LinksNameQualitySeedersLeechers

House on Haunted Hill torrent reviews

Dave C (es) wrote: This is a vampire film with both expected and unexpected twists.The threatening tide of lesbianism never quite seems to break and the styling of the "heroes" as consumer mad new money vampires is a great idea... that never seems to get beyond sitting round a pool at midnight in bikinis.Played against Berlin's Love Parade ecstasy and cocaine culture it does have its moments, not enough to be great, but certainly interesting.

Branden D (de) wrote: "A Portrait of Brutality" A disturbing and unsettling display of brutality and a showcase of the deepest and darkest depths of depravity. This film is a powerful experience that is haunting and sickening. The behavior being displayed in this film is some of the most vile and grotesque I have ever seen. This film is about three prisoners locked away for nonviolent crimes who decide to brutalize their cellmate in the most twisted ways imaginable after a heated game of poker takes a dark turn. Some of the acting in this film is fantastic because of how realistic these evil individuals are portrayed. The only well known name in this film is Edward Furlong, who is also the standout here. I have never even heard of or seen anyone else in this film before but they all deliver exceptional performances. I was pretty surprised by how good the acting was in this film. Of course, this film is looked down upon for being directed by Uwe Boll who is considered to be one of the worst directors of all time. Uwe has made some awful films, but with this film he proves that he does have some talent. Stoic is a fearless film, but not exactly something you'll want to watch more than once. It's simply a portrait of the most brutal behavior you can imagine and doesn't contain much complexity or originality. I think this film is important because it shows just how evil human nature can be, but I doubt I'll ever watch it again. A good film, but not a work of art.

Jeremy L (es) wrote: I think this movie set African American people back 10 years, and Irish people back 15 years, HAHA. Very predictable movie

Matt M (fr) wrote: A tribute to the old fashioned romantic comedies based on the battle of the sexes, most obviously Pillow Talk, it's the story of the opposite's attraction between a feminist writer and a man about town journalist. Though the film certainly does have the appeal and charm of older and better movies, it simply gets dull along the way and gets lost in its own preciousness.

Nathan N (ca) wrote: Inventive but goes on for way too long.

Stefano L (us) wrote: Dopo il suo capolavoro La grande illusione, Renoir firma questo Drama espressionista ambientato tra Parigi e Le Havre, sul tragico triangolo amoroso tra una coppia di coniugi composta da un funzionario della stazione di Havre, la giovane e affascinante moglie Sverine, ed il macchinista Jacques Lantier. Definita da un romanticismo che evoca suggestioni vicine all'influenza naturalista della letteratura e dell'arte visiva, l'opera caratterizzata da una struttura narrativa pregna di forti elementi allegorici, quali riescono, grazie all'efficacia di immagini emblematiche nel preventivare situazioni e risvolti infausti, e piani sequenza ipnotici, a generare un pathos che, questa volta, mostra senza tab o censure quelle apprensioni pessimiste che tormentavano la classe proletaria in un momento della storia in cui, da l a poco, sarebbero state messe a dura prova le convinzioni e le ideologie di questa problematica casta sociale. Il risentimento da parte di Lantier (un impeccabile Gabin) di non poter uscire dai suoi schemi "ereditari" (lui stesso afferma di essere il discendente di una famiglia di alcolisti) lo porter a compiere quegli istinti omicidi manifestati verso le sue amanti, spesso paradossalmente attratte proprio dalla sua apparente condizione di serenit ed autocontrollo; un onesto lavoratore che si ritrova a fare i conti con l'arroganza del ceto aristocratico, come per il suo collega Roubaud, anche lui ormai stanco di una vita "ordinaria" e constantemente sull'orlo paranoico di una crisi di nervi (triste ma significativa la scena in cui ruba dei soldi dal portafoglio dell'amante della moglie, ucciso con la complicit di quest'ultima, e verso cui, in un primo momento, aveva promesso a s stesso di non impossessarsi dei suoi averi; promessa che, come visto, durer ben poco). Questi sentimenti di frustazione e collera porteranno i due protagonisti a quei comportamenti violenti ed pericolosamente impulsivi quali li identificheranno come "bestie umane" (dal titolo del romanzo d'ispirazione di Zola): ad affliggere gli animi inquieti di Jacques e Roubaud, c', appunto, Sverine: femme fatale che si pu rivelare un'arma a doppio taglio; anche lei, infatti, decisa ad entrare nel mondo della piccola borghesia con tutti i compromessi possibili, persino brutali (sebbene il personaggio, in s, non si possa considerare esattamente "malvagio"). Il destino dei tre sciagurati non potr che essere nefasto. Nonostante il ritmo lento della trama, Renoir dirige eccellentemente i ruoli di Gabin, Ledoux, e Simon con una maniera autentica che gli permette di rappresentare una suspense della messa in scena giocata sul continuo alterco tra buon costume e violazione delle regole.

Allan C (mx) wrote: Probably the best blaxploitation title of all time, with exception of this film's sequel "Scream, Blacula, Scream!" or "Blackenstein". Despite the very silly title, it's actually a pretty entertaining bit of 1970s horror.

Sylvester K (fr) wrote: A very loose adaptation of Lovecraft's classic tale of alien invasion. It was cheesy but fun nonetheless.

Emanuele B (jp) wrote: Requiem for a Dream is maybe one of the most depressing and heart breaking movies in the history of cinema, featuring an old woman, who starts doing drugs to fight back her addiction to chocolate and sweets and attend her favorite TV show unsuccessfully, whose son is a junkie like his best friend and his girlfriend. The movie is divided in three parts:-SUMMER, where the characters are introduced, and where Aronofsky gives the audience hope about the future of them. The love between Harry and Marion is particularly exalted, like Sara's typical widow's way to live. All the main characters underestimate their addiction to drugs as they reach their top. -FALL, where everything start crumbling. Drugs take control over everyone's life. -WINTER, aka the saddest part of the movie. Not crying is a challenge at this point, as Arronofsky great technique to create a link to all the characters makes you feel like you are part of their lives. The movie is not perfect at all, as it features a really poor character's design, an overall repetitive pacing before the latter part, a sometimes confusing photography, but has a strong and perfect soundtrack (one of the most famous in the world), a great plot and is just so entertaining, you sometimes forget to be seeing a DVD. With Trainspotting, this is the best "don't do drugs" movie ever, although I wouldn't recommend it to weak people as it may be one of the less enjoyable experience ever.

Ian F (au) wrote: I was surprised I liked this because it's a western (of sorts- it was filmed in Banff!) as well because Monroe is spellbinding and I really, REALLY need to see more of her work. She was phenomenal! Sure she overacted, but that was the 50s; everyone did by today's standards!She provided a lot of the soundtrack and sings beautifully; the rest of the soundtrack was suitable. It looked great (again, bad green screen, but it was the 50s) and... I don't know, it just worked! Well!And yes, the ending is bad, especially since Monroe's Kay almost gets raped by Robert Mitchum's Matt but really, did you expect it to end any other way? It was fitting for the times, we'll say that! But Monroe makes the movie!

Bryan C (us) wrote: I love Val Kilmer but this movie just didn't do it for me. I didn't understand his relationship with the kid was supposed to be! It didn't make sense being mad and then not being mad...and then being mad...just poorly written I think. Kilmer needs to make it back to the big screen because he is the man. I just didn't feel it in this movie. Not a whole lot of action and looked low budget!

James J G C (ag) wrote: This movie sucke dthe air out of the room. Sigourney was like fingernails on a chaulkboard. No wonder it was mnever released here since p-eople would be pissed if they paid to see this uncreative and grating pos.