A young doctor visits the secluded home of his ailing mentor - Eric Usher - who believes the house itself is alive and plotting to drive him insane, manifesting itself through ghostly appari... Read allA young doctor visits the secluded home of his ailing mentor - Eric Usher - who believes the house itself is alive and plotting to drive him insane, manifesting itself through ghostly apparitions.A young doctor visits the secluded home of his ailing mentor - Eric Usher - who believes the house itself is alive and plotting to drive him insane, manifesting itself through ghostly apparitions.
Antonio Mayans
- Alan Harker
- (as Robert Foster)
Daniel White
- Dr. Seward
- (as Daniel Villiers)
Analía Ivars
- Caged Girl (French version)
- (as Joan Virly)
Flavia Mayans
- Murdered Girl
- (as Flavia Hervás)
- Directors
- Writers
- All cast & crew
- Production, box office & more at IMDbPro
Storyline
Did you know
- TriviaSeveral scenes in black and white from "The Awful Dr. Orlof" (1962) were used in the third cut of the film as flashbacks of a young Usher, since Usher and Orlof were interpreted by the same actor, Howard Vernon.
- Alternate versionsThere are three different versions of this film:
- The first one, which is considered the original cut of director Jesús Franco, is called "The Hundimiento de la Casa Usher" ("The Fall of the House of Usher"), and was shown only once on his premiere on Imagfic - Festival Internacional de Madrid de Cine Imaginario y de Ciencia-ficción, on 23 March 1983. Due to the bad reception from the audience - who laughed and booed from start to finish -, Franco could not get commercial distribution of the film. This version is now alleged to be a lost film.
- In 1984, the director filmed three new scenes showing the actor Howard Vernon murdering three victims (among them, actresses Flavia Hervás and Helena Garret, who did not appear in the original cut). He then added these scenes to the film, considerably altering the original plot, and creating the second version, called "Los Crímenes de Usher" ("The Crimes of Usher"). It had a very limited release in some Spanish cinemas in 1986.
- Finally, the third version was produced by Eurocine and is the only one that had commercial video release with the title "Neurosis/Revenge in the House of Usher". This version eliminates all the scenes shot for "Los Crímenes de Usher" and inserts new scenes shot with other actors (Françoise Blanchard, Olivier Mathot, Valerie Russell and Jean Tolzac, among others), creating a new plot that turns Usher in a mad doctor who keeps his daughter alive with the blood of innocent victims. Also, this cut reused about 15 minutes of footage from an old Franco movie, The Awful Dr. Orlof (1962), as flashbacks of the main character. "Revenge in the House of Usher" is the version that has less in common with the original cut, or even with the short story by Edgar Allan Poe that inspired the film.
- ConnectionsEdited from The Awful Dr. Orlof (1962)
Featured review
Greetings And Salutations, and welcome to my review of Revenge In The House Of Usher; here's the breakdown of my ratings:
Story: 1.00 Direction: 0.75 Pace: 0.25 Acting: 0.75 Enjoyment: 0.75
TOTAL: 3.50 out of 10
Oh dear, what happened to Jesus Franco? After watching his version of Dracula, which I didn't mind, I thought I'd keep an eye on this director. However, had I viewed any of his subsequent films first, I would never have watched Dracula. It would appear Franco plummeted after old fang face. Though Revenge shows a glimmer of hope in its direction, the story is atrocious.
However, its awfulness isn't too surprising. Not when you consider the three rewrites it required to get international distribution. Three revisions and three movies. Why not forget the project after being laughed at and booed out of the festival and revisit it later? I don't mind the premise for the final story. The trouble is that Franco tries to cobble it together with the original tale, making it problematic. It would have been better to start afresh with a new script. He then shoots the new scenes and patches them into the previous work to create a new monster. Yep. Franco is Frankenstein, but his creation isn't as entertaining as Victor's.
That said, I did see a glimmer of hope in Franco's filming. Some segments are pretty decent. He utilises shadows and light to create an uneasy atmosphere. There are some diverse camera angles to add interest to the scenes. Sadly though, he doesn't get the best from his cast. And they often let him down, as does the flow of the picture. It's okay for a set to be lit and filmed perfectly, but if the sequence drags on too long or the performers don't bring their characters to life, the segment starts to fail. And there are too many of these in Revenge. One of the worst and best things with Revenge is Dr Orloff. Franco takes a large portion of the black and white Dr Orloff flick to use as a backstory to his character of Eric Usher. The good thing is that both films' lead character is portrayed by Howard Vernon. The terrible thing is also Howerd Vernon playing both characters. In the old B&W clips, Vernon is a much stronger actor. He comes across with panache and flair. In Revenge, it's a different story. He looks bored and comes across as tired, for the most part. The lack of umph is a hindrance to the film. It adds to the picture's lacklustre feel and dullness. It's a shame as he appeared to be a talented actor.
In fact, a few of the cast members suffer from the same malediction. The worst is the second lead, Antonio Mayans, as Alan Harker. Franco could have saved money by substituting Mayans for a cardboard cut-out - It would have possessed the same emotional range.
Revenge in the right hands and with the right performers could have been good. Sadly, the hands belonged to Jesus Franco and his regular cast of actors and actresses. Therefore, unless you're a die-hard Franco fan, I suggest you beat a clear path away from this House Of Usher.
Please feel free to visit my Killer Thriller Chillers and Absolute Horror lists to see where I ranked Revenge In The House Of Usher.
Take Care & Stay Well.
Story: 1.00 Direction: 0.75 Pace: 0.25 Acting: 0.75 Enjoyment: 0.75
TOTAL: 3.50 out of 10
Oh dear, what happened to Jesus Franco? After watching his version of Dracula, which I didn't mind, I thought I'd keep an eye on this director. However, had I viewed any of his subsequent films first, I would never have watched Dracula. It would appear Franco plummeted after old fang face. Though Revenge shows a glimmer of hope in its direction, the story is atrocious.
However, its awfulness isn't too surprising. Not when you consider the three rewrites it required to get international distribution. Three revisions and three movies. Why not forget the project after being laughed at and booed out of the festival and revisit it later? I don't mind the premise for the final story. The trouble is that Franco tries to cobble it together with the original tale, making it problematic. It would have been better to start afresh with a new script. He then shoots the new scenes and patches them into the previous work to create a new monster. Yep. Franco is Frankenstein, but his creation isn't as entertaining as Victor's.
That said, I did see a glimmer of hope in Franco's filming. Some segments are pretty decent. He utilises shadows and light to create an uneasy atmosphere. There are some diverse camera angles to add interest to the scenes. Sadly though, he doesn't get the best from his cast. And they often let him down, as does the flow of the picture. It's okay for a set to be lit and filmed perfectly, but if the sequence drags on too long or the performers don't bring their characters to life, the segment starts to fail. And there are too many of these in Revenge. One of the worst and best things with Revenge is Dr Orloff. Franco takes a large portion of the black and white Dr Orloff flick to use as a backstory to his character of Eric Usher. The good thing is that both films' lead character is portrayed by Howard Vernon. The terrible thing is also Howerd Vernon playing both characters. In the old B&W clips, Vernon is a much stronger actor. He comes across with panache and flair. In Revenge, it's a different story. He looks bored and comes across as tired, for the most part. The lack of umph is a hindrance to the film. It adds to the picture's lacklustre feel and dullness. It's a shame as he appeared to be a talented actor.
In fact, a few of the cast members suffer from the same malediction. The worst is the second lead, Antonio Mayans, as Alan Harker. Franco could have saved money by substituting Mayans for a cardboard cut-out - It would have possessed the same emotional range.
Revenge in the right hands and with the right performers could have been good. Sadly, the hands belonged to Jesus Franco and his regular cast of actors and actresses. Therefore, unless you're a die-hard Franco fan, I suggest you beat a clear path away from this House Of Usher.
Please feel free to visit my Killer Thriller Chillers and Absolute Horror lists to see where I ranked Revenge In The House Of Usher.
Take Care & Stay Well.
- P3n-E-W1s3
- May 15, 2022
- Permalink
Details
- Runtime1 hour 33 minutes
- Color
- Sound mix
- Aspect ratio
- 1.85 : 1
Contribute to this page
Suggest an edit or add missing content
Top Gap
By what name was Revenge in the House of Usher (1983) officially released in Canada in English?
Answer