ChicRawIdol A brilliant film that helped define a genre

Salubfoto It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

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

Abbigail Bush what a terribly boring film. I'm sorry but this is absolutely not deserving of best picture and will be forgotten quickly. Entertaining and engaging cinema? No. Nothing performances with flat faces and mistaking silence for subtlety.

Nigel P This anthology film starts in a refreshing manner. A standard family emerge from their home in sunny suburbia to have dinner at a neighbours'. Whereas often the family would be swapping cutesy witticisms with each other, this one is arguing and cursing before their own front door is shut behind them. As it turns out, this family returns to feature in the last of this trio of tales involving various bloody misdeeds that have occurred in the basement of this house over the years.Of the three stories, the first is an enjoyably perverse, open-ended piece in which hints are given about possible unsavoury relations between four family members involved in a séance.The second is my favourite, and features a gleefully animalistic character who keeps his 'guests' in two cages. One, he abuses regularly but keeps alive – she is his 'audience'. The second cage is used far more regularly, as the unfortunates he brings to that one don't live for very long after he begins to systematically torture them in various graphic ways. The relationship takes on an almost humorous familiarity before it, too, ends with no real sense of closure.And to the third story, which deals with the original family being tortured also, in various horrifying ways – perhaps the worst is the daughter of the house stabbed multiple times and then thrown into a bath of lemon juice. Without any real narrative, however, this emerges simply as scenes of torture for the sake of it.There's no real conclusion to the overall story either, which is disappointing, other than now, in the present day, someone has actually brought the property, and already there is a body in the basement … This is an odd experience. At turns gratuitous, funny, but ultimately fairly plot less.

lazarillo This an anthology horror film about a sexy female realtor (Monique Parent, who appeared in countless softcore porn films in the 90's) showing a young couple house where all kinds of horrible things have happened. It's basically the same plot as Hammer's "The House that Dripped Blood" (and the John Ritter TV movie "Terror Tract"). The first story is the best. It's about a very messed-up family--the mother is mentally ill and off her meds, the father may be sleeping with the daughter, and the son has become murderously resentful. It all blows up when they're forced to seek shelter down in the basement during a storm (with a whole lot of knives). I've noticed that when they treat the subject of incest in movies, they're often so circumspect about it that they ironically don't make it nearly as ugly as it would be in real life. It also may be a little hypocritical here because they prominently display this alleged teen incest victim in her underwear (although I seriously doubt the actress is really young a teen). On the other hand, I did appreciate that the subject is treated with some ambiguity and subtlety because NOTHING ELSE in this movie is.I hate to describe the last two stories as sheer "torture porn" because I really don't like that term. Most people watch horror and porn for completely different reason. Still, the second story is pretty much just unrelenting sadism about a serial killer who tortures and murders victims of both sexes in his basement and has kept one woman alive to periodically sexually assault, but mostly watch him kill the others. This is hard to take very seriously because the acting isn't very believable and there's zero character development, but it did make me question why I was watching this in the first place. When torture goes on long enough, it isn't really "horror" anymore; the term "porn" is not really accurate because only a very disturbed person is going to get turned on by this, but there is something unpleasant and definitely not very fun about it.The third story, unfortunately, is more of the same except the victims are a whole family (with yet another teenage girl stripped to her underwear) being victimized by their crazy older neighbor. This segment has the only "name" actor in Felissa Rose, who played the transgendered killer in "Sleepaway Camp". I think anybody with a family will find this really hard to watch, and the ending is definitely harder to take than the second. But there is SOME black humor here because the neighbor is set off when the father forgets to return his weed-whacker! Still, it's less funny when he sets on the teen daughter for being scantily clad and promiscuous. I don't know what he has against the younger children. The movie shatters some cinematic taboos here, but it really does it just to do it.Overall though, I wouldn't describe this movie as offensive, and it certainly does succeed at being pretty grueling. But it is also pretty puerile, definitely pointless (any point it has usually ends up shoved in someone's eye), and just not a lot of fun.

bob_meg "I'd go so far as to call The Perfect House one of the most pointless, soulless, ugly, and disgusting horror films of the past ten years...and that's precisely what these filmmakers are after." - Scott Weinberg, FEARnet Mr. Weinberg's comments are so dead-on, I just had to repeat them. I wished I'd read his review before I wasted $5 on this sub-amateurish torture-porn farce that's really only tolerable when it's making fun of itself, which unfortunately isn't often enough.The Perfect House is something like a car wreck: a film so poorly acted, so abominably shot and edited that most times you simply can't believe what you're seeing. It's hard to look away from because you can't imagine any filmmaker would expect this tripe to be taken seriously. And that's just the technical aspect.This is a cobbled-together home-made POS with not one shred of redeeming value as a horror film (or any film). These "filmmakers" are not movie lovers. It's doubtful whether they've even seen a movie or maybe are just incompetent at operating the $200 software package they obviously used to edit with (after they recorded it on their five-year-old Handycam). No, these people are hucksters pure and simple. They know they're pulling one over on you and worse, they want you to know it. Either that, or they are dumber than they obviously assume that you are.Here's a quick run-down of the film's "plot": It's an Anthology film (of course...since all the 'plots' are ludicrously flimsy and clichéd, unable to sustain a full length film certainly) about an "evil" house that drives ordinary people to commit murderous acts (weak attempts at the type of black humor horror done quite well in EC Comics stuff like "Creepshow"). Almost all the segments feature ridiculously hollow, hammy villains who mete out particularly vile tortures for no reason...to many children, no less. I guess they couldn't get away with torturing animals, thank god. There are few good "effects" --- most of the violence is done in cutaway or is blurred or sped-up to mask the VFX guys incompetence or the lack of budget. Speaking of budget, what ghetto did they film this supposed "dream house" in?Yes, TPH is gory, gross, and nauseating. Some of the best horror films are. What they are not, is puerile, shoddily made, and insulting. Sam Raimi's Evil Dead, this is not. It's not even fourth-rate swill like "Don't Look in the Basement" or a camp horror film that's a pleasure because it is so bad (the "Sleepaway Camp" films featuring Felissa Rose, who does scream well here). These guys might be able to daydream about being that good one day, but they'll probably just wind up watching these other films on cable.Just because a film has no money doesn't mean it has to suck. But that requires technique, good camera set-ups, and actors who actually are capable of and want to do a decent job. Oh yes, and a script whose lines aren't complete recycled garbage from bad '60s drive-in fare and actually reflect how people speak, with hints to their characters' motivations and back stories and....What's the point? If you agree that those things are important, run as fast as you can from this film. It is a dangerous piece of "art" --- simply because making it a success will no doubt egg on other charlatans to follow the money trail with yet another poorly made con job.

seniornibbles I had high hopes for this film since it was given to me by a friend and recommended as a must watch, but the video quality, acting and poor directing of this film was to much for me to handle. Now granted I did not watch till the end but after 40 min of mind numbing torture I had to turn this film off.In the age of digital cinema one would expect the use of a high quality camera to shoot, but the grainy unfocused shots lead me to believe this was shot on a lower level camera and not one befitting a feature film. Now I am not sure who is responsible for the directing but by the fact that Co-Director Randy Kent is not attached to the 2nd attempt at a franchise I would guess it was the other director. I would say pass on this film as well as the unwise attempt at a 2nd in the series which looks like as of this review is currently in production. However if you believe that "The Room" is the greatest movie ever shot then this is in fact a must see for you.