Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

FuzzyTagz If the ambition is to provide two hours of instantly forgettable, popcorn-munching escapism, it succeeds.

Quiet Muffin This movie tries so hard to be funny, yet it falls flat every time. Just another example of recycled ideas repackaged with women in an attempt to appeal to a certain audience.

Phillida Let me be very fair here, this is not the best movie in my opinion. But, this movie is fun, it has purpose and is very enjoyable to watch.

Coventry Harry Kümel's ambitious & courageous film version of Jean Ray's complex novel was offered one big chance to prove itself internationally and to instantly become a genre classic at the annual Cannes Film Festival in 1972. Sadly enough, the shown version – which later got rejected by the director – didn't impress any audiences then and by the time Kümel came trotting along with his very own (and much better) re-edited version of the film, containing over twenty minutes of extra footage, nobody really cared to see it anymore. Now that's a real pity, because in this restored version "Malpertuis" is a truly brilliant work of Gothic art and unquestionably one of the greatest movies ever made in Belgium. A lot more than in the international-orientated versions, the emphasis now lies on obscure mystery and claustrophobic set designs. Both versions are so incredibly different that the common plot summaries of the international Cannes version, which can be found in newspaper articles and movie websites, actually reveal the mysterious denouement of Kümel's ultimate re-edited version! Those reviews immediately explain what odd types of characters are living in the Malpertuis mansion whereas, in the 'correct' version, it is kept secret to the young protagonist Jan as well as to the viewer. I'm desperately trying not to include any spoilers in this user-comment while the same essential plot twists can be read everywhere over the internet… Evidently this film didn't appeal to anyone in Cannes! You can clearly see where it's going right away and thus the sophisticated and enormously stylish hints that are given to unravel the mystery yourself become completely pointless.The legendary Orson Welles stars in one of his last glorious roles, as the mighty and fearsome, albeit bed-ridden patriarch of the immense Malpertuis mansion who gathered an eccentric collection of people to announce his last will to. Among them is young sailor Jan, who swore that he would never set foot in Malpertuis ever again and he constantly tries to convince his sister Nancy to do the same. Quentin Cassavius' testament claims that there's a gigantic family fortune to divide, only none of the persons present is allowed to leave the mansion and the last remaining man and woman have to get married. Jan is determined to stay around as soon as he falls in love with the mysteriously beautiful Euryale, but other members of the pact that try to escape the domain are found dead soon after, causing hostility and unrest among the remaining members. Harry Kümel builds up the tension and unfolds the mystery like a genuine master, and all this without showing the slightest bit of graphic violence. Instead, he portrays the ominous mansion like an inescapable surreal dimension with endless dark corridors and spiral staircases. Secondary scenery, like paintings on the wall and statues in the grim attic, magnificently add to the wondrous Gothic atmosphere. Meanwhile, the constant elaboration of patterns and intrigues between the many supportive characters lead the story to one of the most grotesque and devastating climaxes in cinema ever. Of course, you'll only be truly enchanted by this climax if you haven't seen the English/French versions or read any plot descriptions before you watch it. Orson Welles and Mathieu Carrière are great but the true star is Susan Hampshire, playing no less than three different and very complex characters. Harry Kümel's "Malpertuis" is a small masterpiece, combining visual artwork with extraordinary plotting. An absolute must!

Walter Tabax I saw an english spoken version with 110m informed on the video box, but really 95min in video band. I remember, a long time ago, I saw this film in cinema with more as 110m. A lot of scenes disapeared: The face from Alecta, two times that the antiquaire appears in the film. I remember it was another end too, or maybe I'm wrong? Was ever the last scene a close of Jan's eye? Where is a complete copy of this film? It's very sad this cutting of scenes.

dbdumonteil That's what the title means;or at least,that's what the priest explains to Matthieu Carrière.The subtitle is overkill and was added for commercial reasons,probably unbeknownst to the director."Doomed house" is a stupid title:are we so sure it's the story of a house? Isn't it rather the story of a mind? of a fantasy? of a folly?This poesque subtitle is not suitable for Jean Ray's world,who keeps a certain logic inside a nightmarish swarming of monsters,werewolves,Gorgons and mad scientists.Some of his obsessions surface here:the Gorgon,turning mortals into stone,the taxidermist working on alive bodies,are topics we find not only in "Malpertuis" but also in "the adventures of Harry Dickson" ,his favorite hero (he wrote dozens of stories of this detective and his pupil Tom wills)Prometheus recalls here how suffering and sadism were haunting the Belgian writer.Because Belgian,this definitely is.Kummel's closest relative is none other than his compatriot André Delvaux who quoted Jean Ray in his masterwork "un soir,un train".I urge the users who have liked "Malpertuis" to try "Un soir ,un train".It's the same kind of atmosphere,simply it's more mastered,the emotional power -cruelly lacking in Kummel's work- is increased tenfold ."Malpertuis" has a dream of a cast:Orson Welles-in a short part,but he makes every of his word count-,Matthieu Carrière ,"Der Junge Törless" wunderkind,Susan Hampshire,Two Chabrol favorites (Michel Bouquet and Jean-Pierre Cassel,both in "la rupture" some months before),and,most amazing thing,French singer Sylvie Vartan and in a cameo(uncredited) her then-husband ,Johnny Hallyday.The plot may be hard to swallow for horror buffs.It's a film "à tiroirs",and the ending has in store at least three unexpected twists.The last picture leaves the spectator bewildered.Hampshire and Carrière seem unreal,and the world that surrounds them is no longer a world in ruins,but a world that forgot he's in ruins.And what kind of world is it?

awalter1 Based on the novel by Jean Ray (the so-called "Belgian Poe"), "Malpertuis" begins with Jan, a young sailor, being summoned with a motley company of acquaintances and family to the death bed of his mysterious Uncle Cassave. Cassave soon dies, leaving his considerable fortune to the dozen or so people he has summoned. However, there are stiff terms attached to his gift: The inheritors must all live for the rest of their lives at Malpertuis, Cassave's mansion. Jan soon realizes there is something amiss at Malpertuis (a name meaning either "house of evil" or "house of cunning"). There is something odd in the attic, in the labyrinthine hallways, and in the surrounding wood. There is something even stranger about Malpertuis' other inhabitants: the mad hermit Lampernisse who haunts the mansion's dark corridors, the coy and beautiful Euryale who will not look anyone in the face, and the diabolic taxidermist Philarete, to name only a few. When the secret of Malpertuis is finally brought to light among this bizarre cast of characters, the mansion erupts into a seething cauldron of terror, and both heaven and earth seem to collapse around Jan.While fans of Jean Ray's novel will find the story much changed, the film is visually engaging at the very least, and the casting is excellent, for the most part. Orson Welles plays the dying Uncle Cassave, delivering the second performance of his career as a large man stuck in a very large bed (the other performance being, of course, in his adaptation of Kafka's "The Trial"). Susan Hampshire gives an admirable performance in four different roles--excellently well disguised and made-over in each--as Euryale, Nancy, Alice, and a nurse. The sets are extraordinary, filling the screen with an unending stream of vivid detail. Also, the film's cinematography is often both aggressive and intelligently creative, employing just the sort of unpredictable perspective necessary to portray the mansion's mystifying interior.Disappointments with the film begin small. Jean-Pierre Cassel as Lampernisse does not look the part. Instead of a tall, shadowy, aged-but-ageless, and profoundly mad hermit, he looks like a leper who has wandered off the set of "Ben-Hur." Accompanying Lampernisse is the laughable, high-pitched babble of the "creatures in the attic." In these rare instances, the filmmakers miss by a wide margin the texture of Ray's novel. At other times the film slightly underplays or rushes some of the book's strongest scenes. The one serious offense, though, is the film's ending; the muddled chaos here is a poor substitute for Ray's synchronized anarchy.This is not to say that the film loses itself completely. The strength of the first hour and more cannot be entirely undermined by the ending. The inspired cinematography and many of the sets, performances, and special effects are truly exceptional. The scenes with little, crazed, mousy Philarete and his morbid workroom are reason enough for the film to exist. Subtlety and humor are here as well, perhaps best represented in the recurring static shot of the inheritors occupying themselves in Malpertuis' small drawing room.