Kattiera Nana I think this is a new genre that they're all sort of working their way through it and haven't got all the kinks worked out yet but it's a genre that works for me.

Incannerax What a waste of my time!!!

AshUnow This is a small, humorous movie in some ways, but it has a huge heart. What a nice experience.

mraculeated The biggest problem with this movie is it’s a little better than you think it might be, which somehow makes it worse. As in, it takes itself a bit too seriously, which makes most of the movie feel kind of dull.

dfcurran What is excellent about this film is its stylistic presentation. Elizabeth Berridge is an excellent actress from her enticing nude shower scene at the very beginning to her very believable fright at the end. Berridge comes across as the innocent girl next door and wins the viewers hearts at the start. Why this actress did not go on to starring roles in many more films is a mystery. Rather than down the clear steps they go into the funhouse at a carney. Rather than just take the ride they decide to not get off, and rather hide inside and spend the night. The funhouse has some. Nice effects and reminds me of the old mil in Rye Playland in NY But what makes this movie compelling is that much of it is believable. I recommend it to horror fans and for film students it is a must see for it is excellently done.

Michael_Elliott The Funhouse (1981) ** 1/2 (out of 4)A teenage girl sneaks off with three friends to a carnival even though her father warned her that there were issues with this sideshow the previous year. At first the four are having a great time but after witnessing a murder they become the hunted by a mutant.Tobe Hooper's THE FUNHOUSE was released at a time when slashers were taking over the genre and if you look at the poster you'd think that this was going to be another but it's actually not. I think the film had a pretty negative reputation for quite sometime because people were going in expecting something that what they actually got. Technically speaking this is an extremely well-made film that manages to build up a rather nice atmosphere and it certainly has some interesting stuff going for it but there are still some flaws that keep it from being a good picture.It's interesting that Hooper would go for a scare picture even though that's not what people were really wanting in 1981. The film manages to have some very good moments thanks in large part to Hooper giving it a very interesting atmosphere. You can certainly feel the carnival atmosphere as you watch the picture and the screenplay certainly gives us a lot of character development for the four leads. Another good thing the film has going for it is the cinematography and music score. Both of them perfectly capture the "shocks" of what the film has to offer. For the most part the performances are also good with Elizabeth Berridge making for a good lead and we get some nice support from Sylvia Miles and William Finley.The film has its issues as I said and this includes the fact that nothing really happens until after the hour mark. I'm sure Hooper and company were wanting to build up the atmosphere as they did but I think they should have thrown in some sort of killing to keep people caught up in what's going on. Also, logically, you have to wonder about really being trapped in such a small space. This here is what really keeps the film from being better but there's still a lot to enjoy here. If you're looking for gore then you're going to be disappointed but THE FUNHOUSE is a nice little monster movie.

punishmentpark Elizabeth Berridge, Elizabeth Berridge, where had I seen her before? It didn't come to me, as I was thinking of probably some other horror film. No, she was in 'Amadeus' as quite the frivolous and sympathetic girl who ended up marrying him (Amadeus). She's an exuberant appearance, even if, here, i didn't care much for her acting.The opening scene is titillating fun, but then things get quite boring quite fast. Two double dates (and separately, a kid brother) stroll around a carnival without much really exciting happening (highlight is William Finley as Marco the Magnificent and bloody tricks and tales); it's colorful, though, and if you like a good carnival... In the last half hour things are finally going wrong and some killing, screaming and running must be done. Hardly a slasher, though; no kills until the last half hour (only the mentioning of earlier murders) and no mystery about who are responsible, even if one of them is wearing a mask. Still, there there's a good effort made to give the story some substance, by giving the killers a background and not making all the carnies a murdering bunch.Still, there's not so much to enjoy; 5 out of 10. No, wait, 6 out of 10; an extra point for Berridge and a few very good, creepy scenes (one with Amy, the other with Liz, both in the ventilation system).

TheRedDeath30 Tobe Hooper is a mystery to me. His debut film, Texas CHAINSAW, might be the greatest horror film in modern times, a benchmark in which to compare all horror movies since. So, why is it that he's never really been able to come close to the majesty of that movie? Yes, you can point to POLTERGEIST, but many in filmdom would argue that movie is more Spielberg than Hooper.I would put this movie in a similar category with EATEN ALIVE, his previous film, a movie which I seem to enjoy far more than most. Both movies carry a similar problem, though. They are gorgeously filmed, stylishly lit, artistic slashers with wooden characters, dull plots and poor pacing. Part of that blame lies in the screenwriters, to be sure, but it's as if Hooper spent far too much time worrying about how to shoot his films and not enough wondering if it was a worthwhile film to make in the first place.The movie starts off with an "homage" to HALLOWEEN, introducing us to the main heroine and her kid brother who will be pivotal to the plot. We could, also, argue here that there is a fine line between "paying homage" and "ripping off". Our final girl has a typical a*hole boyfriend who is taking her to a carnival against her father's wishes, with two stereotypical teens in tow. From here, the movie spends a little bit too much time with the teens exploring the carnival. It badly cries out for something similar to the Hitchhiker scene in TCM to establish a bit of tension that will carry the plot through this portion, something that portends the doom to follow, but it's essentially nothing more than 4 generic teens walking around a carnival. When I say generic, I mean it. There is no personality to here. Nothing to like or dislike. They exist only to die later. I do think Kevin Conway's multiple appearance as a carny barker are good here and help to set somewhat of a tone. There's something inherently creepy, to me, about that poor audio, cheap microphone sound that's used well. The fun starts when the teens decide to spend the evening in the funhouse. This is where Hooper really shines. He uses the spooky qualities of the old school carnival shocks to maximum effect, combined with his always excellent sense of lighting to create a genuinely unsettling funhouse atmosphere.The teens then witness something that will spell out their inevitable doom and our creature is unmasked in a reveal reminiscent of Chaney's PHANTOM OF THE OPERA. The monster makeup is excellent and provides a unique slasher villain. From here, though, the movie just never goes anywhere you want it to go. Hooper sets up these amazing sets and excellent shots and you want so much for him to use this setting to the same max effect that he was able to use the old farmhouse in TCM, but it never gets there. The killings become paint by the numbers, formulaic slasher deaths, all leading up to the inevitability that our final girl will escape and the monster will meet its' demise.It's better than the majority of generic slashers that came out in the wake of HALLOWEEN and Friday THE 13th, but can't quite elevate itself to classic level.