SummaryUpon entering his fiancée's family mansion, a man discovers a savage family curse and fears that his future brother-in-law has entombed his bride-to-be prematurely.
Directed By:Roger Corman
Written By:Edgar Allan Poe, Richard Matheson
House of Usher
Metascore
Generally Favorable
75
User score
Generally Favorable
7.1
My Score
Drag or tap to give a rating
Hover and click to give a rating
Not available in your country?
ExpressVPN
Get 3 Extra months free
$6.67/mth
Metascore
Generally Favorable
88% Positive
7 Reviews
7 Reviews
13% Mixed
1 Review
1 Review
0% Negative
0 Reviews
0 Reviews
100
Corman's legendary parsimony has rarely been so inobvious; House of Usher has the look and feel of a film made for far more than its tiny $200K budget (and on a tight, 15-day shooting schedule). Its authentically creepy dream-sequence – all grasping hands and hazy blue-gelled fog swirls – is a minor surrealist masterpiece by its own right.
80
The movie, shot in CinemaScope and colour, is punctuated by shocking moments, but is more notable for its claustrophobic, doom-laden, necrophilic atmosphere and elegant camerawork than the kind of fashionable, in-your-face horror that was launched in the same year by Psycho.
80
The first of Corman's eight-film Poe cycle, and one of his most faithful adaptations. Price is his usual impressive self as the almost certainly incestuously inclined Roderick Usher who, having buried his sister alive when she falls into a cataleptic trance, becomes the victim of her ghostly revenge; but it is Corman's overall direction that lends the film its intelligence and power.
75
Price is wonderful as the spooky owner, but the other three players are merely adequate. But still a superlative Corman/AIP effort and a great beginning to a varying but always interesting series of horror films.
75
Corman's filmmaking runs on unchanneled energy and apocalyptic emotions; his is an art without craft.
70
In patronizingly romanticizing Poe's venerable prose, scenarist Richard Matheson has managed to preserve enough of the original's haunting flavor and spirit. The elaborations change the personalities of the three central characters, but not recklessly so.
50
Under the low-budget circumstances, Vincent Price and Myrna Fahey should not be blamed for portraying the decadent Ushers with arch affectation, nor Mark Damon held to account for the traces of Brooklynese that creep into his stiffly costumed impersonation of the mystified interloper.
User score
Generally Favorable
80% Positive
8 Ratings
8 Ratings
20% Mixed
2 Ratings
2 Ratings
0% Negative
0 Ratings
0 Ratings
Oct 29, 2023
7
Solid Roger Corman horror adaptation of Poe's story. Movie's MVP is Vincent Price, in a commanding performance. I liked the old school spooky look of the mansion, the eerie dank dungeon crypt sets, and unsettling blue tinted nightmare sequence. Towards the end, I was surprised how much gore the early 1960's censors allowed to be shown. Kudos also to Richard Matheson for his script.
Nov 1, 2021
7
A very interesting film, with good suspense premises and a Victorian environment that knows how to involve us. This film is, very basically, a very light and uncompromising adaptation of the Edgar Alan Poe short story of the same name. It's not an extraordinary film: it's full of the usual cinema clichés of its time (we need to understand this well) and sometimes it looks a lot like a play in the way the actors act, which also seems to me to be fits reasonably into the cinematographic style of that time. Still, it's an enjoyable film, has a good cast, good sets and costumes, a pleasantly dense, Victorian atmosphere, and a story that has coherence and elegance. I won't go into the script too much, I think the skeleton of the tale is very present even though there is a good deal of invention mixed up. As the house is a character in the tale and a symbol of decay, moral and mental, of the family that inhabits it, it played a very important role in the plot, although it is evident throughout the film that its inhabitants are the real villains. Vincent Price is a good actor and brings us here another excellent work, where he embodies a crazy villain, but very dignified and chivalrous, with ademands of old aristocracy. I liked his work, but as I mentioned, I felt the actor was, at times, overly theatrical. It's an option that I understand, however, and it seems to me to be coherent with the style of the film, as a whole. Mark Damon is decent for the role of “knight in shining armor” the script reserves for him, and does a satisfying job. Myrna Fahey is also a good choice to play the “damsel in distress”, with the right to fainting and occasional hysteria. On a technical level, it seems to me to be a contained film, perhaps because of a limited budget and a conscious commitment to creating an interesting story, based on the work of the cast. The cinematography is not particularly remarkable, but it has good colors and light, a good filming job, and the editing was also well done, with the film dragging in places, but without this making us really tired. The house, an additional character to the story, is very elegant and suitably dreary, with settings denoting elegance. I liked the detail that the family portraits are basically modernist works where the face is distorted. With an excellent work of environment, the film works very well for fans of gothic suspense.
Production Company:
- Alta Vista Productions
Release Date:Jun 18, 1960
Duration:1 h 19 m
Tagline:Edgar Allan Poe's overwhelming tale of EVIL & TORMENT
Awards
Golden Globes, USA
• 1 Win & 1 Nomination
Laurel Awards
• 1 Win & 1 Nomination
National Film Preservation Board, USA
• 1 Win & 1 Nomination































