House 3 - Kind of an afterthought

I have to confess absolutely loving the first 'House' film.  Yes, the (now iconic) marketing poster of a decomposing severed hand ringing a doorbell may have been a tad misleading.  You may think you were in for one scary experience when, in fact, you received one hell of a tongue-in-cheek black horror-comedy.  The (inevitable) sequel was so-so, but by this third instalment, it had well and truly lost its way.

Where as the first two 'House' films were both heavily linked to - surprise, surprise - a house, this film seems to forget why it's called what it is.  In fact I believe in some territories when the film was released the 'House' part of the title was completely dropped in favour of a more ambiguous 'The Horror Show' title.  I guess this tells you pretty much everything you need to know about the project, i.e. it's not really a sequel but more of a horror script that was sort of crow-barred in under the familiar (and therefore profitable) 'House' brand in order to increase sales.  But is it any good?

Unfortunately, not really.  Even by a stand-alone horror film it's a bit lame.  However, that's not for the efforts of leading man Lance Henriksen, who does everything in his extensively-cool acting range to bring some drama to the proceedings.  It's starts okay enough - Henriksen is a cop tortured by his previous experiences with a serial killer, only for said nasty to come back from the grave to haunt his family (in the house, in case you were wondering).  Then it all kind of falls apart as the scares become fewer and further between and the plot descends into predictability.  The serial killer is portrayed by (Bladerunner's) Brion James and he too does his best to add some terror with the limited script available to him.  However, in the end, both main actors end up just chewing up the scenery in an attempt to try and elevate what is a particularly forgettable B-movie into something vaguely memorable.

There's some nice practical effects here and there and it's always nice to be reminded of a time before CGI gore ruled the horror scene.  But, at the end of the day, it's not enough to save this film.  I'm a big fan of Lance Henriksen and watch most of his output, but even I would struggle to sit through this film again (I've watched it twice - the first time over twenty years ago and completely forgotten it.  Therefore I've just seen it again and felt I better review it before everything about it escapes me again).  The first 'House' film is a classic.  Just stick to that.

5/10 a hard trek, a bit like unicycling to Mordor and back