Stuart Gordon put this hour of horror into a fine piece of work. A little disappointed with the finish but hey Lovecraft stories are always strange. Some decent splatter and gore here too. The wrist wounds were a bit much considering what caused them. The witch looked very demonic and spooky which added more flavor to the already catchy film. It is a good concept of a movie which was delivered exceptionally well though the eyes of a Lovecraft patron, Gordon. I commend the masters of horror for seeking out the true masters of horror and letting them shine. We all need a breath of fresh air in the horror genre.
51 Reviews
Nightmares in the Witch-House
claudio_carvalho3 May 2007
The university student Walter Gilman (Ezra Godden) moves to a very low-budget room in an old house. He becomes close to Frances Elwood (Chelah Horsdal), his next door neighbor, and her baby son Danny after saving them from a huge rat. While studying for his thesis, Walter listens to noises in the first floor, and finds the tenant Masurewicz (Campbell Lane) praying and hitting his head on a chair. The old man advises him about a rat with a man's face and a witch that would be after him, and offers a crucifix for his protection. Walter ignores the advice, and has nightmares along the night. When Frances asks Walter to be the babysitter of Bobby for a couple of hours, Walter is lured by the witch, who pretends to be Frances, and he is marked on his back. Later he realizes that the evil witch is Keziah Mason (Susanna Uchatius) and the rat is her assistant Brown Jenkin (Yevgen Voronin), and they want him to sacrifice Bobby in an ancient ritual to the devil.
This episode of "Masters of Horror" is a gore witch tale, with a good story and performances. I like this kind of horror movie that is not corny and in this case does not spare a baby and the lead character. It was good to see Stuart Gordon, the director of "Re-Animator" and "From Beyond", back in a good horror movie. I only regret that the show is less than fifty-five minutes running time and was released in Brazil in an expensive DVD. The series "Masters of Horror" is not aired on cable television in Brazil, and the viewer must rent or buy the DVD to see this series, and each episode is released in one DVD. Therefore, why not a box with all the episodes? My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Sonhos na Casa da Bruxa" ("Dreams in the Witch-House")
This episode of "Masters of Horror" is a gore witch tale, with a good story and performances. I like this kind of horror movie that is not corny and in this case does not spare a baby and the lead character. It was good to see Stuart Gordon, the director of "Re-Animator" and "From Beyond", back in a good horror movie. I only regret that the show is less than fifty-five minutes running time and was released in Brazil in an expensive DVD. The series "Masters of Horror" is not aired on cable television in Brazil, and the viewer must rent or buy the DVD to see this series, and each episode is released in one DVD. Therefore, why not a box with all the episodes? My vote is seven.
Title (Brazil): "Sonhos na Casa da Bruxa" ("Dreams in the Witch-House")
Stuart Gordon Is In His Element
gavin694213 November 2006
A student of Miskatonic University discovers that three planes in his room (which are completely non-Euclidian) allow a witch to enter his universe and try to steal the souls of children. Being the babysitter for one such child, he does what any good sitter would do and faces the witch.
Director Stuart Gordon and writer H.P. Lovecraft go together like dogs, a bottle of Wild Turkey and dead bears. Really, the only thing better than these two combined is the addition of Jeffrey Combs (who was sadly absent for this movie, despite being previously attached to the project). Gordon knows the mythos and he's not afraid to use it to his advantage while both updating it and making fun of it in a respectful way (underneath it all, this film and "Re-Animator" are both comedies to a degree).
The blood and gore in this were more than the usual from Gordon. While he has been known to have some very mutilated bodies, they do not often bleed. Blood is everywhere here as flesh is torn from bones and animals chew through sinew and muscle.
The main character, Walter, was great and I enjoyed his lack of skill with the ladies (this is what happens when you spend all day studying string theory, an aspect of the story that was cleverly updated from the short story). The old man (which was supposed to be played by Combs) was good, the witch very nice. Even the rat was pretty cool.
I can't talk about the movie much without giving it away (the best scenes are towards the end), but let's say if you like blood, nudity and Gordon's brand of Lovecraft, you'll want this in your collection. If you're a Lovecraft fan who worries about adaptations, I suggest a listen to the commentary -- Gordon painstakingly goes through the process of film-making and explains why things need to be changed as you switch mediums. (I found this the best part of the commentary.) "Dreams" is easily one of the best films in the "Masters of Horror" series.
Director Stuart Gordon and writer H.P. Lovecraft go together like dogs, a bottle of Wild Turkey and dead bears. Really, the only thing better than these two combined is the addition of Jeffrey Combs (who was sadly absent for this movie, despite being previously attached to the project). Gordon knows the mythos and he's not afraid to use it to his advantage while both updating it and making fun of it in a respectful way (underneath it all, this film and "Re-Animator" are both comedies to a degree).
The blood and gore in this were more than the usual from Gordon. While he has been known to have some very mutilated bodies, they do not often bleed. Blood is everywhere here as flesh is torn from bones and animals chew through sinew and muscle.
The main character, Walter, was great and I enjoyed his lack of skill with the ladies (this is what happens when you spend all day studying string theory, an aspect of the story that was cleverly updated from the short story). The old man (which was supposed to be played by Combs) was good, the witch very nice. Even the rat was pretty cool.
I can't talk about the movie much without giving it away (the best scenes are towards the end), but let's say if you like blood, nudity and Gordon's brand of Lovecraft, you'll want this in your collection. If you're a Lovecraft fan who worries about adaptations, I suggest a listen to the commentary -- Gordon painstakingly goes through the process of film-making and explains why things need to be changed as you switch mediums. (I found this the best part of the commentary.) "Dreams" is easily one of the best films in the "Masters of Horror" series.
The Best Lovecraft-Translation to-date
myboigie9 April 2006
Amazing is the only-word I can find to express how good this short-film is. Mick Garris deserves thunderous-applause for initiating what will probably be the most-important development in horror in over 20-years. While Stuart Gordon has done Lovecraft proud with "ReAnimator", "from Beyond" and "Dagon", this simply excels-them in capturing the dread and cosmic-horror. Insofar as horror goes, this is Gordon's finest-addition so far. I read the short-story 20-years-ago, and this summarizes it well. Lovecraft-purists are going to have their hackles-up, but the omissions and changes still capture the spirit of the original and do not detract from the basic-thrust its plot.
Yes, the cloven "Black Man", and a trip to the surface of another planet are not-present, which is fine. Do we really want to see Lovecraft's racism on-display, especially when he rejected-it at the end of his life? The answer is no. People also tend-to-forget that in some areas, Lovecraft gets-tedious, often going-on for too-long with descriptions of things, or he just meanders. Yes, you can actually improve-upon some of his work, I contend. Dennis Paoli and Stuart Gordon have achieved this feat, and where Lovecraft was bad at warm-characters, the writer(s) and director compensate. I truly love and care about the characters in this story, especially the mother and her child. The fears of this story are so primal and basic--everyone fears for a baby in a movie, it's true.
What excites me so-much about this short-film is how effectively it conveys many of Lovecraft's themes: the fear of losing-one's-mind, the fear of women, the fear of the unknown, the fear of a loss-of-control, the fear of mortality, and-then-some. Also very-exciting is how well Gordon and Paoli realize the Witch--I would say this is the best-depiction of what the Puritans, and Medieval Europeans thought witches were, and what they did. Usually, they try to steal-babies to sacrifice to some dark-power. But Lovecraft's true-genius was taking physics-theory to explain witchcraft, and a witch's powers.
To the uninitiated, H.P. Lovecraft's tomes seem to have appeared, fully-formed, but he was an avid-scholar of New England folklore. Much of the rule-book he uses for the witch and her powers and actions are from the writings of Cotton Mather, and other Puritanical leaders, thinkers and witch-hunters. It's likely he even consulted the witchfinder's-manual, "Malleus Malificarum". Lovecraft didn't believe in the supernatural as a reality, but did accept the possibility that odd-phenomena did exist, and could be explained by science at some point.
So, while this tale and many-others written by him seem fantastical, some elements are not-entirely implausible based on his scientific-philosophies! "Dreams in the Witch House" is not-unlike a rational-mind trying to grasp how a witch could be possible. This little crumb-of-plausibility is a component of what makes the writings of H.P. Lovecraft so scary, and contemporary. Even educated-adults can entertain their reality, and this film captures this reality in every-respect. People tend-to-forget that modern-science comes from alchemy, after-all! The story concerns Walter Gilman, a Physics-major, who has found a room at 300-year-old house in Providence. Yes, in the short-story, Walter already knows the reputation of the house, but I think it was wise for film to omit this. Walter represents we, the audience, and this is a story of curiosity, discovery, and tragedy. Walter notices that his theories on multiple-universes, and his mathematical-maps resemble the shape of a corner of his room. In-time, he begins to have-dreams of meeting a familiar--a rat with a human-face, perfectly in-keeping with witch-lore! Eventually, it becomes-clear from an older-tenant, and other-dreams, that the witch is very-much alive within the house. She wants Walter (us) to fetch her a child, the infant-son his neighbor.
There is a sense of dread, sorrow and inevitability in Walter's situation that echoes the victims of witches in lore. It is a situation without-much-hope, the only exit being death or insanity, so very Lovecraftian. Anchor Bay/IDT have done a perfect DVD, no-complaints here. The transfer is perfect, the audio is perfect, and the extras are incredibly-generous and substantial for the most die-hard-fan of Stuart Gordon. Richard Band's score is wonderful, and makes this story all-the-more timeless in its sorrow, grimness and evocation of mystery. It has been 12-years since Band has done a score for Gordon with his excellent score for "Castle Freak" in 1994. It has been too-long, and thank-God it happened. The entire Masters of Horror series promises to be superb, a great-day for true fans of horror.
Yes, the cloven "Black Man", and a trip to the surface of another planet are not-present, which is fine. Do we really want to see Lovecraft's racism on-display, especially when he rejected-it at the end of his life? The answer is no. People also tend-to-forget that in some areas, Lovecraft gets-tedious, often going-on for too-long with descriptions of things, or he just meanders. Yes, you can actually improve-upon some of his work, I contend. Dennis Paoli and Stuart Gordon have achieved this feat, and where Lovecraft was bad at warm-characters, the writer(s) and director compensate. I truly love and care about the characters in this story, especially the mother and her child. The fears of this story are so primal and basic--everyone fears for a baby in a movie, it's true.
What excites me so-much about this short-film is how effectively it conveys many of Lovecraft's themes: the fear of losing-one's-mind, the fear of women, the fear of the unknown, the fear of a loss-of-control, the fear of mortality, and-then-some. Also very-exciting is how well Gordon and Paoli realize the Witch--I would say this is the best-depiction of what the Puritans, and Medieval Europeans thought witches were, and what they did. Usually, they try to steal-babies to sacrifice to some dark-power. But Lovecraft's true-genius was taking physics-theory to explain witchcraft, and a witch's powers.
To the uninitiated, H.P. Lovecraft's tomes seem to have appeared, fully-formed, but he was an avid-scholar of New England folklore. Much of the rule-book he uses for the witch and her powers and actions are from the writings of Cotton Mather, and other Puritanical leaders, thinkers and witch-hunters. It's likely he even consulted the witchfinder's-manual, "Malleus Malificarum". Lovecraft didn't believe in the supernatural as a reality, but did accept the possibility that odd-phenomena did exist, and could be explained by science at some point.
So, while this tale and many-others written by him seem fantastical, some elements are not-entirely implausible based on his scientific-philosophies! "Dreams in the Witch House" is not-unlike a rational-mind trying to grasp how a witch could be possible. This little crumb-of-plausibility is a component of what makes the writings of H.P. Lovecraft so scary, and contemporary. Even educated-adults can entertain their reality, and this film captures this reality in every-respect. People tend-to-forget that modern-science comes from alchemy, after-all! The story concerns Walter Gilman, a Physics-major, who has found a room at 300-year-old house in Providence. Yes, in the short-story, Walter already knows the reputation of the house, but I think it was wise for film to omit this. Walter represents we, the audience, and this is a story of curiosity, discovery, and tragedy. Walter notices that his theories on multiple-universes, and his mathematical-maps resemble the shape of a corner of his room. In-time, he begins to have-dreams of meeting a familiar--a rat with a human-face, perfectly in-keeping with witch-lore! Eventually, it becomes-clear from an older-tenant, and other-dreams, that the witch is very-much alive within the house. She wants Walter (us) to fetch her a child, the infant-son his neighbor.
There is a sense of dread, sorrow and inevitability in Walter's situation that echoes the victims of witches in lore. It is a situation without-much-hope, the only exit being death or insanity, so very Lovecraftian. Anchor Bay/IDT have done a perfect DVD, no-complaints here. The transfer is perfect, the audio is perfect, and the extras are incredibly-generous and substantial for the most die-hard-fan of Stuart Gordon. Richard Band's score is wonderful, and makes this story all-the-more timeless in its sorrow, grimness and evocation of mystery. It has been 12-years since Band has done a score for Gordon with his excellent score for "Castle Freak" in 1994. It has been too-long, and thank-God it happened. The entire Masters of Horror series promises to be superb, a great-day for true fans of horror.
One of Gordon's better films
timhayes-11 April 2006
Clocking in at just under an hour, Stuart Gordon's adaptation of H. P. Lovecraft's Dreams In The Witch House is one of Gordon'e better films though not his best adaptation of the author. That particular honour goes to Re-Animator which will probably be the best Lovecraft film ever. Certainly, Gordon and coscripter Dennis Paoli have figured out over the years what makes a Lovecraft film work and what doesn't. Dreams does manage to make for some enthralling viewing. There's some updates to the storyline from the original short for sure, but they always figure out how to do these things and still make the film close to what Lovecraft wrote. Ezra Godden returns to the Gordon camp after his stint in Dagon and appears to be setting himself up to be the next Jeffrey Combs who would probably have played this role had it been made back in the mid eighties when Combs was Godden's age. All in all a good adaptation.
Not everyone's sense of horror
jdollak9 April 2006
Based on an H.P. Lovecraft story of the same name, Nightmares In The Witch-house is a solid second entry in the series. The story has moved from being straight slasher into being less slasher and more nightmare.
A grad student rents the cheapest room he can find, where he can work on his schoolwork quietly. He finds what seems to be some sort of dimensional portal in the corner of his room (not a vortex or anything, just an odd convergence of lines). He befriends the lady in the room next door, and her baby boy. He eventually becomes manipulated by the witch, who seems to be doing a series of bizarre rituals toward an unknown end, but it involves using the student to sacrifice the baby boy next door.
What I mean by saying that the episode is more nightmare than straightforward slasher is that the horror is not based so much on being in a difficult situation as it is about being unable to control your actions. This is a nightmarish quality when you know that if you open the door in your dreams, you'll be scared, but you do it anyway, almost out of your control. This idea is a theme throughout the movie, but it's not as trumped up as I thought it could be. I'm reminded of the movie The Game (Michael Douglas one from '98, I think) which I always considered to be a horror, in a certain sense. The character's control over the environment is lost, leading to a near-nightmare situation. I've read a bit of Lovecraft's work. It mostly seems to be roughly the same stuff. But I looked into it, and he went through a few different phases in his work. While there's no mention of Chulhu here, there's the Necronomicon, thus firmly tying it together with his other work. It's ultimately a good episode. I've seen it twice, and my only beef with it is that the sound varies too much in volume.
A grad student rents the cheapest room he can find, where he can work on his schoolwork quietly. He finds what seems to be some sort of dimensional portal in the corner of his room (not a vortex or anything, just an odd convergence of lines). He befriends the lady in the room next door, and her baby boy. He eventually becomes manipulated by the witch, who seems to be doing a series of bizarre rituals toward an unknown end, but it involves using the student to sacrifice the baby boy next door.
What I mean by saying that the episode is more nightmare than straightforward slasher is that the horror is not based so much on being in a difficult situation as it is about being unable to control your actions. This is a nightmarish quality when you know that if you open the door in your dreams, you'll be scared, but you do it anyway, almost out of your control. This idea is a theme throughout the movie, but it's not as trumped up as I thought it could be. I'm reminded of the movie The Game (Michael Douglas one from '98, I think) which I always considered to be a horror, in a certain sense. The character's control over the environment is lost, leading to a near-nightmare situation. I've read a bit of Lovecraft's work. It mostly seems to be roughly the same stuff. But I looked into it, and he went through a few different phases in his work. While there's no mention of Chulhu here, there's the Necronomicon, thus firmly tying it together with his other work. It's ultimately a good episode. I've seen it twice, and my only beef with it is that the sound varies too much in volume.
OK but not Lovecraftian
urabutln28 March 2007
This episode has taken it's name and it's main villains from the Lovecraft story with the same name. Though this story bears little resemblance to the original Lovecraft story.
The story is full of blood, to the extent it's almost an exploitation film. The storyline isn't too bad so if you are into horror films and especially gory ones then this is worth watching. The actors are good, and I can't wait to see them in yet another story.
If you are a fan of Lovecraft and read the original stories and expect something similar, then you will get disappointed as this episode is more direct, bloody and not really in the spirit of Lovecraft.
The story is full of blood, to the extent it's almost an exploitation film. The storyline isn't too bad so if you are into horror films and especially gory ones then this is worth watching. The actors are good, and I can't wait to see them in yet another story.
If you are a fan of Lovecraft and read the original stories and expect something similar, then you will get disappointed as this episode is more direct, bloody and not really in the spirit of Lovecraft.
fine adaption of a Lovecraft story
trashgang18 June 2013
Based on a story of H.P. Lovecraft you know that this isn't going to be a normal entry in the series and indeed it doesn't. Common, a rat with a human face that's not the normal stuff you expect from Masters Of Horrors. But it's so typical Lovecraft that you don't have any trouble seeing the rat's face.
I can't really say that this was a straight horror, it's more a supernatural thing. When Walter Gilman (Ezra Godden) rents the cheapest room to finish his final rapport for school he's hearing noises from behind the wall. rats of course because his female neighbour once screamed it out when a rat was running in her kitchen. By closing up the hole they all think things were back to normal but it wasn't. After noticing that his room has some kind of dimensional portal things go wrong and a baby needs to be sacrificed. Guess who's baby that is going to be?
This episode needs it from the atmosphere created and not the gore or horror. And it worked out fine. When the witch appears it gives an uneasy feeling because she goes full frontal. A good entry in the series for the lovers of Lovecraft.
Gore 1/5 Nudity 1/5 Effects 3/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5
I can't really say that this was a straight horror, it's more a supernatural thing. When Walter Gilman (Ezra Godden) rents the cheapest room to finish his final rapport for school he's hearing noises from behind the wall. rats of course because his female neighbour once screamed it out when a rat was running in her kitchen. By closing up the hole they all think things were back to normal but it wasn't. After noticing that his room has some kind of dimensional portal things go wrong and a baby needs to be sacrificed. Guess who's baby that is going to be?
This episode needs it from the atmosphere created and not the gore or horror. And it worked out fine. When the witch appears it gives an uneasy feeling because she goes full frontal. A good entry in the series for the lovers of Lovecraft.
Gore 1/5 Nudity 1/5 Effects 3/5 Story 3/5 Comedy 0/5
True horror in the classic form
super marauder8 June 2013
Stuart Gordon looks like a grizzly bear, but in watching interviews with him he seems like a big teddy bear. And it really shows in this.
Of course the Lovecraft story is updated a bit but it does capture the heart of it.
The story is a collage student rents a room in an old boarding house and encounters a slob of a landlord, on old guy who seems a little off of his rocker, and a very likable single mom with a baby who's just trying to get by. The student befriends the mom and baby only to find out the house has a dark secret. And of course the student looks for the answers.
This is really creepy. I guess it goes back to childhood stories about witches that creeped me out when I was four years old. So, I think of it as an adult fairy tail.
If you like classic horror stories, this should grab you!
Of course the Lovecraft story is updated a bit but it does capture the heart of it.
The story is a collage student rents a room in an old boarding house and encounters a slob of a landlord, on old guy who seems a little off of his rocker, and a very likable single mom with a baby who's just trying to get by. The student befriends the mom and baby only to find out the house has a dark secret. And of course the student looks for the answers.
This is really creepy. I guess it goes back to childhood stories about witches that creeped me out when I was four years old. So, I think of it as an adult fairy tail.
If you like classic horror stories, this should grab you!
A "Masters of Horror" disappointment
DVD_Connoisseur6 November 2006
For some reason, this episode from Stuart Gordon just didn't gel for me. It's a capably told tale, based on the story by H.P. Lovecraft, but it didn't excite me in the way that other "Masters of Horror" have.
The episode is quite a low-key affair. It doesn't have the scale of some of the other stories and, to my mind, suffers a little as a result.
While I enjoyed "Dreams in the Witch-House" to some extent, I was disappointed with this entry in the series. Quite simply, it wasn't my cup of tea. This feeling of disappointment was down to the story itself rather than the production values (which remain as high as always).
The episode is quite a low-key affair. It doesn't have the scale of some of the other stories and, to my mind, suffers a little as a result.
While I enjoyed "Dreams in the Witch-House" to some extent, I was disappointed with this entry in the series. Quite simply, it wasn't my cup of tea. This feeling of disappointment was down to the story itself rather than the production values (which remain as high as always).
GARBAGE! Lovecraft fans will hate this, and probably non-fans, too.
barrydwriter16 June 2006
Warning: Spoilers
This had to be one of the singularly worst adaptations of any work of fiction that I've ever seen. Seriously. Let me elaborate.
The majority of similarities between the story and the movie are mostly in the title: there is a house, there are dreams, and there is a witch. There are a few scenes that were transferred (Walter Gilman throwing flour on the floor to trace his somnambulism, purplish light appearing whenever the witch appears, and the very last event in the final scene). There were even several attempts at making signs of a genuine adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story including a seal for Miskatonic University, laughably (and poorly) edited from Brown University's own shield and cross. Several characters retain the same names and general roles, but the similarities end here.
There are random characters that were seemingly included just for the hell of it (namely Francis "Frankie" Elwood, atrociously portrayed by Chelah Horsdal). Not once in the movie are the witch or her "rat with a human face" familiar referred to by name, and yet somehow, they earn their respective names Keziah Mason and Brown Jenkin in the credits! There were many other huge departures from the story HUGE including a complete absence of any inter-dimensional jaunts by Gilman, which was THE main theme. And there are mentions of Satan in here no, no, NO!! Lovecraft NEVER incorporated Satan into his works, because beings like Satan (and the Other Guy) are just mankind's attempts at feeling there's some kind of reason and order to the world, when in fact we know NOTHING about the universe we live in! Lovecraft understood this concept, and he used it in EVERY one of his works. And even while this movie makes a focus on Gilman's studies on time and space, entering other dimensions, etc., his only "trips" are from one room of the house to another. Cheap? I'd say so! Oh, and to any fans of this flick might defend that it would be too costly or take too long to show alien worlds: if it was going to be such trouble, then why even TRY to make this into a movie, let alone a 55-minute made-for-TV one?!? H.P. Lovecraft had a knack for describing things that were so horrible, so alien, so inconceivable to people that he purposely left descriptions vague, simply because to comprehend some of his worlds and beings would be to go insane. It's next to impossible to describe HOW an alien could reduce a person into a gibbering, drooling maniac simply because of its size, let alone show it in a visual medium. If it was too much for Mr. Gordon to show, then why'd he even bother? There were also some pretty spotty production values, too, including a rat that looked like a rat, except close-ups showed a laughable amount of fake fur and two very fake-looking teeth pasted onto Yevgen Voronin's face. Add a smile and his Beavis laugh and you get a very pathetic excuse for a villain.
This installment of Masters of Horror is a film to be banished into oblivion along with two other terrible adaptations: "Bram Stoker's" Dracula and "Mary Shelly's" Frankenstein movies that claim to have faithful ties to their original works by including the author's name, but most likely as a cover for the huge liberties taken in the adaptation. Having "H.P. Lovecraft" in the moniker is an insult to the man, not only because he never wrote garbage like this, but never would.
Dear god, this movie was terrible. Just terrible. I don't even see how someone who ISN'T a fan of the original story could like it bad acting, bad directing, bad production, bad everything. My review includes one star simply because I can't rate with a zero which is what I honestly feel it deserves. Mr. Gordon? Shame on you.
The majority of similarities between the story and the movie are mostly in the title: there is a house, there are dreams, and there is a witch. There are a few scenes that were transferred (Walter Gilman throwing flour on the floor to trace his somnambulism, purplish light appearing whenever the witch appears, and the very last event in the final scene). There were even several attempts at making signs of a genuine adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story including a seal for Miskatonic University, laughably (and poorly) edited from Brown University's own shield and cross. Several characters retain the same names and general roles, but the similarities end here.
There are random characters that were seemingly included just for the hell of it (namely Francis "Frankie" Elwood, atrociously portrayed by Chelah Horsdal). Not once in the movie are the witch or her "rat with a human face" familiar referred to by name, and yet somehow, they earn their respective names Keziah Mason and Brown Jenkin in the credits! There were many other huge departures from the story HUGE including a complete absence of any inter-dimensional jaunts by Gilman, which was THE main theme. And there are mentions of Satan in here no, no, NO!! Lovecraft NEVER incorporated Satan into his works, because beings like Satan (and the Other Guy) are just mankind's attempts at feeling there's some kind of reason and order to the world, when in fact we know NOTHING about the universe we live in! Lovecraft understood this concept, and he used it in EVERY one of his works. And even while this movie makes a focus on Gilman's studies on time and space, entering other dimensions, etc., his only "trips" are from one room of the house to another. Cheap? I'd say so! Oh, and to any fans of this flick might defend that it would be too costly or take too long to show alien worlds: if it was going to be such trouble, then why even TRY to make this into a movie, let alone a 55-minute made-for-TV one?!? H.P. Lovecraft had a knack for describing things that were so horrible, so alien, so inconceivable to people that he purposely left descriptions vague, simply because to comprehend some of his worlds and beings would be to go insane. It's next to impossible to describe HOW an alien could reduce a person into a gibbering, drooling maniac simply because of its size, let alone show it in a visual medium. If it was too much for Mr. Gordon to show, then why'd he even bother? There were also some pretty spotty production values, too, including a rat that looked like a rat, except close-ups showed a laughable amount of fake fur and two very fake-looking teeth pasted onto Yevgen Voronin's face. Add a smile and his Beavis laugh and you get a very pathetic excuse for a villain.
This installment of Masters of Horror is a film to be banished into oblivion along with two other terrible adaptations: "Bram Stoker's" Dracula and "Mary Shelly's" Frankenstein movies that claim to have faithful ties to their original works by including the author's name, but most likely as a cover for the huge liberties taken in the adaptation. Having "H.P. Lovecraft" in the moniker is an insult to the man, not only because he never wrote garbage like this, but never would.
Dear god, this movie was terrible. Just terrible. I don't even see how someone who ISN'T a fan of the original story could like it bad acting, bad directing, bad production, bad everything. My review includes one star simply because I can't rate with a zero which is what I honestly feel it deserves. Mr. Gordon? Shame on you.
A typically fine H.P. Lovecraft adaptation by the always reliable Stuart Gordon
Woodyanders8 November 2007
Warning: Spoilers
University student Walter Gilman (an extremely affable portrayal by Ezra Godden) rents a seedy room cheap in a rundown old boarding house. Walter discovers that the gateway to another dimension exists in his room. Walter has frightening visions of ghoulish ratman hybrid Brown Jenkin (a marvelously grotesque Yevgen Voronin) and falls under the sinister spell of evil witch Keziah Mason (a deliciously wicked Susanna Uchatius). Director Stuart Gordon, who also co-wrote the intelligent and engrossing script with longtime collaborator Dennis Paoli (said script is based on an H.P. Lovecraft short story), does his usual aces job with creating and sustaining an eerie and mysterious atmosphere that becomes more increasingly creepy and nightmarish as the story heads toward its positively horrific climax. Better still, Gordon gives the whole grisly affair a dark, brooding, no-holds-barred tough and grimly serious tone that stays true to itself to the literal bitter end. Godden's intense and excellent acting in the lead really holds everything together; he receives fine support from ravishing redhead Chelah Horsdal as nice struggling single mother Frances Elwood, Jay Brazeau as cranky landlord Mr. Dombrowski, and Campbell Lane as the helpful, regretful elderly tenant Masurewicz. Jon Joffin's slick cinematography, Richard Band's exquisitely lush'n'spooky score, and the supremely gruesome make-up f/x are all on the money solid and effective. Well worth a watch.
More Lovecraft from Stuart Gordon
cgyford25 September 2009
"Re-Animator" and "From Beyond" director Stuart Gordon seizes the opportunity, as perhaps could have been expected, to update a 1930s "Weird Tales" short story from the genre legend H.P. Lovecraft, whom he seems so greatly to admire, as his entry in the show's first season.
Ezra Godden display some schoolboy charm as the physics grad student with a dimensional doorway in the corner of his digs and Chelah Horsdal reciprocates in kind with a distinctly distressed desirability whilst Jay Brazeau heads a succinct supporting cast that includes Campbell Lane and Susan Bain.
The master does his best to bring the classic yarn bang up to date but the supernatural elements of the Lovecraftian Cthulhu Mythos start to look decidedly hokey when brought into the modern world on a limited subscription channel budget and the whole thing subsequently falls a little flat.
That's what happens when you travel through space and time.
Ezra Godden display some schoolboy charm as the physics grad student with a dimensional doorway in the corner of his digs and Chelah Horsdal reciprocates in kind with a distinctly distressed desirability whilst Jay Brazeau heads a succinct supporting cast that includes Campbell Lane and Susan Bain.
The master does his best to bring the classic yarn bang up to date but the supernatural elements of the Lovecraftian Cthulhu Mythos start to look decidedly hokey when brought into the modern world on a limited subscription channel budget and the whole thing subsequently falls a little flat.
That's what happens when you travel through space and time.
I want my hour back!
Kia_Tee30 December 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I began watching this film and less than 20 minutes into it, I had to talk myself though finishing it. I suppose its my fault because I always watch film adaptation of H.P Lovecraft's work thinking the same thing every time "This time It's GOT to be better."...Well, I was wrong yet again.
The plot circles around a young man who moves into a run down boarding house in order to get some peace and quite and finish his thesis. What he gets caught up in instead is a world of witches, curses, sex, and murder, (complete with human-faced rats) all in the corner of his little room.
This film proves, once again, that Lovecraft's work is for reading only. Some creepy things should stay in one's imagination.
The plot circles around a young man who moves into a run down boarding house in order to get some peace and quite and finish his thesis. What he gets caught up in instead is a world of witches, curses, sex, and murder, (complete with human-faced rats) all in the corner of his little room.
This film proves, once again, that Lovecraft's work is for reading only. Some creepy things should stay in one's imagination.
Great version of a Lovecraft classic
knight110tim5 February 2006
Warning: Spoilers
As part of the 13 episode Masters of Horror strand currently showing on Bravo in the United Kingdom, H.P. Lovecraft's Dreams In The Witch-House is a contemporary retelling of the old story by writer-director Stuart Gordon, who also gave us the seriously underrated, Lovecraft-adaption Dagon.
With slightly more nudity, bad language and sex than the original tale, Gordon proves his love of the Master's work by keeping the key elements - such as the creepy rat creature Brown Jenkin, who looks like an escapee from a Basement Jaxx video - but building faithfully on the story's foundations for a rounded televisual experience.
Ezra Godden returns from the watery depths of Dagon to don a Miskatonic University top again as struggling student Walter Gilman (unintentional in-joke there, given his previous Lovecraft role as a man turning into a Deep One). His decline into madness - a common theme in Lovecraft's work - is wonderfully captured. Gordon's direction is spot on for atmosphere, with one stand-out scene (when Gilman is being compelled by the witch to sacrifice a child) being so agonisingly intense that it's almost impossible to watch.
A great episode that is hopefully is representative of the standard of the series - 13 tales by 13 different genre directors - which is screened at 11pm every Friday.
With slightly more nudity, bad language and sex than the original tale, Gordon proves his love of the Master's work by keeping the key elements - such as the creepy rat creature Brown Jenkin, who looks like an escapee from a Basement Jaxx video - but building faithfully on the story's foundations for a rounded televisual experience.
Ezra Godden returns from the watery depths of Dagon to don a Miskatonic University top again as struggling student Walter Gilman (unintentional in-joke there, given his previous Lovecraft role as a man turning into a Deep One). His decline into madness - a common theme in Lovecraft's work - is wonderfully captured. Gordon's direction is spot on for atmosphere, with one stand-out scene (when Gilman is being compelled by the witch to sacrifice a child) being so agonisingly intense that it's almost impossible to watch.
A great episode that is hopefully is representative of the standard of the series - 13 tales by 13 different genre directors - which is screened at 11pm every Friday.
Nightmares In A Lovecraft Universe
Witchfinder-General-66624 July 2007
Director Stuart Gordon (Re-Animator) delivers a great, brutal and weird second episode to the "Masters Of Horror" series with "H.P. Lovecraft's Dreams in The Witchhouse". Gordon, whose earlier work, such as "Re-Animator" or "From Beyond" has been based on the writings of the ingenious H.P. Lovecraft, manages to put Lovecraft's typical supernatural and extrasensory atmosphere to screen in a very good, eerie way.
University student Walter (Ezra Godden) moves into a 300 year old house, where he expects a low rent and the appropriate quietness he needs to study. The house is inhabited by its disgusting, greasy and heartless landlord (Jay Barzeau), a supposedly crazy old man (Campbell Lane) and a pretty young mother named Frances (Chelah Horsdal) and her baby son. While Walter and Frances start to befriend, strange things start happening when Walter is on his own. He hears strange noises, and has some very weird dreams...
This second episode, which is not afraid to break taboos, is one of the very good ones from the first season. It is gruesome and eerie as Horror should be, the performances are entirely good and convincing, and the whole episode is highly atmospheric, and very suspenseful throughout its 55 minutes. My praise goes to Stuart Gordon for this eerie and breathtaking second entry to the great MoH series. If you like the show, you certainly shouldn't miss "Dreams In The Witch House"!
University student Walter (Ezra Godden) moves into a 300 year old house, where he expects a low rent and the appropriate quietness he needs to study. The house is inhabited by its disgusting, greasy and heartless landlord (Jay Barzeau), a supposedly crazy old man (Campbell Lane) and a pretty young mother named Frances (Chelah Horsdal) and her baby son. While Walter and Frances start to befriend, strange things start happening when Walter is on his own. He hears strange noises, and has some very weird dreams...
This second episode, which is not afraid to break taboos, is one of the very good ones from the first season. It is gruesome and eerie as Horror should be, the performances are entirely good and convincing, and the whole episode is highly atmospheric, and very suspenseful throughout its 55 minutes. My praise goes to Stuart Gordon for this eerie and breathtaking second entry to the great MoH series. If you like the show, you certainly shouldn't miss "Dreams In The Witch House"!
Not That good
jed-estes5 September 2006
Warning: Spoilers
I find Stuart Gording and his taste for making films boring as is indicated in this show. This was in the first batch of episodes released and as I can not afford the Show Time channel and have no access to it, this is the only way for me to view this great show. Thank God for DVD and Masters of Horror, but this show is defiantly the bottom of the barrel and when I bought it I thought maybe the rest of the series would be crap to, but to my surprise that was not to be the case. The rest have all been beautiful and tell great stories, with the exception of John Carpenter's episode as well, it lacked any of his greatness. In retrospect it's kind of sad that Anchor Bay released the two worst episodes at the same time. This almost drove me off, and I see how it could have driven off others. But as for Gordan's episode, it stank and almost put me to sleep. The only saving grace in it is when the human rat eats the baby. I cheered in this scene as it broke a barrier on film. It's just like when animals are killed on screen and everyone goes "awe", like some one just really killed a or something. I say get over it. Their not really hurting animals or humans on screen and people should take it for such. It's just bloody good fun. But if you want to only see the best episodes of this series save your money.
On par with Gordon's recent output...
Jonny_Numb28 March 2006
'Dreams in the Witch-House,' Stuart Gordon's entry into the "Masters of Horror" anthology series, is a raucous trip into the unknown, buoyed by a naively assertive performance by Ezra Godden (who collaborated with Gordon on the disappointing "Dagon") and some striking imagery. True to its title (inspired by an H.P. Lovecraft tale), this 55-minute film is an interesting view, but suffers from some shallow characterization and plot material as a result of its condensed run time. A young grad student (Godden) moves into an old boarding-house where a 300-year old witch resides behind the walls, looking for a child sacrifice. Gordon's direction and usage of 'stingers' helps things considerably.
6 out of 10
6 out of 10
Good
Stevieboy66618 March 2019
Picked up a Masters of Horror double DVD and watched this one first. Lots of things packed into a very reasonable 52 minutes. A creepy, dilapidated old house. A witch. Her talking rat familiar, with a human face. Lots of blood. A sexy, naked succubus. Parallel dimensions. Terror, and humour. I enjoyed this.
A brilliant adaptation of H.P Lovecrafts Classic tale by veteran director Stuart Gordon.
Vivekmaru4515 November 2010
This Is Horror at its very best.
Based on a short story by the undisputed master of the horror tale H.P Lovecraft first published in the July 1933 issue of Weird Tales .
The Dreams in the Witch House was likely inspired by the lecture "The Size Of The Universe" by Willem de Sitter which Lovecraft attended three months prior to writing the story.
Several prominent motifs—including the geometry and curvature of space, and a deeper understanding of the nature of the universe through pure mathematics—are covered in de Sitter's lecture. The idea of using higher dimensions of non-Euclidean space as short cuts through normal space can be traced to A. S. Eddington's The Nature of the Physical World which Lovecraft alludes to having read.
A graduate student Walter Gilman (played by Ezra Godden) rents a cheap room. The dimensions of Gilman's room in the house are unusual, and seem to conform to a kind of unearthly geometry that Gilman theorizes can enable travel from one plane or dimension to another.
Walter hers some shrieks coming from a neighboring room where a single mother Frances Elwood (played by Chelah Horsdal) lives with her baby boy. He immediately goes to see what the trouble is and finds her fending of a rat. He chases the rat away which disappears through a hole in the wall. Frances tells Walter that the rat has been plaguing her baby for some time.
He informs the unconcerned landlord who promptly tells him to sort out any problems he has by himself. It is her that he first meet Masurewicz (played by Campbell Lane) who asks him if the rat that he saw had a human face. Walter denied having seen a rat with a human face.
In a dream that he has he is visited by a rat-faced human familiar Brown Jenkin who tells him that "She will come for him".
He goes to Masurewicz and tells him about the dream. Masurewicz tells him that his life is in great peril.
What happens next in the film is for you to find out.
Expect nothing but the best from Stuart Gordon the director of The Re-animator (1985), From Beyond (1986), Fortress (1992) and Dagon (2001). Special effects are solid along with terrific acting.
Buy the Masters Of Horror Complete Collection on DVD and enjoy horror by the greatest horror directors of all time.
Based on a short story by the undisputed master of the horror tale H.P Lovecraft first published in the July 1933 issue of Weird Tales .
The Dreams in the Witch House was likely inspired by the lecture "The Size Of The Universe" by Willem de Sitter which Lovecraft attended three months prior to writing the story.
Several prominent motifs—including the geometry and curvature of space, and a deeper understanding of the nature of the universe through pure mathematics—are covered in de Sitter's lecture. The idea of using higher dimensions of non-Euclidean space as short cuts through normal space can be traced to A. S. Eddington's The Nature of the Physical World which Lovecraft alludes to having read.
A graduate student Walter Gilman (played by Ezra Godden) rents a cheap room. The dimensions of Gilman's room in the house are unusual, and seem to conform to a kind of unearthly geometry that Gilman theorizes can enable travel from one plane or dimension to another.
Walter hers some shrieks coming from a neighboring room where a single mother Frances Elwood (played by Chelah Horsdal) lives with her baby boy. He immediately goes to see what the trouble is and finds her fending of a rat. He chases the rat away which disappears through a hole in the wall. Frances tells Walter that the rat has been plaguing her baby for some time.
He informs the unconcerned landlord who promptly tells him to sort out any problems he has by himself. It is her that he first meet Masurewicz (played by Campbell Lane) who asks him if the rat that he saw had a human face. Walter denied having seen a rat with a human face.
In a dream that he has he is visited by a rat-faced human familiar Brown Jenkin who tells him that "She will come for him".
He goes to Masurewicz and tells him about the dream. Masurewicz tells him that his life is in great peril.
What happens next in the film is for you to find out.
Expect nothing but the best from Stuart Gordon the director of The Re-animator (1985), From Beyond (1986), Fortress (1992) and Dagon (2001). Special effects are solid along with terrific acting.
Buy the Masters Of Horror Complete Collection on DVD and enjoy horror by the greatest horror directors of all time.
An improvement over the first episode, but Stuart Gordon is better than this
The_Void1 March 2006
This is both the second episode in the Masters of Horror series and the second episode that I've seen. I can't say that I've been overly impressed with the first two entries, although Stuart Gordon's sombre second part is a marked improvement over Don Coscarelli's frenzied opener. Stuart Gordon has a penchant for H.P. Lovecraft, and so it is fitting that his entry in the Masters of Horror series is based on a story by the literary horror master. The title pretty much gives the plot away, and Dreams in Witch House follows the fortunes of a student (played by Ezra Godden who you might recognise from 'Dagon') who takes up residence in a cheap, rat-infested, dump. It isn't long before he starts having dreams of a witch and her familiar, and the plans that she has for him are more than just a little sinister. The title of this series is somewhat ironic. Creator Mick Garris has called it 'Masters of Horror' but it seems, thus far anyway, that all its doing is bringing out the worst in the directors involved. Coscarelli is capable of much better than he delivered with episode one and this is also the weakest thing I've ever seen Stuart Gordon direct. It's full of his trademarks, however, and Gordon hasn't failed his fans - but the story doesn't have enough bite, and it feels like something that the director put together in his spare time rather than being a project that means anything to him. And that probably is the case.
If you are a Fan Lovecraft, DON'T WATCH THIS!
Manicman816 January 2015
Warning: Spoilers
Being a big fan of Lovecraft and knowing most screen versions are pretty bad, I decided to watch this when I had the chance, seeing some good reviews of it.. Knowing it was cut down to an hour (50mins or so) means a lot would be removed, but this was a joke.
Basically everything about Brown Jenkin and Keziah Mason is removed (he is just 'the rat' and she is just 'the witch'). All the Lovecraft Mythical world from the story is scrapped (No Elder things, No Nyarlathotep, no Azathoth), though a.. weird version of the Necronomicon appears which doesn't tally with any version from Lovecraft's stories).
Gillman seams to be studying string theory which isn't quite right as a modern version of his work (Non-Euclidean calculus and quantum physics) but just about okay.. He isn't student of Mathematics and folklore, This garret room with the weird dimensions become one corner of the room being a bit off. and it's not really a garret room at all. Elwood, his friend and fellow student is now a female love interest leading to a nude scene which doesn't have much place in Lovecraft and the child from a local area becomes Francine Elwood's son Danny. The Building horror of the coming of Walpurgis night is completely removed. Joesph Mazurewicz becomes an old guy that was also used by the witch and killed many children in the past, which completely changes the character.
Gilman is less harmed by his battle with the witch, and instead of having his heart eaten out by Brown Jenkins, is put in an asylum and Brown Jenkins eats through his insides, coming out of his right side of his body, removing the whole eating out his beating heart. Gilman seams to not gain knowledge from the witch, but just has odd dreams.
It appears, apart from a small part, all the idea of drawing lines and curves is removed.
like with a lot of modern horror, thrown in tons of unrealistic gore, making things like Brown Jenkins no longer biting threw the child's wrist but chew open it's neck.
I can probably go on dissecting every part of this.. 'Inspired by' story but I'm probably expecting too much from it. While I'm not a fan of taking stories set in the past and making them modern day, I've seen far better examples which done ruin the original story so much..
IF you are a Lovecraft Fan, just don't bother with this and just stick to the works of people like the H.P. Lovecraft Historical Society which have done two good versions of this story in both there Dark Adventures Radio Theatre (Under the original title 'The Dreams in the witch House', and the fantastic 'Dreams in the Witch House' rock opera album.
If you are just a modern day horror fan, you will probably like this if you have only school boy knowledge of Lovecraft's work.
Basically everything about Brown Jenkin and Keziah Mason is removed (he is just 'the rat' and she is just 'the witch'). All the Lovecraft Mythical world from the story is scrapped (No Elder things, No Nyarlathotep, no Azathoth), though a.. weird version of the Necronomicon appears which doesn't tally with any version from Lovecraft's stories).
Gillman seams to be studying string theory which isn't quite right as a modern version of his work (Non-Euclidean calculus and quantum physics) but just about okay.. He isn't student of Mathematics and folklore, This garret room with the weird dimensions become one corner of the room being a bit off. and it's not really a garret room at all. Elwood, his friend and fellow student is now a female love interest leading to a nude scene which doesn't have much place in Lovecraft and the child from a local area becomes Francine Elwood's son Danny. The Building horror of the coming of Walpurgis night is completely removed. Joesph Mazurewicz becomes an old guy that was also used by the witch and killed many children in the past, which completely changes the character.
Gilman is less harmed by his battle with the witch, and instead of having his heart eaten out by Brown Jenkins, is put in an asylum and Brown Jenkins eats through his insides, coming out of his right side of his body, removing the whole eating out his beating heart. Gilman seams to not gain knowledge from the witch, but just has odd dreams.
It appears, apart from a small part, all the idea of drawing lines and curves is removed.
like with a lot of modern horror, thrown in tons of unrealistic gore, making things like Brown Jenkins no longer biting threw the child's wrist but chew open it's neck.
I can probably go on dissecting every part of this.. 'Inspired by' story but I'm probably expecting too much from it. While I'm not a fan of taking stories set in the past and making them modern day, I've seen far better examples which done ruin the original story so much..
IF you are a Lovecraft Fan, just don't bother with this and just stick to the works of people like the H.P. Lovecraft Historical Society which have done two good versions of this story in both there Dark Adventures Radio Theatre (Under the original title 'The Dreams in the witch House', and the fantastic 'Dreams in the Witch House' rock opera album.
If you are just a modern day horror fan, you will probably like this if you have only school boy knowledge of Lovecraft's work.
One of the better Lovecraft adaptations!
Clayton073 July 2007
Warning: Spoilers
With all of the Lovecraftian horror films out there, Gordon does an excellent job staying close to the actual story. He strays from time to time and adds a few things, such as a few nude scenes, but that is to be expected with Gordon. Ezra Godden's acting is very believable, you can actually believe that he is descending into madness throughout the film. The special effects on Brown Jenkin are good yet provide some humor to the film, as is Gordon's style.
If you are a fan of Lovecraft and a fan of Stuart Gordon's work, this film is a must. And if not a fan of Lovecraft, it is a great little horror film with plenty of gore. One of my favorites.
If you are a fan of Lovecraft and a fan of Stuart Gordon's work, this film is a must. And if not a fan of Lovecraft, it is a great little horror film with plenty of gore. One of my favorites.
not bad at all
shawshank8624 August 2007
Warning: Spoilers
this was a fairly well executed movie. genuinely creepy. there was a tragic flaw, which is a line that i consider to be atrocious. i added it to my list of incredibly dumb things people say. the main character is a grad student working towards his physics degree specializing in time/dimension travel. he explains how the witch is able to stay alive all these years by stating: "witches were astrologers; they knew a lot about science". horrible explanation, sir. astrology is a pseudoscience, meaning there is no scientific basis. also, knowledge of star alignment does not imply knowledge of relativity.
otherwise, fantastic movie with an ending that is not normative. one of those movies that leaves you with a feeling of "oh wow, i can't believe that just happened". an absolute must for fans of this series or horror in general.
otherwise, fantastic movie with an ending that is not normative. one of those movies that leaves you with a feeling of "oh wow, i can't believe that just happened". an absolute must for fans of this series or horror in general.
OK beginning gets worse and worse
nickcarr17 December 2006
I love HP Lovecraft, and I fully support any filmmaker who attempts to bring his work to screen. I'm not a stickler on retaining the original material - Re-Animator and Dagon both department significantly from their sources yet capture the Lovecraft tone better than any other attempt.
And to some degree, Gordon does some good stuff with Witch House. At the end, however, I have to concede that it's pretty badly done. Some of the concepts, including "angles," are tedious as hell to read in the original short story and just plain goofy on the screen. The rat creature is the most ridiculous, laugh-out-loud bad make-up job in recent memory. And any logic the film tries to string together falls apart in the last fifteen minutes. I totally appreciated the gruesome ending, but it didn't make up for the multitude of unanswered questions. How does this crap keeping getting greenlit? The house itself, which should be a centerpiece of New England foreboding, is pretty disappointing. Ezra Godden is always fun to watch, and does a good job here.
And to some degree, Gordon does some good stuff with Witch House. At the end, however, I have to concede that it's pretty badly done. Some of the concepts, including "angles," are tedious as hell to read in the original short story and just plain goofy on the screen. The rat creature is the most ridiculous, laugh-out-loud bad make-up job in recent memory. And any logic the film tries to string together falls apart in the last fifteen minutes. I totally appreciated the gruesome ending, but it didn't make up for the multitude of unanswered questions. How does this crap keeping getting greenlit? The house itself, which should be a centerpiece of New England foreboding, is pretty disappointing. Ezra Godden is always fun to watch, and does a good job here.
See also
Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews
