Product Details
- #21187 in VHS
- Released on: 2001-08-28
- Rating: R (Restricted)
- Formats: Closed-captioned, Color, NTSC
- Number of tapes: 1
- Running time: 97 minutes
Editorial Reviews
Amazon.com
Released a year after John Carpenter's 1978 Halloween, this thriller by longtime actor-turned-director Fred Walton has held a strong following of its own. In an exemplary piece of suspense, the film begins with a babysitter (Carol Kane) fielding threatening phone calls while on the job. She soon finds that a pair of children in her charge have been murdered in their beds; she is nearly killed herself by the homicidal maniac before police arrive. As with Halloween, the action jumps some years ahead, when Kane's character is herself a wife and mother--and the monster escapes from a mental institution to re-create his original carnage in the heroine's own home. Between these exciting bookends, the film loses its way and becomes dissatisfying and obscure. But Walton compensates by engineering a couple of great horror moments worth savoring. Tom Keogh
Rating: 
-
The fabulous "Original"
This movie is by far, one of my all time favorite suspense movies.. The first 15 minutes will leave your heart pounding! The remake of "When a Stranger Calls" was and is horrible! A totally cheap imitation of this classic! Before you go and purchase the remake..DON'T! Buy this one instead. You won't be disappointed!
Rating: 
-
When A Stranger Hits Redial
"What are you going to do tonight?" a friend of mine asked.
"I'm going to watch a movie, an old scary one. WHEN A STRANGER CALLS. It's supposed to be good."
"Is that the one with the babysitter?"
"I don't know. I haven't seen it."
"Yeah. I know that one. It's famous, right? It's the one where you find out he's calling -- "
"Shut up shut up shut up! I don't want to know anything about it. I like to go in fresh."
So I went in fresh, and ten minutes in, I realized that I already knew the creepy twist. And if you've been told at least three campfire tales in your life, I'd wager odds that you know the twist, too. Even if you've never seen the movie in question.
That's not so bad. The first twenty minutes of the original manage to be tense without trying the patience. The elfin Carol Kane stars as a babysitter named Jill who finds her night plagued with strange phone calls. The caller never says much, but what he does say (voiced with fragile menace by the late Tony Beckley) can melt the nerves. It's the kind of powerful scene that is usually found at the climax of a movie.
And therein lies the problem.
WHEN THE STRANGER CALLS (1979) has a neat idea, but nothing to go with it. After the First Act scare, the movie becomes philosophical and ponderous. The camera follows two men: Charles Durning as the dispeptic private detective John Clifford and our resident serial killer, Curt Duncan. "He's from England."
It's not unheard of for a "horror" movie (that's where you'll find this title shelved, but the genre is misapplied) to reveal some of the basic humanity of its villain, but this flick goes a step further and exposes his tenderest vulnerabilities. He is made more human, brittler, his actual madness becomes a place for pity. All of this while Clifford pursues him with squinty-eyed persistence and a lock needle in his pocket. (If you've never heard of a lock needle before, it is a long, pointy thing that you would never, ever want to carry in your pocket.)
Trying to reverse the roles like that -- murderer becomes society's whipping boy versus the man trying to get vengence beyond the law -- makes for an interesting social studies lesson. But it's not hard to get the picture within the first fifteen minutes, and yet there are roughly forty more to go. After this, the finale is a welcome burst of energy, but it doesn't linger with quite the smack that the intro offers.
Certainly a movie that could use some renovation, right? So thought Simon West, whose directorial debut was Con Air. And thus a remake was born.
Watching the remake immediately after the original might have been a bad idea, but it did make a few things very clear to me.
First of all, West must've been aware of the first film's shortcomings, because he only sticks to what worked for the original: the first twenty minutes. Granted, the first twenty minutes would make a GREAT episode of The Twilight Zone (I could've sworn it already was), but a feature-length movie? Errrmmmm.
And there's the unfortunate part. West's re-do steals some scene direction and a lot of lines from the original. But to pad the film out, he has added the tricky maze of a doctor's absurdly large house, along with all of the doctor's weird gadgetry (automatic lights, a greenhouse built in the center of the house, a remote controlled fireplace). He also gives us a few unnecessary characters (a ridiculous visit from a friend and a live-in maid ... why are these people hiring a babysitter if they have a live-in maid?). This plus a very fragile sub-plot involving jogging.
West moves fast once the movie has finally exhausted it's key line ("He's calling **** ****** *** *****!"), which is wise. It gets a little awkward when the kids get involved, but only because they are such poor actors that West films them mostly in obscurity and gives them no lines whatsoever. And whereas the first film shows the killer in a shadowless spotlight, West keeps him as murky as his voice, this time around the over-done gravel of Lance Henriksen. It's a predictable trade-off, and it has predictably mediocre results.
It's a movie that knows what it has going for it. Even after fullfilling the necessary wrap-up, though, West can't resist one last stinger, a completely unnecessary but totally understandable last moment zing that, of course, concludes with the greatest thing about either of these movies:
"HE'S CALLING ...
No. I'm not going to be the one to spoil it for you.
Rating: -
About that mid-movie...
As generally pointed out, the beginning of this movie is one of the better Suspense sequences made, while the ending, if a bit weaker, is still well done and exciting.
But that notoriously "slow" middle section really is better than some credit it. It fleshes out the characters very well, creating some sympathy for the "psycho" and showing the darker side of the "good guys", while introducing the "bar fly" character played very well by Colleen Dewhurst. The pace is much slower than the rest of the movie, but adds frustration to the mix of emotions sparked by the movie. Perhaps the ending would not be as thrilling without the unsuccessful search to contrast it.
The real problem is that someone looking for a "scary" movie will be disappointed by the realism of the middle of this one; spoiled by the beginning and welcoming the ending, many will resent the in-between. But for those who can appreciate a little more "meat" to a scare-flick, this does a decent job.
It's not Hitchcock, but has some of those elements.
The DVD quality was good; there were no extras to speak of, but a good buy, if the price is low.
Rating: 
-
Not how I remembered, but still good
I remember being terrified by this movie as a child ...
I remembered the first 20 minutes vividly, and it is still just as scary as it was when I was a kid. Carol Kane is quite good as the terrified babysitter. The phrase: "Why haven't you checked the children?" will now make you uneasy. It is quick paced and suspenseful. (I am sure I never saw past this point.)
Then we jump forward in time to when the harasser escapes the insane asylum and begins his reign of terror again. After a prolonged police drama sequence (really unnecessary) we return to the babysitter, Carol Kane, now all grown up and with a family of her own. Her and her husband go out for the night, and disturbing things begin to happen to her babysitter!!
Overall, still a good film, even though the middle of the film (the bulk of it) lost my interest at times I still enjoyed it. Tony Beckley has some truly great scenes as the demented stalker and Carol Kane is the quintessential hysterical woman. Watch and enjoy!
Rating: -
The first 20min is worth it all
If for know other reason the first 20min of this film is worth checking out. If you want tension suspense and pure terror this is it. If your a fan of this type of film or even a film student the begining of this film alone is worth a look.....The rest of the film is slow with no action and kind of falls apart really. I'm not sure how you top the first part of this film with the great mood it sets with it's camera work and music !
Rating: -
Very freaky
This movie is by far one of the creepiest, and not alot goes on in the plot. It's the classic "babysitter" story..."have you check the children?" A babysitter, is recieving prank phone calls. First the caller just breathes into the phone, then he starts saying weird things. The voice on the line is soooo creepy, with every phone call the tension builds and builds. The end is classic...This is one that should be in every horror collectors, collection!
Rating: -
Excellent chiller
I have seen a lot of horror flicks and suspense/thrillers in my day and the first 21-mintues to When a Stranger Calls easily rates as possibly the very best first act I have ever seen. From the way it was written, shot, scored and acted there is for me no doubt it's just simply perfection. I was on the edge of my seat the whole time. The phone calls may not be the scariest in the sense that the caller at first doesn't say anything threatening or even sexual.
Each minute of the first act raises the tension unlike any horror flick I have ever seen. By the time you reach the end of the first act you'll be held in such suspense that scaring you is now simple. Any filmmaker can create a jump scene where the killer or ghost or whatever pops out of the corner. Most of the time jumping back is just simply a reaction. How many movies have you watched where you jumped back, but weren't scared at all? It's just a reaction and any filmmaker can do that regardless if they are good or a hack.
That is why I normally prefer movies like this that are a bit more subtle. Problem is though after the opening act business does indeed slow down. Most people say the middle sections are boring and it's kind of hard to argue with them. Though I will say the middle sections of When a Stranger Calls does get better on multiple viewings. The filmmakers did such a great job in the opening act that we the audience are on such a high that anything afterwards is bound to be a let down.
The screenplay written by Steve Feke and Fred Walton was overall pretty good; the first act was very well written and extremely creepy, but after that the movie changes focus. It seems the story will be built around Jill Johnson played by Carol Kane, but instead the movie focuses on the killer Roy Duncan played by Tony Beckley and a private detective named John Clifford played by Charles Durning who is on the hunt for the psychotic killer.
When a Stranger Calls isn't the typical horror movie, yes I consider it a horror flick for the sole reason the movie does aim to scare you. Not in the typical horror movie way, but with more suspense. Some suspense flicks have nothing to do with horror where as others play off some kind of primal fear often found in the horror genre. The 2nd half becomes more of a crime drama. We follow Roy Duncan and to be honest the guy is quite pathetic.
Feke and Walton take an interesting approach; Duncan is obviously a psycho but he's so pathetic we almost feel sorry for him. But the man is a child killer and I cannot feel for them. They are the lowest of the low. He's homeless, broke we see him get beat up and later beg for money. Hardly the typical movie villain; problem though is he's just not an interesting enough character to follow around. Tony Beckley does an out-standing job. There is no denying his talents in this movie as an actor. But the character just simply was not interesting.
Charles Durning does a great job though at carrying the movie. He is the more interesting of the two characters and his obsession with finding the killer is entertaining. But what went wrong with the middle sections? Simple it goes back to the killer just not being interesting enough. For almost an hour of the movie it's John Clifford hunting down Roy Duncan. While it's not as boring as some people make it out to be, I do think Steve Feke and Fred Walton could have done more. Their screenplay does seem to drag in some spots and by a certain point the movie does sort of repeat itself, but thankfully the final act gets back to Jill Johnson.
I didn't hate the middle sections, but they weren't as strong as they could have been. I personally always felt the movie should have been Jill's story with Roy Duncan being in the movie a little less. It would suck to lose the scenes with Charles Durning because he was so great same goes for Tony Beckley, but I personally think making it Jill's story and use Clifford and Duncan as more of a sub-plot would have worked better. The remake attempted to do just that and failed big time.
As stated earlier the opening act was just brilliant; director Fred Walton gets the most out of every single shot and raises the suspense and tension unlike any movie I have ever seen. Like I said anybody can do a clichéd scare movie, but it takes real talent to do what Fred Walton did. The 2nd half while yes does lose a little bit of steam, Fred Walton is still able to keep the suspense level at a decent level. The scenes with Colleen Dewhurst who plays Lisa are well done overall and remind us what kind of movie we are watching. The hour mark features a great and creepy scene with her and Roy Duncan. Though when all is said and done the Lisa character seems nothing more than filler scenes. It never really goes anywhere, but does provide some decent suspense.
The final act is when things really pick up and we return to Jill Johnson who is now married with 2-kids of her own. Besides the opening act, the final act is the most solid. It goes back to being very creepy and while it does lack compared to the opening it does give us some chills and thrills. Like I said before I do believe When a Stranger Calls is a movie that needs multiple viewings. The opening act was so brilliant anything afterwards is bound to bet a let down. It might be boring at first, but when you see it again you might be able to appreciate it a little bit more. I've come to enjoy the middle sections even if it wasn't as good as it could have been.
Carol Kane was great and I do believe the movie might have worked better had the focus been more on her and use Duncan and Clifford as a sub-plot. Kane does appear in half the movie actually. It's just she's used in the opening and ending, which results in roughly 40-minutes or so screen time, but since it's so far between it seems like she's barley in the movie.
Despite some problems with the middle sections, When a Stranger Calls is a highly suspenseful and very creepy movie with excellent performances. I'd advise those who felt the middle sections were boring to give it another try. It does grow on you and for those who haven't seen it just expect more a crime/drama with some suspense thrown in during the middle. But the opening and closing act just might be the best you'll find in this genre.
Rating: -
A Sitter's Worst Nightmare
Even after nearly 30 years, the original "When a Stranger Calls" is still as frightening today as the day it was released. Again, I must strongly suggest not to watch the horrible remake from a couple of years ago, which totally ruins the tale. Part of the suspense of the original was the fact that we, along with Carol Kane, didn't know where the phone call was originating from. It's every babysitter's nightmare--and played so convincingly here. The beginning of the movie is really the reason for three stars here; the rest of the film can't live up to such a sensational opening. The ending tries to recapture the tension of the first twenty minutes, but it only succeeds in reminding us of that fantastic opening. As far as horror films go, this one still ranks near the top as having one of the best beginnings in the entire genre. Now go and check the children, before you watch the film of course.
Rating: -
ORIGINAL THRILLER STILL A CHILLER!
"The call is coming from inside the house"! That famous line had movie goers screaming! I had not seen this film since I saw it in the theater many years ago. I was very surprised at how well it held up. This version blows the remake out of the water! I actually forgot the second and most of the third acts when watching this film. It has good acting, pacing, suspense and tension, even if It seems a little tame by today's standards. I think it still delivers the goods and I give it 3 1/2 stars. The DVD transfer is very good.
Rating: -
RE: orginal When a Stranger...messes with your mind...
They just don't make them any better than this. Tony Beckley is chilling as the nut house escapee.
Entire cast is terrific. Fred Walton knows his way around a thriller. This is Halloween for grownups.
Quite possibly better than Carpenter's classic.
Minor whine here: where are the extras, Mr. Walton? This fine film of yours absolutely deserves better
treatment in that department. We demand extras, we cry for extras; we beg and beseech for extras.
Because if we didn't respect the film, we would not give a damn about the lack of special features.
Click here for comments posted by our customers
Apparel-Sitemap ![When a Stranger Calls [VHS]](http://www.cuteseller.com/images22/51FGFZX8NXL._SL210_.jpg)
