Leofwine_draca This effective shocker manages to combine the possession themes from THE EXORCIST with the supernatural deaths from THE OMEN into a workable mixture, heavy on the atmosphere and nostalgia; smattered with enough bizarre incident, cheap deaths, and harassed acting on the part of the main performers to make it worthwhile. The best thing about the film by far is not the fragmented plot, but rather the direction of cult favourite Curtis Harrington, who fills every moment with enough suspense, tense atmosphere, and shuddery chills to flesh out a dozen later horror flicks. The setting of a dead-end drive-in (forever playing ATTACK OF THE 50 FOOT WOMAN) is a perfect one, with supernatural incident after supernatural incident taking place in the creaking, derelict, and run-down old buildings. Bodies are impaled to the giant screen, hanged with film reels, and disappear inside Coke machines, and there are enough low-budget blood and grue effects to please the graphic horror fan no end, along with a little macabre humour here and there.The scripting is character-focused for a change, giving a chance for the main performers to develop their roles before being offed by the unseen spirit, which is a plus because the casting is excellent. Taking the title role is Piper Laurie, hot on the success of CARRIE, playing another eccentric character whose fate is inexorably bound up with that of her dead lover. She's just as good here as she was in Brian De Palma's hit, even if her character is deeper and more subtle than there. The underrated Stuart Whitman also turns in a fine portrayal as Vince, the ageing helper with an affection for Ruby, who may or may not be doomed to die at the hands of the vengeful spirit.As the possessed child Leslie, Janit Baldwin is exceptionally creepy; with the aid of some eye make-up she easily transforms from looking like an innocent child into a creature of evil, and hers is the scariest performance in the whole movie. Finally we have Roger Davis, as the spiritual doctor brought in to sort out the whole mess, and he too contributes a solid and flawless performance. High on horror and creepy shudders, RUBY skilfully combines old-fashioned atmosphere and suspense with new-fangled bloodshed and violence, and the end result is an unfairly forgotten yarn which is not without flaws, but for the most part one to watch. Also be sure to check out the CARRIE-style shock ending, which is one of the best I've seen.

chas77 I really wanted to like this film. I loved the director's earlier "Night Tides" movie which I saw at a special screening in the '90s somewhere in Hollywood. Many critics have praised this film and I heard it was a minor hit when it came out so I was looking forward to it.That said, this is not an easy movie to like. I think part of the problem lies in the forced attempt at creating the '50s setting. In larger budgeted films where you can use a studio back lot or hire tons of top-notch art directors, set dressers, expensive costumers, etc., that type of recreation can work (although sometimes it does do not) but in this case it seemed like they were trying to too hard to set it in the '50s -- it seemed off. My wife walked by while I was watching it, didn't know anything about this movie and said, "it looks like a '70s movie." Why would she say this? Something about it is off, the haircuts seem a little bit too shaggy and some of the costumes aren't quite right. It was a coup to get all the period cars though, gotta give credit where credit is due.Anyway, getting to the story. This is also kinda weird. We're supposed to believe that a nightclub singer whose beloved boyfriend was killed by his mobster friends right in front of her eyes would hire the same mobsters to help her run a drive-in after they are paroled from prison? And she's even sleeping with one of them? I don't think so. Had a hard time buying that. Piper Laurie as said singer is also shown in flashbacks from 17 years ago and instead of getting a different actress (one who might be 30 pounds lighter) they simply change her hair do. I'm not buying it.The acting is hit and miss. Piper is one-note shrill. Stuart Whitman as her retired mobster boyfriend is pretty good. The guy playing the parapsychologist (or whatever he was - somehow he doubled as the prison doctor, from what the dialogue inferred) seemed like something out of another movie entirely. The best acting goes to the weirdo possessed daughter who gets to be in the movie's few effective scenes when she babbles in a man's voice. Maybe if the film included more of these "Exorcist"-inspired scenes it would have worked better.The laughable ending with Piper fighting a plastic skeleton in the water is mind-numbingly awful. Even worse is the "Laura" rip-off end song which is just bad.

preppy-3 Horror movie with a needlessly convoluted plot. In 1935 a gangster's girlfriend named Ruby (Piper Laurie) sees her boyfriend shot down dead. At that moment she gives birth to his baby (!!!) The movie cuts to 16 years later. Ruby is an alcoholic running a drive in and Leslie is her daughter--born a deaf mute (I think). For reasons never made totally clear she has the guys who shot her boyfriend dead working for her in the drive in! Then they start getting killed--it seems Ruby's ex is coming back for revenge...If that synopsis sounds confusing you should see the movie! Curtis Harrington is a good director and I'm giving this a 4 just because it is well-directed...it just doesn't make a lot of sense. I saw the director's cut which was thought to be lost. Harrington was fired before the movie was finished. The producer took the movie, cut out all the violence and shot scenes with a totally different cast! That was the one released. Harrington complained about it and said his version was gone. Somehow it was found and that's the one I saw. If this is the cut the director approved I can only wonder how bad the reedited version was! Scenes seem to end before they're finished; the plot meanders all over the place; there are way too many unanswered questions still lingering at the end; Ruby is inexplicably always dressed like a madam; the special effects are poor; the deaths are very poorly done (and look REAL fake); the twist at the end comes out of nowhere--and doesn't make a lot of sense and, basically, this is BORING!Laurie is a wonderful actress but she's terrible in this. She appears to be drunk most of the time--or looks like she wishes she were. Stuart Whitman walks through his role. Janit Baldwin is actually pretty good as Leslie. And Roger Davis (fondly remembered from "Dark Shadows") pops up about 30 minutes in as a parapsychologist. He has little to do with the plot except have Whitman provide some clumsy exposition to him. It's supposed to clear up the plot--it doesn't.A dull, confusing mess. Not worth seeing at all. It's really a shame-the VCI DVD looks just beautiful.

Maciste_Brother RUBY is a bizarre amalgamation of incongruous elements taken from different genres that just doesn't work as a whole once they're put together. I haven't seen such a kookily conceived horror film since THE BOOGEYMAN. But unlike that Uli Lommel flick, which actually works in an odd kinda of way, RUBY's disparate elements are totally impossible to mix together to create a satisfying product. Take one part Film Noir flick, one part THE EXORCIST, one part CARRIE and one part DRIVE-IN exploitation flick and what you get is something that's just plain silly. The direction is very old fashioned, which would have worked in the 1960s but not in the gritty 1970s, when the film was released. And why is the title of the film called RUBY, when it should have been LESLIE? What does Ruby the character have anything to do with the horror in the story? If a movie can't get its title right, what hope is there for the rest of the film? RUBY is more of a showcase for Piper Laurie, who's good but for what? Singing (but is that what we're looking for in a horror film)? Or dressing up in vintage clothes (again, the same question...)? Or spouting inane "film noir" dialogue? While watching it, I couldn't help but feel that the production was highjacked by producers (like THE REDEEMER) and the whole thing was altered in order to capitalize on the success of CARRIE and THE EXORCIST, and other horror movies of that period. The end result is embarrassing.