Stephen Abell Alison Parker (Raines) is a working model who is not yet ready to marry her boyfriend Michael (Sarandon) and who needs to find a place of her own to get her mind and thoughts right. However, the city isn't cheap and Alison is about to give up when she comes across an apartment in an old house. The house and the apartments inside are in the process of being renovated, giving her the opportunity to rent for a reasonable amount. However, once there, things start to get strange... not only are the other tenants peculiar in the way they act and behave towards her... but she starts to get a feeling of apprehension and a sense of being watched... there's something not quite right with this big old house and it may have something to do with the priest in the top apartment; though he's blind he spends every hour sat in front of his window looking out over the city...Michael Winner opted to go the route of the original Rosemary's Baby with this little "Big" horror flick of good versus evil. The entire atmosphere of the film is reminiscent of Polanski. Even the camera work, at times, has a similar feel. However, it's Winner's direction and use of actors that make this a more enjoyable affair. I have to admit I found Rosemary quite boring, though it was nicely shot and had a decent cast. Winner injects a little more action and tries for a more ominous and eerie atmosphere, which he doesn't quite pull off.Another positive is the story, based on a novel by Jeffrey Convitz (which I now want to read as the movie had so many elements that could only be expanded and improved upon in written form), as this has more than a few twists and turns along its way. It would have been nice to see some of these utilised a tad better as it could have made for a stronger movie. Though, back in '77, movies were frowned upon when they went over an hour and a half, which probably meant quite a few bits of celluloid on the floor.As for the actors, well the cast is massive for a horror flick. Granted the big names are in supporting roles, though this is a good ploy by Winner, as the story is mostly revolving around the occupants. We have Burgess "WARK! WARK!" Meredith as the enigmatic and gentlemanly Charles Chazon; Sylvia Miles and Beverly D'Angelo as the uninhabited lesbians Gerde Engstrom and Sandra; and as the omnipresent blind priest Father Halliran we have John Carradine. But the names don't stop there, and Winner has a good eye for up and coming talent as there's Christopher Walken, Tom Berenger, Jeff Goldblum, and Richard Dreyfuss thrown into the mix for good measure.However, though the cast is great it's too big. There are too many characters knocking about and this gives the entire film the feeling of being crowded. This would work well in a novel as there's more space to work in. However, in the confines of an hour and a half, it may have been better to reduce the cast to essential characters and built on them a little more, giving them more depth and making the film stronger in the process.That said, I will say this is worth at least one watch, especially if you're an old-school-horror fan who likes the religious good versus evil twist... or if you just want to give zombies and wimped out vampires a miss...

hellholehorror This took the brooding suspense of Rosemary's Baby (1968) and the mythology of The Exorcist (1973) and mashed together a slow psychological horror. My biggest gripe was that it wasn't scary enough. There was one really scary scene around the middle that was so effective in building tension and then reaching a horrific climax with genuine fear long the way. Other than that and the ending, that was a bit creepy, this was a little disappointing. The pace is slow as most films were back in the seventies. This is well acted and suitably directed. It suffers from blandness when compared to much better films in the same genre from the same era. I didn't like the complete lack of supernatural special effects. I had to think. It would have been a lot scarier if I was a Christian.

chaos-rampant There were three masters of horror at the time driven by vision, Hooper, Argento, Carpenter, perhaps two films each.Then the bulk of horror, either studio or gonzo. This is studio, pretty awful in its basic gears. Story and acting are wooden, editing is artless. I can feel a workmanlike hand in the story, a hack in control, always some narrative noise going on and cut to someone talking with hardly a moment of quiet. But for whatever reason it's also shrill, crazy, nonsensical. Unusual. I'll take this over polished horror like The Omen. If we make nonsense after all, it hurts no one and may open a few doors of the imagination. This lack of finesse is funneled here into a kind of demented energy, I would describe it overall as a hellish mix between Fulci and Raimi. A young TV model moves into a New York apartment with a creepy blind old man staring out the window in the floor above, soon hell is unleashed. I will keep with me all the scenes that show a snooping around in dark corridors and up the stairs to the old man, they are perhaps no more than 2-3 of them but hacked raw from the walls of nightmare. So a strange thing, silly and yet disturbing as another reviewer said.

utgard14 A model (Cristina Raines) moves into an apartment building where strange things occur and her odd neighbors are not what they seem. An interesting, but flawed, horror movie that peddles in weirdness just for the sake of weirdness. Pretty Cristina Raines is fine but does nothing to rise above the material. Mustachioed Chris Sarandon plays her boyfriend and it's pretty hard to take him seriously looking like a guy who belongs at Studio 54. The supporting cast helps the movie out greatly. Screen vets Ava Gardner, John Carradine, Burgess Meredith, Eli Wallach, Martin Balsam and Arthur Kennedy are all fantastic. Also early roles for Christopher Walken, Jerry Orbach, Jeff Goldblum, and Beverly D'Angelo. In the "blink and you'll miss them" category, there's Richard Dreyfuss and Tom Berenger. A packed lineup for a movie like this. It's not a great horror film. It's not scary and is seldom suspenseful. But there is something undeniably curious about it. The controversial climax may repulse sensitive types.