MovieChat Forums > The Legend of Hell House (1973) Discussion > the book

the book

posted 20 years ago by RoxyUMD
16 replies | jump to latest

I just finished reading the book, and I haven't seen the movie yet. Anyone read it AND seen the film, and have any comments on how it was adapted? Since I read it was rated PG, there is NO WAY they included half of the things that were in the book in the film. (I.E., Florence Tanner getting raped by "Daniel's" ghost, Edith throwing herself at Fischer (it's pretty graphic what she does). There's more, but the more I think about it I can't actually put it into words. It's pretty gruesome, if you ask me, not that I minded. I tend to enjoy really gruesome films.

JULES: What ain't no country I ever heard of. They speak English in What?

[–] gillian-22 20 years ago

The film is much less graphic but a lot of things are implied. Florence reacts to her "rape" but it isn't seen on screen.
When she attempts to seduce him Fischer sees more of Edith (called Ann in the fim) than the audience does.
As I said, a lot is implied, and it's still very scary.

[–] j-kerr-1 20 years ago

I've just finished reading the book too. Bit of a let down - shoddy ending. Anyone know of a really scary haunted house book/film (I love the promise of Hell House, though, I just didn't think the conclusion was up to scratch).

[–] julie_robin2 20 years ago

The Changeling is a scary 'haunted house' film -it's not so scary in the middle, but the beginning and end...!

I prefer Imaginality to reality.

[–] ecummins86 19 years ago

It's been a while since I've read the book version of The Haunting (of which I refer to Robert Wise's film and not the cruddy 1999 remake - titled The Haunting Of Hill House), but from what I remember the book is just as good as Robert Wise's movie. Again there are some things in Jackson's novel that were left out of the movie (there's a scene where Theo, Luke and Eleanor are taking a walk around the property and Theo and Eleanor talk of how nice it would be to come back to the house some time later and have a picnic down by the area of the property they're walking around), but for the movie part the original movie version is pretty faithful to the book.

[–] pillowtalk1959 19 years ago

The movie is based on the book "Hell House," by Richard Matheson, not the Shirley Jackson book. It was published in the late 60s/ early 70s, and he wrote some other books which were filmed.

[–] rockandrollhellcat 18 years ago

This movie has nothing to do with "The Haunting." It is based on a novel by Richard Matheson titled, "Hell House."

[–] balkaster 20 years ago

You must have seen the "cut up for TV" version. In the DVD release, the rape is shown on screen (as much as can be shown without getting an "R" rating -- it's pretty disturbing just the same), but because the rapist is a ghost, naturally it's all just Franklin reacting to something that isn't there. The seduction scene is all suggestion and no flesh below the shoulders, but the suggestion is done pretty well. Fondling the breasts of a statue, Hunnicutt projecting almost a completely different personality and a different look, the beads of perspiration, licking and biting her lips, and that wild eyed speech, "You...me...that girl...naked...DRUNK!...sweating...clutching...BITING!" It all weaves together. It doesn't have to match the book. The effect is the same. If it had gone on much longer, it would have altered the pace of the film.

[–] Hup234! 19 years ago

Is the novel more graphic? Yes, it is. Oh, yes. In the film, Fischer only very briefly sketches the reasons why the Belasco House is what it is (which is a minor flaw in the film, as we want a bit more), but the novel goes into a much greater and more explicit and horrifying history of the house's worsening corruption over the years, while still leaving enough to the readers' imagination.

There's much more. One of my favorite scenes in the book - a real hair-raiser! - wasn't in the film:

In the film, the already-dead Dr. Barrett seemingly answers "In here!" when his wife calls to him; when she goes to him, we learn the truth. But in the book, Barrett is walking right beside her, and we sense her growing suspicion, and she turns to look at him as they walk, and sees the thing beside her to be not her husband but rather a mocking, grinning, staring caricature.

Both the novel and the film are classics to be repeatedly enjoyed.

[–] clwowski 19 years ago

Its been years since I read the book, but I do remember "bastard bog". still creeps me out when I think of it.

[–] phillip-nicholson1 19 years ago

The Ghost's Of Sleath and Haunted(also a movie) are good Haunted House novels by James Herbert.

[–] jtate1960 19 years ago

"I've just finished reading the book too. Bit of a let down - shoddy ending. Anyone know of a really scary haunted house book/film (I love the promise of Hell House, though, I just didn't think the conclusion was up to scratch)."

If you can find it, read "Burnt Offerings" by Robert Marasco. It is one of my favorites and it was also translated to the screen. I do like the film, but the book is far superior.

[–] organschizm 19 years ago

How is the Emeric Belasco character protrayed in the movie? Is he anything like he is in the book?
Also, is the chapel in the house in the movie? and if so is it depicted as it is in the book?

I refuse to have a signature. this is degrading. For shame!

[–] gillian-22 19 years ago

The chapel in the film is pretty much as it was in the book, the evil pictures and evil crucifix and so forth. You see just enough to get the general idea.

Spoiler Ahead!

Emeric Belasco doesn't make a "personal" appearance until the very end when they discover his embalmed body and artificial legs.

Before then the audience can hear but not see him. The characters react to his hauntings and talk to him though.

[–] Lawdog1527 18 years ago

Someone mentioned earlier the film does show the rape scene; this isn't really the case. It's more implied.

(Spoiler)

In the novel Tanner's ordeal is more horrific than first thought. She realizes she's being violated by a rotted corpse.

[–] MightyMarge 18 years ago

And I have to mention that Balasco, when finally seen, was played by vetern British actor, Michael Gough. Who has been in so many British horror movies, including Christopher Lee's first Dracula flick, THE HORROR OF DRACULA. I sincerely appreciated that nodd to his fans.

[–] rockandrollhellcat 18 years ago

As has been stated otherwise, the movie leaves out a LOT of stuff that was in the book. The movie is tame compared to the novel. If the right director did a remake that was faithful to the original movel, that would be great. Yeah, don't expect the film to be like the novel.