The Haunted House on Film: An Historical Analysis
Published by McFarland, 2019. 222 pages
By Paul Meehan

The haunted house film is one of my favorite sub-genres so I was very excited to dig into this title when it finally came out. I was hoping to add a multitude to titles to my “Crap! I haven’t seen that yet” list, which is exactly what I did. Even before we get into the thick of this review, anytime a book has you seeking out different titles, that is always a good thing!

The introduction gives a great overview of the not only haunted house in cinema, but in fiction as well, giving the reader a nice background as to where all of this really started. When you consider that the very first haunted house film, Georges Méliès 1986 film Le Chateau Hante (aka The Haunted Castle), was also the very first horror film, makes this sub-genre really the oldest in the horror film category. But we also have early titles discussed such as D.W. Griffith’s One Exciting Night (1922) and Roland West’s The Bat (1926). Meehan covers the early “old dark house” films that really were a combination of mystery/thriller/comedies, giving a good explanation as to why these are really different than what one would normally define as a haunted house film. On many of the movies discussed, where there is a mystery killer, the author leaves it up to the reader to find the movie and watch it to find out who that might be. Since many authors will give away any surprises, which really is a letdown going into the film if you know the ending, it’s nice to know those secrets were left hidden.

I really enjoyed the fact that while the usual suspects are discussed, such as The Innocents (1961), The Haunting (1963), to The Shining (1980), there are numerous titles that are still hiding in the shadows from most film lovers, either because they haven’t gotten a release on DVD or Blu-ray, or they are just not in the public eye as much as the others. So kudos to Meehan for helping to breathe new life into some of these.

When I saw Hitchcock’s Psycho (1960) being covered here I had to stop and wonder why, since it really is about a someone with a bit of madness running through them, and not really what most would consider a traditional haunted house movie. But when the author calls the house that Norman lives with his mother as a “brooding domain of terror that towers over the bland horizontal layout of the motel below and is a visual metaphor for the way that Mrs. Bates’ dark personality dominates Norman’s”, it makes total sense. Could Norman be possessed by his mother? Whether or not you agree, it is fun to ponder, isn’t it?

Meehan covers the wide variety of titles from here in the states, as well as from other countries. He also explains why the haunted house sub-genre wasn’t a strong one in the beginning, compared to other famous monsters like Dracula and Frankenstein, and why most of the early “old dark house” titles that had ghosts always had the Scooby-Doo endings. It is one of those trivial things that you might not really think about, but when you look at the number of these titles and when they came out, it would make you wonder why it wasn’t a bigger sub-genre. Then we see the progression to modern day, when people are a little more open to the possibility of outside forces, or a ghostly existence, or even life after death, it makes it easier to sell to the mass market.

I did find a few mistakes here and there, such as the details on the behind-the-scenes information on Rosemary’s Baby (1968), in regards to producer Castle having an incident and being hospitalized with severe kidney failure in April of 1969, “dying soon afterwards”. Castle didn’t pass away until 1977, and not of kidney failure but a heart attack. If there was a report of that, I’m sure Castle was using it for ballyhoo for the film. And the head injury composer Krzysztof Komeda died from wasn’t from a motorcycle accident, but when his friend and writer Marek Hłasko accidently pushed him off an escarpment, which caused the injury that led to a hematoma of the brain.

In discussing The Legend of Hell House (1973), the author wrote “Dr. Barrett hires a couple of psychics to assist him on his paranormal quest.” It wasn’t Barrett that hired them but by the owner of the estate that wanted proof of life after death, wanting that avenue covered as well as the scientific way. And the director is John Hough, not Peter.

Yes, these are very picky and minor errors, but I feel they needed to be pointed out.

Aside from that, I found this book immensely enjoyable. It not only gave me new titles to look for, but also reminded me of many that I had already seen, but really felt the need to revisit them again. That is the beauty of a good and informative book. If you put it down wanting to go bust out a movie you haven’t seen in a few years after just reading about it, then it is doing its job. I had that happen several times during my reading of it.

You can order this book directly from the publisher, McFarland by clicking HERE.