Dynamixor The performances transcend the film's tropes, grounding it in characters that feel more complete than this subgenre often produces.

BeSummers Funny, strange, confrontational and subversive, this is one of the most interesting experiences you'll have at the cinema this year.

Kien Navarro Exactly the movie you think it is, but not the movie you want it to be.

Staci Frederick Blistering performances.

mark.waltz A wealthy man's wife and daughter plot to kill the nasty brute who is greatly abusive to the both of them. Taking this past the plot line of the cult French film "Diabolique", this brings on a horror element to a familiar plot and ties mother and daughter together in a way that binds them externally. The only real shocker is their inability to dispose of Gough's corpse as it keeps showing up again Michael Gough, the talk and lanky British character actor, played many villains in his career, and this one is one of the most despicable. Yvonne Mitchell and Sharon Gurney give crafty but sensitive performances as two women you truly root for to get away with their crime. There's a lull between the murder and the repercussions, and with a spoiled son in danger of discovering their secret, this lull brings on a great level of suspense.It's funny to see how much Michael Hough resembles Anthony Perkins who played his share of horror villains himself. This is more a psychological thriller than a horror movie, and for that, this really doesn't belong in horror movie DVD collections. Michael's son Simon plays his son here, although this is isn't a really large part.

Steve Nyland (Squonkamatic) I've always enjoyed this film, better known under the export title CRUCIBLE OF HORROR than the more descriptive British release title THE CORPSE. Nearly every Gothic horror fan over the age of 30 will remember seeing it on a local late nite creature feature at some point, where it would play along such related fare as CONQUEROR WORM or IT! with the rampaging Golem, though it's more of a psychological drama rather than a full-blown horror outing. But while it may seem slow there isn't a wasted or unnecessary scene in the whole film, which is essentially an update on DIABOLIQUE with a dysfunctional British family dynamic instead of a boarding school.CRUCIBLE centers on priceless British character actor Michael Gough as the tyrannical, sadistic patriarch of a staid British family. He's the kind of guy who unwinds after a long day by putting on a shirt & a tie to work on the gardening for a bit, then psychologically tortures his long suffering wife and daughter over a thoroughly unappetizing looking dinner. Then maybe a glass of sherry and take the riding crop to the daughter for no good reason. The guy is stuffy, uptight, demented, weird, and heartless, which is all we need to know about him, and Gough does a magnificent job of making us hate his guts.His son Rupert plays along with the old man, seeming to get a kick out of the mental abuse hurled at his sibling & mum, and in my opinion is the most twisted character in the drama. He works at the insurance firm with his father and likewise relaxes around the house in his tweeds, the two men driven spare by things like a random Kleenex on the night table or the family guns in slight disarray. Their off-hours consist of an endless pursuit of wrongdoings by the women of the house, who in due course get sick of it and plot a murder.One interesting aspect of the movie that I don't see others raise is the question of who is more evil: The domineering, abusive, sociopathic men of the house, or the women who grind up a bottle of sleeping pills, blend them in with a bottle of cognac and force it down someone's gullet with the aid of a huge funnel? The movie then picks up a bit of steam when the (apparently) dead body first disappears and then begins turning up in odd, inconvenient places at just the wrong moment, say when the nosy neighbor turns up with his bloodhound wondering where the old man has been. A great deal of time is spent with the two women fretting out the night, wondering what will happen next, raising the interesting question of just who is playing whom here, and is there some supernatural force at play or are they just inept killers?What works with the film is an almost unbearable sense of claustrophobia, comprehensive creepiness and dread, as well as Gough's delightfully nasty performance as the emotionless father. What doesn't work is one of the standard complaints about British horror from the period in which it was made: There are no real fireworks in terms of violence, gore or sexuality. Instead the film's perversity is suggested by a serious of flashbacks & dream sequences that seem to imply a forced incestuous relationship and spousal abuse, all of which is brimming under the surface while never really being elaborated upon. The audience's own polymorphously perverse nature is projected onto the film by such grimace inducing scenes as a father feeling his daughter's bicycle seat to see if it's still warm (ewww!) and a mother regarding her son with quiet resignation after witnessing him slapping around his sister.And while it isn't very shocking the final climactic scene is one of the strangest sequences in the subgenre of British horror, raising more questions than it answers -- was anybody really murdered at all? If not then why did a particular character go through so much bother to creep everybody out? Was there some sort of a plot in works even before the ladies hatched their murder scheme? And was that a calculated part of this greater plan? The film succeeds by not answering any of these questions and closing on a great Hitchcokian downbeat that would have been undone by having somebody explain what may or may not have happened. Hitchcock would have approved.5/10

sol1218 **SPOILERS** A bit uneven but still interesting family drama with an overly strict father Walter Eastwood, Michael Gough, who's constant mistreatment of the women of his household his wife and daughter Edith and Jane, Yavnnoe Mitchell and Sharon Gurney, leads them to a plan and later make an attempt on his life. We see earlier in the film how Walter's daughter drives him batty both with her screwing around and her kleptomania. Jane stealing of money from the local Golf Club has the club's manager Gregson, David Butler, show up at the Eastwood residence asking Walter for the money that she took. Gregson also seemed to have something going with the 16 year-old Jane that had nothing to do with putting a golf ball. We later see that Jane also has something going on with local grease monkey Benjy, Nicholas Jones, who also has the hots for her but only from a distance. Later Walter, after Jane swore that she didn't steal the club's money, finds the stolen money in Jane's wig he gives her the beating of her life. Even though we never see Walter abuse his wife Edith physically he does treat her as if she's a bit mad. Which we later find out that she is. Later Edith and Jane concoct a plan to murder Walter when he goes out to his country cottage hunting that weekend. The "plan" doesn't go off well but in the end the two do in the overly drunk, which they made sure that he was, Walter. Leaving his body to be found later in bed dead from an apparent heart-attack. But later as the two murderesses don't get any call from the people that Walter was to meet hunting it's obvious that something went wrong in their hair-brained scheme. The ending is a bit hard to take but overall the movie "The Corpes" is much better then you would have expected it to be because of the top notch acting by all involved in it, even the dog Sam did a good job of "acting". There were a number of really good dream-like sequences in the movie involving Edith that showed just who mentally unstable she was. There's also a flashback where we see Walter, again, brutally beat Jane in a lake with her almost nude. Walter himself seemed to have this "Mister Clean" faddish where he would vigorously wash his hands every time he touched something or someone he felt had germs or dirt on it, or them. Walter's son Rupert, Simon Gough, was the only one in the family that he didn't abuse since he felt that he lived up to the very high standards that he set for his family members. Rupert was a combination insurance salesman and stock broker.

keeponwithbrian Not to be confused with the 1972 horror film about wax museums called Crucible of Terror; This is Crucible of Horror (1970) - British title: The Corpse. The film stars Michael Gough (Alfred from the Batman films) as Walter Eastwood - a wealthy, cruel & sadistic husband and father. Yvonne Mitchell plays Edith, the poor unfortunate woman who's basically lost her soul being married to Walter. Their children are Jane (Sharon Gurney) and Rupert (played by Gough's real life son, Simon). Walter consistently abuses Jane and praises Rupert. In one frightening scene, Walter beats Jane with a reed for stealing money from a friend of his. Rupert is the only one with a reasonably normal relationship with Walter - and why shouldn't he be? Walter puts his son on a pedestal and abuses his wife and daughter mentally and physically. The point of the film is that Edith and Jane reach their breaking point and decide to end their abuse by putting an end to Walter. So they poison him and make it look like a suicide. Then they have to worry about keeping it from Rupert. Things don't go exactly as planned. I won't dare ruin the outcome of this suspenseful british classic. If your a fan of the best Hammer films and horror of the late 60s and 70s, I highly recommend seeking Crucible of Horror out. There is something about this film, the music, the cinematography, etc., that creates a chilling atmosphere. Turn the lights out when you watch this. You'll never see Alfred the butler in the same way again!