Alicia I love this movie so much

Megamind To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

Jenna Walter The film may be flawed, but its message is not.

Paynbob It’s fine. It's literally the definition of a fine movie. You’ve seen it before, you know every beat and outcome before the characters even do. Only question is how much escapism you’re looking for.

Red-Barracuda Despite its reception, which seems to have been quite negative from what I have read, Ruby made an absolutely huge profit at the box office. Made for $600,000 it went on to rake in $16million. That's serious commercial success for sure. But it appears to have been one of those movies which made big waves on initial release but then kind of fell off the radar immediately afterwards. In 1935 a man is gunned down by his fellow gangsters. Sixteen years later his wife, now the mother to a disturbing mute girl, runs a drive-in theatre that specialises in horror movies. She employs all the men responsible for the earlier murder and soon they all start winding up dead, victims of a mysterious supernatural entity. It soon transpires that the young daughter is possessed by her dead father's spirit and he's out for some serious pay-back.This one was directed by Curtis Harrington who was responsible for the subtle off-kilter chiller Night Tide (1961) which featured a young Dennis Hopper in an unusually restrained role. Ruby is a decidedly more standard horror offering combining elements of a trio of big-hitting horror hits of the day including Carrie (1976) with Piper Laurie as a demented mother, The Exorcist (1973) with the spider-walking possessed young girl and The Omen (1976) with its series of elaborate death scenes - victims are impaled high up on cinema screens, choked to death on film reels, hung from trees and left bloodied in...a Coke machine. It's a combination that basically works though, with enough incidents occurring to ensure it's never a boring watch. I think its possession movie element is the one that works best though, with Janit Baldwin perfectly cast in the role of the demented daughter. With her saucer eyes and creepy smile she is genuinely unsettling and the scenes with her possessed by her father are actually kind of scary. Perhaps if the various death scenes had been executed with a little more verve and detail, the film would be better but the weird killings still do add a further macabre detail to the overall whole never-the-less. The drive-in setting is actually a pretty good one and gives the film a bit of distinct character and I did enjoy the interspersing of the featured film Attack of the 50 Foot Woman into things even if it was a movie released seven years after events depicted on screen were supposed to be happening - ah, the trifling details film-makers could so easily get away with in the days before the internet! Anyway, events do dovetail to an ending which was a little odd. I don't think the general idea of it was especially bad – quite decent in actual fact – but it was just far, far too abrupt. All-in-all though, this forgotten box-office smash is actually well worth seeking out if you like 70's horror movies, it's a little ropey in places for sure but it does have a bit of atmosphere, originality and legitimately scary moments.

HumanoidOfFlesh The prologue takes place in 1935.Former actress Ruby Claire witnesses her gangster boyfriend Nicky's killing by his associates.Sixteen years later.Ruby operates highly successful drive-in movie cinema located in the middle of rural US.Unfortunately the ghost of Nicky returns to claim revenge on his killers,who work with Ruby.Last theatrical horror film of Curtis "The Killing Kind" Harrington is a mix of haunted drive-in/possession flick in the vein of "The Exorcist".My favourite scene from "Ruby" is when mutilated body is hidden inside Coke vending machine.Incredibly fat woman decides to have a drink,puts a coin and receives healthy cup of fresh blood.The film has moments of effective suspense but there are also some dull spots.6 cups of blood out of 10.

Woodyanders Hard-bitten former gangster's moll and faded nightclub singer Ruby Claire (superbly played by Piper Laurie) runs a drive-in movie theater and pines for the good old days. The vengeful spirit of Ruby's murdered mobster lover Nicky Rocco (handsome Sal Vecchio) uses the body of Ruby's sweet and innocent mute daughter Leslie (an impressive almost wordless portrayal by Janit Baldwin) as a vessel to exact revenge from beyond the grave on the people who killed him. Director Curtis Harrington, working from an engrossing script by George Edwards and Barry Schneider, relates the absorbing story at a steady pace, offers a generous sprinkling of decent gore, adds a few neat touches of amusing macabre humor (a corpse gets stashed in a soda vending machine that pumps out the guy's blood), and does his customary expert job of creating and sustaining a supremely eerie and unsettling gloom-doom atmosphere. Moreover, Harrington brings a wistful and melancholy nostalgic sensibility to the material which kicks the picture up a few extra notches. The sturdy acting from the sound cast rates as another major asset: Stuart Whitman does well as Ruby's loyal and amiable longtime buddy Vince Kemper, Roger Davis contributes fine support as helpful parapsychologist Dr. Paul Keller, and comely flash-in-the-pan 70's exploitation film starlet Crystin Sinclaire vamps it up nicely as shameless stuck-up tramp Lila June. William Mendell's crisp cinematography makes excellent use of vibrant color and makes the most out of the misty swampland location. Don Ellis' moody score hits the shuddery spot. Marred only by a rushed and sloppy tacked-on cheap shock ending, "Ruby" overall sizes up as a fun little low-budget fright feature.

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.