Audrey Rose (1977)

Sick Product of a Sick System

Did you people see the same film I saw?

An old-fashioned movie made with new-fashioned finesse.

The acting in this movie is really good.

The only thing worthwhile about this embarrassment is the opening 20 seconds or so. Very moody, intriguing, even brave. Everything after that is hopeless. Clearly aping The Exorcist (Marsha Mason isn't fit to drink from Ellen Burstyn's shoe), the film ends up being a weird hash of TV movie and student film... even Marsha Mason bashed it one year after it came out (!). Really, Wise must've been directing this from the catering truck or something. A few things that had me almost hating this ting from the opening credits (none are spoilers). Everyone is smiling so hard their faces will break, even when doing something no real person would smile during.... like being alone in a dark room. Ear to ear smile in a home dark room looking at the 10000000th shot of your kid? No. When the girl is handed a single balloon by her dad in the park she practically explodes with glee, running around like a person with some sort of a problem. All of this serves to fulfill a dreadful movie cliche: all of these people are soon to be miserable so let's see the counterpoint. Look how far they've fallen. It's on the level of junior high emotional appeal...Then, mom waits outside her daughter's school door. The instant the bell rings - in fact I believe the ringing overlaps this - kids begin pouring out of the doors. That's not how it works. Kids don't line up against the door looking at their parents through the glass waiting for a bell that allows them to open the door. That's the kind of movie this is.Finally, the worst part. Cinematography. Some of the ugliest, phoniest garbage I have ever seen outside of 1970s network tv shows. Any sequence in the apartment is utterly hideous, with light glaring off actors' cheeks and coming from all directions. Nobody's house interior ever looked like this. Oh. I spent a good stretch of the film with the subtitles on and sound muted because the girl's performance has got to be one of the most annoying things I've ever heard. See this and tell me you aren't moved into any other emotion than annoyance at all the whining. Flabbergastingly awful. I only wrote this review bec so many seem to be lukewarm about it.

For me this movie is masterpiece fantastic anthony hopkins is really incredible it gave me shiver 10 on 10

Robert Wise may have directed "West Side Story" and "The Sound of Music." But he has done a fair share of horror films and thrillers, including "The Curse of the Cat People," "The Day The Earth Stood Still," but most notably, "The Haunting." However, hardly anybody seems to remember a 1977 film called "Audrey Rose." It is another film from the famed director that, in my eyes, is very memorable and atmospheric.Janice and Bill Templeton are leading a very happy marriage with their daughter, Ivy. The last thing they want is a strange man by the name of Elliot Hoover stalking them. Worst of all, he sets his eye on Ivy. Soon enough, they are able to talk to Hoover. He explains that his wife and daughter, Audrey Rose, died in a horrible car accident, and that his daughter may have crossed over into Ivy. Of course, Janice and Bill dismiss Hoover as a lunatic. But that's when Ivy begins to exhibit strange behavior. Could Hoover be correct? Is Ivy really the reincarnation of Audrey Rose? Now, when "Audrey Rose" first came out in 1977, it was subject to mixed reviews, mostly because it was seen as a horror film, and I can understand why. It was released a few years after "The Exorcist," when horror films were becoming more modern and faith was being challenged. But I don't see "Audrey Rose" as a horror film. Instead, I perceive it as a supernatural thriller with a touch of family drama. And it's a very good one.Based on the novel by Frank De Felitta, creator of "The Entity" and director of "Dark Night of the Scarecrow," "Audrey Rose" is a nifty thriller for three reasons.First, Robert Wise gives superb direction. He registers the exact amount of passion that he had for "The Haunting" and he has chosen an effective story that challenges the beliefs of the viewer. Do we choose to believe Hoover in that his daughter has come back in the form of Ivy? Or is Ivy simply an ill child in need of psychiatric help? It is a great story.Second, the acting is quite good. Anthony Hopkins and John Beck give very nice performances as Hoover and Bill. The wide-eyed newcomer Susan Swift is especially believable in the scenes in which Ivy shows off the nightmarish behavior of Hoover's dead daughter. But I, and many other people who have seen the movie, feel that the greatest performance belongs to Marsha Mason, star of "The Goodbye Girl," as Janice. Once Audrey Rose takes over Ivy, Janice's fear of losing her daughter shows and Mason's acting intensifies as the movie goes on.Third, the film has a tremendous atmosphere. The scenes of rain pattering on the windows as Ivy screams for her daddy are incredibly creepy, and so are the scenes at Ivy's school and inside the banal hospital.There are plenty of movies about possession and bad seeds, but a reincarnation thriller is very uncommon. "Audrey Rose" may be a little long, but it is a super-effective supernatural thriller that is very creepy. It will leave you with questions, and raise ideas about reincarnation. Robert Wise has given us a thriller to remember.

Maybe I'm biased. When I was looking for something to spice up the Halloween mood Netflix recommended this movie to me. I enjoy paranormal horror films and was looking for the moody, psychological thrill that the 70's horror films seemed to have in spades. That was not delivered to me with this film.On it's own, Audrey Rose isn't a bad movie. Not great, but not bad. I don't know how I feel about Marsha Mason on a whole. I don't think she added the dramatic oomph that I was hoping for from her character, but she wasn't bad or a distraction, which is more than I can say for the little girl. I thought that the actress playing Ivy was awful the majority of the time, non-sympathetic and obnoxiously pouty.But the real issue with the film is that I felt cheated. I was promised a horror story and instead I got one of reincarnation. This film is really more of a courtroom drama if anything. Aside from my issue with how the film is presented, I also found myself annoyed that the filmed seemed to allude that those who believe in reincarnation are the only ones that believe in life after death and can therefore be comforted instead of bereft.All in all, this film served as an OK drama about the benefits of Hinduism. If you walk into it knowing that maybe you can get more out of it than I did.