This movie scared the crap
out of me before I even saw the thing. I should explain. When a Stranger Calls is based on an urban legend about a
babysitter who keeps receiving calls asking her to “check the children,” only
to discover the calls are emanating from the house where she’s working, and that the kids in her care
have already been murdered. Around dusk one evening in the
mid-’70s, when I was a preteen living in Michigan, I was walking through my
suburban neighborhood with a gaggle of fellow youths. One
of the older kids in the group told a version of the “check the children”
story, adding (of course) that the story really happened, and that it happened
nearby. Cue freaked-out little me. For many years afterward, the experience of
hearing the urban legend (which I completely believed) and the subsequent
release of When a Stranger Calls
blurred.
Thus, once I finally sat down to watch the flick as an adult, I was prepared
for a terrifying ordeal. During the beginning of the picture, I almost got what
I expected. The first 15 minutes or so, which dramatizes the whole “check the
children” bit, is hella creepy. How could it not be, especially with such a nihilistic
climax? Alas, the movie’s energy drains afterwards, because it becomes a drab
stalker picture in which the killer (Tony Beckley) torments the babysitter (Carol Kane) once more. Even with the fabulous Charles
Durning playing the cop who tries to protect Jill, When a Stranger Calls
cannot overcome a lifeless script, and first-time director
Fred Walton’s work is competent but painfully unimaginative. Poor Kane, a gifted
actress who should have known better than to appear in a psycho thriller, is left
floundering through one flat scene after another, unable to showcase her
charming idiosyncrasies. All in all, a missed opportunity—and yet for some
reason, Durning, Kane, and Walton reteamed for a made-for-TV sequel, When a Stranger Calls Back (1993), and
the original picture was remade in 2006, with Camilla Belle in the Kane role.
When a Stranger Calls: LAME
Ha ha ha I had pretty much the same experience with that urban legend!
ReplyDeleteI had the same exerience with the urban legend as well. I'm the same age as you and back in the 70's there was no internet so these tales that were supposedly 'true' could not be researched and you had no way of knowing otherwise.
ReplyDeleteGood review. I had the same expectations for the film and the same reaction afterwards. I think the 2006 remake might be better. At least the previews looked cool and I should probably check it out.
I agree that the first 15 min was very good - I would even say terrifying, but after that , WOW, pretty Bad !! Colleen Dewhurst's role seems to be from another movie entirley
ReplyDelete