Are You in the House Alone?

1978 "I’m watching you…"
Are You in the House Alone?
5.6| 1h36m| NR| en| More Info
Released: 20 September 1978 Released
Producted By: Charles Fries Productions
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website:
Synopsis

An average high school girl's life is turned upside down after she is attacked and savagely assaulted. When a mysterious person begins leaving her threatening messages and making unsettling phone calls, Gail realizes that the nightmare is only just beginning...

... View More
Stream Online

The movie is currently not available onine

Director

Producted By

Charles Fries Productions

Trailers & Images

Reviews

markcope1981 this film is a good film about Gail Osborne a girl who is raped at a house she is babysitting multiple flashbacks tell how she was stalked at school AND at her house AND while babysitting this inspired Halloween oh and when a stranger calls by the why hysteria lives should not assume this came first some people wished there was a body count but this is lucky this isn't a mindless gore flick Gail Osborne is a likable character and though there isn't a body count she belongs in the line of all those final girls this good movie that came before and possibly inspired movies of equal quality . further more this is not boring hysteria lives which is usually a very right site very good film
Robert J. Maxwell It has all the trappings of a bad movie about high school students, their loves, intrigues, and murders, but it's a little better than that. Poor Kathleen Beller, a pretty student at Oldfield High, starts getting mysterious notes saying things like, "I'm watching you." If that weren't unnerving enough, the phone calls begin. It all finally ends in her being raped, rather decorously. I had the wrong villain picked out. I could have sworn it would turn out to be the encouraging but slightly out-of-focus photography teacher.It's not a slasher movie. There's no blood. Nobody threatens anybody else with an ax. It essentially a drawn-out story of Beller and the conundrums she faces regarding sex, family disputes, the threatening phone calls, her talent at photography, and whatnot.A lot depends on Beller. She's in almost every scene. And she's adequate -- no more than that. She has an effective pout. Neither she nor anyone else has any scenes in which they explode with emotion. She's attractive in a babyish way and has wavy burnt-carmine hair that's really LONG, like down to her sacroiliac, the kind of soft mane any normal man would want to run barefoot through. Her boy friend, Tony Bill, has even features, and that's it. Ditto for Beller's Dad, who should never be promoted out of hair spray for men commercials.The best performance is unquestionably from Blythe Danner. Her big blue eyes and ash blond hair aside, she's able to do something original with even small moments of distress or concern, and it makes much of the rest of the cast look as if they're auditioning for parts. Dennis Quaid has an important role but doesn't do much with it, partly because it's not written that way. He has only a few lines and is asked to do nothing but smirk or look puzzled. He was to improve mightily over the next few years.I don't know that the film deserves too much acting talent. The director, Walter Graumann, must have once read a book of formulas for directors. Let's see. There's the camera zooming in for a choker close up when someone is about to say something important or express an emotion deeper than indifference.Twice, Beller, the helpless victimized young girl, is quietly attending to something and an unexpected event takes place -- a door swings open without warning, or a figure appears out of the darkness -- and she leaps to her feet and gasps loudly. I guess someone forgot the musical sting that usually accompanies these shocks.The camera has a habit of taking the point of view of the miscreant -- the monster, the murderer, the rapist, the voyeur. I don't know why this meme has infected the industry. Yes, it serves to hide the identity of the heavy, but it also forces the audience into the position of identifying with the person who is about to do wrong. The device was much less offensive in "Rear Window." Final cliché: After the rape, Beller wakes up in the hospital, bruised and deflowered, surrounded by loving family, doctors, and police. They all ask her, "Who did this?" And, as is WAY too often the case, the victim breaks down and begins sobbing gibberish. "Nobody will believe me anyway," she finally gasps out. I'll skip the legal improbabilities that follow.I'm being kind of harsh on the movie not because it's so terrible but because with a little imagination and talent it could have been better than it is. Those family disputes, for instance, are an irrelevant distraction. Much is made of Dad's being laid off and hiding it from Beller to "protect her." Mom, with her part-time job showing houses, is holding everything together. But the movie has little sympathy for the parents. Instead, as Beller finally tells them, they should stop treating her like a baby.Nice photography in joyous color. The sky is always a blazing blue. There are few spooky night-time scenes. Everybody is middle-class or better. They drive some sporty machines, take fencing classes, and if things don't work out at Oldfield High, the parents send them back East to private boarding schools. How nice for them, he said, in an envious froth.
ricky roche Distributor: GOODTIMES home video Plot: A pretty high school student is marked for unrelenting terror in this suspense filled made for TV movie. Gail Osborne is new in town. She makes friends, has a boyfriend and everything seems to be going her way. That is until she gets an ominous and frightening phone call while babysitting. After more and more phone calls, she is raped. throughout most of the movie, she tries to find proof that the person did rape her.Audio/Video: This 1987 VHS edition from Goodtimes stinks. There are constant lines at the bottom and top of the screen.Extras: No extras from Goodtimes home video.Final thoughts: This suspense filled made for TV movie was made in 1978, so don't expect many deaths (there are none). If you can find this movie with the Worldvision home video logo on the front, then buy it. But the Goodtimes version is pretty crappy. This can be a little boring, but if you are patient, the ending is pretty good.
lazarillo Someone should really make an effort to find more of these old 70's TV movies and release them on DVD. I've been fortunate enough to catch "When Michael Calls", "Terror on the Beach", and this one on late-night cable showings. Others like "Bad Ronald", "This House Possessed", and "Go Ask Alice" can be obtained if you don't mind spending money in the morally ambiguous world of bootleg video sellers (or, even worse, on E-bay). Others though like the the made-for-TV slasher flick "Deadly Lessons" seem to be lost forever.The 70's TV movies were not necessarily good, but they were often pretty enjoyable in a cheesy way. They were aimed at a more general audience than TV movies today (i.e. not just dumb, bored housewives) and they did not try to tackle any "issues". This movie actually kind of does tackle an issue (stalking and acquaintance rape), but it was really before it was an issue. It also has some pretty effective suspense leading up to the rape (scary notes, creepy phone calls, "Halloween"-style POV camera shots ). And instead of turning into a predictable courtroom drama after the rape, it ends on a rather ironic and somewhat cynical note. Interestingly, the movie was based on a fairly well-known young adult novel of the same name by Richard Peck (whose other book "If You Don't Look, It won't Hurt" would later provide the inspiration for the theatrical art film "Gas, Food, Lodging). As adaptations of young adult novels go, it's a hell of a lot better than "I Know What you Did Last Summer". I wouldn't pay $20 to an unscrupulous bootlegger to see this, but it's definitely worth watching if it comes on cable TV.