House of 1000 Corpses

2003 "The most shocking tale of carnage ever seen."
6| 1h29m| R| en| More Info
Released: 11 April 2003 Released
Producted By: Spectacle Entertainment Group
Country: United States of America
Budget: 0
Revenue: 0
Official Website: http://robzombie.com/movies/house-of-1000-corpses/
Synopsis

Two teenage couples traveling across the backwoods of Texas searching for urban legends of serial killers end up as prisoners of a bizarre and sadistic backwater family of serial killers.

... View More
Stream Online

Stream with Prime Video

Director

Producted By

Spectacle Entertainment Group

Trailers & Images

Reviews

hillbillyhatfield 1 hour and a half of mutilation- including gutting, scalping, disemboweling, disfigurement, and amputation. No plot, no character development, no creative filming. We call those snuff films. And they suck except for sick people and for shock.
emeraldgoddess This movie was horrible. Years ago when I got my first tattoo this had just come to video. They were playing it and as soon as it ended it restarted and I had to watch it again. It wasn't worth one watch let alone two.
maherbo So two Rob Zombie movies were scheduled on the horror movie channel. I didn't know Zombie and after checking out the reviews on IMDb, curiosity had a hold on me. So even if I wasn't enthusiastic, I decided to set the DVR for both of them, «House of 1000 Corpses» being the first one I watched.I was promised a gore fest and I must admit I'm not usually a big fan of this genre, but the comedy aspect was appealing. I was afraid it would be one those horror movies that try to make you jump of your seat every 5 minutes, which I dislike. Worst of all, I certainly hoped it wouldn't be a festival of girls screaming for the entire movie, as I hate that too. So I was curious, but I was reluctant to waste my time watching this movie.Is there a good story? Nope. The first part with Captain Spaulding is really great. Then you go with that weird family, which kind of brings you elsewhere (It reminded me of «Nothing But Trouble» (1991) by Dan Aykroyd, which is not a good thing). And finally you go to Dr. Satan, which was introduced in the first part, but too late as you already have forgotten about him and it doesn't really affect you at this point and you're kind of glad the movie is finally ending.Is it scary? Not at all. Is it funny? Not really. Was I disgusted by the violence/torture/horror? It was pretty standard stuff and not that much of it (for an horror movie that is supposed to be a gore fest, anyway). I was more disturbed by the transformation in «Tusk» (2014) than anything in that movie.You really don't have that suspense that makes you say: «Oh no! Are they really gonna go there? They wouldn't. OMG, they went there!» Really nothing of the sort. Also - thank God - not too much screaming either.Did I like the movie? HELL YEAH!Somehow, it worked on a whole other level for me. I just loved the way it was shot. The directing and the editing was what made it for me, even though some reviews here hated the movie for the exact same reason I loved it.I felt I was watching my own nightmare. You know the kind of dream you have after watching a disturbing movie, where you are kind of reliving the movie, but nothing makes sense. You are not scared, because you know you are dreaming. You know you can stop everything by waking up, yet you don't want to, because you want to see what will happen next.The story kind of goes nowhere and everywhere, but so do the plots in my nightmares. All of those scenes that come from nowhere and those special effects that makes things look weird, guess what? Just like in my nightmares. Even this short movie was kind of long for what it had to say; Just like my nightmares that seem to circle around a theme by repeating the same scenes over and over.You can't make sense of the movie. You have to only enjoy the weirdness of it, just like a dream. I don't know if this was the intent of the director, but if it wasn't, it was a nice outcome that I enjoyed dearly.Usually, horror movies try to find another (original) way of killing someone. This movie was more about finding another (original) way of filming a very typical killing. The shooting scene was awesome. For an horror movie, you must admit that shooting your victims with a hand gun is rather boring, better suited to a western or action movie. Yet, the way it was shot, with the slow motion to the song «I remember you», followed by this extremely long waiting period before the last shot is fired (that you barely can see, which is weird for a movie that is said to be a gore fest), I thought it was really original and it kind of brings you back into the movie, wanting to see more of it.The music. Another great feature of the movie that really sets the mood, even if you don't get into the story. Weird, but fun. You listen to this (mostly) heavy metal music (which is good) and then you have an «I Wanna Be Loved By You» or a «Brick house» thrown at you that just makes you want to sing along. I'm telling you, fun!Is this the best horror movie ever? No. But it was fun to watch, left me with a «feel good» sentiment and I now am enthusiastic about watching my second Rob Zombie movie recorded on my DVR.
gorf Once upon a time, Americans used to make good horror movies. Frankenstein, The Wolf Man, Dracula, The Thing (50s version) and Invasion of the Body Snatchers to name a few. Somewhere along the road, they decided that graphic violence and jump scares equals good horror. It probably started with garbage like "Blood Feast".Instead of the horror/sci-fi movie serving as a warning against messing with the unknown/nature, they just wanted to shock people with naked and dead bodies. Movies like Friday the 13th and Nightmare on Elm Street started to pop up, movies where the only purpose is for the monster to kill off one character and then move on to the next till almost everyone is dead. It wasn't enough with a couple or stabbings, we needed "cool" and inventive ways for the victims to die. The monster needed to be a "badass" too, someone you could root for. Michael Myers is a silent ninja assassin with a butcher's knife, Jason is The Hulk with a hockey mask, and Freddy Krueger is a comedian with claws. The victims, and especially the women, had to show their naked bodies on screen. Horror became more and more about sexuality. Horror regressed into a primitive state where only blood, gore, jump scares and graphic sex mattered.House of 1000 Corpses is one of the most extreme cases of primitive horror. I had the displeasure to watch this piece of crap back in 2008, and I still regret it. For some reason, Rob Zombie, who can't even make good music, decided to try horror movies. He took the script from Texas Chainsaw Massacre, xeroxed it and added a lot more gore and his exhibitionist wife. Now I know why he calls himself "zombie".Watching it, I got the disturbing feeling that Rob Zombie actually thought his fictional serial killers were cool, that he approved of their behavior. It seemed to me that they were his "heroes". From what I've heard, this is also the case with the sequel I will never watch, and the Halloween remake and sequel. If it's true, he should probably seek help. Usually, I say stuff like: "why waste your talent making crap like this". This time, there's no talent to be found.House of 1000 Corpses is cruel and disgusting without any redeeming features whatsoever. It doesn't even deserve to be called a movie. Like I said earlier, I regret that I wasted my time and money on it when I was younger. Money and time that could have been spent on better things. Some years after I watched it, I took the DVD and threw it in the garbage where it belonged. Please, stay away from this movie. Don't give away your money to makers of trash. Vote with your wallet! Like He-Man would say: "We have the POOOWEEEEERRR!"(One star? Zero stars!)