When a Stranger Calls (1979) Poster

User Reviews

Review this title
187 Reviews
Sort by:
Filter by Rating:
6/10
Two Incredibly Frightening Sequences
jamiemiller-076111 August 2019
There really is something to that old adage that if you grip the audience right away and end up giving them a good, strong finish, you're golden. When A Stranger Calls takes this to heart and serves up two genuinely terrifying 20 minutes sequences that are held together by a slow, plodding 2nd act that waddles along without much zip or excitement. For a thriller, it's not very thrilling.

The film starts off with a babysitter (the excellent Carol Kane whose expressive eyes could tell an entire 90 minute story without dialogue) being tormented by an obscene phone caller telling her to check the children. Anyone over the age of 10 has probably heard the classic legend that this section is based on and the payoff is, more or less, the same. It's a brilliant, suspenseful sequence that shows director Fred Walton as a master of his craft.

After this, we end up following the detective on the case (Charles Durning) who is looking for the child killer. That's essentially the next 40/50 minutes and it's about as exciting and gripping as an episode of Columbo. Try as the actors might, it just never gets off the ground until the killer decides to go after Kane's character in the present day where she has two young children of her own. Once that section begins, the film hits its stride again and ends on a high, terrifying note.

When A Stranger Calls is pretty much two really effective short films with a dull police procedural shoved in between it.
23 out of 24 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Great opening and ending--lousy middle
preppy-320 March 2004
A girl (Carol Kane) is babysitting one night. She keeps getting phone calls from a guy saying "Have you checked the children". (They're upstairs sleeping). The phone calls continue. She gets nervous (and never checks the children). She calls the police. They trace the calls--they're coming from INSIDE the house...

This was a big hit in 1979 with teenagers--despite the R rating kids were let into this one. It does have a great opening 20 minutes and a pretty scary ending--but the middle is dull dull dull. It involves the killer (well played by Tony Beckley) stalking an older woman (Colleen Dewhurst slumming) and a police detective (Charles Durning--also slumming) after him.

Good performances save the middle half from being totally unbearable, and there is good direction from Fred Walton. But all in all this is a mediocre thriller. Still, I'm giving it a 7 for the opening, the closing and the acting.
44 out of 51 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Solid Horror Creep Fest
TheAnimalMother12 May 2010
If you like to watch horror films to challenge your comfort zone and get some real chills running down your spine. When A Stranger Calls(1979) is a pretty good bet to do the job. This film builds its tension quite well, partly by using well chosen and well placed music to increase the creepiness. Rather than resorting to needlessly overdone gore; This film relies mostly on the old tried and tested power of suggestion to mount most of its suspense and scare factor. A much more effective method in my view, and there is strong evidence of this here.

Make no mistake, this film is no masterpiece. It has it's flaws. I found a couple of parts pretty unconvincing. Such as how easily John Clifford is able to convince Mrs.Mandrakis to let him in, and then help him. The execution of this part is a little weak. However that really doesn't take away from the films eerie feel and overall horror enjoyment. The film is pretty well paced, and kept leaving me wanting to see what was going to happen next; Where as many other horror films leave me not even caring what happens next. The acting here is pretty solid all the way around, and the direction is decent.

Usually I would rate a decent film like this, with a couple of somewhat unconvincing parts a 6 out of 10. However this film is definitely very effective in what it sets out to do. Which is of course to give the viewer some real creepy thrills. So I find it hard to give this any less than a 7. I got from it exactly what I had hoped. It could have been a little better in some areas, but all in all it's a pretty solid film. So as far as horror films go, this is in the upper echelon in my view.

Note: I only decided to watch this film based on an interview I saw with actress Jennifer Connelly on The Late Show with David Letterman. She basically said that this film scared the crap out of her. So being the film nut I am, I figured it was worth a look. And it was, so I owe thanks to her.

7/10
42 out of 49 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
"Have you checked the children?"
Backlash0078 November 2001
When a Stranger Calls boasts the scariest opening in film history. Wes Craven completely ripped this intro off in Scream. It's that good. Too bad the rest of the film isn't. It goes completely downhill after the beginning. It's so scary and has such a tense start that you can hardly watch it without holding your breathe. My girlfriend couldn't watch it period. She had to turn her head and keep asking me when it was over. It's very subtle, slow, and deliberate, and very frightening. The rest of the film can't live up to the energy generated by the beginning. But still, I recommend this because the beginning alone is better than most fright flicks in their entirety.
57 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Have you checked the children?
jhaggardjr23 October 2000
"When a Stranger Calls" is a somewhat entertaining horror-suspense-thriller that starts off great, loses steam in the middle, then comes back for a good finish. The beginning of this movie is outstanding, with babysitter Carol Kane receiving obscene phone calls from an unknown maniac. This is far and away the best part of the film. It's scary, creepy, and downright eerie. But it doesn't sustain that level through the entire film. The mid-portion of the movie is rather dull, featuring a few lazy supporting performances. But "When a Stranger Calls" redeems itself with a nail-biting climax, even though the conclusion doesn't top the film's opening in terms of scariness. Carol Kane and Charles Durning are good in the roles of the terrified babysitter and the private detective searching for the killer when he's on the loose. "When a Stranger Calls" is not a great horror movie but a good one. And its better than the cable-made sequel that came out fourteen years later, "When a Stranger Calls Back".

*** (out of four)
42 out of 50 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
That opening sequence is still incredible.
Sleepin_Dragon19 August 2021
It's a story we've all seen before many times, a babysitter is terrified by an unknown stalker...

..however there is something pretty different about this one, for my shame, I had no idea this film existed, I enjoy what I now know to be the remake, but this original version deserves the credit for originality.

There is some real tension in the first twenty minutes, it's a very powerful start, you are made to feel very uncomfortable as you watch Jill go from irritation to sheer panic.

Credit to Carol Kane, I think she plays the part of Jill very well, it's such a sincere performance.

The music and filming work really well, a lot of thought went into its production. Nowadays we're hardened to gore and violence, and horror in general, I can imagine when this went out, many people felt uneasy when home alone.

I think there is some real menace in this film, the scares are real, it's just a shame that we only really get them at the beginning, and the end of the film. The middle segment of the film doesn't quite have the same bite as the start and finish, but overall, it is still a cracking horror, 7/10.
16 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Tense and chilling suspense thriller that has a haunting past!
blanbrn22 February 2020
"When a Stranger Calls" from 1979 is a cult chiller classic as the famous words "Have you checked the children" stand long in memory. And the start and ending of the film is best, the scenes and dark backgrounds make for some scary moments. It involves Carol Kane as Jill Johnson a teen babysitter who's terrorized by strange phone calls while baby sitting only then tragedy happens, then the film expands and slows down and goes over a period of seven years, then Jill later an adult again has a past haunt! The film ends well. Overall good classic horror chiller of tease, and tense psycho like fear.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Creepy late night suspense thriller
Stevieboy66631 October 2021
When a Stranger Calls (1979) is probably best known for its opening scene in which baby sitter Jill (Carol Kane) is terrorised by an unknown caller, a man who asks her several times "Have you checked the children?" Without giving anything away part of this appears to have been lifted from "Black Christmas" (1974), Wes Craven then used it to great effect in his slasher revival classic "Scream" (1996). Many reviews on here call the middle part boring, however I disagree. We get to see a lot of the caller, a psycho called Curt Duncan (Tony Beckley), after he escapes from a mental institution, and an ex cop John Clifford (Charles Durning), who is after him. This all builds to a suspenseful finale, reuniting Jill and Curt. English actor Beckley gives a superb performance as Curt, sadly he died soon after the movie was released. Don't go into this movie expecting a slasher movie, it is not one. It is a tense suspense psycho thriller that has an excellent creepy score courtesy of Dana Kaproff, and needs to be watched late at night with the lights off. The remake was pretty good too.
6 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
10/10
still scary
kimbee10329 December 2005
Warning: Spoilers
This movie still scares me. I have babysat before in someone else's house and i remember getting the creeps with every little noise i heard. This is the ultimate realistic scary movie. You can easily put yourself in her place, unlike many of the horror films we see today. We had a discussion about this movie today (Dec. 2005) when we talked about a coworker wearing clothes the same color as the walls and her blending in... it brought up the discussion about the stalker painting himself to blend into the wall. I am excited to see that it will be remade next year. i hope it is just as good as the original. I can't wait to see it.
14 out of 17 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Skip the Middle
michellegriffin-0498918 July 2020
Watch the first 20 minutes, grab a snack, walk your dog, take a shower, have a drink, and get back in time for the last 20 minutes. You won't miss much except Colleen Dewhurst as a barfly telling people to leave her alone. Actually, maybe you should stay and watch the middle part of this movie. It's growing on me. Carol Kane also gets to play someone fairly down to earth and not kooky for a change and she's really terrific.
15 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
The film tries to be too many things .....
PimpinAinttEasy6 September 2015
Warning: Spoilers
The beginning is very good with the phone calls coming in. The sinister background score is used to great effect. Carol Kane is really cute. I expected a slightly cheesy thriller with a man who kills children at the center of it all.

There are some potentially interesting characters.

Charles Durning's character is apparently obsessed with the child killer. But why? There is no real character development to show why he is so obsessed.

There is the lonely woman (played by Colleen Dewhurst) at the bar. The child killer becomes obsessed with her. What was her story? We do not know. She disappears after a while.

Then we are supposed to feel sympathy towards the escaped child killer. But the child killer's days outside the jail are very uninteresting. And then Carol Kane's character makes a comeback towards the end.

So the film starts off as a cheesy thriller with a beautiful babysitter. Then some really adult characters make their entry. But none of it is particularly well developed.

The film tries to be many things. But ends up as nothing.
14 out of 19 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
A Very Scary and Real Thriller
claudio_carvalho21 February 2004
Jill Johnson (Carol Kane) is babysitting two children, when a stranger insists calling her in the phone, asking her to see the children in the upper floor. She decides to telephone to the police, to trace the phone call. When the officer on duty tells her that the call is from inside the house, Jill panics. Seven years later, the maniac escapes from the asylum and the private investigator John Clifford (Charles Durning) is hired by the father of the children to kill the man.

It is almost impossible to write a summary of this thriller without spoilers, so I have to stop here. A couple of days ago, I watched 'When a Strange Call Back', a type of sequel of this film. I was amazed with the beginning of the story, one of the most scary I have ever seen. Yesterday I decided to see 'When a Stranger Calls' and it is indeed a tense and suspenseful thriller. The situation through which Jill passes is amazingly real and scary. When the police officer tells Jill that the phone call is from inside the house, he heart of the viewer 'jumps'. This part is too frightening. The greatest problem in both movies is the continuation of the story seven years later (five in the sequel). It breaks the tension and the viewer gets completely lost about what happened to the characters. With a better sequence, this film certainly would be considered a classic. The story is excellent, and the performances are very realistic. In my opinion, the famous 'Scream' copied the introduction of this film. In Brazil, it was released on VHS only, and the quality of the image is not good. It deserves to be released on DVD. It is really worthwhile to watch this film. My vote is eight.

Title (Brazil): 'Mensageiro da Morte' ('Messenger of Death')

Note: On 17 October 2022, I saw this film again in a recently released Brazilian DVD from Versátil distributor.
39 out of 55 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
Not problem-free, but effective at times
Wizard-811 May 2013
"When A Stranger Calls" is a thriller that, while not perfect, does overall deliver a lot of chills. The opening sequence is the most memorable part - while you will guess the surprise twist in this segment long before it happens, the sequence is masterfully directed so it comes across as creepy all the same. The climatic scene, while a little short, also delivers a jolt.

While the opening and closing are well done, the middle portion of the movie has a problem. It's not only very slow, not much happens to advance the plot. Still, this middle segment often has a moody feeling that fits well with the rest of the movie, and Tony Beckley's performance as the psycho is a good one.

By the way, while the movie was rated "R" when it was first released, most viewers in this day and age will find that rating a little harsh. By today's standards, the movie deserves a PG-13 rating. Maybe even a PG rating.
12 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
hey, did you know...the middle part drags!
LordElfstone17 September 2010
Warning: Spoilers
Yeah, that's news. I guess everyone can agree on that. It is painfully obvious that the introduction was a separate short before it was decided to turn it into a full feature. While the beginning and the end are somewhat tense, I never got behind this supposed classic from the onset. Nothing seemed realistic to me. (spoilers, for details) Like, turning the lights off when you are scared and waiting that long to finally "check the children". Sure, she was not supposed to wake them, but I doubt her screaming on the phone had less potential disturbing their sleep. It seemed artificially drawing tension. Plus, back in the day of no cell phones, when a creep kept calling you, at least you knew he wasn't in front of your doorstep. That said, I found it completely illogical that the guy was calling from inside the kids' bedroom...

Then, the middle part...it doesn't service your scary movie if you show how pathetic the killer is. In fact, I thought there was a twist coming and it was the detective, who did it, having this guy picked as the fall guy he blackmailed or threatened to play the caller. I think I would have liked that more, no matter how contrived it would be. This part was an obvious extension of the short and felt like it each passing minute.

When we go back to Jill, this is probably the most interesting act of the movie. The scenes in the restaurant are effective. Coming full circle is kind of poetic. The ending was predictable, but played out nicely, at least. Out of the "Holy Trinity" of creepy-strangers-calling-movies, the other two being Halloween and Black Christmas, I still prefer the latter (incidentally, the oldest one of them).
12 out of 16 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
7/10
"Have you checked the children?"
classicsoncall8 December 2022
Warning: Spoilers
The story would have had more credibility if it was revealed in some manner how Curt Duncan (Tony Beckley) entered the Mandrakis home at the beginning of the story, how he got into Tracy Fuller's (Colleen Dewhurst) apartment after she had taken all sorts of precaution to secure her place (with John Clifford surveilling), and finally Jill Lockhart's (Carol Kane) home to wrap up the picture. These are not little things, and you can suspend disbelief so far, but how did the guy do it? Of course, there's no rational explanation, so the viewer subliminally takes it on faith that all of his intrusions were simply a matter of fact, no further consideration necessary.

Now if you cast those thoughts aside, you have a taut little thriller here, especially in the first twenty minutes setting up then young Jill Johnson's (Kane) panic. Can anyone reasonably say they wouldn't lose their cookies if they found out a series of distressing phone calls came from WITHIN the same house you were receiving them from? That is the stuff of pure psychological terror. Unlike a lot of reviewers, I didn't mind the expository middle of the picture dealing with Duncan's instability, but I do question why Tracy Fuller left the door to her apartment open to take a phone call with him standing there, right after witnessing the brutal beating of Duncan at the bar. Waltzing right in, Duncan could have attacked her at any moment. By the way, in case you didn't notice, when Duncan got beat up at Torchy's, the guy who did it poured a bottle of liquor all over Duncan's body, yet when he arrived at Tracy's immediately after, his shirt was dry.

The shocker at the end was a neat touch when Duncan popped up in Jill Johnson's bed, one of those jump scares that come out of nowhere to grab you by the throat. But there again, you have the whole scenario of Duncan knowing who she was as a married woman (although her picture was in the paper), where she lived, and where she was out dining that evening. I guess I just require a little more explanation on how those things were possible before I buy into the whole premise. And you know what else was truly irksome? That cad Bobby never did call Jill when she was babysitting for the Mandrakis family.
4 out of 4 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
dead middle
SnoopyStyle31 January 2021
Warning: Spoilers
Babysitter Jill Johnson (Carol Kane) starts receiving prank calls from a scary man who keeps asking her to check on the children. "It's coming from inside the house." Curt Duncan (Tony Beckley) had already killed the kids. Police detective John Clifford (Charles Durning) has the case. It's seven years later and Duncan has escaped. He starts fixating on Tracy (Colleen Dewhurst).

The opening twenty minutes is amazing. I think everyone can see the copying from Scream. I wonder if this is where the call-coming-from-inside-the-house trope comes from. Carol Kane is part of the appeal but it's more than that. It's simple and stripped down. It's brutal in its quiet terror. Then the movie takes an one hour break. It loses all momentum until we reunite with Carol Kane. Then the quiet terror resurfaces. There are basically two movies in one. The movie that bookends the story is a very compelling horror but the middle part is a lot of nothing with moments of weird creepiness.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Shame about the middle part.
The_Void6 August 2005
Going into When a Stranger Calls, I was expecting something alone the same lines as Black Christmas and Halloween, due to the film's relationship with those movies. I'm not a massive fan of either of those films, but I recognise Black Christmas as an important film for the genre, and if When a Stranger Calls turned out to be as good as that; I wouldn't be disappointed. It didn't turn out to be as good, however, as despite a great opening; the film never reaches any kind of high, and on the whole; this is just another slasher. The film starts out with a babysitter looking after someone's house. It isn't long after her employers have left that she starts receiving odd anonymous calls, and it isn't long after that before she discovers that the calls are coming from inside the house! It's the classic babysitter story, and if the film had stuck to this story for it's entire running time; I would have liked it a lot more. I realise that it would have been difficult to make a feature length film with just a girl, a house and a madman upstairs...but films have been made with less.

Instead of following the babysitter story, we are presented with a story taking place seven years later. The killer has escaped from a mental hospital and is now roaming the streets, with the detective from the original case on his tail. While this film never actually becomes boring, the chase plot never gives the audience enough tension or intrigue to keep interest levels high, and if it wasn't for the smart, but abrupt, ending; it would have been hard for me to write this review without calling the film a failure. In the beginning, the film has all the elements needed for a successful horror movie in place. It's got atmosphere, suspense and a plausible plot line, which is why I cant understand why the filmmakers would ditch this for the plot that they decided the movie should take. There is very little (if any) gore in the film, as it's obvious that the director preferred the 'Halloween' approach; but this doesn't work in the film's favour as this film isn't interesting enough to not have any gory sequences. On the whole; When a Stranger Calls has a good beginning and a good end. The middle part is wholly forgettable.
38 out of 66 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
Can I Come Out From Hiding Now?
dougdoepke22 November 2021
I'm still reluctant to answer the phone after 90-minutes of this chiller-thriller. Pity sweet teen baby-sitter Carol Kane, alone in a big house with two toddler kids asleep upstairs. Then the phone rings. It's a voice from the grave: 'Check the kids', it says. She shrugs it off, but the calls continue with the same creepy sound and ominous message before going to dead air. Now alarmed she calls the cops, only to find out the calls are coming from inside the house. Oh my gosh, who could it be? Suddenly I'm under the couch - especially when the kids are found bloody murdered. All in all, for this fan of the genre, it's one of the most chilling and compelling openings in horror movies that I've seen.

Following the first part, events shift after seven movie years to rotund ex-cop Clifford (Durning), now on the trail of escaped lunatic Duncan (Beckley) who he believes is the kids killer. But is he. After all, things remain too murky to tell. Fleeing from the relentless ex-cop, the suspect's trail is up trashy alleys and down grungy streets along LA's skid row. The mood itself remains bleakly uncertain. For example, we see the supposed loony Duncan act sensitively toward over-age bar-fly Tracy (Dewhurst, in a superbly cryptic performance). Still, Duncan does seem a bit unstable, (made more realistic by actor Beckley's declining health shortly before unfortunately passing away). All in all, this mid-section sustains the suspense in moody and compelling fashion, heightened by the slow tracking shots up and down the dismal hallways and alley-ways of the pursuit.

The ending too, doesn't disappoint as Kane reappears, now seven years older and married, ominously with two kids of her own. So hold on, for one of the best sustained suspense thrillers of that time or any time. Anyway, the wife's happy now that I'm bold enough to answer the phone. At least, I am for now.
5 out of 6 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Pristine premise stretched until flabby
fertilecelluloid6 January 2006
Warning: Spoilers
Problematic suspense thriller. The short film this is based on, which milked a pristine premise for maximum tension, worked. As a short. This film, directed by the same director as the short, used the short film's premise as its first act. Beyond that, it stops working.

A babysitter receives a series of harassing phone calls -- "Have you checked the children?" -- that she learns are coming from INSIDE the house. THAT is the film's big surprise, and it comes at the twenty-one minute point. The film's second act involves the search for the phone caller who, we learn, killed the babysitter's charges.

The phone call revelation was stolen from "Black Christmas" and used again in Wes Craven's "Scream". It's a good, creepy one, but it's a one-note revelation that you can not hang a feature film on.

The storyline involving detective Charles Durning (who is always good) and Colleen Dewhurst is pedestrian at best. Durning's search for the killer and his connection to Dewhurst grinds the narrative to a halt. Although the third act amps the suspense up once again, it comes to late to rescuscitate the corpse.

Carol Kane, the excellent actress from the underrated "The Mafu Cage" is terrific as babysitter Jill Johnson and makes us believe in her fear.

Fred Walton's almost shot-for-shot remaking of his accomplished short film is suspenseful and Hitchcockian in the extreme, but nothing can change the fact that the premise had nowhere to go after it had blown its first act wad.
10 out of 15 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
8/10
Amazing scary psychological thriller
willandcharlenebrown18 September 2020
This movie scared me as a kid and now as a 50 year old, I find it still frightening because now I have kids and even grandkids! What a great revisit down memory lane!
6 out of 7 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
Death Messenger
Fernando-Rodrigues1 March 2021
The 1st and last act are amazingly tense, but that middle part... It was a wrong decision.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
5/10
A fantastic 20-minute short buried in a 90-minute mess
happyendingrocks16 July 2009
Warning: Spoilers
The first 20 minutes of this film have been copied or parodied so many times in the last 30 years, it's hard to look objectively today at the impact of this sequence. However, even stripped of pretensions, the first act of When A Stranger Calls remains one of the most harrowing and effective horror stages ever set.

The simplicity here is key. The voice on the phone that haunts Carol Kane throughout is soft-spoken, not wild and animalistic. Therefore, the words themselves become the source of horror, and this works just fine, since a malevolent timbre asking "have you checked the children?" suggests more menace than film-makers would dare put on the screen. The camera work is likewise sparse: shots of Kane from strange angles that seem to show the camera poised in the darkest, most oblique corners of the house. We don't quite know who is watching her, or from where, but the tension as we are led through the process of discovery is palpable. Kane's performance isn't hysterical or unrealistic, it's actually just as deliberate and cautious as the pacing of the terrors to come. The way director Fred Walton pulls us through this opening salvo is genius, and it's especially fitting that we never lay eyes on the mysterious caller, and that we never get to "check the children".

Given the sublime execution here, it's not surprising that the remainder of the film fails to match the impact of this opening sequence. What is surprising is that the largely inept and dull hour that follows was directed by the same person. In fact, the rest of When A Stranger Calls is so disjointed and unnecessary that we can't help but guess that Walton made a brilliant short film and succumbed to the pressure to flesh out the piece into feature length to ensure that more eyes would see it.

Our second act takes the film into a myriad of directions, none of which ultimately have any point when we reach our finale. Frankly, the stories tacked on to the initial shocking narrative are uninteresting, and despite a great performance from Colleen Dewhurst and a nail-biting sequence in her apartment, the entire middle section is almost tedious enough to make us forget how floored we were by the first segment. In fact, it isn't entirely clear why Dewhurst is even in the film, since she has nothing to do with the opening set-up, nor the climax that concludes it. She simply disappears as we enter the final act, after we've invested 40 minutes of screen time in developing her character, and we're left wondering if we didn't wander into a different movie by mistake. Given that nearly half of the film's running time is devoted to the entirely useless series of subplots found in this awkwardly-paced middle act, it's no wonder that When A Stranger Calls isn't regarded as a classic, despite its immeasurably influential opening number.

Ultimately, the film isn't sure what it wants to be. Is our focus on an overweight ex-cop seeking justice for the horrific murders he was unable to stop seven years before? If so, the presentation of this is so banal, it isn't even worth making a movie about. Charles Durning has less screen presence than the telephone Kane answers so many times early in the film, and his rote performance is about as nuanced as that of the couch Kane sits on. Maybe we're supposed to root for Durning as a hero, but the viewer can't help but imagine that if our lives depended on Durning saving the day, we'd be quite doomed.

Perhaps the point is to study a schizophrenic murderer trying to forge a normal life after bottling up the atrocities that led to his institutionalization? Okay, I'll bite, and this is certainly a lot more interesting than watching Durning show the killer's mugshot to everyone in the city in a vain attempt at pursuit. However, if this is a character study of a psychopath, we're offered very little pathos here. Aside from a brief scene where Tony Beckley remembers his past and breaks down in a homeless shelter bathroom (which, subsequently, is a rare moment of impact during the plodding second act), this element isn't really touched on with any sincerity.

70 minutes into the film, we finally rejoin the story we started watching to begin with, and having Kane back on the screen again certainly helps matters, since we feel like we're about to make sense of the lengthy diversion we've just endured. However, despite a great scene where Kane takes a call and hears the dreaded catch-phrase once again, the film's climax is as anticlimactic as the dreadful second act. The suspense generated at the beginning of the film is abandoned for a timid "boo" as the killer finally strikes. Somehow, despite the ineptness he displays throughout the rest of the film, Durning shows up to save the day, and the film sputters to an unspectacular halt. We're given no further explanation of the significance of the film's middle, and we're offered no hint that the film-makers weren't just padding the run time.

Every horror fan should experience the original sequence at least once, for sure. But the wise horror fan will have the sense to eject the disc as soon as Charles Durning appears on the screen. It's truly a shame that the film doesn't live up to the promise it offers from the outset, because the first scares of this film are certainly worthy of the attention and emulation they've received. The rest of When A Stranger Calls is only scary when you consider that you'll never get back the additional hour you spent following this road to nowhere.
10 out of 13 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
9/10
Chills to the Core
view_and_review23 November 2019
Oh man. I never thought the words, "Have you checked the children?" could be so creepy.

This movie is what I call a terrorizer. A terrorizer movie may or may not be a slasher, but in any regard it involves a killer or killers that like to terrorize their victims much like the movies Strangers, Kristy, The Hills Have Eyes, and others. Unlike a Jason, or a Michael Meyers, terrorizers want you to know they're there and you can do nothing about it.

In this terrorizer flick Jill Johnson (Carol Kane) babysits for the Mandrakis's and is hounded by an unknown caller. Sometimes he asks, "Have you checked the children?" and sometimes he's silent. In all cases he is scaring the daylights out of Jill.

The last words Jill hears on the phone brings all bodily functions to a halt as the police tell her that the call is coming from inside the house. [I'm shuttering just thinking of that scene.]

To give credit where credit is due, that line was first used in the movie Black Christmas (1974) with Margot Kidder. It was well used in that movie but it could not compare to the usage in this movie.

When a Stranger Calls continued to creep out, spook, and menace from beginning to end. The fact that such a deranged psycho was still alive after what he did at the beginning of the movie makes the movie eerie. Plus, the movie was greatly aided by the musical score. The cello chords and other instruments (almost like the THX riff with the steady pitch change of the one note) totally set the mood. If darkness and desolation wasn't ominous enough, the string and wind instruments drove it home.

This movie is a real horror gem. This movie chills to the core.
7 out of 9 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
6/10
What an Opening!
markdecarlo-9832127 October 2021
It's hard to imagine an opening sequence generating more tension, unease, and fear than the opening 20 minutes of When A Stranger Calls. By itself, it works as a self-contained short film - a ghoulish urban legend or campfire story come to life. With Fred Walton's sharp direction and Carol Kane's expressive eyes, they're able to work wonders with very little. Anything coming after that can't help but disappoint and, unfortunately, When A Stranger Calls turns into a typical police procedural for the rest of its runtime until the final 15 minutes which are at least somewhat effective.
2 out of 2 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
4/10
Opening and ending are great, but too slow to be scary.
Monkeyguy3917 June 2006
I had seen the beginning of this movie when i was a lot younger on television. And seeing it as a young kid, i have to admit the opening scene scared the crap out of me. So when i saw this movie on the shelf in the video store a few months ago, they had just re-released it on DVD due to the remake being in theaters at the time i quickly picked it up. When i brought it home i began to watch it, and i have to admit the opening scene, while not as scary as i remember, still holds up as being a truly terrifying moment in the film. Now i wish i could say that the rest of the film held up to what the opening scene had provided for the viewer. After the opening, the film goes around and shows the story of the "stranger" from earlier in the film, who has now been released from prison and wants to start his life over again. Now while this would have been a good premise for a thriller in the drama section, it seems really out of place in the horror section. Watching the "stranger" go to a bar and get in a fight, would be exciting in any other movie, if you actually cared about the character involved and if it helped the plot move forward. But watching the film i wish i had been called by a "stranger" just so i could have had something to do while this sloooooooooooooow movie went on. And while the ending scene did almost match the opening scene in its creepiness, the rest of the movie is not enough to make a viewer sit and watch the rest of the film. So if you rent this movie, my advice is to either not watch it, cause it is really a pretty big waste of your time, or to watch the opening scene, and then fast forward to the ending scene. Maybe at least that would trick you into believeing that you were actually watching a good movie.
13 out of 18 found this helpful. Was this review helpful? Sign in to vote.
Permalink
An error has occured. Please try again.

See also

Awards | FAQ | User Ratings | External Reviews | Metacritic Reviews


Recently Viewed