Hurler de peur

I certainly wouldn't call it a horror film, but rather a thriller that, except for two scenes, noticeably lacks suffocating tension. But that wouldn't matter, if it wasn’t for one problem: an unexpected plot twist, which, though impressively orchestrated, turns all previous events on their head and lacks any logic. As with that twist, unfortunately the actions of the main character follow the same silliness to the weakly built-up conclusion. It's really a shame, in the first half this film had the potential to be really Hitchcockian, but it ended up being a complete bust. (09/10/2018)

While watching – and then reviewing – old horror films it often happens to me that the general naivete, the wooden actors, the extremely illogical behaviour make me bang my head… but then I tell myself that this is alright for its time, and I overlook all that and give them at least an above-average rating (3*). But every now and again I find a low-key gem like Taste of Fear that blows my mind. And this one, mind you, is a film from the early sixties. The creators hold you all the time in a sense of uncertainty, making you bumble around between several possible outcomes, and they still surprise you in the end… because this is something you can’t guess. After a long time, I’m really happy. PS: According to very recent information, a remake is in the works with the talented Spaniard Juan Antonio Bayona (The Orphanage, The Impossible) at the helm. (28/03/2013)

Maybe it’s just my current mood, but I really did not consider Taste of Fear to be some kind of jewel among horror movies. It was filmed in the sixties, so I often struggle with the naivety and amateurism of the main characters. There are also some ridiculous dialogues, the kind I would have troubles with even in a comedy. The film is helped by the atmosphere, which comparable to the one in The Haunting, meaning it has quality. Nevertheless, you are still aware of how old this movie is. And that sometimes fits a movie, and sometimes it doesn’t. (11/04/2016)

I treated myself to an older classic on recommendation after a long time, and I am not impressed. It's black and white, it's slow, and above all, it's a drama that is relatively well-crafted with its final twist, but honestly, without that twist, nothing interesting really happens. The story didn't seem very interesting to me, there are hardly any suspense and horror scenes, and the acting is also lackluster. It's probably okay for its time (since there was likely nothing better or more interesting), but from today's perspective, the film is quite unsatisfactory for me. Fortunately, it only lasts 78 minutes, I probably couldn't have physically handled two hours. (21/04/2021)

Je me risque à dire que ce thriller offre, à peu de choses près, tout ce qui fait un film d’Hitchcock, avec un dénouement surprenant à la fin. Il ne faut pas se fier aux apparences. Le suspense et l’adroite résolution fonctionnent parfaitement. J’ai particulièrement apprécié la distribution précise, même si, à part le vétéran des productions Hammer Christopher Lee, les noms sont plutôt inconnus – ce qui n’est pas une mauvaise chose. Hurler de peur est, comparé aux autres films Hammer, un étonnant sans-faute que les fans d'horreur ne devraient manquer sous aucun prétexte. Vivement recommandé ! (22/09/2018)

This is a movie that could easily be classified as a treasure among what the Hammer studio has made. It stands out with the acting performances, which are quite natural and not forced, but above all, it excels in building an incredible atmosphere that will truly give you chills. It only takes a little, it would seem. It just needs a good screenplay that doesn't fail even at the end and is able to surprise with its twist. (09/01/2014)