The Haunting (1999) vs. House on Haunted Hill (1999)

The haunted house is always thought of as just a house that is occupied by ghosts, zombies, or other ghoulish creatures. Well, The Haunting and House on Haunted Hill take the haunted house to a whole new level. The monster in these two movies is actually the houses. These two movies are about houses that are possessed by past occupants who are trapped in the house. Does this new definition of "haunted house" evoke fear in the audience? Which movie is more effective at causing the audience to fear a house?

The Haunting takes place in an old mansion, that is possessed by its first owner and maker, Hugh Crane. Hugh Crane made the mansion for children, but somehow all the children who came to the mansion always disappeared. Hundreds of years later, a professor decides to do a study on fear. The three subjects have no idea of the history of the house, until the professor lets them in on the secret. As the movie progresses the house comes to life. It starts out subtle with pounding on walls and doors and then progresses to writing on walls in blood and then to actually moving.

The house is a fusion character because it is not only a house, but also possessed by a ghost. The Haunting does not use gore to evoke fear, but suspense in not knowing what is going on. We don't understand as an audience what is causing the house to act this way. The audience isn't sure if someone is trying to scare the group of people or if the house is really possessed. The Haunting does not use the complex discovery plot. I believe that if it had, the fear of the house would not be there. The house can evoke fear in the fact that it has so many rooms, the characters are easily lost in the house. The Haunting does a great job at creating suspense, but it did not evoke fear in me when I was watching it.

House on Haunted Hill takes place in an old insane asylum that was caught on fire and all but 5 people died. Dr. Vannicutt was the head of the asylum and had gone mad. He started operating on the patients and doing procedures that were not approved. Dr. Vannicutt possesses the asylum and all the enter are killed and trapped inside with all the rest of the souls that died the night of the fire. 5 people are invited to the house many years later to stay for a night and if they do, then they will receive 1 million dollars in the morning.

The house is a fusion character, like in The Haunting. This film does not use the complex discovery plot either. It does evoke a lot more fear though. The background story of the asylum itself is more frightful and the asylum is more disgusting. There are all sorts of deformed bodies in cases, procedure rooms that involve torture, and a room with a huge tub of blood. The movie has a lot of gore and is way more graphic. I feel that this house is the better of the two at evoking fear from its audience. I was truely scared while watching. It was not just suspense, but fear and disgust at what the house was doing.

The new definition of haunted house is definitely scarier, but does it really matter whether the house is occupied by ghosts or possessed by one? It can be a fearsome and disgusting creature either way. The possession of a house evokes fear, because a house is an everyday object that the human mind does not put with being possessed. A house is usually a sanctuary, but in these films, it becomes a type of hell.