You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.

Reviews tagging 'Sexual content'

La Maison des damnés by Richard Matheson

50 reviews

remyu's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Plot
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

2.5

Weirdly horny with flat characters, a flimsy premise, and a predictable plot. Hell House reflects attitudes of its time, and not in the best ways. I stuck through to the end thinking it would at least get scary at some point, but no luck.  Based on the other reviews, I’m now looking forward to reading a real horror story in Haunting of Hill House. 
Expand filter menu Content Warnings

crispywonton's review against another edition

Go to review page

challenging dark mysterious tense fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? It's complicated
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

scarwilde's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Plot
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

2.0

So this is what happens when The Haunting of Hill House is rewritten by a man who thinks he's edgy. I respect Matheson's contributions to the genre, but I can only assume this played better in 1971.

The women are barely people, hysterics at constant threat of (and victim of) sexual violence. Their bodies (particularly the more buxom of the two) are described in graphic detail. The men are reticent and upstanding and with the sole exception of the one character's post-polio disability being a factor, the men's bodies are essentially not described. The backstory is just a mashup of the most morally abhorrent things a straight man in 1970 could think of, which of course means that much of it isn't even particularly shocking (oh no! Sex parties and lesbians!).

And then at the end it turns out the Big Bad became so because he was... insecure? Because he was short and born illegitimate? I guess, while I'm sitting here in the US in 2025 watching two men burn the country to the ground because people made fun of them on the internet, it shouldn't make me scoff, but it does anyway.
Expand filter menu Content Warnings

miss_andrist's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Plot
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

4.0

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

book_adjacent's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious tense medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Plot
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? No

5.0

Expand filter menu Content Warnings

miw4everaly's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious reflective sad slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? Character
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

1.0

I was not a fan of this book. I didn't care for the characters, the plot was weak, and the only interesting moment was when stuff started flying around the dining room. I truly didn't care who lived or died and the ending wasn't satisfying. 
Expand filter menu Content Warnings

idkimhaley's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious tense slow-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

3.0

70s sexual objectification lol
Expand filter menu Content Warnings

strangenessbooks's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark medium-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? No
  • Loveable characters? No
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? It's complicated

2.25

The scariest thing about this book was when my sky light window decided to smash as I was reading it and I dismissed as it being my overactive imagination deciding to spice up this boring book, while I was in a dark house by myself. Yeah, it was the only inside panel so spooky.

This book is from 1970 and apparently being lesbian was the scariest thing possible. Or this was written by a man who wants to fetish woman so it's just someone being sexually oppressed. This book is compared to Shirley Jackson beautiful novel, however, they not that similar except both have a group of four people investigating ghosts. Also, lesbians. One makes me want to dig up a body, just to disrespect it, in the way the author disrespects women. This novel falls into "Men should be banned from writing horror" camp. I found the writing of the women very annoying especially as the men were not sexually haunted. 

Disability is treated interestingly here and interesting, I mean it's definitely has ableism. A slur even and disrespectful to intersex people. 
Surprise, we have a disabled villain reveal at the end that rises several questions for anyone who knows anything about the dangers of amputation in 1800s.  
We have a disabled main character, but he also a constant sceptic in an haunted house so definitely mocked by the narrative. I don't think he disabled in the film adaption but I'm gonna have to re-watch that because I rated it very high and I'm curious to remind myself why. Possible because all the sex stuff is not there, but definitely had questionable things on disability too. 

The sexual nature of this book has aged it terribly. Frankly, now it would be comical for some of the tad bits.
Like Jesus's giant penis.
. Yes, Americans are still weird about sex but gay people exist in normality now and thanks to the internet, I treat kink in horror like an annoying jump scare. I think it would be funny to adapt it now, with modern people. Maybe that's just Scary Movie 2. 

The haunting is meant to be personal but I get the women confused and had to go back to figure out who was being sexually violated this time. 

The ending is too convoluted. Frankly, you can only do a fake out once, where this book does three times and expects me to respect it. 

The setting of Christmas is incredibly random and it's never justified, or brought up until the last line of the novel. Why start this thing five days before Christmas? I mean in real life, stuff happens whenever but story tend to have reasons for being set at Christmas. 

Anyway, Maine continues to be the most cursed place in Horror. Its funny seeing it appear pre-Stephen King who has a thing against his home state. I will probably read "I am legend" but probably done on the novel front for Matheson.
Expand filter menu Content Warnings

leswampwitch's review against another edition

Go to review page

Not very frightening and too much sexual content for my taste.
Expand filter menu Content Warnings

morgan_not_sarah's review against another edition

Go to review page

dark mysterious tense fast-paced
  • Plot- or character-driven? A mix
  • Strong character development? Yes
  • Loveable characters? It's complicated
  • Diverse cast of characters? No
  • Flaws of characters a main focus? Yes

5.0

Expand filter menu Content Warnings