Boring

Watch something else. There are very few redeeming qualities to this film.

Easily the biggest piece of Right wing non sense propaganda I ever saw.

While it is a pity that the story wasn't told with more visual finesse, this is trivial compared to our real-world problems. It takes a good movie to put that into perspective.

This is among the director's most popular works, being the one that overtly played him up as a potential rival to Alfred Hitchcock (complete with Castle's cheeky introduction a' la Hitch's own TV appearances); at the same time, its deliberate nods to PSYCHO (1960) did not really endear it to critics but, of course, audiences at the time lapped it up… which only goes to prove just how much of a milestone the Hitchcock classic was when it first emerged and has remained so over the years through countless imitations!Anyway, taken on its own merits, the film is certainly an above-average chiller for Castle – yet one is left wondering whether he was audacious or foolhardy in his approach towards the all-important plot twist; Hitchcock was certainly wiser in keeping "Mother" in the background, whereas Castle throws the secondary personality of the titular figure in our faces almost from the get-go! Indeed, the prologue should have been omitted entirely – as it really gave the game away to discerning viewers. The transvestism element, then, elicits unwarranted comparisons throughout with Ed Wood's notorious GLEN OR GLENDA? (1953) – but the PSYCHO borrowings, at least, are fairly well integrated into the narrative: a stint by the blonde leading lady at a run-down motel, a near-brush with the Law, a nosy investigator, an invalid also staying at the house, the put-upon young couple, etc. Having said that, the aforementioned prologue, the sadistic mistreatment of the latter character and the underlying "greed is the root of all evil" theme clearly anticipate the next phase in Horror film-making: the "Grand Guignol" chillers spearheaded by Robert Aldrich's WHAT EVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE? (1962)…Still, while it also has an early and would-be shocking (because apparently unprovoked) murder – that could have pointed out to yet another childhood sexual trauma in other scenarios – one cannot sensibly compare the impact of the bloody yet extremely clumsy stabbing of James Westerfield with the legendary shower sequence from PSYCHO involving Janet Leigh! Incidentally, even if we do get to hear the two personalities speak in the same sequence (as Anthony Perkins did in the earlier film), their never actually appearing together – to say nothing of the man's distinctly effeminate appearance – should have alerted audiences as to the nature of the ruse (not that her eventual uncovering – preceded by the gimmicky 45-second "Fright Break" – is totally ineffective, unlike her ultimate come-uppance…which comes off as rushed)! Casting-wise, it is obviously Jean Arless (actually Joan Marshall, who adopted the pseudonym so as not to be typecast, but her subsequent roles were negligible at best!) who makes the biggest impression, whereas Eugenie Leontovich's stroke victim – with her incessant banging to attract attention – gets on one's nerves very quickly!

William Castle directed this blatant rip off of "Psycho", featuring Patricia Breslin as Miriam Webster, who is set to inherit a fortune along with her half-brother Warren, who still lives in their childhood home with his guardian Helga(now wheelchair bound) and her strange nurse Emily. Weird things are going on, and after a justice of the peace is brutally murdered with a knife, it is obvious that a homicidal psycho is on the loose, and may well be living closer than Miriam suspects... The gimmick of a "Fright Break" was used for film goers too scared to finish the film, though they would have to stand in the "coward corner" in the theater! Too bad this obvious film wasn't as imaginative...

Everybody and his or her dog keeps yelping about how this is a bargain-basement copy of "Psycho". I wrote a paper on the Hitchcock film during my Master's studies in film so I know the film reel by reel. This one, the Castle film, was INSPIRED by "Psycho"or, more to the point, inspired by that film's financial success, but the impetus and the format are vastly different. There is no heroine in peril or any old, dark house. Nobody has been embalmed and frankly, I don't remember any bathtubs at all. It doesn't feature any major stars and wasn't made at a major studio. There is gender confusion for the audience to solve but the characters are all very much alive. There is very little humor in "Homicidal" while humor is hidden all over "Psycho". Perhaps viewers take Leonard Maltin too seriously. He writes "popcorn reviews" aimed right down the middle of the viewing public and that's about it. Nothing that sways in any other direction is valid for him, alas.Curtis Stotlar

Homicidal is directed by William Castle and written by Robb White. It stars Jean Arless, Glenn Corbett, Patricia Breslin, Richard Rust and James Westerfield. Music is by Hugo Friedhoffer and cinematography by Burnett Guffey.From the showman stable of William Castle, comes this weird psycho chiller that hinges on its twist reveal and comes out in credit. Story essentially follows the unravelling of one off kilter family, enter gruesome murder, inheritance issues and cruelty. Gone is the camp value normally associated with this period of Castle's career, though we do get one of his gimmicks here, a 45 second countdown clock as Castle gives the audience chance to leave the cinema before the ending is revealed, they would then have to go and stand in "cowards corner" before claiming a refund on their admission ticket.Nicely shot in broad black and white by the talented Guffey, Homicidal is often considered as being either a homage or a rip-off of Hitchcock's Psycho released the previous year. Which ever way you view it, it is hard not to refer back to Hitch's superior movie, but what film of its type can compare to Psycho? With that in mind, Homicidal is one of the best there is, and it's not as if Castle's movie is not without its own ideas. Critics remain divided on the film's quality, though it should be said that there were one or two who stood up say it was better than Psycho. That appears to be folly now and still further gives Homicidal an uphill battle to be judged on its own entertaining terms. It's a tough ask, but if first time viewers can do this then they should enjoy a devilishly constructed picture made by a man with a glint in is eye and a cigar on his lips. 7/10