whineycracker2000 I think it's fascinating (and sort of sad) that a movie like "It Follows" (while not terrible, but very tiresome for those who grew up in the 70's and 80's and can call every one of its myriad influences that it flat out rips off.).gets rave reviews on Rotten Tomatoes and then a film as influential, terrifying, and so well made as this 1979 shocker (yes, even with its complete tonal shift into character study in the mid-portion) gets a 6%? Everything about this film is first rate, and I firmly believe the first 20 minutes is arguably the closest thing to a nightmare caught on film in the medium's long history (along with Chainsaw 74').The film requires patience. Younger reviewers who find the film tame and "not scary" have to be reminded of the time period that this film was released. Child killers like Gacy, and a dozens more were at their peak in the 70's, which is why Carpenter's Halloween, and "Stranger" resonated so much to the movie-going public. When a Stranger Calls may indeed be based on an urban legend, but do some extensive research on the horrors taking place in 70's suburbia, and "Stranger Calls" starts to look like a fairy tale in comparison. Again, it's all about context; on one hand, one must consider that "women in peril/stalker films" were a new sub-genre. Long before Jason, American Horror Story, Saw, etc. we had very few horror films that reminded audiences that horror wasn't just set in outer space, old creepy castles, rural wastelands, or even creepy motels. They literally could be one house away. For the sake of time, I want to recommend this really thought-provoking piece that had me seeing this 1979 mini-masterpiece in a brand new light: it's called "Giving When a Stranger Calls Another Shot" in a 2014 issue of BirthDeathMovies. IMDb won't let me post the link here, but I strongly recommend taking a look!

PimpinAinttEasy 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.

Michael_Elliott When a Stranger Calls (1979) *** (out of 4)Intense psychological thriller has a babysitter (Carol Kane) receiving phone calls from a stranger asking if she has checked on the children. Flash forward seven years when the psychopath (Tony Beckley) escapes from a mental hospital so a detective (Charles Durning) tries to track him down before he can harm anyone else.WHEN A STRANGER CALLS has become somewhat legendary in the thriller/horror genre due in large part to a nearly perfectly executed opening 20-minute sequence where Kane is terrorized by the mysterious man on the phone. There's no question that this sequence has gone down in horror history as a major highlight but I don't think the rest of the film gets nearly enough credit as it deserves. The middle portion of the film is pretty much a character study as we focus in on the psycho who is out in the streets and pretty much walking about trying to find friends. Even though we know the monster he is, the film at times paints him in a sympathetic light.The middle portion of the film has several thriller aspects that work extremely well including one where a bar woman pretty much gives a cold shoulder to the psycho. Of course, she doesn't know who he is and this helps with the suspense because the viewer very well knows what he's capable of. Even the detective is someone we get to learn about as the movie goes along because we can tell that this is a case that haunts him and you have to think that he dropped off the force and went into a private business in hopes of one day getting his chance to kill this guy.Director Fred Walton does a very good job at managing to build up the suspense during the opening sequence and the problem with a lot of thrillers is that they can contain one great suspense scene and then things just go flat or can never recapture that same tension. Even though the middle portion of this film is more laid back, the director still manages to build up a creepy atmosphere and the viewer is always on the edge knowing that this guy could flip at any moment. The cat and mouse game being played works out extremely well. The film also benefits from a very effective score by Dana Kaproff, which helps add to the tension and atmosphere. Add in some nice cinematography and you've really got everything working right.The performances are also another major plus as Durning is an actor that fits that "every man's" approach. He looks like a real detective. He acts like a real detective. You can look in his eyes and see years of experience and this here just helps the film. Kane is also very effective playing the "scared" female part and there's no question that she helps sell the opening sequence. The film, however, belongs to Beckley who is simply terrific in the role of the psycho. The character actually has quite a bit to do here and the actor perfectly captures not only the evilness that lurks below the surface but as I said earlier, there are scenes where he's mistreated and the actor manages to get some sympathy even when you hate the guy. This certainly reminds one of the performance of Boris Karloff in FRANKENSTEIN.WHEN A STRANGER CALLS is a very intense little gem but there are still some flaws to be found in it. This includes the movie running about five minutes too long and there's also another sequence inside a restaurant where you just want to scream at the Kane character to get up and do something rather than sitting around and crying on a floor. Still, this film deserves its reputation as a real gem.

thesar-2 "Why haven't you checked the children?" asks the bogeyman caller and that's a damn good question.1979's When a Stranger Calls feels (and was) like a short indie film remade and stretched because of the success of 1978's masterpiece, Halloween. So much so, that this, being my first time ever seeing the film (on 10/2/13,) I was amazed that so much more happens outside the babysittin' house than what we saw.Naturally, any horror fan, like me, has seen clips of Carol Kane answering the phone more than dozens of times. In fact, die-hard horror fans will laugh through this scene because of it being thoroughly and mocked incredibly well in the comedy/horror classic: Student Bodies. But, for a first-time viewer who spends his days avoiding as many spoilers (and reviews) until I actually see the movie, I was completely blown away that 70% of this movie takes place outside Carol Kane's role.Unfortunately, for all of us, frontrunner to the movie's credits, Carol Kane's small-bit story is the most interesting and the rest of the less horror/more mood tale felt, well, too much a stretch. And hence, the short indie film is very obvious when they added in the middle 70% of footage.What we have here is: Carol Kane's babysitting Jill takes to studying vs. ever once doing her job. Okay, well, she studies and answers the phone, repeatedly. Only problem is, when the caller repeatedly asks if the children have been checked in on, she never thinks to do so. I guess the audience is supposed to sympathize with her and her being relentless stalked over the phone, but realists, like me, are angered by the fact she always put herself first.Well, she was proved wrong. Despite being told, she wasn't the intended target, and the kids had been brutally, but mercifully never shown, slaughtered in the beginning by a crazy man. He's easily caught once the police do something about her calls/screams for assistance. And fast forward seven years later……and we get into the dull 70% I was referring to. The killer escapes the mental ward (hmmm, that sounds a tad familiar – at least when the Friday the 13th creators stated they wanted to blatantly rip-off Halloween, they did their best, and succeeded, in creating a new movie) and he now stalks someone at the complete opposite end of his previous demented craving: Tracy, a middle-aged woman. Enter in ex-cop, turned vigilante, Clifford who stupidly reports his intentions to the police of his desire to find and kill the killer. Naturally, in this movie's realm and not in real life, he's sent on his way to "seek justice" by using Tracy as bait.When that, and the boring 1970's melodrama 70% of the film falls flat, the obvious, albeit completely ludicrous storyline returns to Jill. Again, this sounds all-too familiar. The plot-hole in the Halloween series, specifically decades later in Halloween H20, was how Michael Myers could track down his original target, Laurie Strode. At least here, you have to give them credit for being ahead of the game in 1979 and show how easy it is for this homeless, resourceless and wanted killer to find Jill.I thoroughly expected so much more out of this "classic" that I've heard so much about and saw endless clips of the phone'a'ringing scenes. What I got was a pathetic, useless and thoughtless attempt to cash in on Halloween. It would've been tremendously more suspenseful, and horrific, had they focused their story on Jill, and maybe, just maaaaybe, have her check the kids just once, like she was paid to do.* * * Final thoughts: Now, the cycle's complete. I finally "get" the opening segment that Student Bodies was spoofing. While I always found that opening Student Bodies segment absolutely hilarious, I never knew the full reference to what they were talking about until now. Thankfully, I can continue watching and understanding that great movie more, over this one I'll likely never see again.