Back in the 1800s a lady gives birth to a monster. They decide that the baby is too ugly to name, therefore the monster is known as the "Unnamable"...While this film may only be casually connected to the Lovecraft story whose name it has, that really should not be held against it. Heck, many Lovecraft adaptations are quite loose and the 1930s film "The Black Cat" claims to be based on Poe, when it has no connection whatsoever.On its merits alone, this is a pretty entertaining and fun film, with a strange narration from one character who talks like a fictional pilgrim, a woman who claims to have an accent but is obviously just deaf, and a monster that is something between a goat and a woman, with demon characteristics mixed in.All in all, not a bad one... they might have shown the "unnamable" just a bit too much, giving it less mystery than it probably required. I have not yet seen the sequel, but now I am curious to see where it goes...

Oh jolly, another H.P. Lovecraft horror adaptation! In the vein of the successful "Re-Animator", these adaptations were extremely popular during the late 80's and early 90's but most of them were only very loosely inspired by Lovecraft and furthermore just an excuse to bring to the screen hideous demons and cheesy gore. "The Unnamable" is the best example of this, actually, as the opening fifteen minutes still attempt to create an atmosphere of mystery and morbidity reminiscent of H.P. Lovecraft's finest works, but afterwards the film quickly degenerates into a typically 80's teenybopper flick with fraternity initiation rites and really dumb dialogs. 200 years ago, Joshua Winthrop's wife gave birth to a female demon and he kept it locked away in the attic for a long time until the creature eventually killed him. The film opens with this storytelling, as the concerned house still exists and is now located nearby the Miskatonic University and three male students challenge each other to spend the night. Two of them refuse and the third one is never heard from again. The next day, the two others go back to search for their missing friend, but they're unaware than another group of brainless students already broke into the house. "The Unnamable" is far from a great horror film but, in all fairness, you could do a lot worse in case you're just looking to kill an hour and a half of time. The titular demon, which as it turns out in the end had a name all along, isn't seen until 50 minutes in the film even though there's an illustration of it on the DVD-cover. Before that, we just hear a lot of screeching, growling and thumping on doors. There are quite a few weird characters in the film, like the alleged Lovecraft alter ego Randolph Carter who talks funnily and pretends to be an expert in demonology even though he spends most of the film in a library looking things up. The gore effects are delightfully cheesy and grotesque, with a couple of torn open throats, decapitations and the repeated smashing off a person's head against a hard wooden floor. "The Unnamable" is insignificant, forgettable and quite dumb, but nevertheless okay entertainment for fans of rancid 80's horror.

The Unnamable (1988)** out of ****Directed by Jean-Paul OuelletteWith Mark Kinsey Stephenson, Charles Klausmeyer and Alexandra Durell Here is JaJa when four bourgeoisie's college kids goes to an abandoned old house without known an unnameable creature lives killing people. Performances, storytelling and effects are totally out in this funny film - it is supposed to be an horror one -, in spite of it, the scene in the library is good as Mark Kinsey Stephenson, who is the only one who have a respectable performance with an amazing character an give it to this movie a kind of "decent" rating. For the rest, beware. Based on a story of H.P Lovecraft.

This is a cheapie, but interesting as an artifact of pure primitive suspense technology. A small group of college students creep around a house and confront an escalating series of scares, frights, horrors, attacks, deaths. To my way of thinking, creeping down a long dark cooridor when there's a monster in the house is as old-fashioned and bed-rock as scare tactics get, and anybody who has an interest in making suspense movies could look at this as a great way of sparking thoughts on the nature of filmed suspense. Very little in the way of special effects, extremely simple dialogue, and a rigid focus on those stairs and hallways give this a purity that gooses the fright-o-meter just a nudge. The biggest problem I have with this movie is a basic mistake story-tellers occasionally make: for too long the main characters are unaware that they are in danger. True horror requires that potential victims be mind-blowingly aware of their danger. The people in this movie don't really get a clue until about forty minutes into their tour of the haunted house.