Once again, the 70's feels like being really weird with its titles and have them have nothing to do with the actual story. i love it. oh wait. no i don't, it's STUPID. oh well. Onto movie 9 of the Chilling classics box set.<br /><br />What do we have to look forward to this time? well some ultra Jesus loving chick named Ingrid! there's a bunch of murders taking place around the area with a dude with some scissors and soon enough she gets attacked, but she gets away and then a whole bunch of zaniness begins! like rapings and crazily boring scenes that don't need be there! hooray for the 70's! Supposedly Ingrid gets raped by this guy named Frankie. i say supposedly cause...well you'll see later. anyway after a while, the sheriff (who sounds like he has a touch of the throat cancer) and his cronies discover who the killer is and the good ol boys take him out. with guns...although he's unarmed. that always makes me wonder. why is it ALWAYS sheriffs in horror movies? to this day, i have never seen a bumbling sheriff in real life. do they exist? oh well, maybe out west. anywho, Ingrid doesn't believe its over because she thinks Frankie is still on the loose. her and her uncle she's living with takes him out. and all is well........or is it? Little do we know that she really didn't get raped and she made everything up with her craziness. what a twist! oh no wait...the twist was STUPID. and then the movie proceeds to go on for 10 minutes longer than it should describing what the hell happened in the rest of the movie. another reason to show that this movie messed up. it shouldn't NEED to have that explanation, it should be obvious in the storytelling. Even though i may not be a fan of the movie "Hide and Seek", it actually SHOWED us what happened as opposed to this movie that felt it necessary to give us a 10 minute dialogue because they were too stupid to figure out a way to show it.<br /><br />So the movie ends with the uncle going into the house and going a bit crazy. The end.<br /><br />Now, is it just me, or for some reason, why do all 1970's movies seem to have titles that have NOTHING to do with the movie. "Bell from hell" "Medusa", etc. i don't know WHY the 70's loved doing this so much when the film's alternate titles are so much better . The alternate title for this film is "The Veil" and granted, that ALSO has nothing to do with the movie, i think overall it's a better title than HAUNTS. because haunts promises ghosts or demons or something. Veil promises...well, a veil. and if there's no veil, i'm not nearly as disappointed.<br /><br />So yeah, another boring 70's movie. Not nearly as painful as Medusa, but hardly anything is.<br /><br />Haunts gets 3 pairs of scissors, out of 10