By 1909, D.W. Griffith had been directing films for the Biograph Company for about a year, and  working at a rate of two or three per week  was rapidly beginning to develop his skills as a filmmaker. 'The Sealed Room' is a very interesting 11 minute short, a fascinating piece of Gothic melodrama that even drifts slightly into the realm of early horror. The simple narrative was probably inspired by Edgar Allen Poe's 1846 short story, "The Cask of Amontillado," and concerns a powerful king who conceives a deliciously sadistic form of revenge to punish his wife's infidelity.
Set in medieval times, 'The Sealed Room' begins with the king (Arthur V. Johnson) overseeing the construction of a windowless room from a sequestered dove-cote, the idea being that he and his wife (Marion Leonard) will have a completely private place to enjoy each other's company. He is obviously very much in love with her, always showing his affection, this latest act the crowning achievement of his endearment. However, unbeknownst to the king, his wife has fallen in love with the royal minstrel (Henry B. Walthall). During one romantic liaison inside the specially-built room, the wife and the minstrel are discovered, and the heartbroken king conceives a means of getting his retribution on the ignorant couple. Silently, he orders his workmen to seal off the only doorway with stone and mortar, slowly descending into cackling insanity as each new stone is placed down.
D.W. Griffith always had an eye for acute detail, and 'The Sealed Room' is an excellent early example of this. The lavish medieval century costumes lend the film a sense of reality, and the castle interior looks authentic enough to be believable. At the time, the director was also pioneering methods of creating suspense, and I must admit that, as the film progressed, I became fixated on finding out what would happen to the hapless young lovers. In the early minutes, Griffith restricts his shots to lengthy long-takes from a stationary camera (as was usual at the time), but soon  parallel to the progressively darker subject matter  he alters his editing tactics in a fascinating way. Though he may not have invented the technique, Griffith was crucial in popularising the use of "cross-cutting"  that is, alternating between different events occurring at the same time. Not only does this create a sense of continuity, but it also maximises the level of suspense, since we, as the audience, are well aware, not only of the king's ghastly actions, but also that the wife and the minstrel are oblivious to it all.
Despite these innovations, 'The Sealed Room' suffers from many of the shortcomings typical of the era. The entire film takes place in just two rooms, with footage captured from a total of just three positions, and so it is prone to become dull and monotonous at times. The acting performances are greatly exaggerated for extra effect, however, at least in the case of Arthur V. Johnson, his overplaying actually contributed to recognising the escalating madness of the betrayed king. A moment that I thought particularly effective was when the two lovers attempted to exit the room, only to find their only doorway replaced with a wall of solid stone. Their panicked reactions, accompanied by the silent maniacal cackling of the king, serve very well to create an impending sense of claustrophobia. I did think, however, that their supply of oxygen was exhausted surprisingly quickly.

Note: I couldn't force myself to actually write up a constructive review of Prom Night. It just can't be done. Instead, I went through what I thought about while watching the movie.
Things that I thought about while watching Prom Night:
-I'm so tired of those dreams where these elaborate deaths will take place, only for the main character to wake up right before she bites it. Of course, when I say "elaborate deaths", I mean off screen throat slashes or stabs in the stomach. Didn't the whole "it's just a dream" thing get ruined by Dallas? Speaking of which, I wonder if a couple stabs in the gut will cause immediate death.
-The film is only ten minutes into and I can already count the horror clichés on two hands. Not a good sign.
-Even after just meeting the protagonist's boyfriend, I'm convinced he will die. Anybody want to place bets?
-The killer in this movie is a teacher that is obsessed with the main character, Donna. (By the way, does anybody think that "Donna" is a horrible name for a main character in a horror film?) He spends three years in a maximum security prison before breaking out and finds Donna celebrating her high school prom. While there is no accounting for taste, I seriously wonder who would take all that time to stalk somebody as dull as Donna.
-High schools allow proms to take place at hotels and doesn't keep track of the students. Apparently students are perfectly able to buy a hotel room and go in and out as they please. I suppose if this plot point wasn't in place, the movie would be 90 minutes of people being bored out of their mind and randomly biting the dust whenever they go to the bathroom. I suppose the trade-off for their excitement is my utter boredom with everything. I've already played "count the pieces of chewed bubble gum under the seat" and "guess how much money I have in my wallet" and I'm only in the 20 minute mark. How else will I entertain myself?
-Note to self: Don't forget milk and bread on the way home.
-Dear screenwriter: You've used up enough false scares to get through this movie and every other horror remake this year.
-The 1980 version of this film wasn't that good but compared to this remake it was like Citizen Kane, or at least The Godfather. It had Jamie Lee Curtis in one of her many post-Halloween horror flicks and it did have a little "twist" at the end. I miss Jamie Lee. I wish she'd act more.
-Apparently at prom there isn't much dancing going on. Instead the girls get in fights with their boyfriends over where they plan to attend college. I hear all these colleges being brought up by name, and I can't help but wonder who these girls have to cheat off of on the entrance exam to get in.
-The killer must carry a bag of really effective cleaning supplies and wipes up his mess between scenes. That's the only logical explanation for why he could stab somebody to death on the carpet or in the bathroom and by the time somebody goes up to the hotel room, there is no trace of a struggle. (On another side note: This is a very lazy killer. Michael Myers went hunting after his victims. Just saying.)
-It's official: the entire audience in the theater is rooting on the killer. What triggered it? Was it whenever Donna went back up to her hotel room while sirens were going off ordering everybody to exit the building? Was it her constant dreams, and how even after going through something dramatic in said dream she insisted on reenacting her steps to a tee? Or was it Brittany Snow's unconvincing performance? I'll have to say it was all of the above.
-Okay, who had "he dies off screen in the third act"? You win the pot.
-Finally, the movie is over. My friend turns to me and says "Donna wasn't too smart." That's the understatement of the week. Kind of like saying that a tornado is a small gust of wind, or a week long power outage is a slight inconvenience.
-I can't wait to get on Rotten Tomatoes and see if anybody gave this move a favoring review.
-I can't recommend this. I refuse to recommend this. This is as lazy of a horror film as any, and the only way to enjoy its cheese smelling plot is if you are under the influence of at least ten beers. And unfortunately for theater patrons, alcohol isn't served.
Rating: * out of ****