The Dunwich Horror (2009)

I love Mr Lovecraft as much as anyone and there are many stories of his I'd like to see made - and made well. Look, you can be a real Lovecraft stickler and pick this film to bits for it's inaccuracies, etc. However, the cover of the DVD does say "BASED ON H.P. Lovecraft's The Dunwich Horror". And on the back - "An ADAPTATION . . ."Before I watched it I took this movie as someone's expression of a Lovecraft story. I expected it to be, well, unfortunate. But sometimes bad movies can be at least funny.I have to say I was surprised. No it isn't the best Lovecraft movie around (is there one?). But it's a great movie taken on its own merit. I like the location move (and a beautiful location it is too). I particularly like the scene of the boat journey through the bayou. I just wanted to be there. The atmosphere still remained and, honestly, even though New England is the 'correct' setting, Louisiana works a treat.I thought the filming/editing of Wilbur's sections gave the feeling of his disjointed psyche and Jeffrey played a very different and disturbing Wilbur. I don't know if the wild departure from Dean's original charming (but still creepy) portrayal was Leigh Scott's idea or Jeffrey's but it worked for me.Griff and Sarah were believable. Little natural actions that we all do everyday were there. I also liked Wormius. Again, a different way of looking at this kind of character. Not all occultists, magicians, alchemists, and other assorted spooks look like they've popped out of a fairy tale (or Hollywood) - believe me, I know.What I liked most of all was the representation of some of the occult concepts and I really liked the use of homages to Charles D Ward, Innsmouth, Witch House, etc. I have to say that adding some of the ideas from these other stories (e.g.: the Witch House and it's extending hallway) make for recognition of astral realms explored by many in reality. And the idea that the Necronomicon does not actually exist (at least in our physical realm) but rather as the house (a gateway in itself - or rather, a kind of foyer with many doors) probably irritates those that so very much want the Necronomicon to be real (for real!). Putting all of this stuff into an astral (or, dare I say, a subconscious) setting, via the helpful 'assistance' of Wormius suggests a writer that has done a bit of research into such methods. Sometimes there is no time for training and a quick sip of metaphysical 'punch' works as well.All in all, I was pleasantly surprised and would happily recommend this film (but maybe not to hard- core H.P. fans!).

I can imagine the frustration of Hollywood producers trying to transmute a rich and reputed mythos into money by using the same old recipes that work for any other concept and failing miserably in the case of Lovecraft. But they have to try.Such an attempt is this adaptation of the short story with the same name. They start with the wise and nutty professor and his sexy assistant, join forces with an unbeliever and proceed through bad CGI to make him believe before he can use the knowledge that he already had to defeat the monster that had no chance to win in the first place. Yeah, the script is a mess, especially considering that The Dunwich Horror is one of the more classically good vs evil Lovecraft stories.However, that doesn't mean the film cannot be entertaining. As a nod to the 1970 version, Dean Stockwell plays again for the good team, while Jeffrey Combs is a really convincing Wilbur. The horror of the possible opening of the portal to the Old Ones is rendered well, yet everything else is cheesy in a "let's make some money" way that disgusts me. Yog-Sothoth take all money grabbing Hollywood people! I hated the entire useless romantic liaison added, as well as the "team" aspect that never existed in the original material and was put here only to standardize the story to something the public is used to.Bottom line: in the end, the Lovecraft aspect of the film is minimal, even if they kept the general plot of the story. It is the soul that they couldn't grasp. And it is strange, too, as Lovecraft is usually tending to the needs of the superego, distressed by "unnatural" events or beings; it should be easy to put that into a movie. I just don't think they get it! You need to make your viewers feel dirty inside for watching the film. That's the actual point of Lovecraft stuff!

***Spoilers***Why can't Hollywood or the Syfy Channel just read what Lovecraft wrote and do some good anthology movies of his short stories?? Trying to take one of his novella's or short stories and stretch it into an hour and one half movie is a hard task to do except for those film makers who truly love Lovecraft's writings. Dean Stockwell shows up again, not doing quite as good a job as the first time. The plot is very far away from the original written classic. Acting and special effects okay, but they should have stayed much closer to the original story. A cute girl was added for eye candy effect, also not a character found in the original story. And a rather wooden excuse for a primary hero in the college professor. Alas, poor Lovecraft!! I pray a well funded famous director will do you justice one day!!

The film is as cheap and mediocre (leaning towards bad) as you can guess. Bad directing, bad effects (that's the least), a rather sloppy plot that doesn't really do any justice to the original material. The acting is better than I expected, but doesn't deserve praise either. The only real reason to watch the film is that there is such a shortage of Cthulhu Mythos based movies (and how few of them are actually good!) that a true fan will try anything. The house-searching scene was the only one that showed a little bit of inspiration, albeit poorly executed. Other than that you get a pointless background (really far in the background) romance, a rather silly version of Olaus Vormius and a momentary presence of Abdul Alhazred who kind of steals the show.