The Resurrected (1991)

"The Resurrected," based on Lovecraft's story "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward," focuses on a Rhode Island P.I. who one day is contacted by the wife of a chemist. She expresses concern over her husband's erratic behavior, which has led to him isolating himself at his remote family estate, where he has been suspected by locals of grave robbing and performing disturbing experiments with human body parts. What they discover is all that and more.Given that I am not familiar with H.P. Lovecraft, nor am I familiar with director Dan O'Bannon's work or other Lovecraft adaptations, I feel I have a fairly objective opinion to offer here. It seems that the user reviews largely reflect the reactions of (mostly) big Lovecraft fans. From my knowledge, "The Resurrected" essentially takes the premise of the Lovecraft story and situates it in the twentieth century, and more or less is consistent with the story's framework.The film's beginning is rather dull, and I wondered what I was getting myself into; a drab, single-take shot of Jane Sibbett and John Terry in a very nineties-decor office gave the affect of a cheap television movie—and in all honesty, much of the film does in fact feel like that, from the unimaginative cinematography to the poor editing and sometimes awkward performances. That said, if you stick with the film, it does get progressively interesting and progressively weird.The final thirty minutes are what really cemented my enjoyment of the film, where it becomes a sort of "Indiana Jones"-esque horror film, and the filmmakers seem to step up their game in terms of the camera-work and atmosphere. The special effects are in some respects dated, but in others look passable by today's standards. The acting, as I said, is a bit of a hodgepodge, with Chris Sarandon overacting at times; John Terry is only mildly likable as the lead detective, and Jane Sibbett ranges from bad to quite good. Robert Romanus has a memorable part as the P.I.'s chain-smoking sidekick. The final showdown is well-handled, though the voiceovers from Terry that conclude the film (and which are present throughout) leave a bit to be desired.Overall, "The Resurrected" is a pretty decent horror flick. It definitely has the look and feel of a low-budget television movie at times, but it also manages to be atmospheric and quite a lot of fun once its wheels get turning. If the first twenty minutes of early-nineties aesthetic overload is too much, I'd urge you stick with it, as it really starts to demand one's attention about a quarter of the way through. It is not a flawless film by any stretch of the imagination, but it is commendably dark and compelling. 6/10.

First of,Im not a real fan of Lovecrafts writing but other movies with mention his name are better than this like "re-animator" and "from beyond".Problem with this one is,that not everything works and as a whole it has a strange way of storytelling and building up the movie.The characters narrating over this movie was really annoying more so if some time later you see it played out in a scene.Everything was moderate in this flick and it don't excel in any aspect of movie making.It felt dull trying to put to much story in what is suppose to be a horror movie.The reviews were some what of a surprise.Now I'm rating this as low as possible.It's just to make it fair.This should be a 3 overall. A bit of a decent thriller/horror.

Private investigator John March (John Terry) recounts the closed case of Charles Dexter Ward (Chris Sarandon) starting from 3 weeks ago in Providence. Ward's wife Claire (Jane Sibbett) hires March to investigate her chemical engineer husband and some strange smells. There is a mysterious Dr. Ash. Ward is researching the occult and raising the dead practiced by his ancestor Joseph Curwen.Dan O'Bannon lacks a visual eye for directing. His legendary status has little to do with that. It's not his strong suit. This looks more like a weak TV movie shot by the second unit. The H.P. Lovecraft story has some potential but the script doesn't add much. The dialog is stale. John Terry is not a particularly good lead. There is nothing scary or too grotesque. The pacing is slow. There is little tension. It's not horrible but it's not good either.

I'm really confused by other users comments. After reading them I ordered a copy from the states as fast as my fingers could click to Amazon. I'm a huge fan of Lovecraft and to be told that this is the best film adaption of his work and that I'd never even heard of it made me think I was about to get my slime covered tentacles on a forgotten gem. Then it arrived and I must ask the other users, are you all completely bonkers? This is a terrible, terrible film. It's badly lit, shot, edited, acted and scripted. When the femme non fetale first arrives at the PI's office it's this dreadful side shot which just sits there for about five minutes while the two of them fail to act in each others general direction from the opposite sides of the screen. The rest of the film seems to consist of either seen it all before POV's or more of these overly lit side shots, I thought Dan O'Bannon could shoot films? Thank god the flashbacks break up the boredom. In a voice over Ward's wife says something like "He just left the party and said he had to do some work that couldn't wait", at which point Ward in the flashback says "I have to leave the party to do some work that cannot wait." Brilliant! It goes on like that for an hour and forty tedious minutes with a couple of goofy and gooey effects don't liven up the proceedings one bit, until it ends with Chris Sarandon hamming it up for all he's worth while I considered hanging myself from the tedium of it all. Come on guys, us Lovecraft fans have to be forgiving occasionally by the general low quality and/or budgets of his related movies, but we shouldn't let this film off the hook just because it sticks fairly close to the original story. I mean, Dagon is rubbish but at least it's FUN rubbish, this is just plain dull.