Go Back   Horror.com Forums - Talk about horror. > Horror Movie Discussion > Vintage Horror Movies

Reply
 
Thread Tools
  #3751  
Old 10-19-2018, 11:28 AM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 4,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by FryeDwight View Post
DR JEKYLL AND MR HYDE (1931). For me, the definitive version of the Robert Louis Stevenson novella with impressive camera work for the time and damn good transformation scenes with Hyde looking positively beastial towards the end. A lot of stilted dialogue...all the "Darling!", "Sir" and "How I love You!" bits will have You fidgeting, but stick with it . This was Pre-Code, so it's quite violent and incredibly heavy on the sex stuff; Jekyll is almost panting in his desire to get married and as soon as he becomes Hyde, he goes immediately to find the streetwalker who so captivated Jekyll. Frederic March won an Oscar as the titular character, but for Me the highlight of the film is Miriam, Hopkins. What I've read about her strikes me as a demanding, scene stealing diva, but she is sensational and heartbreaking as Ivy, the Good Time girl whose life quickly becomes a nightmare. ****
Well said, FD! I agree, I think Jekyll/Hyde 31 is very impressive, especially the camera work and camera tricks. It has more interesting and effective motion than some modern day films. The direction/camera pace is fast out of the gun, and becomes seamless, and well integrated into the story. The camera work must have blown some minds in 1931.

And being pre-code the dialogue seems very modern. No holds barred in what he's talking about and how he says it.

I think it is the best Jekyll/Hyde film to date. Still none of the films capture the short story well enough, which is too bad, because it has the best concepts, no need to change anything.

FryeDwight? If anything, what did you think the potion and change was a symbol(s) for?
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
  #3752  
Old 10-21-2018, 02:17 AM
Tommy Jarvis's Avatar
Tommy Jarvis Tommy Jarvis is offline
Living Dead
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Location: Belgium
Posts: 93
Freaks: I enjoyed it, though it felt a bit slow sometimes, even for a kind of short film.

It also seemed to me that the story still holds relevancy today. The idea that the freaks, in a way, actually look more welcoming and tolerant than the "norms" can still resonate in an age where bullying is being heavily debated.
__________________
Reply With Quote
  #3753  
Old 10-21-2018, 09:55 AM
LuvablePsycho's Avatar
LuvablePsycho LuvablePsycho is offline
Rotten Stinky Zombie
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: In a dark, dark place.
Posts: 1,022
I finally own Night of the Living Dead, Carnival of Souls, and Nosferatu on Bluray.

My copy of NotLD seems to be very poor quality though it has so much static on the screen. Maybe one day I should replace it with a better copy? This version is from Mill Creek and I think they're one of those companies that always publish public domain films in really poor quality.
__________________
We R Going 2 Eat U!
Reply With Quote
  #3754  
Old 10-21-2018, 04:26 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 4,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuvablePsycho View Post
I finally own Night of the Living Dead, Carnival of Souls, and Nosferatu on Bluray.

My copy of NotLD seems to be very poor quality though it has so much static on the screen. Maybe one day I should replace it with a better copy? This version is from Mill Creek and I think they're one of those companies that always publish public domain films in really poor quality.
Not sure what you mean by static, besides the obvious TV white speckle static.
You getting sound static too? Either don't sound normal. The DVD copy I have is SD, but there's no static.

You could send it back, get a refund, try another source.
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
  #3755  
Old 10-21-2018, 04:36 PM
LuvablePsycho's Avatar
LuvablePsycho LuvablePsycho is offline
Rotten Stinky Zombie
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: In a dark, dark place.
Posts: 1,022
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sculpt View Post
Not sure what you mean by static, besides the obvious TV white speckle static.
You getting sound static too? Either don't sound normal. The DVD copy I have is SD, but there's no static.

You could send it back, get a refund, try another source.
I mean the little white fuzzy things that tend to appear in old black and white movies that are not polished quality.

I don't think I can send it back because I have had it a long time and I no longer have the Walmart receipt. But maybe I can just accept it as is? The poor quality might even feel a little retro.

Besides I have seen all these movies in worse quality when I used to download them for free from archive org
__________________
We R Going 2 Eat U!
Reply With Quote
  #3756  
Old 10-21-2018, 04:48 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 4,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by LuvablePsycho View Post
I mean the little white fuzzy things that tend to appear in old black and white movies that are not polished quality.

I don't think I can send it back because I have had it a long time and I no longer have the Walmart receipt. But maybe I can just accept it as is? The poor quality might even feel a little retro.

Besides I have seen all these movies in worse quality when I used to download them for free from archive org
Oh, the specks on old films, like lint and hair. Ya, I wouldn't worry about that. It is kind of homie. Electronic static would be out of place.
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
  #3757  
Old 10-24-2018, 12:42 AM
FryeDwight FryeDwight is offline
Evil Dead
 
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 1,262
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sculpt View Post
Well said, FD! I agree, I think Jekyll/Hyde 31 is very impressive, especially the camera work and camera tricks. It has more interesting and effective motion than some modern day films. The direction/camera pace is fast out of the gun, and becomes seamless, and well integrated into the story. The camera work must have blown some minds in 1931.

And being pre-code the dialogue seems very modern. No holds barred in what he's talking about and how he says it.

I think it is the best Jekyll/Hyde film to date. Still none of the films capture the short story well enough, which is too bad, because it has the best concepts, no need to change anything.

FryeDwight? If anything, what did you think the potion and change was a symbol(s) for?
I guess in the most vulgar parlance I can think of was He had a major desire to get laid, hence all the panting to get married. And while Muriel is out of town , he goes to see Ivy, but "undercover" as it were, to not have damage to his Victorian image/reputation.

Seriously, he wanted to separate the two selves of human psyche and have the best of both worlds without anyone knowing. In the excellent Greg Mark commentary (Greg is my favorite for these, good writer and cool guy), he compares Hyde at first as a young puppy or kitten, more mischievous than anything else-He also looks a LOT like Jimmy McNulty from THE WIRE in his first change. As time goes on, Hyde's baser instincts come out and he truly becomes a Monster.
Reply With Quote
  #3758  
Old 10-24-2018, 01:31 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 4,667
Quote:
Originally Posted by FryeDwight View Post
I guess in the most vulgar parlance I can think of was He had a major desire to get laid, hence all the panting to get married. And while Muriel is out of town , he goes to see Ivy, but "undercover" as it were, to not have damage to his Victorian image/reputation.

Seriously, he wanted to separate the two selves of human psyche and have the best of both worlds without anyone knowing. In the excellent Greg Mark commentary (Greg is my favorite for these, good writer and cool guy), he compares Hyde at first as a young puppy or kitten, more mischievous than anything else-He also looks a LOT like Jimmy McNulty from THE WIRE in his first change. As time goes on, Hyde's baser instincts come out and he truly becomes a Monster.
I think you're right, in a way, on both accounts, that is in your first paragraph, you may be saying the potion is the vehicle for him to get laid in secret and 'not damage his Victorian image/reputation'. And in your second paragraph you're noting the film's, may I say, ridiculous theory about the good of separating the good man and the animal man -- which is not in the novel, and something I didn't like about the film.

You didn't mention what you thought the potion represented. In the short story (only about 170pgs), I think it's alluded to even more than in this or other films. I kind of think it's a bit obvious. I think it's alcohol. For many throughout history it's the potion that causes inhibition, and for some allows, or causes, people to lose contact with their higher brain function, empathy, morality, love and self control. Of course it's also a symbol for whatever else acts to do the same thing... a theory, a practice and societal system. But he does drink it, doesn't he?

Here's a quote from the film about the why he made the potion (which is not in the short story).

Quote:
The soul of man.
My analysis of this soul,
the human psyche...
It leads me to believe
that man is not truly one...
but truly two.
One of him strives for the nobilities of life.
This we call his good self.
The other
seeks an expression of impulses...
that bind him to some dim animal relation
with the earth.
This, we may call the bad.
These two carry out an eternal struggle
in the nature of man...
yet they are chained together.
And that chain spells
repression to the evil.
Remorse to the good.
Now, if these two selves
could be separated from each other...
how much freer the good in us would be.
What heights it might scale.
And the so-called evil, once liberated...
would fulfill itself and trouble us no more.

I believe the day is not far off...
when this separation will be possible.
In my experiments, I have found...
that certain chemicals have the power....
Tell me, he can split me in two
like a jolly amoeba.
So, in the bold, is where it's ridiculous, that is, it doesn't really make any sense within itself. Liberate evil to fulfill itself so it troubles us no more? I'm guessing he means do it, the animal impulses, to get it out of your system? Yeah, like that ever worked. Both the book and film do point to the same thing, in that, even so with the alcoholic, the more this activity is done, the more it entrenches itself into the person/brain/psyche/soul, not the other way around. It, 'evil', or unchecked selfishness, and insanity, emerges even without the potion, and can't be reversed even with the antidote, so to speak.

Of course I recommend reading the short story, as it's only 170 pages. Love to hear what you think.
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
  #3759  
Old 10-25-2018, 08:46 PM
Sculpt's Avatar
Sculpt Sculpt is offline
ventricle
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Location: USA, IL
Posts: 4,667
House of Dracula (1945)
6/10

"Count Dracula (John Carradine) and the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney Jr) seek cures for their afflictions; a hunchbacked woman, a mad scientist (Onslow Stevens) and Frankenstein's Monster have their own troubles."

It's an interesting story, with some interesting scenes, especially the trippy piano scene. Still, the story and characters are shallow, the dialogue and some acting is rather campy, it's not scary or exciting, little to no build of suspense.


Abbott and Costello Meet Frankenstein (1943)
6/10

"Two hapless freight handlers find themselves encountering Dracula (Lugosi) , the Frankenstein Monster (Glenn Strange) and the Wolf Man (Lon Chaney Jr)."

I liked this better when I was a kid. If you find Costello's regular screen routine funny, than you'll like this. You'll know after the first scene with him. If not, you're in for a long show, cause this is Costello doing his thing over and over again. Other than that, there's not much there; because although the Universal Monster Characters are playing it straight, as they should, it's not convincing, especially Dracula is not at all the character he was in Dracula (1931) he's more of caricature. They get chased around, near misses, some secret passages and gags.

During the scene where Abbott & Costello bring Drac and Frank into the museum, I was really bored to tears. Just didn't find it was funny.
__________________
.
.
.
.

Reply With Quote
  #3760  
Old 10-28-2018, 04:05 AM
DeadbeatAtDawn's Avatar
DeadbeatAtDawn DeadbeatAtDawn is offline
病気の
 
Join Date: Aug 2014
Location: Extreme Horror Cinema
Posts: 2,253
Rosemary's Baby, 1968


__________________
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:44 PM.