Dread Cthulhu lies …
Well …
Possibly wondering what happened …
I know me and Adrian were.
I managed to track a copy of the 2007 film, “Cthulhu”, which isn’t necessarily what it says on the tin.
I think …
I got hold of this knowing in advance, that it wasn’t a film version of H.P Lovecraft’s “Call of Cthulhu”, but of another of his work’s, “The Shadow over Innsmouth”*; not that I’m complaining, per sé.
I’m as aware as anyone that Hollywood can take the odd liberty.
But what gets me is simply that I was expecting something that …
Well …
Maybe was a little bit better done.
Possibly I’m being a touch harsh, here — thoughts and comments, please, Adrian, everybody — but it did strike both of us that, with the possible exception of the very tongue in cheek “Reanimator”, many of the H. P. Lovecraft film adaptions have been a touch … clunky …
And “Cthulhu” seems to be another in the theme, if somewhat slightly better doneº. Or at least in my opinion; I think Adrian’s going to disagree.
I do know we both managed to land ourselves with a ‘B’ movie, tonight. I think what got me was simply the fact that something — the scripting, the plotting, the editing, something! — didn’t seem especially well done. And there wasn’t a trace of “Reanimator”’s humour!
Off putting, that …
Now, don’t get me wrong.
Lovecraft at his worst, could be bad. But on form — which was most of the time — could be very entertaining. And inspired others, after him, to do better.
But that isn’t necessarily reflected in many films made from his material.
“Cthulhu” is a brave effect. But I don’t think it does its source material justice. And it isn’t doing the ‘Bottle o’ Beer’ routine, with someone’s skull.
Bear that in mind, if you’re thinking of investing in it.
* With the interesting twist that the central protagonist is gay. Nicely Right on, although I think ol’ Howard would have certainly complained …
º If it’s possible to do a good, bad movie …
No comments:
Post a Comment