Wednesday, May 25, 2011

The Haunting (1963) Vs. The Haunting (1999)



The Haunting (1963)
Directed by: Robert Wise
Starring: Julie Harris, Claire Bloom, Richard Johnson, Russ Tamblyn, Rosalie Crutchley, Lois Maxwell, and Valentine Dyall

Genre: Horror / Psychological Thriller
Based on the Novel “The Haunting of Hill House” by Shirley Jackson
"Hill House ... had stood there for eighty years and might stand there for eighty more ... and whatever walked there, walked alone."

Following the plot of the 1959 novel, three people are invited to take part in a paranormal study with Dr. Markway (Richard Johnson) at a secluded mansion with a reputation called Hill House. Along for the adventure are Eleanor “Nell” Lance (Julie Harris), a woman with deep rooted insecurities who longs for acceptance; Theodora (Claire Bloom), an eccentric, sexually ambiguous, confident woman; and Luke Sanderson, a playboy who stands to inherit the house in the future. Theo and Nell were selected by Dr. Markway because they exhibited a history with the paranormal. Nell has had “poltergeist phenomenon” occur around her, or possibly because of her – it is hinted she has telekinetic powers. Theo is thought to have ESP, or at the very least to be incredibly perceptive. Luke is just along to make sure no harm comes to the property, and he seems fairly skeptical about any paranormal phenomenon that has occurred within the house. They soon discover that they are not alone in Hill House as strange and horrifying (for them) things begin to happen. It becomes clear that the house wants Nell, and is determined to have her. But is the house really haunted, or is Nell unknowingly making these things happen?

What I loved most about this movie was how true it stayed to the classic novel. The film opens with the same lines as the novel does, and ends with the same poetic lines. They kept most of the major unsettling moments from the novel and they translated well onto the screen. The pounding and writing on the walls, ghostly touching, etc. was all made believable. I also liked that they kept the lesbian subplot between Theo and Nell in the film, as well as keeping it as subtle as it was in the novel. (In the 1950s and ‘60s, homosexuality was still a very taboo topic, so anything dealing with it had to be subtle.) There are hints throughout the film that Theo has a thing for Nell, and she is very ambiguous about her personal love life. (Ex: she lives with a ‘partner’ whose gender is never specified in both the novel and the film)

However, the name changes seem unnecessary – in the novel Eleanor’s last name was Vance and the doctor’s last name was Montegue. This is more of a nitpicky detail than anything, though. Also, they changed the character of the doctor’s wife from a woman who thought she could communicate with the spirits of Hill House to a woman who was highly skeptical and even challenged the house’s ghostly phenomenon. Granted, the movie character was far less annoying than her novelized counterpart, but I would have preferred that they remained true to the story. She was a great antagonist to everyone involved in the study, including the doctor himself.

As far as the components of the film go – it was very well-done. The atmosphere was perfect – it gave off that creepy, claustrophobic vibe necessary for ghost stories to take root in the viewer. Yet at the same time, the sets were beautiful. The suspense element was a major factor in the success of this movie – we never actually see the ghosts that haunt Hill House, just hear them and see the aftermath of their antics. The viewer is always wondering what will happen next, if everything is really happening or if Nell is just crazy.

 The acting was pitch-perfect, each character brought to life as if they’d walked right out of the book. (Minus the changes in Mrs. Markway of course) Nell is hard to take in places. Her character can be very annoying. However, she isn’t meant to be likable. I felt sorry for her because she was so socially awkward and had never really had a mature, mutually respectful relationship with anyone. She was incredibly needy in her longing for a connection – trying to find one with Theo and with Dr. Markway. Julie Harris did a wonderful job depicting Nell’s socially awkward ways as well as her decent into madness without coming off as campy or cheesy. Claire Bloom was graceful and lovely as Theodora, but she could also be nasty when the scene called for it. Richard Johnson gave off a very Vincent Price-like air as Dr. Markway and Russ Tamblyn’s Luke was charming and playful, if a little greedy and self-involved. Each character was on screen as they were written in the novel, which is something hard to come by in book-to-film adaptations.

Overall: A definite classic film with great atmosphere, a few scares, and great acting. It is true to its source material and does the novel justice, bringing it to life on screen. Both this film and the novel are highly recommended.

8/10


The Haunting (1999)
Directed by: Jan de Bont
Starring: Liam Neeson, Catherine Zeta Jones, Owen Wilson, Lili Taylor
Genre: Horror / Supernatural
Rated: PG-13
Loosely Based on the Novel “The Haunting of Hill House” by Shirley Jackson.

The plot is similar to that of this film’s [superior] predecessor: three people, Eleanor or “Nell” (Lili Taylor), Theo (Catherine Zeta Jones) and Luke (Owen Wilson) are invited to Hill House to participate in a study on insomnia conducted by Dr. Marrow (Liam Neeson). What they don’t know is that Dr. Marrow is employing the old “bait-and-switch” method – the patients think he’s studying their insomnia, but he’s really doing a study on fear – and Hill House definitely provides them with plenty of that. Upon the first night there, the banging noises begin, and events progressively intensify. Once again, it becomes clear that the house wants Nell, but for a reason far different from the original film. As Nell descends into madness, she believes that she must protect the ghosts of the house as she begins to unravel the mystery of why Hill House is haunted.

I remember seeing this film at about thirteen or fourteen, and thinking it was rather bland. Now, having a lot more movie knowledge and knowing that it was spawned from two far superior works, I’ve come to truly dislike it. The back-story of Hill House was completely changed from that of the novel and original film – the only similar element is the name of the man who built it. While in the novel and original film it was proposed that the house was just “born bad,” in this version there is a rather clichéd and ridiculous explanation for the haunting that trivialized the original ideas behind the story. The idea that it may also be in Nell’s mind or of her own creation is also dropped entirely, losing another aspect of depth that the original story had.

The dialogue was uninspired and barely varied from character to character. The only dialogue that remained the same in all three versions was Mrs. Dudley’s (housekeeper) speech about when she sets the meals on the table and how she will not stay after it begins to get dark – consequently the only decent lines in the film. Also, the characters have changed. Theo is now a blatant bisexual, who not only states this fact, but also flirts with both Nell and Luke. (The lesbian subplot raises its head, but is swept over and nearly forgotten by the end of the film.) Luke is no longer the handsome, charming, playboy heir, but just another hapless insomniac with a goofy demeanor. And what is with the constant changing of the doctor’s last name?

The doctor’s wife is no longer a character at all. She doesn’t exist in this reality. Instead she is replaced by two pointless characters - Mary and another assistant to the doctor – both of whom have maybe two to five minutes of wasted screen time. They were completely unnecessary to the plot and could have been left out altogether. Mary’s injury and the death of one of the main four characters seem to have been added for shock value, but were also unnecessary.

The acting in this is rather wooden considering the all-star cast. Liam Neeson and Catherine Zeta Jones have both been up for Oscars and have clearly proven themselves as incredibly talented. Owen Wilson has a great sense of humor and comedic timing – his is probably the most natural performance out of all of them as his character is similar to many others in his career. Lili Taylor’s performance is solid at first, but becomes a little campy as she gets more involved in the mystery behind Hill House. Catherine Zeta Jones exudes sex appeal and glamour, but she doesn’t really seem to care about her character, and there were times when it felt like Liam Neeson was wondering what the hell he was doing there.

The sets were nice, though a little over the top. Considering this was supposed to be a manor built in the 1800s, I find it hard to believe there would be a carousel-like ballroom floor and a hallway comprised of water, requiring stepping stones to cross. While these elements were beautiful, they were unrealistic to me and took away from the rest of the house, which was actually a very realistic portrayal of an 1800’s manor-style home.

This film is praised for its use of special effects, but I can only wonder why. Some of them were decent, but for the most part, they were made up of really bad CGI. Projected faces in pillows, obviously fake moving wooden carvings, and clearly computer generated smoky ghosts do not scare me – they are rather annoying. The effects were overdone and used way too frequently. I guess de Bont didn’t get the memo that sometimes less is more. Apparently, if you have a great sound system hooked up to your home television, the sound effects are amazing, but I haven’t had the pleasure of experiencing them, nor to I believe they could save this lack-luster, effects ridden effort.

Overall: This could have been a decent film. With today’s technology and the star-studded cast this should have been a lot better than what was delivered in the final product. Too much CGI and terrible writing downgrade this film from what it could have been.

4.5/10

No comments:

Post a Comment