The Whisperer in Darkness

It is notoriously difficult to bring a Lovecraft story to the screens without reinventing pretty much everything. The reason for that is that the emotional tension in his stories is all based on what he tells you the characters feel. He doesn't really construct a horror environment as much as place people who are easily scared, disgusted or appalled in circumstances that are usually light sci-fi.

Created by the same team that did The Call of Cthulhu in 2005, it is a black and white movie, only this time not a mute one. The story it is based on is also longer, but then so is the movie.

I liked it, but then I kind of understand what H.P.Lovecraft was all about. For other people I think this would be a waste of time.

The Whisperer in Darkness ranked in the "pretty good" range of Lovecraft adaptations, for me. The higher range would include Re-Animator, From Beyond, and A Color Out of Space, while the lower range would include Beyond the Wall of Sleep and The Deep Ones. The mid-range is populated by such movies as The Unnamable, Dagon, and Necronomicon, and is a fuller list than either of the other ranges of the spectrum. In The Whisperer in Darkness, we are plagued by poor acting by the little girl, and questionable acting by the lead and main antagonist. The special effects range from mid- to questionable, as well. But as an indie movie, it does really well, and way better than I had expected. I highly recommend to Lovecraft fans, as this one definitely held my attention, and I understand people consider it a pretty faithful adaptation.

I am an avid fan of the writings of Lovecraft, well, and anything Lovecraftian in general, and happened to come across "The Whisperer in Darkness" by sheer luck. I didn't have my hopes up, because most previous movies based on Lovecraft stories had been off key or had too much focus on special effects and putting the ominous dread of the core of the story in the background.

However, as with the 2005 version of "The Call of Cthulhu", I was more than genuinely surprised in a good way with the 2011 film version of "The Whisperer in Darkness". This was right on the spot in every aspect; focusing on the storytelling, the build up of the cosmic dread and the despair of the protagonist.

The actors in the movie were doing good jobs bringing the story to life through their characters. And director Sean Branney really capture the essence of the timeless writing of Lovecraft.

However, personally, I am not overly keen on movies in black and white, as colors add so much more flavor to the movie experience. But keeping it in black and white works well enough for the movie, given the thematic setting of H.P. Lovecraft's mythos and universe.

"The Whisperer in Darkness" is a MUST watch for any fan of Lovecraft. And I rate it a solid seven out of ten stars. If the movie had been in color, the rating would have been eight. Visuals are important in the movie media.

In 1928, Miskatonic University folklore professor Albert Wilmarth enjoys debunking theories of the occult, even though he is roundly trounced – on radio, no less – by Charles Fort when they have a debate on whether certain stories in Vermont that have come to light following a flood are based in fact. He has also been carrying on correspondence with an intelligent, yet fearful, farmer in Vermont, who insists that the strange beings seen in the floodwaters are real, and are all around his farm. Wilmarth is curious, especially after he finds the original manuscript of a very rare book of folklore collected in Vermont back in the 1800s, containing stories which seem to correspond to what his farmer correspondent, Henry Akeley, has described in his letters. So when he receives a strange letter from Akeley that completely up-ends the farmer's previous fears about alien creatures and that invites Wilmarth to come to the farm to discuss the wondrous things that he has learned, well, Wilmarth can't possibly turn the invitation down. But when he arrives in the hills of Vermont, the local folk he meets all seem downright hostile, and when he arrives at the farm, he finds that Akeley himself is not well. And that is just the beginning of the discoveries that await him....

This film, created by a collective called the HP Lovecraft Historical Society, is clearly lovingly made – done in black and white and in the style of the early 1930s, it tells one of Lovecraft's more evocative tales and then expands upon it. (Lovecraft's story ends at about the one-hour mark of the film, which continues for another 40 minutes or so.) The atmosphere is terrific, and the style of the story-telling really permits the audience to feel themselves back in the early 1930s, even up to the various mad-scientist gadgets that evoke such classics as the lab in the original "Frankenstein" film. The monsters are more or less what one might expect to see in an early 1930s film based on an HP Lovecraft story, but that doesn't make them any less menacing or eerie. You don't need to be a Lovecraft fan to love this movie, though it wouldn't hurt; you probably don't even need to be a fan of old movies. You just have to love movies, especially ones with great atmosphere and straight-up acting and a storyline that keeps you involved every step of the way. Highly recommended!

This black and white SF mystery is in every aspect designed to conjure up the experience of reading Lovecraft. Lovecraft is respected both with the story and atmosphere, which makes the film one of the rare true adaptations of this great horror-fantasy author. Its style resembles Film Noir quite a lot, and only quality of the picture breaks down the illusion that you are watching a movie from the first half of the last century. Even the opening and the ending credits are archaic. This is an independent low-budget film, produced by "The H. P. Lovecraft Historical Society". Despite the low budget and unknown actors, the film is very well shot and acted, and the lack of money for quality CGI is offset by excellent directorial tricks that are, at least for my taste, far more effective in intimidating than the technically costly, but essentially cheap CGI explicitness. Unfortunately, towards the end, they decided to break the tension, gradually built with quality hints, by an explicit depiction of extraterrestrial beings. But even that did not turn out to be so bad to completely spoil the experience, although I would personally prefer if they have abstained from this move. Overall, I am very pleased and I would like to see more of such adaptations of my favorite authors in the future. The only thing from this century with which I could compare it, on the basis of personal experience, is the video game "Undying" by Clive Barker from 2001. If you played it and liked it, you will probably like "The Whisperer in Darkness". If you did not, and you like this movie, you should try out the excellent interactive horror of my favorite video game.

7/10