IMDb रेटिंग
6.5/10
3.8 हज़ार
आपकी रेटिंग
अपनी भाषा में प्लॉट जोड़ेंBased on the H. P. Lovecraft story of the same name, a folklorist investigates reports of unusual creatures in Vermont only to uncover more than he bargained forBased on the H. P. Lovecraft story of the same name, a folklorist investigates reports of unusual creatures in Vermont only to uncover more than he bargained forBased on the H. P. Lovecraft story of the same name, a folklorist investigates reports of unusual creatures in Vermont only to uncover more than he bargained for
- निर्देशक
- लेखक
- स्टार
- पुरस्कार
- 3 कुल नामांकन
Conor Timmis
- Porter
- (काटे गए सीन)
फ़ीचर्ड समीक्षाएं
I saw almost everything whats's been done in term of so called "Lovecraft Cinema". From '63 The Haunted Palace , through '85 Re-Animator and 2005 Call Of Cthulhu. This is by far one of the best Lovcraftian adaptations. It really holds the right spirit of both his books and early 50-ties sci-fi cinema. If you're looking for speedy CGI action - forget about this one. If you're into Edgar Allan Poe books, '31 Frankenstein or '56 Forbidden Planet and know at least who Lovecraft is you should definitely see this. Decent acting, good script filmed with the right pace and an old-school production. A perfect alternative for these days cinema. Highly recommended!
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.
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 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!
Really enjoyed the clean look of this film in black & white, and also the sound editing. This is probably the classiest example of what can be achieved with a limited budget when the filmmakers obviously have a love of the material which shines through. The script is faithful to Lovecraft yet it does cuts down on a lot of the excessive verbiage to make it somewhat more palatable to a modern audience. The pace progressively builds and does pay off. The standout performance is from the adorable Autumn Wendell "Hanna Masterson" who embodies the film and is very effective at being terrified, yet innocent at the same time. A perfect fit to a film which achieves the same things.
It is so hard to find a good Lovecraft movie. But this one is excellent. It does not rely on cheap jump scares or the like. It builds up a creepy atmosphere that scares you by suggesting the unimaginable otherworldly. Just like Lovecraft, it presents a vision of superior forces beyond the control of humanity. The acting is great and the screenplay is very fluid. The set design is amazing as well. Sadly, the digital effects are rather noticeable and cheap. Especially on the creatures. I would have really liked to see some good old stop motion, especially on a film that looks so eerily like an old 30s or 40s horror movie.
क्या आपको पता है
- ट्रिवियाCharles Fort (1874-1932) was a real person, a collector of accounts of unusual phenomena, disdaining scientists who would try to explain it all away, as seen in the film.
- गूफ़When Professor Wilmarth is waiting for young Mr. Akeley at the Boston train station, Wilmarth turns his head to see that the train is approaching. Although the image is out of focus, it is clearly a modern train, not one that would be seen in the 1920's.
- क्रेज़ी क्रेडिटAfter the FBI copyright warning: "all video involving fungal beings from the farther reaches of the solar system is carefully monitored by the Mi-Go, who deal harshly with those who duplicate and upload to the internet without permission."
टॉप पसंद
रेटिंग देने के लिए साइन-इन करें और वैयक्तिकृत सुझावों के लिए वॉचलिस्ट करें
- How long is The Whisperer in Darkness?Alexa द्वारा संचालित
विवरण
- रिलीज़ की तारीख़
- कंट्री ऑफ़ ओरिजिन
- आधिकारिक साइट
- भाषा
- इस रूप में भी जाना जाता है
- 克蘇魯怪談:黑暗細語
- उत्पादन कंपनियां
- IMDbPro पर और कंपनी क्रेडिट देखें
- चलने की अवधि
- 1 घं 43 मि(103 min)
- रंग
- पक्ष अनुपात
- 1.78 : 1
इस पेज में योगदान दें
किसी बदलाव का सुझाव दें या अनुपलब्ध कॉन्टेंट जोड़ें