VALUTAZIONE IMDb
6,2/10
5264
LA TUA VALUTAZIONE
La moglie di Charles Dexter Ward chiede aiuto a un investigatore privato per scoprire cosa combina suo marito in una remota capanna di proprietà della sua famiglia da secoli.La moglie di Charles Dexter Ward chiede aiuto a un investigatore privato per scoprire cosa combina suo marito in una remota capanna di proprietà della sua famiglia da secoli.La moglie di Charles Dexter Ward chiede aiuto a un investigatore privato per scoprire cosa combina suo marito in una remota capanna di proprietà della sua famiglia da secoli.
- Premi
- 1 vittoria e 3 candidature totali
Ken Camroux-Taylor
- Captain Ben Szandor
- (as Ken Camroux)
Patrick P. Pon
- Raymond
- (as Patrick Pon)
Philip Maurice Hayes
- Uniform Cop
- (as Philip Hayes)
Charles K. Pitts
- Ezra Ward
- (as Charles Kristian)
Recensioni in evidenza
This movie is a must see, IF you've read the story and like it, and IF you've seen the other adaptation, "The Haunted Palace" with Vincent Price. Sure, this story is a bit different than the book. It's set in the modern day, and Charles Ward is a well-paid chemist at Belmar Cosmetics, not a young antiquarian débutante. And instead of Doctor Willet being the principle investigator, John Marsh P.I. is (nice nod to the Innsmouth stories with that last name).
Aside from those differences necessary to bring this into the modern day, and aside from a very slight difference in how Joseph Curwen is ultimately dealt with, this follows the story in the book. It's all there: the portrait, the neighbor Fenner, the house in Pawtucket, and of course the underground labs of J.C. Curwen. There are story sequences set in Colonial times to build the story as well, and they are nicely done. But the real crowning glory of this movie is the sets they built for Curwens underground lab. They are MARVELOUS. Everything is there: the sanity blasting carvings, the "mistakes and screw-ups" raised from Imperfect salts, and the jars of Materia.
I highly recommend this movie. I'm still treasuring my copy on Laser Disk and hoping that it someday comes out on DVD. Production is top notch, as is the music and of course the story.
Aside from those differences necessary to bring this into the modern day, and aside from a very slight difference in how Joseph Curwen is ultimately dealt with, this follows the story in the book. It's all there: the portrait, the neighbor Fenner, the house in Pawtucket, and of course the underground labs of J.C. Curwen. There are story sequences set in Colonial times to build the story as well, and they are nicely done. But the real crowning glory of this movie is the sets they built for Curwens underground lab. They are MARVELOUS. Everything is there: the sanity blasting carvings, the "mistakes and screw-ups" raised from Imperfect salts, and the jars of Materia.
I highly recommend this movie. I'm still treasuring my copy on Laser Disk and hoping that it someday comes out on DVD. Production is top notch, as is the music and of course the story.
Modern day Rhode Island is the setting for this adaptation of the H.P. Lovecraft yarn "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward". John Terry ("Full Metal Jacket") stars as private eye John March, hired by comely young Claire Ward (Jane Sibbett, 'Friends') to find out what her husband Charles (Chris Sarandon, "Fright Night" and "Child's Play") is up to. Not that long ago, Charles had come into the possessions of an ancestor, and been awfully intrigued by what he found. He sets up a laboratory in a remote locale so he can work on a series of messy (and I do mean MESSY) experiments. Ones that involve a lot of blood and fresh meat.
One of only two feature length directorial efforts for the late screenwriter Dan O'Bannon (the other being, of course, "The Return of the Living Dead"), this picture does have some ominous atmosphere, a twisty story (there are flashbacks within flashbacks), a wonderful music score by Richard Band, and eye popping monster effects by Todd Masters and his company. The acting is variable. Terry is just okay, but he at least comes off better than the bland Sibbett. Sarandon, unsurprisingly, acts rings around them both, and gets to have some fun when he starts behaving even more strangely than before, and speaks using antiquated language. Laurie Briscoe is fine eye candy as March's miniskirt wearing secretary, and the ever amusing Robert Romanus ("Fast Times at Ridgemont High") is amiable as March's leg man Lonnie Peck.
O'Bannon proves himself to be at home in this sort of horror fare. Granted, the production company would tamper with it after he was done, apparently removing the element of humour that one might expect from the man who made RotLd. It's an entertaining story, that begins on a good note, but it's also a protracted one. One major "haunted house walk" set piece occurs a little past the one hour mark, and it could have used some tightening. The film does lead to a dazzling special effects-laden finale, and some horror fans are sure to be delighted by all the gore.
Not a great film, by any means, but reasonably compelling and worth comparing to the 1963 Roger Corman version, "The Haunted Palace".
Seven out of 10.
One of only two feature length directorial efforts for the late screenwriter Dan O'Bannon (the other being, of course, "The Return of the Living Dead"), this picture does have some ominous atmosphere, a twisty story (there are flashbacks within flashbacks), a wonderful music score by Richard Band, and eye popping monster effects by Todd Masters and his company. The acting is variable. Terry is just okay, but he at least comes off better than the bland Sibbett. Sarandon, unsurprisingly, acts rings around them both, and gets to have some fun when he starts behaving even more strangely than before, and speaks using antiquated language. Laurie Briscoe is fine eye candy as March's miniskirt wearing secretary, and the ever amusing Robert Romanus ("Fast Times at Ridgemont High") is amiable as March's leg man Lonnie Peck.
O'Bannon proves himself to be at home in this sort of horror fare. Granted, the production company would tamper with it after he was done, apparently removing the element of humour that one might expect from the man who made RotLd. It's an entertaining story, that begins on a good note, but it's also a protracted one. One major "haunted house walk" set piece occurs a little past the one hour mark, and it could have used some tightening. The film does lead to a dazzling special effects-laden finale, and some horror fans are sure to be delighted by all the gore.
Not a great film, by any means, but reasonably compelling and worth comparing to the 1963 Roger Corman version, "The Haunted Palace".
Seven out of 10.
The Resurrected is a peculiar entry into the Lovecraftian horror genre, and it's a shame that this 1991 film hasn't garnered more attention from horror enthusiasts. It's an oddity, a slow-burn horror that blends neo-noir, science fiction, and supernatural elements, resulting in a somewhat confusing yet intriguing cinematic experience.
This film, directed by Dan O'Bannon of Alien and Return of the Living Dead fame, is a clear labor of love. O'Bannon's influence is evident throughout, with the film bearing the marks of a director passionate about crafting a unique and unsettling experience. Unfortunately, while the film has its merits, it also has its fair share of shortcomings, which may explain why it has flown under the radar for so long.
The Resurrected follows in the footsteps of its director's previous works, boasting impressive practical effects and a gripping, well-paced narrative. The screenplay, by Brent V. Friedman, is a standout feature, seamlessly blending three distinct genres. It's a refreshing change from the often poorly paced and vapid writing of late 80s and early 90s horror. The movie also benefits from strong performances, particularly from Chris Sarandon, who delivers an unhinged and memorable turn.
However, the film's slow pace may be off-putting to some viewers. It often feels more like a TV miniseries that has been condensed, which detracts from the overall impact. While the conclusion is spectacular and justifies the slow burn, with some truly impressive practical effects, the journey there may test the patience of viewers accustomed to faster-paced, more immediate horror thrills.
The Resurrected is a film that divides opinion. It has all the ingredients for a cult classic, but its slow pace and odd tone may deter some from seeing it through to the end. For those willing to embrace its peculiarities, there is much to admire, from the ambitious narrative to the impressive practical effects. However, with a pace that often drags and a story that feels more suited to a longer format, it is easy to see why this film has not achieved wider recognition.
This film, directed by Dan O'Bannon of Alien and Return of the Living Dead fame, is a clear labor of love. O'Bannon's influence is evident throughout, with the film bearing the marks of a director passionate about crafting a unique and unsettling experience. Unfortunately, while the film has its merits, it also has its fair share of shortcomings, which may explain why it has flown under the radar for so long.
The Resurrected follows in the footsteps of its director's previous works, boasting impressive practical effects and a gripping, well-paced narrative. The screenplay, by Brent V. Friedman, is a standout feature, seamlessly blending three distinct genres. It's a refreshing change from the often poorly paced and vapid writing of late 80s and early 90s horror. The movie also benefits from strong performances, particularly from Chris Sarandon, who delivers an unhinged and memorable turn.
However, the film's slow pace may be off-putting to some viewers. It often feels more like a TV miniseries that has been condensed, which detracts from the overall impact. While the conclusion is spectacular and justifies the slow burn, with some truly impressive practical effects, the journey there may test the patience of viewers accustomed to faster-paced, more immediate horror thrills.
The Resurrected is a film that divides opinion. It has all the ingredients for a cult classic, but its slow pace and odd tone may deter some from seeing it through to the end. For those willing to embrace its peculiarities, there is much to admire, from the ambitious narrative to the impressive practical effects. However, with a pace that often drags and a story that feels more suited to a longer format, it is easy to see why this film has not achieved wider recognition.
The nineties were a disappointing decade for the horror genre whichever way you look at it, so it's lucky that filmmakers like Stuart Gordon and Dan O'Bannon were on hand to adapt classic HP Lovecraft stories. Horror fans have got used to seeing a director's credit for the aforementioned Stuart Gordon and a starring role for the great Jeffrey Combs in Lovecraft films; but even though this one has neither, director Dan O'Bannon has succeeded in brining the classic "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward" to screen. Of course, this isn't the first screen adaptation of the classic story; as Roger Corman made a rather good one in 1963 with the classic 'The Haunted Palace'. The plot has shades of Re-Animator, and follows an investigation into a man who may have found a way to cheat death. The story starts when Charles Dexter Ward's wife visits a private detective, asking him to investigate her husband who has become a recluse; living in a house on their estate grounds. A strange smell of death permeates the air surrounding the retreat, and the neighbours are suspicious after seeing the amount of raw meat being delivered...
The film doesn't contain a great deal of suspense, but the director masks this nicely with a great aura of mystery and intrigue. The film builds up to finally discovering the mystery behind what Charles Dexter Ward has been doing, and although it takes a while to get there - the film never gets boring because O'Bannon keeps the mystery bubbling. The special effects are a little silly, but they actually work quite well in the context of the film, and O'Bannon gets to show his twisted imagination with abominations such as a still-living mauled torso and many other otherworldly creatures. There's a lot of blood and guts too, and even though the film appears to be trying to imitate A-class horror, O'Bannon doesn't completely veer away from B-movie cinema. The acting is decent enough, but one of the few weak links for me. John Terry is more than a little unenthusiastic, while Chris Sarandon never completely convinces in the Vincent Price role of the villain. That really isn't important, however, as it's the atmosphere and the story that are the stars of the show here - and The Resurrected is strong in both those areas. This film is indeed a lost gem and one that deserves to be more seen!
The film doesn't contain a great deal of suspense, but the director masks this nicely with a great aura of mystery and intrigue. The film builds up to finally discovering the mystery behind what Charles Dexter Ward has been doing, and although it takes a while to get there - the film never gets boring because O'Bannon keeps the mystery bubbling. The special effects are a little silly, but they actually work quite well in the context of the film, and O'Bannon gets to show his twisted imagination with abominations such as a still-living mauled torso and many other otherworldly creatures. There's a lot of blood and guts too, and even though the film appears to be trying to imitate A-class horror, O'Bannon doesn't completely veer away from B-movie cinema. The acting is decent enough, but one of the few weak links for me. John Terry is more than a little unenthusiastic, while Chris Sarandon never completely convinces in the Vincent Price role of the villain. That really isn't important, however, as it's the atmosphere and the story that are the stars of the show here - and The Resurrected is strong in both those areas. This film is indeed a lost gem and one that deserves to be more seen!
My neighbor came by a few nights ago to return a few of my movies he had borrowed, along with a few of his own for me to watch. One was a film from the "Masters of Horror" series, which I will not mention. The other was "The Resurrected". At first, I made the mistake of putting it aside because of the cover art which looked like the typical straight-to-video horror crap that floods the video store.
I didn't check it out 'till the other night when I was watching the original "Halloween" with my girlfriend. We were having a micro-theater presentation of spooky movies on the video projector and I left it up to her to pick out the next feature. Out of "Hostel", "Tourist Trap", "Night of the Living Dead"(Savini), and "The Grudge", she picked this one. She read the back of the case and said it was based on an H.P. Lovecraft story, which isn't saying much due to the quality of adaptations of his work. Then, she said "directed by Dan O'Bannon". Now, that was a name I hadn't heard in a long time. I mean, he is somewhat of a legend.
After just watching "Halloween", it was hard to get into the flow of this movie, but then Chris Sarandon was the evil doctor, and then I realized what I'd missed out on in the nineties. I'm now checking out other flicks from that decade. You should, too.
I didn't check it out 'till the other night when I was watching the original "Halloween" with my girlfriend. We were having a micro-theater presentation of spooky movies on the video projector and I left it up to her to pick out the next feature. Out of "Hostel", "Tourist Trap", "Night of the Living Dead"(Savini), and "The Grudge", she picked this one. She read the back of the case and said it was based on an H.P. Lovecraft story, which isn't saying much due to the quality of adaptations of his work. Then, she said "directed by Dan O'Bannon". Now, that was a name I hadn't heard in a long time. I mean, he is somewhat of a legend.
After just watching "Halloween", it was hard to get into the flow of this movie, but then Chris Sarandon was the evil doctor, and then I realized what I'd missed out on in the nineties. I'm now checking out other flicks from that decade. You should, too.
Lo sapevi?
- QuizAccording to Diane O'Bannon, the film was re-cut against her husband's objections and released without his approval; it was re-edited without the humor that he had attempted to put into it.
- BlooperWhen Claire Ward first visits John March, she sits in his office, and we can see Holly the receptionist's desk behind Claire through the glass wall. The first time we see this shot, there is someone who is not Holly behind the desk. The next time we see the shot, Holly is at her desk, but talking to someone, although as far as we know, no one else is there.
- Citazioni
Joseph Curwen: Strong as my hunger for knowledge may be, my hunger for food is so much stronger.
- Versioni alternativeDirector Dan O'Bannon's original cut ran over two hours and was subsequently edited down by the film's producers. The recent Blu-ray collector's edition of the film released in Germany by OFDb Filmworks contains a work print cut that runs 2 hours and 17 minutes. Additional scenes include a longer introduction of John March and Lonnie Peck, extended and new dream sequences, and a romantic encounter between March and Claire Ward.
- ConnessioniFeatured in 31 Horror Movies in 31 Days: Missed Potential (2018)
I più visti
Accedi per valutare e creare un elenco di titoli salvati per ottenere consigli personalizzati
- How long is The Resurrected?Powered by Alexa
Dettagli
Botteghino
- Budget
- 4.000.000 USD (previsto)
- Tempo di esecuzione1 ora 48 minuti
- Colore
- Mix di suoni
- Proporzioni
- 1.85 : 1
Contribuisci a questa pagina
Suggerisci una modifica o aggiungi i contenuti mancanti
Divario superiore
What is the Brazilian Portuguese language plot outline for The Resurrected (1991)?
Rispondi