Cthulhu

I really wanted to like this, especially with the glut of direct to video adaptations of Lovecraft stories (Beyond the Wall of Sleep etc) that are essentially student project level non-movies. But this is yet another example of a film that heavily relies on Lovecraft and yet totally jettisons any real relation to the author or his works, much less the sensibility behind them. It owes more to The Shadow Over Innsmouth than anything, and unfortunately that world was already realized in far better (yet still in woefully inadequate) fashion in "Dagon." To someone who loves Lovecraft as much as I, it's rather insulting this film is called "Cthulhu." There are ideas the writer and director were far more interested in, such as the main character's confused sexuality, than anything written by Lovecraft. So, why not drop the illusion of being a Lovecraft adaptation, and simply make the film that was there without him, since little in this film relates much to his writing? Answer? Because if you use his name and the titles of his works you gain free publicity and legitimacy. You will also let down legions of HPL fans because once again someone has made a film that seems to think it's own very uninteresting and pedestrian ideas have any place mixed in with the cosmic horror of Lovecraft. And worse, viewers who don't know HPL will once again be left with the opinion that "Gee, I guess he wasn't that good a writer." And with this sad example, you can probably add "Was Lovecraft gay?" to those questions.

The acting is fair enough. There are moments when overacting and underacting bring scenes down, but nothing is ruined. I liked the editing, for the most part. There are times when it makes the story hard to follow, but overall it's well done. The cinematography is beautiful.

My only real gripe with the movie is that the plot is a bit thin. A lot of things happen that feel ultimately irrelevant, and other things happen without much explanation. The conflict gets lost in all the random happenings, which adds to the difficulty of following the story.

I'm not sure where all the hatred for this movie comes from. It wasn't a great film, but it certainly wasn't horrible. The story felt stretched and a bit convoluted, and the title is misleading since the movie has virtually nothing to do with Cthulhu, but I feel like I have to give props to the director for making the film he made. He easily could have made a weightless horror movie with cheap scares, but he attempted something a little meatier.

A true to life portrayal of H.P. Lovecraft's Cthulu mythology has rarely been seen over the past 40 or so years, especially installment with decent budgets. The few attempts to capture this level of pure insanity have all fallen far far short and this rendition is no saving grace. "Cthulhu" centers around and gay college professor returning home for his mothers funeral, only to discover that his once serene hometown is now the backbone of a malevolent cult, and that he himself, plays a key role in their nefarious machinations. I mention the fact the he is a gay man merely because this is what this movie is about. You heard me, "Cthulhu" is more about a mans struggle between family and his sexual orientation, than about cult worship and the resurrection of ancient deities. Imagine if Lord of the Rings was more about the strong homo-erotic undertones between Sam and Frodo, and less about complete salvation of their entire world. If you can picture that, then you have "Cthulhu"; pretty much all 100 minuets of it I would say. The fact that he is gay does play into the overall storyline, but is overly focused upon, thus resulting in a incoherent story plagued throughout with poorly ad-libbed dialog and plot progression. The story involves several intense moments of emotion and terror, but poor writing and performance by the actors leaves these scenes lifeless and disorienting. One scene literally starts with a discussion about monsters and cult worship, and abruptly ends with argument about a severe lack of jelly on his PB&J. Its OK to feel like you need to read that last sentence again. One could argue that these moments are intentionally puzzling, as to capture the sense of insanity that The Cthulhu Mythos is most know for. Sorry guys not buying it. The direction choices are neither clever nor a foundation of the film fundamentals, what ever they may be, but rather a way of filling space between love scenes and ultimately dumbing down the entire film. However, beautiful imagery and a sparse, but superbly conducted soundtrack make for a stunning viewing experience. Unique and creative camera work establish the drama in more ways than the actors themselves, but a sever lack of music during several key points of the film does little to keep audience's attention during dialog heavy scenes. Anyone interested in a career behind a camera should invest the time into this film for its great camera direction, which though stylish and well refined, is not enough to save this film in its entirety. From the start of the film, audiences are left just far enough out of the story loop to leave you guessing. Guessing what? Perhaps whats going on? Perhaps why are some of the actors incredibly loud all the time, while others can barely be heard? Perhaps why am I still watching this movie? Perhaps the eeriness of devout hordes of ancient demon worshipers is a task that can only be handled by big budget studios and a top list cast. Or, maybe, you just need someone out there who actually wants to make a movie about the Cthulhu Mythos, and not just stick a big "Cthulu was here" sticker on a homosexual love story. If your going to make a movie about Cthulhu, make it about Cthulhu. Life, please don't send me deceitful crap like this again.

This is a terrible adaptation of H.P. Lovecraft's "The Shadow Over Innsmouth." The acting was weak, the direction was weak, and the original content has been butchered. I saw this movie at the Seattle International Film Festival, and that was the worst mistake I made all weekend. If you want to see a film based on "Shadow Over Innsmouth," Stuart Gordon's "Dagon" is mediocre, but it's certainly better than this botched attempt. If you want to see "Call of Cthulhu," the silent film adaptation is great. But this? This film is a waste of time. I suspect the people who are writing 10 out of 10 scores are either friends of the director or shills who worked on the film. There is no earthly way this film is a 10. It stinks like a rotten pile of fish.

Imagine that Stephen-King-wanna-be wrote the gay adaptation of Lovecraft and entrusted directing to David-Lynch-wanna-be. If this sounds to you like an interesting concept, make sure to check out "Cthulhu" from 2007. To me, this accomplishment has left the impression of a paranoid schizophrenic trying to meaningfully screen his hallucinations. On the one hand we have a boring, confusing and seemingly pointless story, mediocre acting and characters with whom I could not connect at any level, and when I saw Tori Spelling in one of the roles I was really on the verge of giving up. And yet, on the other hand, we have an interesting camera work and captivating mystical atmosphere that has kept me to finish it. How to evaluate a movie that I barely made to see through (2/10), which at the same time left a quite strong impression (8/10) ...

5/10