Tag Archives: books

Saturday is Horror Day #222 – We Have Always Lived in the Castle

Leave a reply

Reviewer: Julie Lynn Hayes

We Have Always Lived in the Castle

Sisters Merricat (Taissa Farmiga) and Constance (Alexandra Daddario) Blackwood, along with their disabled Uncle Julian (Crispin Glover) live in isolation at the family home, Blackwood House. Six years have passed since a family tragedy occurred, one involving arsenic. But the villagers at nearby Shirleyville have long memories. When Merricat reluctantly makes her weekly excursion to get supplies, they torment her terribly. As for Constance, she finds herself of leaving the grounds at all.

Merritcat safeguards the house and its inhabitants as well as she can through her witchy spells and the

objects that she buries. But when she is forced to go into the village unexpectedly one day, she doesn’t have the chance to set any spells, and the worst happens in the form of their cousin Charles (Sebastian Stan) who shows up without warning and proceeds to turn their lives upside down. Merricat hates him, but Constance, who is too trusting and innocent for her own good, falls under his spell. Neither realize that he is there to get the money that is kept in the huge safe in the house. When he takes over the household and becomes very strict with Merricat, she realizes something must be done.

We Have Always Lived in the Castle is based on the novel by Shirley Jackson, who also gave us The Lottery and The Haunting of Hill House. This story is similar to the others in that it focus on the psychological rather than physical horror. Referring to Blackwood House as a castle draws an image of splendid isolation, of withdrawl from reality as reflected in the main characters’ withdrawal from even the society of the nearby village. Merricat’s weekly treks into Shirleyville are torturous for her, but she bears them for her sister’s sake, who is even more crippled than she is. It’s not until the arrival of their cousin Charles that the torture continues for Merricat at home as well. Desperate times call for desperate measures.

Taissa Farmiga does a splendid job as Merricat. You may know her older sister Vera, from such films as The Conjuring and The Boy in the Striped Pyjama. I almost didn’t recotnize Crispin Glover as the uncle. Paula Malcolmson also appears – you might remember her from Deadwood and Ray Donovan. And of course my favorite – Sebastian Stan – who was the Hatter in Once Upon a Time, and is probably best known for playing Bucky Barnes in the Marvel film series. That being said, despite the stellar cast, this is definitely a slow burn, and I might have to watch it again to appreciate it better. It’s not your typical horror film – no jump scares, no dismembered corpses, nothing of the kind. Pure psychological horror. Reviews seem to be mixed. It was well done, it just didn’t always keep my attention. However, it is a short film, and I don’t consider it a waste of time. Decide for yourself. I’ll give this film 3.5 Stars.

Saturday is Horror Day #215 – The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

Leave a reply

Reviewer: 

The Strange Case of Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde

Mild-manner Dr. Henry Jekyll (Jack Palance) has a theory regarding the dual nature of man – he posits that it is possible to separate men into good and evil, thus allowing their good nature to overcome and the evil to be quelled. But his ideas are met with scorn by the medical community, and the other doctors tell him that even if he concocts the potion he is speaking of, there will be no way of testing it ethically. So Jekyll returns to is lab undaunted, determined to use the potion on himself. So he takes the potion….

The next morning, he returns to the place where he went the night before, the Windmill Music Hall, and

learns of his actions the night before as his alter ego, Edward Hyde. Seems like Hyde had a good time, drinking and carousing, and particularly spending time with one of the hostesses, Gwen Thomas (Billie Whitelaw). Jekyll repeats the experiment in the following days, and Hyde, who apparently is quite the hedonist, returns to the Windmill and Gwen. But more and more, Hyde’s violent urges come out, and he is vicious and relentless.

Jekyll’s best friend, Devlin (Denholm Elliott) is concerned about Henry, as are his servants, including  his faithful manservant Poole (Gillie Fenwick). When Hyde leans toward ending the experiment, he discovers to his horror that Hyde doesn’t need the potion to come out  to play, and it requires more of the anti-potion to put that particular genie back in the bottle. With Hyde becoming more and more out of control, Jekyll doesn’t know what to do….

This version of Jekyll and Hyde is actually a TV movie from 1968. I remember watching it as a child (I would have been about 11 then), and rewatching it as I grew older. I was always drawn to Jack Palance’s Hyde. From what I read, the role was originally given to Jason Robards, but due to complications, ended up with Palance, and the make-up was changed, the final result meant to resemble a satyr. As a teenager, I remember being quite taken with Mr. Hyde. I wondered if I would feel the same as a fully grown adult – I did. Palance is mesmerizing in the dual roles, between the mild-manner Dr. Jekyll and the sensual hedonistic Hyde. The story is undoubtedly a familiar one to most audiences, based on the story by Robert Louis Stevenson.  I haven’t seen them all, but I always liked this one a great deal.

TV movies and shows were filmed differently, I can’t explain quite why that is, not being an expert, but it’s quite visible, and actually lends a Gothic feel to the movie. From the moment I began to watch, I got strong Dark Shadows vibes – and no wonder, as Dan Curtis of Dark Shadows fame was a producer. Also, if you listen during one of the scenes and you think you recognize an eerie little tune that is being played, you probably do as that song went on to become Quentin’s Song from Dark Shadows.

I was concerned that I might not like the film as much as I did years ago, that it wouldn’t stand up to the test of time. I am happy to report I did and it did, and if you are a fan of Jekyll and Hyde, or Jack Palance, I recommend you add this to your viewing repertoire. I give this film 4 Stars.

Saturday is Horror Day #161 – Victor Frankenstein

Leave a reply

Reviewer: Julie Lynn Hayes

Victor Frankenstein

A young hunchbacked man with no name (Daniel Radcliffe) works for a circus in Victorian England. Although he is abused, and treated like he’s stupid, he secretly studies the subject that interests him – life – in the form of medical books. And he crushes on one of the ladies in the circus, Lorelei (Jessica Brown Findlay). An accident brings him face to face with a medical student in the audience, Victor Frankenstein (James McAvoy), who recognizes the young man’s brilliance and steals him away from the circus. He takes him to his new home, names him Igor, and proceeds to involve him in his experiments, which involve the creation of life itself. Unfortunately for them, a determined policeman, Inspector Turpin (Andrew Scott) is on the case of the missing hunchback and will stop at nothing to find him.

This is the familiar tale of Frankenstein as seen through the eyes of Igor (who, of course, is a completely

original character not from the book). I think it can be considered an origin story as such.  The obsessed Frankenstein manages to find a like-minded patron at the college he somewhat attends, one who is fortunately very wealthy and willing to fund Victor’s research. Having been transformed from being a hunchback, Igor is very grateful for Victor and his friendship. But he begins to wonder about the ethics of what they are doing. Also, who is this Igor he is named after, and where is he?

The film is very creative in sets and design, the writing and directing are good, but, at least for me, it didn’t quite make it. Something fell just a little flat, although I’m not sure I can put my finger on what. Perhaps it didn’t quite make me believe, didn’t ground me in its reality. While Daniel Radcliffe is good as Igor, his transition from supposed circus idiot to brilliant biologist was a little too quick to be really believable. McAvoy’s Frankenstein is a little two-dimensional, and reveals nothing of the person beneath until we get to the story of his brother at the end, and that’s just too little too late. Andrew Scott’s Inspector Turpin (sorry, I keep wanting to say Moriarity lol) is sufficiently obsessed and off his rocker  as well as being a religious fanatic who thinks they are doing the work of Satan, but he doesn’t ring quite true to me.

At what I believe to be the heart of this story is the question of science vs morality – just because we know how to do it, should we? Or are there things that are better left alone, such as the creation of life? Of course, there is no definitive answer as this is the lead-in to the Frankenstein story itself, which explores that theme as well.  Was it worth watching. Yes, but it wasn’t quite the film I had hoped for, despite a great cast. I’ll give this film 3.5 Stars.