Howard Phillips Lovecraft

[Mr_Vindictive]

Over the years, I've read quite a bit of Lovecraft and August Derleth.  I do agree that some of his climaxes are a complete let down, but it's just as Neville said, it's the journey.  I recently read an article about Lovecraft on forteantimes.com that really gave quite a bit of insight into him.

It seems that the man didn't believe in anything occult, which is quite astounding considering his body of work.  It's amazing that he conjured up such creatures and yet didn't believe in anything occult.  

His work has obviously influenced much of the horror genre over the years.  Hellboy was extremely Lovecraftian, and ID Software's "Quake" is heavily based on Lovecraft lore.  If I'm not mistaken, the final boss of that game was the Shrub-n***arath(sp?).  

Although August Derleth is no Lovecraft, I have found myself getting just as entertained by some of his works as I have Lovecraft.  He seemed to understand Lovecraft's works as well as anyone and made some great additions to the lore.

[Menard]

Lovecraft's agnosticism certainly appears to have been a factor in the essense of his writing. Many writers who believed in the occult often used the fantastical within their stories. While this works within fantasy stories, it has a tendency to become the unbelieveable, and thus, the unfrightening within horror stories. With Lovecraft's tendency toward rationalization within his characters offset by their ever edging closer to the brink of insanity gave a feeling of actuality to his stories. Even when it was the fantastical, there was a feeling that something was happening, real or imagined. Of course Lovecraft's talent as a writer contributed, as his services were used to revise other writers work to make them more publishable. Even those revisions are often considered to be part of the body of his work.

[Dianetics]

My favorite has to be The Hound. I love the way he described the personality and motives of the graverobbers. I think that was the story that showed me just how capable he was at painting a picture using words.

[Vinz]

>Lovecraft's agnosticism certainly appears to have been a factor in the essense of his writing.

hm... i had the occasion to make son searches about the man and his pieces and i often found out that Lovecraft was said to really belive in his own mythology.
lots of people are actually leading cults on it  (based  on so-said ancestral writings and manuscripts) and i dont  really think he was so...agnostic.thats another point of view maybe
peace

[Menard]

Agnosticism is not another term for atheism. Agnosticism does not deny a belief in the supernatural or spirituality, rather that such cannot be proven. An agnostic is often a skeptic who might actually like to believe but cannot bring themselves to that point without evidence.

Agnosticism, as it's name implies, is the opposite, or anti, of gnosis. Gnosticism implies knowledge but makes the presumption that the source of that knowledge is god; hence, the existence of god can be proven through that knowledge, provided that proof in this context has different meanings. Agnosticism does not presume the source, and as such, the knowledge must be proven. Atheism denies the source, and as such, the knowledge can never be proven as it has no basis in fact.

Lovecraft had a belief in the supernatural and probably in an omnipresence but was not a believer in either; there is a distinct difference. This came across in his stories as something which felt believable because he did not use definable sources, such as demons from hell, which would require a belief in such for a reader to feel it was real.

With regard to a belief in early advanced civilizations (Ancient Astronauts, Chariots of the Gods, etc), Lovecraft had written about such beliefs in his letters to others. Although he did not believe in his own mythos, he did not deny that it had it's root in his own beliefs.

Please be aware that my summary of isms of belief is an over-simplification of complex topics.

[peter johnson]

I actually enjoyed both the film and the story of The Dunwich Horror, and like the stories The Rats in The Walls, The Colour Out of Space, Dreams in the Witchhouse, and Rackham's(?) Model -- doing from memory here --
Now that special effects have advanced to some degree, I do think that a serious horror film adaptation of Lovecraft's work in a big budget way can't be too far off.
I mean, look at Lemony Snickett -- Dat be Lovecraft Lite
peter johnson/denny crane

[Menard]

Even with big budgets and great special effects they will still run into a lot of the problems that have happened before: re-writing his stories to the point where they have little if any resemblance to the original; and trying to fit it to a cliched horror movie. Several of Lovecraft's works were narrated second hand, especially CALL OF CTHULHU, trying to do them from a first hand perspective becomes a difficult task. I think that what happens to the wife in THE COLOUR OUT OF SPACE loses some of it's impact if they try to show it rather than use the narrator's perspective (could be wrong). I did rather like the PRIME SUSPECT movies and especially the way they had of making a murder feel that much more horrible by not showing the actual murder, but rather preluding the murder and then having the forensics person go through and describe the events as they transpired. What the viewer could imagine was more horrible than what they could have probably put on the screen and each viewer has a different perspective of what is disturbing to them and can project that into the scene for an individual experience; not too different from reading. If Lovecrafts monsters are defined on screen, that is the only interpretation and fails if it is not found to be frightening. Aside from that though, I think it would be interesting to see Ridley Scott do a take on Lovecraft. Any directors you feel could do a good job?

[JohnL]

>Rackham's(?) Model

Pickman's Model

[Brother Ragnarok]

> Aside from that though, I think it would be interesting to see
> Ridley Scott do a take on Lovecraft. Any directors you feel
> could do a good job?

I second the Ridley Scott motion, that would rock mightily.  That aside, I think Stuart Gordon and John Carpenter have both done excellent jobs, although Carpenter's "In the Mouth of Madness" was inspired by Lovecraft but not based on any particular one of his stories.  David Fincher could do some interesting things with a Lovecraft story.  The extended version of Alien 3 had some vague Lovecrafty undertones to it.

[Menard]

I agree that it would be interesting to see John Carpenter do a Lovecraft story. He has proven that he can make an effective thriller without having to throw cheap scares at the audience. His work on THE THING also shows how well (in my opinion) that he can work with the heavy use of effects and not get lost in those effects. I could imagine other directors trying to do THE THING and focusing too much attention on the effects that the story becomes lost in them. Carpenter never allowed that to happen.

[Mr_Vindictive]

JohnL wrote:

> >Rackham's(?) Model
>
> Pickman's Model



I too was curious about that.  Was beginning to draw up Orson Scott Card/Lovecraft comparisons.  

As for a good director to helm a Lovecraft flick.....I believe as Bro R said that Fincher would be a great person to do so.  Fincher has proven that he has a unique imagination when it comes to film and knows what he's doing.  I can't imagine someone doing any better than him.

The only problem that I see with a "big budget" version of Lovecraft's work is that the creatures wouldn't be scary.  When you read Lovecraft, you create the creatures yourself.  You make them into what would scare you.  

Now think about what Hollywood would do.  Something tells me that a 90ft CGI version of the following, just wouldn't work:

http://www.toyvault.com/cthulhu/plush_cthulhu.html

[Andrew]

I definitely agree that one of Lovecraft's skills was getting his readers' imagination going, creating a hazy image of the unfathomable horrors awaiting those unfortunate enough to be the main characters of his stories.  Making that into a movie takes a good bit of restraint and finesse.

One of the better Lovecraft-type films I have seen was given to me by Dr. Freex.  That would be "The Resurrected."  The movie has atmosphere, hints at dark things, and then does a not too bad job of delivering when forced to show something.   The last point is important, because it is obvious the film makers were on a budget.

I think that the remake of "House on Haunted Hill" could have used some careful fostering of the audience's imagination.  The killer Rorschach Test did not do it for me.

[Mr_Vindictive]

Andrew,

I just did an IMDB on The Resurrected, and it certainly looks worth checking out.  A film directed by Dan O'Bannon based on Lovecraft?  I'm there!

[Andrew]

Skaboi wrote:
 
> I just did an IMDB on The Resurrected, and it certainly looks
> worth checking out.  A film directed by Dan O'Bannon based on
> Lovecraft?  I'm there!

You will not be sorry.  I let it sit on my shelf for some time before watching the film and then kept wondering why I always make the wrong decision.  (Putting off seeing it - I was glad that I watched it.)

And, along the lines of "loose Lovecraft based" movies - I have had this terrible urge to watch "Cast a Deadly Spell" again.  No chance of that until I get back, but this reminds me of having an itch under a cast.

Both "The Resurrected" and "Cast a Deadly Spell" deserve DVD releases and soon.

[Neville]

I'ts funny that some of you mention "The Thing" as proof than Carpenter can do Lovecraft. Some of the reviews I've read mention that one of Carpenter's inspiration for the film could have come from "At the mountains of madness". If you remember the story well, the narrator and other people found at the beginning an arctic camp destroyed by resurrected creatures. Little is told of what could have happened, but the situation is quite similar as the one described by both "thing" films, even if they're based on a different novel.

Other Carpenter films have evident Lovecraftian undertones, like "Prince of Darkness".