 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
|
|
The Haunting - Theaters
1999 Version:
Writer: David Self, from a novel by Shirley JacksonDirector: Jan De Bont Producer: Characters: Dr. David Marrow - Liam Neeson Theo - Catherine Zeta-Jones Luke Sannerson - Owen Wilson Lili Taylor - Eleanor Vance 1963 Version: Writer: Nelson Gidding, from a novel by Shirley Jackson Director: Robert Wise Producer: Denis Johnson, Robert Wise Characters: Eleanor Lance - Julie Harris Theodora - Claire Bloom Dr. John Markway - Richard Johnson Luke Sanderson - Russ Tamblyn Studio: Dreamworks Review: In 1963, audiences were enthralled with a new film from director Robert Wise, The Haunting. In 1999, director Jan De Bont (Speed, Twister, Speed II) decided to take a stab at a remake. Watching the original 1963 version of The Haunting, it’s pretty easy to see the appeal of a remake. The film is incredibly spooky but is also incredibly dated. Given the subtleties of the film, and the imaginative use of sets and sound effects, remaking the film with today’s technology would seem to be a given. Follow the same formula, tweak the pacing a bit, build lavish sets and hire a great sound designer to scare the hell out of audiences. Unfortunately, Dreamworks decided to go with De Bont as the director. De Bont is a pretty good action director. Speed was a pretty original action film at a time when the action genre was flagging, Twister was a great special effects showpiece even if the stories and characters were weak, and Speed II – well, OK, there’s no excuse for that one. Unfortunately, De Bont is not a horror film director. Directing a good horror film requires patience, subtlety and a low-key approach. All things that are the antithesis of a loud, obnoxious action film. Had a true horror film director like Wes Craven been given this film, it could have been one of the most frightening films of our time. Craven (or maybe John Carpenter) would’ve been able to take the original film’s spookiness and update it for today’s faster-paced, more jaded audiences. Quite frankly, a 1999 audience doesn’t scare as easily as a 1963 audience, and it requires a light touch to scare people. De Bont’s heavy-handed approach to directing, which works well with a good action script, doesn’t work at all in a horror film. It’s also ironic that a director like Craven also would’ve brought the movie in significantly cheaper than the reported $80 million De Bont spent on his film – after all, the money spent on CGI would’ve been saved. De Bont did get the movie right for about the first hour. The film is genuinely creepy, the sets are amazing in their intricacy and spookiness and very little is actually shown, but instead everything is heard. The only effects through the beginning of the movie are aural, with a few light CG touches in the way of cold breath. In terms of spookiness, my only complaints would be some poorly placed and really bad attempts at humor. They fail miserably, and should’ve been cut. Sadly, after the first hour, the movie begins to fall apart and eventually it all culminates in a big CG battle with a hopelessly tacked-on ending. The end result is that the movie starts out creepily enough, but it can’t sustain the pace. Like a runaway train, it keeps accelerating until it eventually slams into something and explodes. Sadly, even the CGI work isn’t entertaining. It’s incredibly distracting, and such obvious CGI work that it simply pulls the viewer out of the movie. Instead of thinking “wow, this is scary!”, the audience goes “wow, that cost a lot of money!”. Not exactly the reaction the filmmakers should be after. The sound work, on the other hand, is absolutely amazing, and deserving of the Oscar this year. The filmmakers wisely used the new Dolby Digital EX sound system, and used it to great effect (if you’re in a properly equipped theatre). Oh, and as a side note, I’ve ready several reviews which state that The Haunting is the second film to use Dolby Digital EX (after The Phantom Menace). Absolutely incorrect. It’s the third. Austin Powers: The Spy Who Shagged Me used it as well (just not to very good effect). The script didn’t help a lot, either. The original 1963 version of The Haunting placed our characters in Hill House strictly for the purpose of observing any paranormal activity. The new version has the characters tricked into being there under the guise of a sleep study. I personally found the gathering of subjects to observe paranormal activity much more plausible, and it doesn’t require as much exposition as the “improved” premise. Also, in the original film there’s an incredible amount of underlying sexual tension, which is never relieved. It makes for some amazingly subtle (and surprising risque, given the time frame) references to lesbianism, and sexuality in general. The original version of The Haunting is a textbook example of how to use symbolism to express those things that the censors won’t allow an audience to see. After all, we all know anyone dumb enough to be a censor is not going to be smart enough to know what to really censor. I’ve read a lot of reviews that criticize the performances of the actors involved. In this case, I didn’t actually have any problem with the acting. I found the principal actors were more than adequate at slipping into their respective roles, it’s just that their roles were underwritten. In an attempt to flesh out the story, the screenwriters actually ended up muddying the core of the story. In the original film, the premise was simple and straightforward. The house is evil - it doesn’t want visitors. In this new version, the house somehow calls long lost relatives of the original owner of the house. Bah…it’s scarier when the house doesn’t have a motive. Lili Taylor does an absolutely admirable job of filling Julie Harris’ shoes in the film. It’s almost as if Taylor is playing Julie playing Eleanor. Zeta-Jones is very vampy as bi-sexual artist Theodora, and Owen Wilson seems to be having a very good time playing Luke Sannerson (whose character is much more fleshed out in the original version of the film, not to mention more plausible). If you’re looking for a genuine scare, I don’t think I can honestly recommend either version of The Haunting. The original is just too dated to scare (it’s more laughable than anything else these days), the new one is an absolute wasteland of failed scares. If you must see a version of The Haunting (i.e., you read the book and loved it), then the original is the way to go. My personal opinion, though, would be to wait until October 28th when The House on Haunted Hill comes out. In the meantime, for a genuinely scary film experience you may want to check out The Sixth Sense with Bruce Willis. I’ve heard it’s as spooky as they come. Ken Pierce Dvdken@home.com Contributing Editor, www.dvdfuture.com |
copyright ®1999