Must See Movie...

An Exercise In Nonsense

Although it has its amusing moments, in eneral the plot does not convince.

Simple and well acted, it has tension enough to knot the stomach.

"The Resurrected," based on Lovecraft's story "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward," focuses on a Rhode Island P.I. who one day is contacted by the wife of a chemist. She expresses concern over her husband's erratic behavior, which has led to him isolating himself at his remote family estate, where he has been suspected by locals of grave robbing and performing disturbing experiments with human body parts. What they discover is all that and more.Given that I am not familiar with H.P. Lovecraft, nor am I familiar with director Dan O'Bannon's work or other Lovecraft adaptations, I feel I have a fairly objective opinion to offer here. It seems that the user reviews largely reflect the reactions of (mostly) big Lovecraft fans. From my knowledge, "The Resurrected" essentially takes the premise of the Lovecraft story and situates it in the twentieth century, and more or less is consistent with the story's framework.The film's beginning is rather dull, and I wondered what I was getting myself into; a drab, single-take shot of Jane Sibbett and John Terry in a very nineties-decor office gave the affect of a cheap television movie—and in all honesty, much of the film does in fact feel like that, from the unimaginative cinematography to the poor editing and sometimes awkward performances. That said, if you stick with the film, it does get progressively interesting and progressively weird.The final thirty minutes are what really cemented my enjoyment of the film, where it becomes a sort of "Indiana Jones"-esque horror film, and the filmmakers seem to step up their game in terms of the camera-work and atmosphere. The special effects are in some respects dated, but in others look passable by today's standards. The acting, as I said, is a bit of a hodgepodge, with Chris Sarandon overacting at times; John Terry is only mildly likable as the lead detective, and Jane Sibbett ranges from bad to quite good. Robert Romanus has a memorable part as the P.I.'s chain-smoking sidekick. The final showdown is well-handled, though the voiceovers from Terry that conclude the film (and which are present throughout) leave a bit to be desired.Overall, "The Resurrected" is a pretty decent horror flick. It definitely has the look and feel of a low-budget television movie at times, but it also manages to be atmospheric and quite a lot of fun once its wheels get turning. If the first twenty minutes of early-nineties aesthetic overload is too much, I'd urge you stick with it, as it really starts to demand one's attention about a quarter of the way through. It is not a flawless film by any stretch of the imagination, but it is commendably dark and compelling. 6/10.

Simply put, an atmospheric horror masterpiece worthy of having been adapted from short epistolary novel (51,500 words) by H. P. Lovecraft in 1927.The novel, set in 1918, describes how Charles Dexter Ward becomes obsessed with his distant ancestor, Joseph Curwen, an alleged wizard with unsavory habits. Ward physically resembles Curwen, and attempts to duplicate his ancestor's Qabalistic and alchemical feats. He eventually uses this knowledge to physically resurrect Curwen. Ward's doctor, Marinus Bicknell Willett, investigates Ward's activities and is horrified by what he finds.This film closely follows the novel. Dan O Bannon who wrote the screenplay for Alien, and was co-screen writer for Total Recall 1990, Invaders from Mars 1986, Lifeforce 1985, directs this film superbly.The most well known film personality is Christopher Sarandon, whereas the most known TV personality is John Terry. Robert Romanus is also a well known B-film actor who has starred in films like Fast Times at Ridgemont High(1982), Bad Medicine(1985) and Pulse(1988). Plot: Claire Ward (Sibbett) hires private investigator John March (Terry) to look into the increasingly bizarre activities of her husband Charles Dexter Ward (Sarandon). Ward has become obsessed with the occult practices of raising the dead once practiced by his ancestor Joseph Curwen (Sarandon in a dual role). As the investigators dig deeper, they discover that Ward is performing a series of grisly experiments in an effort to actually resurrect his long-dead relative Curwen. Watch the film to find out what happens next...Verdict: 10/10. Guaranteed to satisfy seasoned horror film enthusiasts. Beautiful background sound, photography and special effects. The director succeeds in creating an atmosphere of Lovecraftian horror. It becomes so apparent when I was watching the film, that had this film been released before Clive Barker's Hellraiser, many people would have given the acclaim that this film truly deserves. Suffice to say it is the best film made by the late Dan O Bannon(September 30, 1946 – December 17, 2009). Movies based on H.P. Lovecraft: Re-Animator 1985, H.P. Lovecraft's: Necronomicon 1994, From Beyond 1986, Dagon 2001, Castle Freak 1995, The Call of Cthulhu 2005, The Unnamable 1988, The Unnamable II: The Statement of Randolph Carter 1993. There are many more films, I can't write down all of them. Just type: Films based one H.P. Lovecraft in Google search, and you will get a list.Thanks for reading, live long and prosper.

When Stuart Gordon became successful with his cheeky versions of H.P. Lovecraft stories I guess other studios decided to attempt doing a movie or two based on the guys work. This is one of them. It's actually pretty good and the best adaptation I know of although I've never read the story (I've read quite a few of his other stories though and their thematic signatures are unmistakable). I just think the movie's good and since his writing style is a lot like it, moody, murky, haunted by ambivalent facts and unholy histories that bleed horrors into the future, it's probably as accurate as your going to get without disfiguring it's essence and losing it's subtext by modernizing it. Actually, it does take place in modern times but accurate to the author's themes reality, the present, is just a superficial veil for the depthless ancient horrors lurking underneath that everyone's existence is built upon. This one takes itself really seriously and deserves credit not only for doing so but for the most part succeeding. And yes, it does have big ugly disgusting deformed monsters filmed in a way to suggest more than a fleeting glimpse of them would drive a person mad while inquisitive characters stumble around in the darkness of subterranean lairs, and of their own pasts, with unanswered questions and inadequate mobile lighting. The basic narrative starts as a detective story and then spreads into a supernatural conspiracy spanning time with the reincarnated version of the main character investigating what might be his own madness. And that's about all I can remember. I remember it was well written too but hey it's not only H.P. but Mr. O'bannon as well doing the honors. Unfortunately the douche bags (the production company?) who released and distributed this movie have not a made a DVD version of it (or any other format of it that I am aware of) readily available in years, possibly decades, so me telling you how good it is is probably a waste of time since the chances of seeing it are about as good as not seeing stupid capitalistic crap propaganda like "Batman Begins" collecting dust in a bargain bin for $2 in some department store dictatorship. Still there is the hope. Anyone with a copy heard of Youtube?

i didn't really like this movie.i found it boring for two thirds.not a lot happens.and then,once things start happening,the movie gets pretty sickening at times.i don't mean that in the "Saw"series kind of way.this is much different than that.to me,it was just too much.you'll have to watch it to see what i mean.i also thought the movie was kind of confusing at times,but that may be just me.i thought the acting was good,especially by Chris Sarandon as the main character/villain in the movie.i don't think the movie was badly done.the makeup effects,i thought were pretty good,just too disgusting.if you have a lot of patience too get through the slow parts,and you have a really strong stomach,you might like this movie.or maybe you won't find it slow or even very disgusting and you might still like it.i can watch most slasher/horror movies with no problem.but like i said this movie is a whole new category of disgust.by the way,i haven't mentioned anything about the general plot line but you can probably use your imagination,based on the title.although i didn't like this movie on the whole,i will give the filmmakers credit for making a movie that comes very close to exceeding my disgust threshold,something i thought would never happen.as a result,i give "The Resurrected" 5/10