Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

/ danielwalterc / Leave a comment

Hello all!  Let this post be an intro to a new section at my blog entitled “Lists”.  In the Lists section, you can see all the groovy lists I made

 Back in 2020, day by day throughout October, I posted a horror book/movie comparison. Each day you had to come back to see what book/movie I was comparing. Now, four years later, you can see them all in one place!

 

 

October 1 – Dracula – Book Vs. Film -Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

I am comparing Bram Stoker’s epic novel to my favorite Dracula movie, which is Tod Browning’s 1931 Universal classic starring the great Bela Lugosi.  I saw Hammer Film’s Productions 1958 Dracula film starring Christopher Lee (it was good), sort of remembered enjoying the Francis Ford Coppola’s 1992 version of the infamous Count, and yes, I appreciated the great silent classic Nosferatu. In the end, it’s the Bela classic that does it for me!  However, the novel “does me more!”

The adventurous carriage ride through the Transylvania forests, the description of the breathtaking views of Dracula’s Castle even from far away. The imprisonment of one Jonathan Harker inside this castle. And of course, the initial account of the ancient and mysterious Count Dracula as he dwells in his domain; all this was captivating on a level that none of the films could reach.

Winner: BOOK

October 2 – Frankenstein – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

Fans of classic literature will hate me for this. Inspiring feminists will want be dead. How can I go with the movie on this one? Mary Shelley’s novel was so original and vastly different from film. All that lightning and laboratory stuff – that was sooo Hollywood!  Maybe so.  In the book, the details concerning the creation of the monster is purposely kept vague, as is the monsters’ appearance, allowing the imagination of the reader to get some exercise. And, I appreciate this. Shelley’s novel is a great piece, no doubt about it.

It’s James Whale’s fault. He be the director of the 1931 Frankenstein film and if he wasn’t such a damn good filmmaker then Shelley would win. I have come to appreciate his style; his use of shadows, his props and settings that bring an eerie life to his films. All this and more helped make the film a masterpiece.

Winner: MOVIE

October 3 – The Invisible Man – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

I first read this H.G. Well’s classic novella in the 8th grade as a reading assignment. I thought it was sort of good, you know, the stuff of homework that wasn’t so bad.  I was in my twenties the first time I paid attention to James Whale’s 1933 film The Invisible Man and I thought it was the stupidest thing ever! Years later, I watched it again and I loved it. It isn’t stupid, it’s just that some parts are intentionally funny.

Likewise, I revisited the novella in my later years. I enjoyed it more than I did as a pubescent young lad, but still, it doesn’t compare to the enjoyment of watching a pair of pants skip down the road while a disembodied voice sings “Here we go gathering nuts in May!”

I have not yet seen the highly recommended recent Invisible Man film.  I am looking forward to watching that one soon.

Winner: MOVIE

October 4 – The Island of Dr. Moreau – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

H G Wells makes this list again with his novella The Island of Dr. Moreau.  The doc in question is creating beast-folk on his island via vivisection surgery on animals.  There were several film adaptions of this work, including a 1996 film starring Marlon Brando and Val Kilmer. But the only film version of this book that I saw is Island of Lost Souls from 1932. It is this old black and white film for which I draw the comparison.

I don’t know, the movie was okay. Nothing extraordinary.  But in the book, there are things that stand out, like the inhuman shrieks of pain that are heard throughout the jungle whenever the mean ol’ doc is doing surgery on his subject. There are many more interesting beast-folk in the book than the movie, so the book wins.

Winner: BOOK

October 5 – The Legend of Sleepy Hallow – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

It was sold out. The movie theater, I mean, when I first attempted to see Tim Burton’s Sleepy Hallow. I was so disappointed. I ended up waiting until it came out on video to finally watch it. And once I did, I was disappointed again. Sure the graphics were great; the headless ghost on his black mare rising out of the tree – creepy. Ah but the premise of the story sucked. Ichabod Crane, an investigator played by the handsome Johnny Depp?  No Mr. Burton, Ichabod is a homely looking school teacher.

What’s missing is the charm of the original. The picturesque description of Sleepy Hollow that Washington Irving conveys. Irving captures the spirit of autumn and sets it loose on the page.

I guess there are several film versions. I remember a made-for-TV film and that was better than the Burton bomb. As was a cartoon. But none of these compare to the original tale.

Winner: BOOK

October 6 – The Phantom of the Opera – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

Let’s see, I think I’ve seen two Phantom of the Opera films. I saw the silent film of the 1920s starring Lon Chaney Sr. and then I watched a version by Hammer Film Productions. The silent film is the better of the two.

Oh but the book! By Gaston Leroux! I read a large chunk of this book while I was in Paris, where I visited the famous Palais Garnier – The Paris Opera House, which of course is the site of the events in the story. To read the words and then take in the sites. Here is a quote from me from an article I wrote:

“There’s the grand staircase of white marble with breathtaking views over the balcony balustrade.  There are towering pillars with ornate carvings. There are corridors that seem to stretch beyond infinity. Life-like statues haunt their corners.  Thankfully, there is an author who succeeds in matching these wonders of the eye with the marvels of storytelling.  His name is Gaston Leroux.  His novel – The Phantom of the Opera.” 

Horrornovelreviews.com

I was so intrigued by the story of “the Opera ghost” that haunts the singers and stagehands, only to learn he is not a ghost at all. He’s a disfigured musician who lives in the sewers of Paris and rises up once in a while inside the Opera House he once performed at.  None of the films were able to capture the essence of the story as well as the book in my opinion.

Winner: BOOK

October 7 – The Turn of the Screw – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

The Henry James classic ghost story, analyzed by many over the years, praised by nearly all. Including me. Do I dare put a film of this on equal ground? I dare. And the film, from 1961, is The Innocents.

It’s the story of a Governess for two children. She is convinced that ghosts are haunting poor little Miles and Flora. Is this really happening or is all in her mind, making her an unreliable narrator?

James, of course, deserves praise for his work. But his writing is a little challenging. The film tells the same story and it flows perfectly. So – a tie. For a more detailed comparison, read my review: Turn of the Screw/The Innocents

Also be on the lookout for the Netflix series The Haunting of Bly Manor, which is inspired by The Turn of the Screw. It premieres soon. In days.

Winner: IT’S A TIE

October 8 – The Haunting of Hill House – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

Shirley Jackson uses her words brilliantly, poetically, to create this terrifyingly, to create this terrifying story that set the standards for a good haunted house read. Likewise, Robert Wise brings the same terror to life on the screen. Impressive visuals, great camera work, and who can forget the phantom pounding. BOOM BOOM BOOM!

So once again, I refuse to declare which is the better. And remember, the film I am referring to is the 1963 movie titled The Haunting. Forget that terrible remake in 1999. Forget it I tell you! For a more detailed comparison, read this review – The Haunting of Hill House/The Haunting

Also, the Haunting of Hill House inspired Season 1 of Michael Flannagan’s Netflix series which is also titled The Haunting of Hill House. Season 2 is this year and it is The Haunting of Bly Manor, which I told you about in the last entry on this list.

Winner: IT’S A TIE

October 9 – The Fall of the House of Usher – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

A long-standing mansion torn apart by the widening of a central fissure.  A family of long-linage down to two sole surviving members, pitted against each other in a death match.  And finally, the splitting of the psyche; madness and mental decay. All this one short story from Edgar Allen Poe. Themes of totality, dualism and a whole bunch of other “isms” for literary analysts to study for years and years. This has been a favorite of mine since I was a young reader. I’ve seen one or two movie portrayal over the years. Just the other night I rented what I hoped would be the best cinematic portrayal of this extensively themed story.  It was. Directed by Roger Corman , screenplay by Richard Matheson (this guy will appear on this list two more times) and starring  Vincent Price, how could it go wrong? It didn’t.  Unlike the story’s pitting of one thing against the other, I will not but the two mediums at odds in this case.

Winner: IT’S A TIE

October 10 – Hell House (The Legend of Hell House) – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

I saw the 1973 film  The Legend of Hell House before I read Richard Matheson’s book. I liked it. It was spooky fun, a good haunted house film. But some of the finer plot points just didn’t make sense to me. It took the book (“took the book”, that rhymes!) to fill in the gaps. When a medium doesn’t do the job of making me understand the story, it obviously must take second place to the medium that does. And so, the book is better.

I enjoyed the film better after reading the book (watched it a second time), but that is only a testament to the novel’s superiority.

For a more in-depth comparison, read my review of the two (“review of the two”, rhymes again!) Hell House/Legend of Hell House

Winner: BOOK

October 11- Rosemary’s Baby – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

For years I didn’t know that there even was a book. I thought Roman Polanski’s 1968 film was the one-stop-shop for this tale of a woman who is about to give birth to Satan’s baby. Little did I know that the book came first. Little did I know that Iva Levin’s Rosemary’s Baby is one of three books credited for spawning the horror paperback novel trend (Along with William Peter Blatty’s novel The Exorcist and Thomas Tryon’s book The Other).

The book is more mysterious and suspenseful than the film. However, the film’s cast is excellent. Ruth Gordon is great. And who can forget that other old lady shouting “Hail Satan!” 

I suppose if someone put a gun to my head and demanded that I state a preference, I might then go with the book. But there is no gun to my head, so I don’t have to do that.

Winner: IT’S A TIE

October 12 – The Exorcist – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

Last year I read William Peter Blatty’s novel for the first time. As one might expect, there is more detail in the book than the movie.  I liked seeing things through the priest/psychiatrist’s perspective. He’s a much more interesting character in the book. What’s interesting is that even up to the very end, the priest allows for a perspective that maybe, just maybe, Satan has nothing to do with the girl’s psychosis and her condition is triggered by some kind of mental illness. Mind you, it is an illness that grants supernatural powers; super strength, telekinesis, etc., but an illness never the less.

The book is great. And yet, here I go favoring the film. It’s hard to compete with the visual of Regan’s head spinning around. Her monstrous face, her demonic voice! The fact that it freaked-out audiences when this film premiered.

But the book is good. No, It’s great. It’s just, well, I like the movie. And that is all.

Winner: FILM

October 13 – Ghost Story – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

One- two.  (Um, what?)  That’s how I introduced myself to both the book and movie, one right after another, hence “one-two”. Only it wasn’t quite like that, cause the book, which I took in  first, is a behemoth thing, so it was more like onnnnnnnnnnnnnnnne then two.  A lot is happening in Peter Straub’s meaty novel. Perhaps the title should be called “Ghost Stories” since there are several ghostly happenings varying across time and place.  The film sticks to one of these stories – a female ghost returns to haunt four old men who harmed her when they were young. It was wise of the film to stick with one perspective. Film is a restrictive medium when compared to a story that is meant for a long novel, so I commend the filmmakers for not biting off more than they can chew. The plot of the book strayed several times, and because of this, I initially favored the film over the movie. You can read all about it here Ghost Story

However, as time marches on, I find myself remembering less and less of the film.  But there is something about the book that is sticking with me. I’m not sure what it is. It’s sort of a vague feeling, as if part of me is still inside this snowy town when most of the hauntings take place. For this reason, I am doing a 180. I prefer the book.

Winner: BOOK

October 14 – Burnt Offerings – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

I first saw this film on television as a kid. A doomed family rents a summer home which turns out to be a vampire house – the house itself feeds off of the life force of its occupants and regenerates as its victims die.  There is this phantom hearse driver with dark sunglasses and a creepy smile that shows up whenever someone is about to die. Scary stuff.

Great movie. It is based Robert Morasco’s book by the same name. The book is better. It’s a rather obscure work and yet it is very influential. Like its predecessor The Haunting of Hill House, Burnt Offerings continues the trend of “a house as an entity” theme. The book gives a very detailed account of the house’s slow-building but inevitable power it has on the occupants. The film does its best with this but the book does it better.

Winner: BOOK

October 15 – The Amityville Horror – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

Some say this is a true story. Others say it’s a bunch of bullshit. I favor the second perspective but never mind, it’s an entertaining story.

The tragedy that sparked the story is true – A young man kills his family in the Amityville house. Included in the slaying are his parents and siblings. Years later the Lutz family purchases the house. They said it was haunted, not by your average house ghost but by demonic forces. The book, written in a diary format, covers more ground than the movie does. There are so many more paranormal occurrences in the book and I wonder why the film omitted so much. Anyway, the book is better and if you want to read a more detailed comparison between the book and movie, read this article here: Amityville Horror Book and Movie

Winner: BOOK

October 16 – Jaws – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

Believe it or not, I was never a super-duper, die-hard fan of this great white shark. I saw Jaws 2 and Jaws 3D, both in the theater, long before I watched the original on TV and then via streaming.  Sure, it’s entertaining. I like that the music, the “dun-dun, dun-dun, dun-dun, dun-dun” that seems to summons the shark, which throughout most of the film displays only its fin, piercing out of the ocean as its hidden body makes its way towards its victim.

The book, which came first, was a best seller. Many people forget that the book was as popular and noteworthy as the film. Some have read it and dismissed it. Too much concentration of the sheriff and his marriage, town politics, person-to-person rivalry, they say. But it is for these reasons that I prefer the book. Also, the book offers theories as to the shark’s origins that aren’t found in the film. So the book wins.

Winner: BOOK

October 17 – The Sentinel – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

I’m guessing that many have not heard of this book or its corresponding film. It’s definitely a slice of horror that remains under the radar. It’s an interesting story. An apartment complex in New York serves as a portal to Hell. A sentinel must guard the gates at all time. Who is this sentinel and how does one get this job? Ah but that is the key to the story.

The cast of this 1977 film is great. It features Burgess Meredith, Ava Gardner, John Carradine, Sylvia Miles, Beverly D’Angelo, Eli Wallach, and bit roles for such unknowns as Jeff Goldblum and Christopher Walken. This is only the supporting cast and they save the film because the main two actors kind of suck if you ask me. Some of the plot is convoluted and will only make sense if one refers to the book.

Jeffery Konitz’s novel The Sentinel is far superior to the film. Thick in plot and mystery, it puts forth a suspenseful page-turner. The movie just can’t compete. For a detailed comparison, read my article The Sentinel Book and Movie

Winner: BOOK

October 18 – Interview With the Vampire – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

It’s the first book in author Anne Rice’s vampire series, and it’s not my favorite. I’m not sure how many vampire books Rice has written, by I have read many. It’s a good book, don’t get me wrong, with the focus being on a Louis, a melancholy vampire from the 17th century, and his counterpart, the little girl vampire named Claudia who is damned to a child’s body for decades. It’s just that Rice’s vampire tales that focus on The Vampire Lestat are more interesting. 

The movie has an excellent cast. Brad Pitt, Tom Cruise and a young Kristen Dunst are surprisingly impressive in their roles. So when all is said and done, I consider this contest to be a draw,

Winner: IT’S A TIE

October 19 – The Queen of the Damned – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

This is the third book in author Anne Rice’s vampire series. It’s one of my favorites. She introduces many interesting vampire characters in this book. And, she traces the origin of vampires to its source – The Queen of the Damned.

The movie combines plot points from Rice’s second vampire book (The Vampire Lestat) and the third. It does so poorly, brushing hectically though important plot points. It’s not a good movie. So the book wins.

Winner: BOOK

October 20 – Beloved – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

If I ever make a list of my top ten favorite novels, Beloved would be on it.  I’m not alone in my praise. It is, after all, a Pulitzer prize winning novel, written by the renowned Toni Morrison, may she rest in peace.  It’s a story of a haunting, with some of the stuff of the supernatural on the surface. Deep down, the true horror is slavery and its aftermath.

How is the movie? It received mixed reviews, much to Oprah Winfrey’s disappointment. She is the lead character alongside Danny Glover. I thought they did well.  For me the movie is good, not a masterpiece, but better than alright.  It is the book that is the masterpiece.

Winner: BOOK

October 21 – Carrie – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

Stephen King’s first novel. Brian De Palma’s award-winning film. The story of “Carrie”, a troubled teenager tormented by her peers. After she has her first period, she develops telekinetic powers, although in the book she was perhaps born a “sensitive”, for as a child, stones from the sky fell on her house while she was in a traumatized state of emotion. Powers went latent until the onset of puberty. By the story’s end, she will use these powers to extract revenge on her peers in a most climatic way.

 Carrie is one of my favorite horror movies, if not my most favorite. It is chilling, atmospheric, sad, and heartbreaking. It leaves a viewer with a sense of unease while allowing the same viewer to appreciate the film’s style.  Did King have the same effect on me with his novel. Sadly no.  There are several reasons for this.

In between the regular narrative there are reports and memoirs, written after the events of the story, by a paranormal committee and one of the survivors of the “Carrie” story. For me, these interludes only distract from the narrative. Also, King ends his story with Carrie running amok, not only burning down the school with her classmates trapped inside, but destroying half the town as well. In the film, Carrie only burns the school in a sort of fit of temporary insanity. One can sympathize with her situation. It is more difficult to sympathize with the Carrie of the book, who, I do believe, even sports a malicious grin during her rampage on the town.

King might have invented the story but screen writer Lawrence D Cohen and director Brian De Palma make it so much better with the film. And you know what? I do believe King agrees.

Winner: FILM

October 22 – The Shining – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

The debate will continue until the end of time. What are we to make of Stanley Kubrick’s film version of Stephen King’s The Shining? I’m going out on a limb here, but I think it breaks down like this. Those that saw the film but have never read the book loooove the movie. Those that have read the book really don’t think much of the film. King himself didn’t like the movie although his opinion has evolved a bit and he has recently noticed the things that worked very well with the film. Still the criticism exist.  In brief, the film flattens out the characters, or turns them into caricatures. Jack Torrance, played by Jack Nicholson, is pretty much a loose cannon throughout the whole film. This is not the case of the character in the book. 

I, of course, have seen both the film and read the book. I’ve seen the film several times. I read the book twice. My verdict? I really, really love the film. It comes close to being just as good as the book for its visuals and brilliant camera work and use of space. But the book is better. So I guess not everyone fits into the dichotomy I described in the above paragraph.

The Shining is my favorite book by Stephen King. It is in my list of top ten books. It is my favorite haunted house novel. Yes, I like it even better than The Haunting of Hill House.

For a more thorough comparison, read my article: The Shining Book – Movie- Miniseries

Winner: BOOK

October 23 – Salem’s Lot – Book Vs. Movie – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

I wish I could remember the finer details of this story. How long has it been since I read this Stephen King classic? Too long. It deserves a second read, even though, despite how others feel, it is not a King favorite of mine. Don’t get me wrong, I like it. It’s probably in his top ten. But not top five.

A vampire takes up resident at Salem’s Lot’s “haunted house”. Soon, the populace of this small town will be infected by vampirism. One by one they become the walking undead.

If you were a kid in the 1970’s, then you probably remember stumbling upon some TV vampire movie and watch young boy vampires floating in the air before a bedroom window, scratching their fingernails the window, wanting in. Pretty scary stuff. This was the Made-For-TV miniseries of Salem’s Lot, directed by Tobe Hooper. Pretty damn good for a TV movie. I watched it for the first time as an adult the other night.

When all is said and done, I favor the book for its thick yet rich plot and interesting characters. The movie attempts a thickness of the plot (over three hours long but meant to be watched over the course of two nights) but it is a bit overbearing at times. Again I must revisit the book.

Winner: BOOK

October 24 – Children of the Corn – Book Vs. Movie – Which Medium Wins (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

Would you like to know when I first began reading Stephen King’s Children of the Corn?  (To tell you the truth, Cheely, I really don’t care…) Great! I will tell you. It was two weeks ago. I read for a few minutes and then suddenly my eReader is telling me that I’m already 25% finished with the story. Read a bit more the next day and discover that I am over 80% done. So, I reread, trying to keep the experience going for as long as I can. Okay, done rereading, I’ll just progress a little further…Congratulations! I’m all done. Boo! I want more!

Okay, I went in knowing it was a short story. But this was like, really short. It was much darker and more wretched than the movie though. The two adult characters, husband and wife, that find themselves in the middle of nowhere in a small abandoned town surrounded by cornfields and killer children are obnoxiously sugar coated in the movie. The young childless couple, hero and heroine, are destined to overcome the supernatural force of “he who walks behind the rows,” escape the evil and thwart the plot of the meanie kids. They are awarded with two adorable children that they rescue from the kid cult. In the book they are flawed individuals struggling to save their rocky marriage. More relatable if you ask me.

Oh but the movie gives us memorable evil children like Malachi, the killer with long red hair and the younger Isaac with the unnerving squeaky voice who leads the pack!  They are simply mentioned in the book. It takes a screen and a longer story to bring them to life.

So which do I prefer? Tough choice. I’ll go with the book (short story) for its commitment to dark storytelling. Maybe later I will flip a coin and let fate decide my preference. But not now.

Winner: BOOK

October 25 – The Funhouse – Book Vs. Movie – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

Remember this movie? It’s somewhat obscure, I guess. Came out in 1981. Directed by Tobe Hooper; he’s not so obscure! (Salem’s Lot director). My Daddy took me to see this in the theater at his suggestion. It was the first time I saw teenagers hacked to death on the big screen.

It’s the story of a shady carnival. Four teenagers spend the night in The Funhouse. They witness a carnival barker’s deformed son kill the carnival’s fortune teller. As witnesses to this crime they must be destroyed. Let the “fun” of “funhouse” begin!

The book is a bit different. It’s the novelization of the film, based on the screenplay. It was written by Owen West, but that’s not the author’s real name. His real name is Dean Koontz. You might have heard of him. Anyway, the entirety of the “trapped inside the funhouse” plot of the film is just one mere chapter in the book – the final chapter. Most of the book is backstory concerning the Conrad the Carnival Barker, his deformed son, and a different story regarding the teenagers. In the book, one of the teenager’s is a daughter or an ex-wife of Conrad and he purposely lures her and her friends into the funhouse so that he may kill them, extracting revenge on his ex-wife for something he did.

The book really does have an interesting backstory. But the film is more thrilling and interesting. It focuses solely on the carnival and funhouse, but details very well the depravity and overall freakiness of this traveling band of misfits. The animatronic attractions in the funhouse are pretty awesome.

Winner: FILM

October 26 – Friday the 13th Part 3 (in 3D) – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 / Leave a comment / Edit

Yes I actually read the novelization of this film. I remember reading and then exclaiming “Wow, this character, his head got “severe + d.””  That’s how I pronounced it; severe with a “d”.  My sister didn’t know what “severe + d’ meant, so she looked at he word. “Danny, that’s severed!” she said.  (But it was a severe act, you have to admit.)

What do you think I thought of this book? Well, I got some Jason backstory I didn’t get elsewhere. But overall, it’s more fun to see teenagers get sliced to death than to read about such a phenomenon. Plus, the words didn’t jump out at me in 3D like the eyeballs did in the movie theater. Jason put some guy’s head in a vice (or was it a vice-like grip with his own two hands? I can’t remember), all that pressure and boing! His eyeball shot out and almost landed in my box of popcorn.  That’s better than the book, doncha’ think?

Winner: FILM

October 27 – The Ruins – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

By Author Scott Smith who also wrote The Simple Plan, later made into a movie starring Bill Paxton, Billy Bob Thornton, and Bridget Fonda. Oh and directed by Sam Raimi – The Evid Dead dude. I both read and saw the film The Simple Plan.  Oops I’m supposed to be writing about The Ruins. Let me redirect.

Anyway, with The Ruins, Smith writes a suspenseful, gory book about young American tourists trapped on the ruins of a Mayan temple in Mexico.  Local Mayas will shoot them dead if they try to leave, and eventually, the vines that grow all along the pyramid-like structure will kill them. They are nasty things, these vines. They pry into the skin, strangle the neck, and their flowers are like mouths and they mimic the screams of its victims and replay personal conversations to pit the survivors against each other.

The book and the film (directed by Carter Smith) pretty much tell the same story with some variations. What happens to certain characters in the book happens instead to other characters in the movie, etc. The endings are different. The book goes for a hopeless conclusion while the film has an inkling of hope.

Book or movie? Hmm. When working out my decision, I kept alternating between “a tie” or “the book as the winner”.  But since I reserved one option for the book as the sole winner and no option for the film as a standalone victor, then I have to go for the book.

Winner: BOOK

October 28 – Pet Sematary – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

The film I am referring to is the 1989 version, not the most recent adaption of Stephen King’s novel, which came out I believe in 2019. I didn’t see the newest version and after I read the reviews I didn’t bother to try. The movie from the 80’s didn’t fare much better. Not having read King’s book, I rented it back in the VCR days and I didn’t care too much for it either. I remember Herman Munster was in it without his Frankenstein’s monster makeup.  Honestly, I don’t remember what faults I had with the film, other than I wanted the makeup back on Herman.

I was reluctant to read King’s book on account of my disliking of the movie. Eventually I did and it turned out to be one of my favorites of his. (In his top 10 somewhere). The “sematary” was creepier, and the hike to the “sematary” was creepier as well. In the film I don’t even remember that there was a woodsy trek to the graveyard. On the trek in the book, there were a lot of spooky noises.

Winner: BOOK

October 29 – Stir of Echoes – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

A 1999 horror movie starring Kevin Bacon.  A 1958 sci-fi horror novel written by Richard Matheson (the third time that author makes this list.)  I really liked the film. Did I love it. Um…no. But it was an interesting ghost story. Mr. Bacon gets hypnotized and suddenly a wall in his psyche breaks down and he now has certain psychic abilities. The ability the film focus’s in on the most involves the ghost of a girl who communicates with him in fragmented visions. The scope of his abilities is wider in the book and it details them more carefully.  Therefore, I favor the book.

For a more detailed comparison, read my article:

Stir of Echoes Vs. A Stir of Echoes

Winner: BOOK

October 30 – The Woman in Black – Book Vs. Film – Which Film Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 

“Modern Gothic at its Best.” This was my tagline for the article I wrote about Susan Hill’s novel The Woman in Black.  Written in 1983 yet capturing the writing style of a piece that might have been written one hundred years prior, Hill’s novel is a such a treat in an era that had seemed to have long forsaken the literary “ways of the Goth”.  Sadly, the 2012 movie starring Daniel Radcliffe strays considerably from the tone that Hill gifted us readers. Yes, the film has the old mansion surrounded by marshes, a staple of Gothic horror. It is a visually stimulating film.  But Mr. Soundman is too eager and he can’t resist sliding the volume lever on the music whenever the film is going for something suspenseful. Funny, because it’s the sounds as described in the book that chill the reader. These would be the sounds of an unseen horse and carriage that struggles in the foggy marshes, not some hyped up musical score. The film barely touches on this. What the film does show, over and over, are one second flashes of a woman in black. Jumps scares. Meh. And the film’s story is considerable different than the book, which is not necessarily a bad thing, but the story as conveyed by Hill is much better. Read my review of the book:  The Woman in Black – Modern Gothic at its Best

Winner: BOOK

October 31- Doctor Sleep – Book Vs. Film – Which Medium Wins? (Thirty-One Days of Halloween)

 / 1 Comment / Edit

Stephen King’s long-awaited novel – the sequel to The Shining. In a twist, the movie is not a sequel to the book. It is a sequel to the movie “The Shining”.  See, the book and the movie (The Shining) have different endings. The book ends in a way that the Overlook Hotel cannot be a part of the sequel. The movie does not have this limitation, thus the Overlook returns!

I’m sorry Mr. King, but I thought your book was a bit hokey. A travelling band of senior-citizen psychic vampires in Winnebago’s with straw hats and tanks of “psychic energy” drained from victims resembling oxygen tanks?  In the film, the tanks are there, but at least the roaming band of psychic vampires appear more threatening. They almost resemble a motorcycle gang in appearance.  And in the film, we get to visit The Overlook Hotel again and watch in suspense as all of its ghosts reawaken.  It was cool! For a more detailed comparison, read my article:

Doctor Sleep

Oh and the film is done by that Michael Flanagan guy, the guy behind the Netflix series The Haunting of Hill House and The Haunting of Bly Manor.

Winner: FILM

Free Short Stories!

/ danielwalterc / Leave a comment

I’ve been updating this blog, changing the layout, adding things here and there.   For instance, on the title bar, I added a section “Free Short Stories!”

 

The stories were there, but I put them in one place.  When you click on it, you will see this cool featured image:

Below that,  you will see this:

Pick a story, and read, read, read!

But if you are feeling like a big spender and you have a wad of cash on you burning in your pocket, you can buy a longer story for only 99 cents! (this week only).   Click the pic and go wild with your wallet!

October is Here! (So, What’s Going to Happen “Here” – At Your Blog?)

/ danielwalterc / Leave a comment

 

Every horror fan’s favorite month is upon us.

The time has come.  It’s October one.   Let’s have fun.

Every year, I do something here at this blog to celebrate. Some years, I crank out the boos like a ghost  on steroids.  And yes, there are years the ghost writer in me barely whimpers a sigh.  This year I’ll put myself somewhere in the middle.  But hey, I’ll have something, and “something is something” (Just call me Yogi “Scare-uh!” )

First, I’m tinkering with the layout of this blog. I’ve already made some minor changes, but you’ll notice it when I do more. And more is what you will get this month!

Second, some of my e-books will be on sale.  Two of my books will be offered at a ridiculously low price! One week one will be on sale and the next week another will drop to an insanely low price.

Third, I’m working on piece that examines various tropes related to haunted houses. In past posts, I explored some architecture of haunted houses. I’ve covered the grounds and goings-on outside of haunted houses. Don’t you think it’s about time to go inside the haunted house?  I will do that in an article that examines staircases, corridors, secret passages and other lovely haunted house staples.

So friends, throughout this month, check back here often!  I’ll be here to welcome you. It’s like Motel 6, except we’ll leave the light off for you!

 

Never Mind Those Enchiladas, Let’s Get Cooking With “Mexican Gothic”!

/ danielwalterc / Leave a comment

Deconstructing  a Gothic Stew

What kind of book do I want to write? Let me see…  

First, I want it to be scary and otherworldly.  It should take place in a big house where a rather  strange family resides. The family should be multigenerational and include in laws and other extended family members. This is a rich family, but secretive, especially on matters concerning their wealth and how it was accumulated. There are dark secrets spanning generations. 

This house should hover on a “high place” that looks down on the rural village below.  Along will come a city person, an outsider, skilled in the social graces of chic environments but totally unfamiliar with the rustic ways of country people. Certainly, this person will clash with the family up on the hill, who are strange even for rural folks.  Alas, this person will have to live with them, try to understand them and uncover unimaginable secrets. Of course, there will be some romance in all this

This sounds like a gothic novel.  Therefore, it is!

But most gothic novels take place in the UK with their passed-down castles and estates , or in the US in large mansions in the northeastern states, or on southern plantations. I don’t want that.  I am going to put my big house….hmmm….where should I build such a….I got it! In Mexico! In the 1950s Mexico.  The house will be called High Place.

Gothic Novel in Mexico =  Mexican Gothic!  That’s what I will call my book – Mexican Gothic 

************  

Yeah, so,  I am sure the above scenario was not how Silvia Moreno Garcia approached the construction of her novel.  I hope I didn’t sound too glib describing this fictional approach to fiction writing. Mexican Gothic is , afterall, a good book, despite some flaws.  It  does come off as too self-consciously gothic at times, and there are very few references to any historical/cultural events or mores. At least not in a real sense; history that takes place outside the novel.  This inclusion would have strengthened her story very much and helped readers settle into the two major dimensions of setting: time and place.

Yet, when reading the novel, I did feel as if I had traveled across both time and place to end up in Somewhere, Mexico.  If I felt that way, then certainly Silvia succeeds at many levels.

Plot In Brief

In the novel, Naomi, a chic urban young woman,  is sent to the country to live with her cousin Catalina, who in turn lives in her in-laws’ mansion “High Place”.  She has been sick and had written a letter to Naomi’s father, begging to be rescued from the house. So Daddy sends daughter Naomi to investigate the situation. When Naomi arrives, she discovers Catalina has no recollection of writing such a letter.  She is, however, quite sick, and spends most of her time confined to the bedroom.

She is not mentally well, the in-laws suggest, including Catalina’s husband Virgil, who turns out to be a real cad. The matriarch (dog gone it, I can’t remember her name) is a no nonsense, rules-must-be-followed, meanie. This includes arcane rules, such as Catalina is not to be seen by any doctor besides the one that has been treating the Doyle Family (by the way, that’s the family name of these High-Place dwellers) for years. The patriarch is the very, very old Howard Doyle (See, right there I said he was a “Doyle” That proves this is the Doyle family), who is bedridden and is rarely seen by the family except on certain occasions.  What are these occasions? You don’t want to know.

There is the nice boy, the sweet one of the family. Francis is Virgil’s brother. He is everything his brother is not.  Sadly, he is too docile and subservient to stand up to the rest of the family, who are constantly bullying him.  He has a thing for Naomi but is intimidated by her sophisticated ways.

There’s something odd about the house. Once people have lived there for a certain length of time, they cannot leave. Well they can, but once they do, once they travel a certain distance away from the house (in the next town, etc.), they find themselves dead. Happens all the time, for as long as the house has held members of the Doyle family and their significant others.  Many generations have passed through the house.  On the other hand, those that have stay, like the good ole’, evil Howard Doyle, live an unnaturally long life.

The Doyles own a lot of land and have grown rich from mining.  Over the years they hired local Mexicans to do the deadly dangerous work involved in the mining while the Doyle family kept the riches. In past times, some of the workers were actually slaves.

 Did I mention that the Doyles aren’t Mexican at all?  They are English. Howard Doyle is very into eugenics and preventing certain genetic traits from surviving.

High Place is haunted. Or is it? Terrible dreams haunt Naomi during her stay. Also, she succumbs to sleepwalking, something she has never done before. Her sleepwalking ventures after hours lead her into some very uncompromising positions. The House is trying to take control of Naomi.  What’s going on?

What’s Going On – Spoilers ahead

Fungus is going on. It exists in the mines as well as the house.  It has special properties. It kills many that are exposed to it. Alas, all those poor workers. But apparently The Doyles have developed a symbiotic relationship with it.  The fungus gives them unnaturally long life.  But once the people who have grown depended on it stray too far from its magical powers, they forfeit their lifeforce and die. 

The fungus grows under the house. It is inside every crack on the walls or the floors. It transmits messages through dreams. It can possess a person.

I don’t always venture into spoiler territory, but when I do it’s for a reason.  Remember, the purpose of this blog is not just to review books and movies, it’s also to analyze themes found in haunted house films and literature.  Can’t analyze themes without encountering a spoiler or two or three or four.

If you’ve read certain posts here at this blog, you’ll know I’m a fan of haunted houses that possess a special sort of uniqueness which causes the haunting in the first place. Something beyond “there’s a ghost in the house. Therefore, the house is haunted”.  Some examples include The Shining, a hotel that possesses psychic powers only project certain gruesome scenes from its sordid past upon the paranormal sensitives.  Or the apartment building in the Sentinel books, which serves as gates to Hell and therefore must be guarded at all times. Or how about those houses (there are many in several stories) that act as receptors to the madness unleashed upon them by unstable occupants. The houses are only giving back what they have received.

In Mexican Gothic, it’s the fungus that is the source of the haunting. Some reviewers aren’t satisfied with this  Goodreads reviewer Elle has this to say:

It’s the fungus. The Doyle family is tied to the house because they breathe in the black mold and ingest funky mushrooms in order to kinda become immortal. And they’re all connected through it and they can never escape from the house and the oldest patriarch is able to control his family’s actions because he is King of the Fungus.

Note the sarcasm in Elle’s “King of the Fungus”. Reading on, she opines that the big reveal of the fungus was a big let down. However Goodreads reviewer chai (thelibrairie on tiktok!)  offers a different take on the fungus:

…it’s a place consumed by a wrongness so old and so pervasive that it never truly leaves such places. It is embedded in the mold-covered wallpaper, wedged into the supports of the house, needled into every woundlike crevice, humming darkly inside the walls and in the places no one ever ventures.

This wrongness, the novel is careful to illustrate, is as deep-running as roots, spreading through generations like a species of fungus: the result of an endless, unbroken history of brown dreams wrecked and swallowed and devoured for the sake of white people’s wellness, of brown bodies poked and prodded for the innumerable ways in which they could be serviceably consumed, a relentless and hideous abrasion of dignity that is not unfamiliar to many people of color everywhere.

I had not thought of this. Chai’s insight has made me appreciate the book more. The fungus is deep-seated racism. People have lived long healthy lives on the backs of other.She describes it as it relates to both the book and racism better than I can. I love when a haunted house is a symbol for a deeper, stronger evil.

SUMMARY

When an author writes a haunted house story and does so by compiling a list of tropes, it can go one of two ways.  It can produce an entertaining book because it gives the reader what s/he expects, while leaving plenty of room for surprise and invention.  Or, it can get so bogged down with the familiar that the book is a bore. 

Along comes Silvia Moreno Garcia with her book that defies my binary analysis. Mexican Gothic has invention and intelligent symbolism (the fungus, thanks Chai), it wasn’t bogged down to the familiar.  Still, here I go with my phrase “Self-consciously gothic” again.  I can’t explain why I feel that way when other authors staple the staples of Gothic literature into their pages and I complain not.  In the end, I like this book much more than I dislike it, so maybe that point is moot.  If I was a giver of stars, it would be four out of five. More realistically 3.9 stars out of 5) Since I’m not a star kind of guy, you don’t have to worry about me slicing up a star into decimals. No supernovas were conducted at the time of this writing. 

A Review of Charnel House

/ danielwalterc / 1 Comment

Hmm…..

Oh shit, where’s my wallet?  Oh wait, I got it.  Holy Crap, I can’t find my phone!  Nevermind, it’s over there.  Now where the hell are my friggin’ glasses?  Well how about that, they are on my head. 

I must be missing something, though. Why else am I unable to appreciate Charnel House by Graham Masterton?

Perhaps I’m not appreciative of pulp fiction (aside from The Quentin Tarantino film).  Oh but wait, I like H.P. Lovecraft and he’s a pulpy kind of dude. Hmm…

Conceivably, I enslaved myself to my own expectations.  Sure! I was expecting to absorb some great haunted house literature and instead I found myself inside a story concerned more broadly with evil demons and native folklore.  Yet, I fell in love with many stories that ignored my expectations and gave me not a haunted house but a ghost story in general.

I got it!  I’m not giving this author a chance. That’s it.  I chose the wrong book, that’s all. But this book received an Edgar Award and many people love it.  Furthermore, I am trying but I am unable to garnish enough interest to purchase any more of his  books.  I’ll show you my efforts…Here I go…I am TRYINGGGGGGG!!!  PUSH out some interest! GGGGRUNT!!!!  Alas. Nothing. Inspiration constipation.

I have to face it.  I don’t like Charnel House and I probably won’t like any other books by Graham Masterson

Plot in brief (Heh-Heh, he writes in his underwear)

The book  starts off well enough. A man goes downtown to the offices of blah-blah ( ah, I don’t remember. Some department within the city government) to complain that his house is breathing.  How cool is that shit for a lover of haunted house stories! Alas, it all goes downhill from here.

The guy at the office that receives the complaint takes on the role as the protagonist.  He turns into some kind of wannabe detective and goes on to investigate the situation. He’s smug, he’s sexist; he’s irritating if you ask me. He partners with a native American spiritual Guru, who embodies every stereotypical notion of what a trite person might consider for such a character. Throw in some generic female characters and an awkward romance as a side plot for the hell of it. And then, discover the source of the mysterious breathing. It’s an ancient demon from native folklore named Coyote.  Only Coyote ain’t bogged down in myths. He’s real.  Really, a showdown with the Demon on the Golden Gate Bridge?  

Ho-Hum

At DMRBooks.com, the blogger has this to say about Masterton:

“Masterton has been described as “cheesy” and “pulpish”. He certainly doesn’t write ‘literary horror’. You know what? I don’t care. Here is why.”

I agree.  It is cheesy (VERY cheesy), and it certainly isn’t literary horror.  He doesn’t care, but I do, and these are the reasons I don’t like the book.  What I don’t care about are  the reasons the author doesn’t care.  I don’t care enough to read his reasons for not being bothered by the cheese and the pulp (sounds like some cheddar, OJ dink)   You can if you wish. Here’s the link

I get it though. His style is simple and he’s a master of quick-reading thrills (I guess), and for this people love Graham Masterton.  I don’t. Sorry.   . 

A Review of  “A Haunting on the Hill” – Sequel to “The Haunting of Hill House”

/ danielwalterc / 1 Comment

 

Let’s step back for a moment to recall our first experience reading Shirley Jackson’s The Haunting of Hill House. (If you haven’t read this yet, you will be sooo lost reading this article. Also, there are huge spoilers. So if you haven’t read it yet and you want to, stop being lost and get lost!) . Not only were we impressed with the style, the flow, and  the hidden intricacies within the narrative, but we were delightfully creeped out.  It’s an awesome book, isn’t it? 

Time for some comparison. Let’s imagine a different kind of scare, one that has the same power of fright but leaves one not “delightfully creeped out” but “sickeningly agitated.”  What kind of scare might this be? How about the mere idea to have a sequel to The Haunting of Hill House?  

I remember a CTA bus advertisement promoting the city of Chicago. It was a quote from Chicago film critic Roger Ebert that read, “Living somewhere else makes as much sense as a sequel to Citizen Kane”.  In other words, there are some works of art, whether they are sculptures, books, films, or compositions that are complete in their greatness. To add, subtract, or alter would only weaken the original.

What kind of pitfalls might there be trying to create a sequel to The Haunting of Hill House? First of all, Shirley Jackson passed away some time ago, so some other author would have to step in and fill the role of the late author. This is no easy task as Shirley is a tough act to follow. Second, we consumers of horror already suffered through film remakes of the original 1963 film The Haunting which was based on the book. If 1999’s The Haunting  taught us one thing, it’s  “don’t mess with the classics”

On the other hand, Michael Flannagan’s Netflix series  That Haunting of Hill House 2018  is pretty damn good. It’s a reimagining, not a retelling of Jackson’s story. As such, it is allowed certain liberties regarding plot and character changes.  So long as the tone and mystery of the original are not sacrificed, these changes are welcome.  And wouldn’t you know it, the changes made by Flannagan are not detrimental to the quality of the original.. If anything, they enhance Hill House’s overall eerie impression

Along comes Elizabeth’s Hands novel, A Haunting on the Hill . It is marketed as a sequel to The Haunting of Hill House.  Pretty damn gutsy of you, Elizabeth, to embark upon such a creation. Before writing the book, did you realize how many ways such an endeavor can easily go south?

Were you aware of the potential criticism if your work could not compare to Jackson?  Scathing criticism, mind you; the yuckiest raspberry in a basket filled with the most sour pickings of the crop.   Were you prepared to stand up for yourself against accusations of blasphemy?

Luckily for Elizabeth Hand, she writes a mighty fine story with A Haunting on the Hill. Seriously, it’s the best haunted house book I’ve read in a long time. Certainly it’s at the top of its genre when compared to other haunted house books written this century. Hand took a chance and it paid off. I have to “hand” it to Hand!

Why is Hand successful in her efforts?  I’ll offer an opinion on that. She doesn’t try to explain the mystique of Hill House. In no way does she try to “correct” the original story.  As far as I’m concerned, she doesn’t retcon. While she doesn’t duplicate Jackson’s engrossing writing style, that’s okay, and moreover it would be sinful to try.  Hand effectively pens in her own style but stays true to tone and mystery upon which Jackson “built” Hill House. Hand explores her own creative ideas and does not rehash the same plot. She gives just enough homage to the original story so readers know they are in familiar territory while at the same time uncovers areas previously unexplored.

Similar to the original story (yet not duplicating it), four people set out to stay at Hill House for a significant length of time.  The reasons for their stay are different from the reasons described in the original. The four from Jackson’s story do so in order to observe and document supernatural phenomena.  The quartet in Hand’s novel wish to hole up in the house to rehearse for a play. 

Holly Sherwin, the leader of the group and  playwright of  Witching Night , stumbles upon Hill House accidentally and is drawn to it. (Or is it Hill House that has found her?). She is attracted to its creepy vibe and decides Hill House would be a most inspiring place to rehearse her play, not yet realizing the haunted history of the mansion.  She meets Ainsley Rowan, who is in charge of subletting the mansion. Ainsley warns her that no one ever stays long at Hill House and tells her about rumors of its dark history, including the story of a woman who killed herself by crashing into a tree on the road that leads to the house. (Of course, this is a reference to Eleanor Vance in the original novel. How about that?  Eleanor, once a receiver of tales of the house’s dark past has now become part of its legend!) 

It’s all set. They move in for a one month stay. Will they make it to the end? 

The “they” includes:

  • Nisa, Holly’s girlfriend/partner, the songstress for the play.
  • Stevie, The sound engineer and voice actor
  • Amanda Greer, semi-retired B movie actress
  • And of course, Holly herself 

There are four of what I will call “outsiders”.  They are connected to the house in various ways but aren’t staying there. Certainly not after dark. They wouldn’t dare. These include:

  • Ainsley Rowan (I know; I mentioned her already)
  • Tru and Melissa, husband and wife, the cook and the cleaning lady
  • A Mysterious old woman who lives in a nearby trailer 

Tru and Melissa have a similar arrangement with the house guests as the Dudley’s had with the guests from Jackson’s novel. They do their best to provide the comforts of home for the guests, but in the end there is only so much they can do for the potentially doomed occupants. They are less hostile than the Dudleys (well…Tru is kind of a prick, come to think about it.  And the old woman in the trailer is such a witch! ((literally? Hmmm, could be!)) though they certainly have their misgivings about this whole arrangement.  These four; though I have labeled them “outsiders,”  when it comes to the goings on of Hill House, they are, to some extent, in the know. But they aren’t telling. In that way, they are truly insiders.

So, what happens to the four guests? Hill House works on all of them, that’s what. In certain places in the house, Nisa discovers she can sing like she never before. Her voice is enchanted. At a rehearsal reading, Stevie is ravishing yet startling and his acting seems all too real.  Little by little, the four clash with each other. They become mistrustful, sometimes solitary. All are scared yet they are united in their mad desire to stay at Hill House. Will this desire be their undoing? 

Ghosts of the Past /Phantoms of the Future

I would like to dedicate this section to a sentence from several paragraphs ago.  Here be the sentence:

She gives just enough homage to the original story so readers know they are in familiar territory while at the same time uncovers areas previously unexplored.

Examples are needed, don’t you think?  I’ve got it covered. First, we’ll explore the tropes that are present in both Jackson’s and Hand’s novels, albeit within different circumstances. Then, we’ll dive into certain “hauntifying” situations that are unique to Hand’s sequel novel. (“hauntifying;” I made that word up. I think it’s quite swell!).

Let’s do this!

(PSST. Some will say these next sections contain minor spoilers. I might not think or say that, but some might)

Revisiting the classical hauntings of Hill House in new contexts 

It’s the same Hill House, tucked away among the hills somewhere outside the town of Hillsdale. It has the same winding road that links the house and the gate.

What else is the same?

The spiral stairway in the library 

Clankety clank shakes this flimsy, metal staircase that leads to the top of the tower/library in Jackson’s novel.. It was not safe for Eleanor to climb but she did so anyway, putting herself and her rescuer Luke in danger, resulting in her banishment from Hill House.  Why is this ladder so alluring? The library is off limits to the guests in Hand’s book, yet one makes her way to this stairway, and the result is…..wait a minute!  Aha! Now I see. This relates to the end of the book when she….(she who?  And what does she do? Never mind. I’ve written too much already)

Blood

Seemingly from nowhere, here comes the blood.  Blood mysteriously soaks Theodora’s clothes in Jackson’s novel.  In Hand’s novel, what at first seems like wine spilled from the tipsy Amanda’s glass somehow turns to what could only be blood. It ruins an antique table cloth.

Rabbits

In Jackson’s original novel, these hares, to be more precise, make brief appearances here and there.  Eleanor and Theodora see such a creature outside the house.  If I’m not mistaken, they try to chase it but it disappears.  Luke and  Dr Montague spot one in the house and they follow it and it leads them outside.

In A Haunting on the Hill,  hares are more prominent.  They stand on their hind legs and seem to sneer at trespassers. They are certainly more aggressive.  And they’re not above dropping into the house via the fireplace (well in one sense, they are above if they get in through the roof!) . Fire itself is no obstacle as one of these creatures passes through the blaze, carrying the flames on its soon to be charred, furry, body, only to escape back to the outdoors.

The nursery

As with Jackson’s novel, the nursery room that Hand writes about is quite the enigma.  In both books it is literally chilling; those entering encounter a discomforting cold spot when crossing the threshold. Two grinning decorative heads adorn the doorway and they forever look at the room’s occupants whether they are coming or going or, worse, remaining in the room. They appear to be mocking these poor folks.

Nighttime noises

Perhaps the most memorable disturbance from Jackson’s novel is the wall-pounding noise. Okay, okay –  maybe this is mostly remembered from the film. But it happens in the novel as well, along with the soft whispers. Things that go pound, and things that whisper softly in the night.

In Hand’s novel, the pounding is absent, but someone hears whispers in the dark of night when trying to sleep. I think it’s good that Hand holds back on the pounding. She leaves this Hill House signature trait to Jackson so she can identify and imagine other haunting manifestations

What a great way to segue into Hand’s unique contributions to Hill House!

Discovering new hauntings of Hill House

The Haunting of Hill House is sometimes described as a summer horror novel.  The events in the story take place in the summer as the characters walk the grounds of the house, admiring the brooks and dreaming of picnics.  This all happens in the 1950s.

The events in A Haunting on the Hill take place nearly seventy years later. This would be in our wonderful modern age of texting and vape pens. It is not summer. What goes down in Hand’s novel does so in the cold, dark winter. 

What else is new?

 

Images within the woodwork  

Nothing to see here. Just your average knolls, knots and swirls ingrained into the wall design. Or are they something more? Do they form images? Do these images reveal scenes of things to come?

Hidden tunnel  

It’s accessible only by crawling. There are strange lights and its end. 

Miscellaneous 

A stray billiard ball rolling across the floor, (there is a billiard room. That’s new…I think) .  Creepy shadows (are they silhouettes?)  are peering in windows. Oh what has the blizzard brought to Hill House?

Conclusion 

While writing this piece, I stumbled upon other books by Elizabeth Hand. Wylding Hall for instance. This caught my eye because the premise seems similar to A Haunting on the Hill: A group of young musicians take up residence in a mansion to rehearse their music.  Actors vs Musicians expressing themselves artistically while living together in a haunted house. Hmm, are Hand’s stories formulaic? 

Sometimes in writing, formulas are good, sometimes not.  Guess it depends on how much the formula dictates the story.  Too strict of an adherence to a reusable,  preconceived plot kills the story. 

I’ll tell ya what!  I’ll read Wylding Hall and report back to you.  Or, you can read and see for yourself: Wylding Hall

Or, skip it for now.  But don’t skip A Haunting on the Hill.  Trust me, it’s good. It’s true to the spirit of Shirley Jackson while allowing for Elizabeth Hand’s creativity to shine.

 

Review of The Haunted Palace and a Tribute to Roger Corman

/ danielwalterc / Leave a comment

Saying Goodbye to Roger Corman 

RogerCormanLast week we lost a legend.  Roger Corman died two years shy of his 100th birthday. Known as the B-movie king, Corman’s filmography is extensive. He produced hundreds of films and contributed significantly to the horror genre.  So I thought I would review one of his films as a sort of tribute.

I’ve seen several but still not many Corman films, considering the mammoth list of films credited to his name. Of the ones I’ve seen, they make their markings all over the likeability scale. I didn’t care for The Undead, for instance.  I am most familiar with his films reimagining to stories of Edgar Allan Poe, of which there are eight.  The Raven has very little in common with the themes of Poe’s famous poem for which the film was made.  It is a fun film and just downright silly.

I loved House of Usher and The Masque of the Red Death. Both are somewhat true to their original stories, but in each case, the figurative concepts with these tales morph into literal, tangible phantoms once the camera captures them.  I have reviewed both these Poe tales, and yet, I have not reviewed these corresponding films of Corman. My excuse to myself was they were not “haunted-housey” enough. But that’s a weak excuse. If they were haunted- housey enough in print, wouldn’t they be haunted-housey enough in film?  So I guess in truth I just never got around to it.

Guess what?  I’m still not getting around to reviewing those films.  Instead, the film I am choosing to review is The Haunted Palace.  I figure, you know, it’s got the phrase “haunted (insert the name of a domicile here)” in its title, so…

Some will argue that despite the film’s title, it’s not a haunted house film.  Their views are not without merit. But I suggest it is.  There is a creepy castle with portraits and winding, stone staircases.  There are large fireplaces and secret passages. There is an overall gothic flavor to this film. Within Gothic literature, something that is “haunted” can simply mean being possessed with troubling things that linger.  Linger they do in this film. Finally, the movie’s called “The Haunted Palace” so contrary to what I wrote earlier, I shall not “despite the film’s title!”

THE HAUNTED PALACE

HauntedPalaceScene

 

“Haunted, not by ghosts. By fear, by guilt, by memory of a particular night”

 

This line is spoken by the village doctor. Played by Frank Maxwell, he is explaining to a couple that is visiting the town of Arkham why their presence is upsetting the locals.   I don’t know why these two visitors should have been so perplexed by their unwelcoming ways.  After all, the male counterpart of this couple, Charles Dexter Ward, is played by the great Vincent Price and he’s running his mouth off about inheriting the creepy palace that stands at the top of the hill overlooking the town.  Vincent Price in a haunted house overlooking the town! That is never a good thing for characters in a movie.

As it turns out, one hundred years prior, a necromancer named Joseph Curwen lived in that palace.  He had a thing for hypnotically seducing young ladies of the village to the castle where he would force them to mate with the elder gods. The villagers didn’t take too kindly to this, so they tied the Joseph to a tree and burned him alive. Before he succumbed to the flames, Joseph cursed the village. He also vowed to one day return from the dead and have revenge. Necromancers will do that; return from the dead.  Low and behold, one hundred years later, Curwen’s ancestor comes to town. This, of course, is Charles Dexter Ward.  Vincent Price plays both Curwen and Ward.  The portrait of Curwen that hangs in the castle looks exactly like Ward (well of course it does, it’s a drawing of the same actor).  So naturally, the townspeople are freaked out.  They believe in the curse. For proof, they look at their children. So many are born with deformities.

Throughout the movie, we see Price as the congenial Ward slowly surrender to the wretched personality of his late ancestor Curwen.  The omen bares out. Curwen’s soul takes possession of Ward.  Price is brilliant during these personality changes. With slight changes of facial expressions, with fluctuations in vocal inflection, he brings these characters to life. At one point in the film, with his wavering of expressions and tone, we aren’t sure who he is at the moment, which is the whole point of the scene.

This film is based on the works of two classic authors of horror: Edgar Allan Poe and H.P. Lovecraft.  The title, The Haunted Palace, is derived from a poem of Poe’s. It was incorporated into Poe’s story The Fall of the House of Usher.  To be honest, it’s not the easiest poem to comprehend.  It’s not that long and you can read it in its entirety here:

As I do so often, when I’m clueless about the meaning of something, I see what good ol’ Wikipedia has to say on the subject. 

The poem is about a king from the days of yore; content, dignified and wise until the great assault.  Assault of “evil things in robes of sorrow, assails the monarch’s high estate”

It is implied the king has gone mad. The assault, perhaps, are the thoughts, emotions, and perceptions that exist to drive one insane.  Thus, the palace referenced by in the title, is actually the king’s own head.  I find this an intriguing concept. There is no scarier haunted house than the head that houses a troubled mind. I’ve thought of similar analogies but of course, Poe always beats me to these concepts, rendering me a useless plagiarizer. (Of course he had the advantage of living long before I was born.)

The story itself is based on H. P. Lovecraft’s The Case of Charles Dexter Ward.  I have not read it, but according to my friend Wikipedia.

The story is about an escapee of a mental asylum, Charles Dexter Ward. He seeks out the grave of his long dead ancestor Joseph Curwen, a mass-murder and necromancer. Like his forefather, he too wants to resurrect the dead, and there is no better person to resurrect than the master resurrector himself.   

The movie itself, like most Corman movies based on literature, only loosely resembles the originals. Unlike the Poe poem, there are no kings.  Unlike the Lovecraft story, Curwen isn’t kidnapping women.  But –

  1. A story of a man losing his identity within the walls of a stone, gothic castle.   How very Poe!
  2. A tale of a necromancer seeking to mate captured women with the elder gods. How very Lovecraft!

In their own way, Corman and screenwriter Charles Beaumont capture the essence of the works of these two authors.

 

I must confess: this is not my favorite Corman film.  I like House of Usher and  The Masque of the Red Death more (both with Vincent Price! If I’m not mistaken, all of Corman’s Poe films feature Price).  But it’s an “okayish” kind of film.

Rest in Peace, Roger.  You worked hard down here on earth. All your many productions are a testament to that. So please, rest. You have earned it.