The Criterion Collection

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Carnival of Souls is one of the eeriest films to ever be made. It's up there with Don't Look Now for me in terms of horror.

We really need both out on Blu-ray and sooner than later.

I have to play the villain this time. I cannot understand why anyone thinks Carnival of Souls is "eerie" or "scary" or "frightening" or whatever. For years I had heard about what a hidden gem it was, and was excited to finally see it myself when Criterion released it on DVD. To be honest, I found it a yawner.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by jayembee

I have to play the villain this time. I cannot understand why anyone thinks Carnival of Souls is "eerie" or "scary" or "frightening" or whatever. For years I had heard about what a hidden gem it was, and was excited to finally see it myself when Criterion released it on DVD. To be honest, I found it a yawner.

I dunno, I'll give it eerie at times but yeah, all the other superlatives that get thrown around seem a bit much. It's interesting enough as a snapshot of an era/precursor to indie/low-budget horror filmmaking but as a film I agree that it doesn't really hold up all that well.

[jayembee]

Originally Posted by Ausjdm

Oscars that year uh, Kramer vs Kramer over Apocalypse Now... what the....

It's not really that great a mystery. More voting members of the Academy preferred Kramer vs. Kramer over Apocalypse Now.

The Oscars are no different than any other poll being voted on by any random group of people. It's all about how many voters like "A" over "B". Even political elections: the winner isn't necessarily the best person for the job, but the one that more people believe is the best person for the job.

This doesn't necessarily mean the Oscars are meaningless. No more than any other award, or even a "best" poll here at blu-ray.com.

[TJS_Blu]

Originally Posted by Ausjdm

Oscars that year uh, Kramer vs Kramer over Apocalypse Now... what the....

I remember reading some pretty negative reviews of AN back in the day. If I had a time machine and Academy membership, I'd vote correctly, promise.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by TJS_Blu

I remember reading some pretty negative reviews of AN back in the day. If I had a time machine and Academy membership, I'd vote correctly, promise.

Mine would have been one of them. I was only 18 or 19 at the time buy my initial reaction was pretty much 'what's all the fuss about'.

I have since come around.

[joie]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Did The Tin Drum seriously win the Palme d'Or...?

Not the one Criterion recently released. You have to back to the old DVD to see the original. There is an extra on that (not carried over to the new, "approved" release) in which the director explains why he made the cuts he made for the original release.

edit: my understanding is that the cut parts were included in the new release, but those additions made the film unfaithful to the novel, which is why, the director explained on the old release, they were cut from the original.

[TJS_Blu]

Originally Posted by octagon

Mine would have been one of them. I was only 18 or 19 at the time buy my initial reaction was pretty much 'what's all the fuss about'.

I have since come around.

Me too. Though I'd have to chew over whether its really 'better' than Breaking Away.

[Scottie]

Originally Posted by jayembee

Yes (as well as the Oscar for Best Foreign Language Film), although it actually tied with Apocalypse Now.

I'm guessing that you didn't like it.

Who would have thought that there was a character out there even more unbearable than Joey from 1953's Shane?

I am really having a difficult time trying to find some redeemable aspects to this film. I have read somewhere that Oskar is apparently the only "sane" individual in the entire film, but I am really, really, really struggling to accept that.

My main problem, though, was not the directing style as it was the story. The whole thing feels like a bizarre retelling of Peter Pan with sexual components thrown in to it.

(Sorry "Tin Drum", I know you love it!)

Originally Posted by jayembee

I have to play the villain this time. I cannot understand why anyone thinks Carnival of Souls is "eerie" or "scary" or "frightening" or whatever. For years I had heard about what a hidden gem it was, and was excited to finally see it myself when Criterion released it on DVD. To be honest, I found it a yawner.

Carnival of Souls was a truly surprising film for me. I did not expect much from it as the general plot description sounded rather generic and the low budget production value led me to assume that it would be a very amateur-looking film. Thankfully, it exceeded all of my expectations.

What I like most about it is that it is a psychological thriller with horror elements and not 100% of one or the either. As I have probably mentioned before, the horror genre is one of my least favorite genres due to how incredibly cliché and predictable it often is. Therefore, when I do find something that stands out, such as this film, it is very refreshing.

Originally Posted by joie

Not the one Criterion recently released. You have to back to the old DVD to see the original. There is an extra on that (not carried over to the new, "approved" release) in which the director explains why he made the cuts he made for the original release.

edit: my understanding is that the cut parts were included in the new release, but those additions made the film unfaithful to the novel, which is why, the director explained on the old release, they were cut from the original.

Hmm?

[Fellini912]

Originally Posted by iScottie

Carnival of Souls was a truly surprising film for me. I did not expect much from it as the general plot description sounded rather generic and the low budget production value led me to assume that it would be a very amateur-looking film. Thankfully, it exceeded all of my expectations.

What I like most about it is that it is a psychological thriller with horror elements and not 100% of one or the either. As I have probably mentioned before, the horror genre is one of my least favorite genres due to how incredibly cliché and predictable it often is. Therefore, when I do find something that stands out, such as this film, it is very refreshing.



Hmm?

I agree entirely with your statement. My experience was very similar.

Everyone has their own definition of horror (even Captain Kurtz or Joseph Conrad), gorefest vs psychological thriller. I find the film editing and scene compositions to be top notch in Carnival of Souls. The location for film also adds to the movie. The pacing and "eerie" atmosphere are perfect with an astounding organ soundtrack. There are very few "horror" films that can match it in quality.

The best way to watch the film is on a big screen on a raining night.

[Fellini912]

http://http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8vicJlPVAQ

[The Great Owl]

Carnival of Souls is basically a feature-length reworking of The Twilight Zone episode, "The Hitch-Hiker", which happens to be my favorite episode of that series. In fact, it wins my vote for the best half hour in the history of television.

Carnival of Souls also resembles the Ambrose Bierce short story, "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge." (A French adaptation of this short story was aired in America as an episode of The Twilight Zone a couple of years after Carnival of Souls was released.)

Despite the borrowed plot, Carnival of Souls comes across as an innovative movie on its own terms, and I love the luxurious pacing, the organ music, and the myriad of haunting images on the pavilion grounds. Candace Hilligoss is wonderful in the lead role.

If Criterion were to release a Blu-ray transfer of Carnival of Souls that is half as good as the transfers of The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, Persona, or Eyes Without a Face, then the low-key horrors of this film will come across with greater effectiveness. I hope that this happens soon.

[Fellini912]

Originally Posted by The Great Owl

Carnival of Souls is basically a feature-length reworking of The Twilight Zone episode, "The Hitch-Hiker", which happens to be my favorite episode of that series. In fact, it wins my vote for the best half hour in the history of television.

Carnival of Souls also resembles the Ambrose Bierce short story, "An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge." (A French adaptation of this short story was aired in America as an episode of The Twilight Zone a couple of years after Carnival of Souls was released.)

Despite the borrowed plot, Carnival of Souls comes across as an innovative movie on its own terms, and I love the luxurious pacing, the organ music, and the myriad of haunting images on the pavilion grounds. Candace Hilligoss is wonderful in the lead role.

If Criterion were to release a Blu-ray transfer of Carnival of Souls that is half as good as the transfers of The Spy Who Came in from the Cold, Persona, or Eyes Without a Face, then the low-key horrors of this film will come across with greater effectiveness. I hope that this happens soon.

Harold "Herk" Harvey was definitely not remaking a Twilight Zone episode. Nice try.



As the Twilight Zone episode and the Ambrose Bierce short story, Carnival Souls is loosely based on a recurring urban legend

[Show spoiler] the vanishing hitchhiker.

. This urban legend has been in existence long before any of these narratives.

If you have not seen the movie, do not see the spoiler. It will ruin the movie.

[kuro_sawa]

Originally Posted by joie

Not the one Criterion recently released. You have to back to the old DVD to see the original. There is an extra on that (not carried over to the new, "approved" release) in which the director explains why he made the cuts he made for the original release.

edit: my understanding is that the cut parts were included in the new release, but those additions made the film unfaithful to the novel, which is why, the director explained on the old release, they were cut from the original.

Thanks for putting the info out here.
The Tin Drum is brilliant either cut.

In my opinion Carnival of Souls is a light watch, I have seen it several times and it is an intellectual bore but I do get the love for it in a campy sort of way

Its a shame Criterion collection did not get to release the Werner Herzog set in the US.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by Fellini912

If you have not seen the movie, do not see the spoiler. It will ruin the movie.

Argh. Good point.

I'm hard-pressed to imagine that the similarity to The Twilight Zone episode is coincidental, though.

On the other hand, this episode of The Twilight Zone was inspired by a 1946 Orson Welles radio play.

The vanishing hitchhiker narrative was probably not around before the 1890 Ambrose Bierce short story, but I see what you mean.

[ravenus]

Originally Posted by Fellini912

The best way to watch the film is on a big screen on a raining night.

Not a rainy night, surely. You would not want anything interfering with the sound design of this film, it's integral to the impact factor.

[hoytereden]

Originally Posted by jayembee

I have to play the villain this time. I cannot understand why anyone thinks Carnival of Souls is "eerie" or "scary" or "frightening" or whatever. For years I had heard about what a hidden gem it was, and was excited to finally see it myself when Criterion released it on DVD. To be honest, I found it a yawner.

Eerie; yes. Frightening, scary; no. When my City's local station used to show their Saturday night horror shows it was pretty predictable '50s-'60s stuff with only a few unique titles that stood out-Curse of the Demon, Night Tide, and Carnival of Souls. Carnival has a otherworldly, dreamlike quality with that abandoned Saltair resort adding to the creepy atmosphere.

[The Great Owl]

Originally Posted by hoytereden

Curse of the Demon

I've been clamoring for a Criterion release of this movie for a while now. Jacques Tourneur's Night of the Demon/Curse of the Demon is horror done right.

Tourneur directed some key Val Lewton horror titles (Cat People, I Walked with a Zombie, The Leopard Man) before brilliantly applying what he learned with those horror titles to film noir with Out of the Past. Night of the Demon blends both genres for a great effect (but obviously leans more to the horror side of the equation).

[Fellini912]

Originally Posted by kuro_sawa

In my opinion Carnival of Souls is a light watch, I have seen it several times and it is an intellectual bore but I do get the love for it in a campy sort of way

What snobbish, nonsense are you talking about.

When does anybody watch a "horror" film for intellectual purposes? It would be similar to trying to find a nihilistic philosophy in Looney Tune cartoons.

[octagon]

Originally Posted by Fellini912

When does anybody watch a "horror" film for intellectual purposes?

You're kidding, right?

A lot of great horror movies are very thought-provoking. Sure, Frankenstein's monster is pretty scary looking but the real meat of that film is philosophical. Rosemary's Baby, The Innocents, The Haunting...the chills in those films all start squarely between the ears.

One could even go a step farther and say that any film that engages the imagination is connecting on an intellectual level. Asking yourself 'jesus, what the hell would I do' while watching Night of the Living Dead is an intellectual exercise.

It might be fun one but still...

[Blu-Velvet]

Originally Posted by octagon

You're kidding, right?

A lot of great horror movies are very thought-provoking. Sure, Frankenstein's monster is pretty scary looking but the real meat of that film is philosophical. Rosemary's Baby, The Innocents, The Haunting...the chills in those films all start squarely between the ears.

One could even go a step farther and say that any film that engages the imagination is connecting on an intellectual level. Asking yourself 'jesus, what the hell would I do' while watching Night of the Living Dead is an intellectual exercise.

It might be fun one but still...

I think he's being sarcastic. One of the main advantages of horror and other genre films is that it gives directors built-in audiences for them to get across all sorts of philosophical, social, and political commentary, among other thematic subtexts, cheerfully and/or thrillingly disguised as mindless entertainment. And after all, many if not most of the Looney Tunes exhibit a heavily nihilistic philosophy.