The Innocents (1961)

[AlexIlDottore]

Originally Posted by bigshot

Have you seen the movie lately? It begins and ends with Deborah Kerr's character praying like this. It's a key image in the film. (And yes, the orgasmic quality is intentional.) Again, this is not just a ghost story. It's about corruption.

That's what I was thinking. Does nobody else remember these haunting images from the debut and ending

As it says commentary in the specs, I assume it isn't the doc on the German disc, but the commentary which is on the German and BFI disc.

I have the BFI disc, but this will be a double dip for me.

[The Great Owl]

That cover is a thing of beauty, and I am sure that the 4K restoration will be mind-blowing for this particular film.

I've seen The Innocents several times before on DVD, so this is one of those "too good to be true" Criterion announcements. I'm really looking forward to this.

[Dr.Mirakle32]

I grew up with the classic Universal and Hammer Horror films. Gothic horror and monsters are practically in my DNA. As a film lover, I also enjoy good films of all genres and eras.

Now I caught THE INNOCENTS several months ago, for the first time, on TCM.

I went in wanting to love it, but ended up forcing myself not to doze off. The cinematography and atmosphere are beautiful and thick enough to cut with a knife, but at the end of the day, I just didn't give a shit about these spoiled rich kids or their nanny.

That said, I wouldn't mind giving it another shot on BD once it's 50% off. Maybe I'll appreciate it more knowing what to expect.

[bigshot]

The Innocents is a movie within a movie. The action that you are seeing on the screen is just a surface mask of what's going on underneath. If you watch The Innocents and just see the characters that are appearing on the screen, you are missing 90% of the film. The ending is one of the biggest mind fricks in the history of cinema. In an instant, everything you just saw totally changes context and you realize the horror you were witnessing all along... and it really has very little to do with ghosts. Capote really MADE this movie great.

That 20 minute documentary on the German disk is the most concise breakdown of the symbolism and undercurrents of the film that I have ever seen. It's really indispensable.

[BLUgrass]

I'm blind buying both this and Eraserhead.

When I was a young kid, we had this mom & pop video store. I always saw these VHS copies there. I had no idea what they were about but they must have left a lasting impression on me because I clearly remember those two (and the kid's cartoon Sampson & Sally). As I grew up, I never followed up. So now is as good a time as any. Y'all have sold me on both movies here and in the Eraserhead Thread

[olivianewtonyawn]

I love Turn of the Screw... is this one worth taking the plunge unseen?

Also, if anyone has read Henry James' novel, is it very close in plot or more just an interpretation with a similar mood?

[uther]

Originally Posted by bigshot

The Innocents is a movie within a movie. The action that you are seeing on the screen is just a surface mask of what's going on underneath. If you watch The Innocents and just see the characters that are appearing on the screen, you are missing 90% of the film. The ending is one of the biggest mind fricks in the history of cinema. In an instant, everything you just saw totally changes context and you realize the horror you were witnessing all along... and it really has very little to do with ghosts. Capote really MADE this movie great.

Some people are not into films that try to make them think and is rare to see such movies today although there are few modern exceptions like Watchmen, the Wrestler and Black Swan.

[Dr.Mirakle32]

Originally Posted by uther

Some people are not into films that try to make them think and is rare to see such movies today although there are few modern exceptions like Watchmen, the Wrestler and Black Swan.

But a truly good movie should engage the general audience off the bat as well as include multiple layers for subsequent viewing.

[EricJ]

Originally Posted by bigshot

Have you seen the movie lately? It begins and ends with Deborah Kerr's character praying like this. It's a key image in the film. (And yes, the orgasmic quality is intentional.) Again, this is not just a ghost story. It's about corruption.

It's Henry James, so you don't know if it IS a ghost story, but you're sure led to believe it's one for most of the story.

And again, the problem is that Criterion sells its covers to people who already know the movie: "Look, it's the image that sums up the abstract tone, in the most memorable scene!" Which is nice if you're in the Classic Movie Stuff That Only We Know club.
Out in the real world, outside of said film-buff community, nobody blind-buys Criterion regardless of title, and they have to be persuaded. I see actresses cinematically light-shadow framed in praying, I think Black Narcissus, not the spooky turning of screws.
And to say, "Ah, but you see, this is what it REALLY means!", like standing for ten minutes in front of an abstract painting trying to define the artist's "true" motivation, may be Art, but it's not Commerce.

[bigshot]

The praying of the governess is central to the film. It shows what she did before the events transpired, and what she did after. But not in the middle. There is nothing abstract about this movie. Once you see it, it can't be unseen. And it's wrong and disturbing on every level. I had a friend who I recommended the movie to. A week later, he said he had watched it and didn't see what the fuss was about. I started asking him questions about subtext and he admitted he had scanned through the movie to find "the scary parts". If you do that, you won't understand anything about what's going on in this film.

Yes, if you like Turn of the Screw, you will like this movie.

[AlexIlDottore]

Originally Posted by EricJ

I see actresses cinematically light-shadow framed in praying, I think Black Narcissus, not the spooky turning of screws.

But the cover is a very well known and important image from the film. Besides, to think Black Narcissus, it would have to be in colour. I really don't get why people who are fans of the movie think this cover is bad or is "divorced" from the movie.

Originally Posted by bigshot

The praying of the governess is central to the film. It shows what she did before the events transpired, and what she did after. But not in the middle. There is nothing abstract about this movie. Once you see it, it can't be unseen. And it's wrong and disturbing on every level.

Yes, if you like Turn of the Screw, you will like this movie.

It can be seen as a ghost story, but once you've understood it, it's indeed one of the most twisted films you'll ever see.

[ShellOilJunior]

Originally Posted by bigshot

The praying of the governess is central to the film. It shows what she did before the events transpired, and what she did after. But not in the middle. There is nothing abstract about this movie. Once you see it, it can't be unseen. And it's wrong and disturbing on every level. I had a friend who I recommended the movie to. A week later, he said he had watched it and didn't see what the fuss was about. I started asking him questions about subtext and he admitted he had scanned through the movie to find "the scary parts". If you do that, you won't understand anything about what's going on in this film.

Yes, if you like Turn of the Screw, you will like this movie.

Wow. Just

[joie]

I don't think it's a ghost story.

[Show spoiler]When she's interviewing for the job, Miss Giddons is asked whether she has a good imagination.

I don't know whether it's relevant, but Henry James' brother was a goto psychologist of his time.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by joie

I don't think it's a ghost story.

[Show spoiler]When she's interviewing for the job, Miss Giddons is asked whether she has a good imagination.

I don't know whether it's relevant, but Henry James' brother was a goto psychologist of his time.

The film is very interesting if viewed in light of William James The Varieties of Religious Experience. Turn of the Screw was published first, but WJ had been lecturing on the subject for several years.

Steve W

[Judex]

Originally Posted by bigshot

When they say Audio Commentary by Christopher Frayling, do they mean the 20 minute documentary on the European blu-rays? Because that documentary is one of the best supplements I've ever seen for a movie.

No, It's the Audio Commentary. Probably the same one that's on the BFI release.
They could add his introduction at a later date, the product page for The Innocents does say "more!".

[lolwut]

The cover is lovely.

[Cbeck]

Originally Posted by olivianewtonyawn

I love Turn of the Screw... is this one worth taking the plunge unseen?

Also, if anyone has read Henry James' novel, is it very close in plot or more just an interpretation with a similar mood?

The Innocents does not have the same ambiguity as the novel. It has good atmosphere and visuals, but that isn't enough.
A better version of Turn of the Screw is the one Ingrid Bergman starred in,which was a live television production done a few years before "The Innocents". If Criterion included that version as an extra that would be a reason to purchase this. For "The Innocents" alone, as a fan of the original story, I would pass.

[AlexIlDottore]

Originally Posted by Cbeck

The Innocents does not have the same ambiguity as the novel. It has good atmosphere and visuals, but that isn't enough.
A better version of Turn of the Screw is the one Ingrid Bergman starred in,which was a live television production done a few years before "The Innocents". If Criterion included that version as an extra that would be a reason to purchase this. For "The Innocents" alone, as a fan of the original story, I would pass.

I've been wanting to see that in decent quality for years.

[Pecker]

Originally Posted by Cbeck

The Innocents does not have the same ambiguity as the novel.

Go ahead. What ambiguity is in the novel but not in the film?

The main ambiguity of the story is

[Show spoiler]whether the governess is losing her mind or if the ghosts are real.

That ambiguity remains in both book and film.

Steve W

[Cbeck]

Originally Posted by Pecker

Go ahead. What ambiguity is in the novel but not in the film?

The main ambiguity of the story is

[Show spoiler]whether the governess is losing her mind or if the ghosts are real.

That ambiguity remains in both book and film.

Steve W

The ghosts are way too literal a presence in The Innocents, compared to the novel and the television production I mentioned. It is a passable spook show, not a film which does justice to a great novel.

In particular the ending of The Innocents is completely cornball and as far from James's ambiguity as possible when you see

[Show spoiler]POV shot from the ghost's perspective, and the ghost raising his hand, causing Miles to collapse and die.