• The Night of the Hunter (1955)
    10 replies, posted
[img]http://img705.imageshack.us/img705/1166/nightofthehunter.jpg[/img] Even though it's in the IMDB top 250, I still feel this movie is vastly underrated. The Night of the Hunter is about this preacher who marries a recent widower so he can try and get her kids to tell them where the stolen money that their father has hidden. That's all I will tell about the plot. For a fairly short movie there is a lot of plot development. Now usually kids in movies are annoying stupid dumb retarded idiot heads who can't act, but the two kids in this movie are really good here. Harry Powell also gives a great performance as the bad guy. He's the type of guy who tries to act like he's god's gift to mankind for everyone, but you know he's insane and it's just awesome. Also this is one of the best looking movies I've seen. The cinematography is amazingly beautiful. It's a shame that this is the only movie that Charles Laughton has ever directed. It is fantastically well made, I love the plot, and the characters, and the acting. So check it out sometime. [media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X20XIg38GcE[/media]
Terrible movie. Terrible plot, terrible script, terrible acting. I don't know how it's as highly thought of as it is.
I agree, I thought I was alone in that opinion. I love the golden era but this movie is awful.
this film is very good, i disagree about this film sucking, why do you hate it?.
Hold on, I'll find a review I wrote. [quote]When the modern viewer approaches a movie from the annals of yesteryear, they expect slightly unusual dialogue due to the changes in dialect, use of colloquialism, notions of obscenity et al, and in most cases will excuse it and enjoy the movie. I can certainly make this claim, for many movies made in and before the 1950s are among my favourites. However, I could not do the same for Night Of The Hunter. I found it very disappointing, and pretty silly. I consider myself a fan of the Southern Gothic genre of films and several rank among my favourites - Wild At Heart, Wise Blood and the like. And there are several moments in Night of the Hunter which allude to greatness. However, most of the film is steeped with irritating characters, such as the totally braindead, absent-mindedly-in-disregard-of-any-notion-of-individuality-or-feminism mother, who lies staring dazedly at the ceiling while her cantankerous new husband slays her in bed. If this was supposed to be some sort of allusion to the brainwashing effects of patriarchal society coupled with Christianity it utterly fails, having already been showcased in the woman who works in the ice cream parlour (also an irritating zealot of a woman). Child actors, who are seldom inspired and frequently annoying, are unfortunately no exception here. Whenever something 'frightening' or 'shocking', the best they can do is to make their mouths agape, with absolutely no hint of emotion about their eyes. At one point, whent he boy is fishing with his chosen surrogate father figure, they are engaged in a discussion about something fairly serious, which at the time of writing I unfortunately cannot completely recall, when suddenly the man catches a fish, and in an unintentionally amusing moment, throws it clumsily aboard the fishing boat...and beats it with an oar. I would love to assert something ridiculous at this point, such as 'this is obviously a brutally symbolic manouevre, simulating an iconoclastic attack on traditional American iconography' but unfortunately, that would be totally farcical. I'm not the sort of person to hate on the classics - I have certainly seen and loved many from this era - but this movie failed for me. [/quote]
Now really that's just nitpicking.
I'm getting the vibe that you only think this movie is good because of when it was made. I have nothing against old films, but that's just silly.
[QUOTE=ILIKEHORSES;27490462]I'm getting the vibe that you only think this movie is good because of when it was made. I have nothing against old films, but that's just silly.[/QUOTE] You know you're right. It's not like I gave any genuine reasons why I liked it in my post. [editline]17th January 2011[/editline] in fact the only movies I watch are films made before 1960!
[QUOTE=pie_is_good;27490690]You know you're right. It's not like I gave any genuine reasons why I liked it in my post. [editline]17th January 2011[/editline] in fact the only movies I watch are films made before 1960![/QUOTE] Well there's your problem. You people who think that all modern films are trash make me sick. There was just as much trash back then as well.
I was being sarcastic. I'm sorry if I didn't make that too clear for you.
[QUOTE=pie_is_good;27490911]I was being sarcastic. I'm sorry if I didn't make that too clear for you.[/QUOTE] From the quality of your previous posts, it was hard to tell.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.