The Whisperer In Darkness - Movie Reviews - Rotten Tomatoes

The Whisperer In Darkness Reviews

Page 1 of 2
July 9, 2016
I love it! The story is good...effects are ok. The acting is super good! H.P. Lovecraft would approve!
Super Reviewer
June 25, 2016
If you are a Lovecraft fan and haven't seen this yet, please slap yourself, then see it as soon as possible. Horror fans won't be let down either. Done in the fashion of an old Universal monster movie with style to spare.
½ September 20, 2015
Very nice representation of the atmosphere of the Cthulu mythos stories. The hopelessness, the insanity and the weird given in an old-style surprise format.
August 5, 2015
While not as polished or stylized feeling as Call of Cthulhu (I think that may be due to Call of Cthulhu's photography and writing) this film still completely pulls off that great lovecraftian 1930s film vibe. This one has some great science fiction aspects to it as well. If Sean Branney were to put out more films like these I would guarantee my viewer ship. Very captivating and spooky story about horror from beyond the stars.
½ July 1, 2015
The same group that made "The Call of Cthulu," a decent adaptation of the HP Lovecraft story of the same name, that nailed the silent style, even of it was a little wordy in the title cards. This time the group faithfully adapts another Lovecraft tale in the style of a 1930s horror film, and the movie is stylish, has some decent acting for a low budget film made just for the love of it, and the effects, while out of place for the style they are trying to emulate, look pretty good. I enjoy their work. I look forward to seeing what they try and do next, because they are two for two now.
June 27, 2015
Even with the low budget and bad acting it was interesting enough to keep my attention, but it lost in the end. For Lovecraft buffs only.
May 12, 2015
In short: Entertaining modernized adaptation of an old Lovecraft story, but still faithful enough to its original source

I saw this film as part of the IMAGINE film festival 2011 in Amsterdam. I booked it out of curiosity, wondering how a modern film maker would treat the 1930's source. I must confess that I'm not fond of most Lovecraft's stories. Though not having read any within more than 30 years, I'm still stuck with an impression of adjective-overloaded descriptions of monsters and their attributes. Many alternative books and stories in this same genre that I've read, attracted me much more. I'm prepared to accept that my reading sample was wrong and my bad impression is just as wrong.

The film makers decided to run the film in black&white, which did not hinder me at all. It even seemed the natural way after some minutes. I'm very glad that we got sound with the film. I hate intervening text boards showing the dialog, known from silent movies. In anticipation I was a bit afraid that parts of the film would develop slowly, not unexpected given the original material, but my fear proved completely unjustified.

The director was present at the screening and answered several questions during the final Q&A. We learned about the 350K$ budget, financed by the film makers out of their own pockets. They did the same for their previous 47 min short "The Call of Cthulhu", which paid itself back eventually. Understandably that several corners were cut for reasons of costs, but their love for Lovecraft did make up the rest. The editing of the material, as well as the pace in which the story develops, were adapted to match current speed expectations. Nowadays we cannot bear to watch 15 minutes of people reading letter fragments to each other, and this part of the original story was visualized differently for good reason. The finale shows a lot of action, and even some monsters. What these aliens look like, has been described by Lovecraft in much detail. These monsters could not be left out, or it would have left us strongly disappointed (said the director).

Back at home I discovered the original story in my own book collection. It was bought a long time ago (1978), and I completely forgot having it. When re-reading the story, I saw some changes by the hands of the film makers in order to liven up the original. As mentioned above, the exchange of letters between Akeley and Wilmarth has been dramatized considerably. And with good reason, otherwise we certainly would have dozed off. Further, the final outdoor scenes don't appear as such in the original story, and has been invented by the film makers, if only to show a few alien monsters and to introduce some action scenes. Maybe somewhat detached from the original, especially the plane scene, but such liberties occur often enough when turning a static book into a motion picture.

When leaving the theater, I gave an "excellent" score for the public prize competition. I can only applaud the design decisions by the film makers, choosing for black and white (no problem) but with sound (very good), and properly pacing the story to maintain a modern tempo throughout its duration. In other words, to a reasonable extent truthful to the 1930's style of film making, but not to such an extreme that it would be tedious for viewers A.D. 2011.
October 5, 2014
Excelente los recuerdos q tenia del relato si fueron tomados en cuenta
July 28, 2014
"The Whisperer in Darkness" is a short story by H. P. Lovecraft. Written February-September 1930, it was first published in Weird Tales, August 1931.[1] Similar to "The Colour Out of Space" (1927), it is a blend of horror and science fiction. Although it makes numerous references to the Cthulhu Mythos, the story is not a central part of the mythos, but reflects a shift in Lovecraft's writing at this time towards science fiction. The story also introduces the Mi-Go, an extraterrestrial race of fungoid creatures.

The Whisperer in Darkness was nominated at Oaxaca Film Fest.

Gold Hugo-Nominated
Free Spirit Award-Nominated
½ April 26, 2014
A solid film adaptation of an H. P. Lovecraft horror story. Much truer to the source than most of the Lovecraft inspired films of recent decades and far the better for it. Decent production values, direction, cinematography, and acting. If you enjoy Lovecraft you will definitely enjoy this film.
March 23, 2014
Filmed like a 1930s horror flick, this one works due to the actors and story, which takes Lovecraft's tale and makes it more grand. The budget is low to the special effects are truly awful.
½ January 8, 2014
Los chicos de la HPLHS la han vuelto a hacer y esta vez saltando del cine mudo de los 20's a el periodo entreguerras. Es una buena adaptacion del relato de H.P. Lovecraft que, sabe Dios, les ha costado lo suyo llevarla a termino! Y creo que supera con creces cualquier adaptacion de lovecraftiana hecha hasta ahora; bien filmada, bien editada, mantiene el aura de la epoca, del relato y de la poetica del autor de Nueva Inglaterra. Tiene la jsuta medida y a la vez aņade elementos nuevos a la narracion, y a las criaturas mismas, dotandole de originalidad a la direccion artistica y conceptual. Hay partes del relato que me parecen interesantes y que, sin embargo, decidieron no filmar lo que, para mi gusto, no le da las cuatro estrellas, pero, como he dicho, es cuestion de gustos. Recomendable para los incondicionales lovecraftianos.
June 1, 2013
Entertaining modernized adaptation of an old Lovecraft story, but still faithful enough to its original source--Vintage Lovecraft!!
½ March 10, 2013
Continuing the HLPHS agenda, the movie is a revisionist piece that mixes 1930's film-making style with some stunning FX that bring to life the creepy story of the Mi-Gos. It's an overall solid feature, though some parts of the script are not as solid.
February 20, 2013
Eccezionale adattamento cinematografico dell'omonimo racconto di H.P. Lovecraft. Forse i Mi-Go in computer grafica alla fine stonano un pochino, ma il film non deluderā gli appassionati dei Miti di Cthulhu.
½ January 24, 2013
"Whisperer in Darkness" has a chiller-diller conclusion and some moments of real terror.
½ December 29, 2012
Finally, a proper adaptation of one of H.P. Lovecraft's most amazing novels. The threatening, ominous atmosphere is coming to life while really impressive is the detailed revival of the locations or the weird devices as they are described from Lovecraft.
Francisco G.
Super Reviewer
September 2, 2012
Yet another very satisfying, respectful and entertaining adaption of one of HP Lovecraft's most accomplished stories by the H.P. Lovecraft Historical Society. The movie embraces the classic sci-fi aesthetic from the 40s and 50s with remarkable results for such a small budgeted flick thanks to a smart script and excellent use of atmosphere and pacing. Some special effects are clunky which helps the movie at times thanks to inspired cinematography but also has some awkward results towards the end on the CGI animated beasts which just doesn't make much sense. Also, the soundtrack is absolutly atrocious and overbearing, distracting the viewer way too much from the narrative and without any emotional resonance.

All in all, a fantastic effort after the already great Call of Cthulhu adaptation by the HPLHS. Bring more of these!
Page 1 of 2