If anyone ought to be able to turn out a decent, relatively faithful cinematic adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story, then it should be an outfit that calls itself the H.P. Lovecraft Historical Society and that is precisely what they have done. In fact this is their second film effort following on the heels of 2005’s THE CALL OF CTHULHU which was also a first class adaptation. What makes both of these films so remarkable is that they were done on what would today be considered shoestring budgets. It just goes to show what can be done with today’s visual technology if you have the necessary skills and vision. A wise and extremely clever decision made by HPLHS was to film both movies as if they were shot in the years that Lovecraft wrote them (1927, 1931). That means that CTHULHU was shot as a modern day silent film (before THE ARTIST) and WHISPERER was shot as if it were an early Universal horror film.
THE WHISPERER IN DARKNESS begins at Lovecraft’s legendary Miskatonic University in Arkham, Massachusetts (shot at Mount Holyoke College) where we meet professor Albert Wilmarth (Matt Foyer), a skeptical folklore specialist who likes to use science to debunk old myths and legends. After a failed radio show attempt to triumph over a believer in the supernatural (Andrew Leman), he goes to an isolated farm in Vermont to speak with its owner (Barry Lynch) and discovers the type of cataclysmic horror that H. P. Lovecraft specialized in. Fans already know what it is but this review is primarily addressed to those readers who are not familiar with Lovecraft. The film is beautifully made from the opening parody of the old Universal logo (instead of a plane circling the globe it’s a zeppelin that crosses over the North Pole) to the period costumes, the old school editing, and an extremely effective soundtrack. The performances by all concerned especially Foyer, Lynch and Autumn Wendel as the young girl Hannah (who is not in the original story) are all you could ask for in an undertaking of this nature. My only reservations, and they are minor ones, are as follows.
1) Every modern day attempt I have seen to shoot a black & white film set in the 1920s and 30’s (and this includes THE ARTIST) is clearly shot in color first with the color then removed (HPLHS’s MythoScope). This creates a sharp focus picture with harsh lighting instead of a soft focus one with subtle lighting although this was likely done out of budget considerations and is therefore understandable. 2) The rather cynical ending (not Lovecraft’s own as the last third is an extension by the filmmakers) would not have occured in a film set in 1931. The tone yes (this would have been a pre-Code movie before censorship clamped down) but not the ending. From a visual standpoint, however, it is remarkably effective. 3) I would not have shown the creatures in close-up at the end as a lot of Lovecraft’s horror deals with the human mind being unable to process what it sees and they didn’t match my imagination’s depictions of them. Unfortunately, subtlety and discretion are not trademarks of the 21st century.
I offer these observations as a film historian in a purely pedantic way out of a desire to provide some additional background on how films in the 1930s were made, not in an attempt to criticize the film or the filmmakers. I think THE WHISPERER IN DARKNESS and its companion piece THE CALL OF CTHULHU to be minor masterpieces which are truly exceptional when you consider their budgetary limitations (check out the special features on Disc 2 for a true appreciation). I not only look forward to more cinematic endeavors from the HPLHS (so buy this DVD which is available on a made-to-order basis and help to finance their next project) but I wish that other low budget filmmakers as well as big budget ones who attempt to do H.P. Lovecraft would follow in their footsteps. They have proved conclusively that is possible to do cinematic adaptations which are faithful in spirit and execution to HPL’s work.
The Capsule Critic 