Director: Charles Laughton
Writer(s): James Agee, from a novel by Davis Grubb
Starring: Robert Mitchum, Shelley Winters, Billy Chapin, and Sally Jane Bruce
The first time I saw Night of the Hunter, I must have been
a teenager; I rented it after hearing all about what a terrifying movie it
was. But back then, I didn’t have much
patience for anything other than gore, and I spent just about the entire movie
in a state of constant boredom. Flash
forward a decade, and after seeing it still get brought back up in “scariest
movie of all time” discussions, I wanted to give it another chance.
Robert Mitchum plays Harry Powell, a traveling preacher who
only stops in towns to seduce women, and then murder them for their money, all
in the name of God. While serving some
time in prison for vehicular theft, he’s placed in a cell with Ben Harper, a
man who killed two people while robbing a bank of $10,000, and was subsequently
sentenced to death. Since the two have
nothing but time to talk, Ben casually suggests that he has hidden the money
somewhere in his house, though he doesn’t specify where; doesn’t matter, as
this is already music to Harry’s ears.
After he is released, Harry heads to the house of Willa
Harper, Ben’s widow (by this time, his sentence for hanging has been carried
out), where he “seduces” her, getting her to marry him very shortly after
meeting him. John, Willa’s young son,
dislikes the preacher right from the outset, but he’s having problems convincing
his younger sister, Pearl,
to do the same.
I’ll start off with an honest inquiry: How is a reviewer
supposed to approach “classic” movies from the past? Should he review it as if it were released in
this day and age? Should he transport
himself back to the year it was released, and pretend as if he’s watching it
for the first time? Or should he simply
conform to popular opinion, and just profess that it’s a good movie, whether or
not that’s what he truly believes?
Well I’m just going to go out on a limb and say that, even
ten years after originally viewing it, Night of the Hunter is still
boring. It was no doubt shocking when it
was released back in 1955, but a lot of things have changed in 60 years—for the
most part now, it feels incredibly dated, which dilutes many of its climactic
scenes. The acting from the two main
child stars, most notably the little girl, is completely nonexistent; she just
throws out her lines with reckless abandon, and apparently no one behind the
camera cared if her tone matched her mood.
The writing is quite terrible, with characters frequently behaving
simply at the whim of the script, with little logical framework to back up
their actions. Many reviews dismiss
these problems by claiming the film was attempting a dreamlike atmosphere, which feels like a cop-out to allow them to like a movie that they otherwise wouldn't.
The only aspect where the film manages to succeed are in the
visuals, courtesy of cinematographer Stanley Cortez; this is a movie that’s
gorgeously, brilliantly shot. Even by
today’s standards, there are several scenes that will stay with you for the
rest of your life, like Willa’s lifeless body floating underwater, or the scene
of the preacher riding a horse across a sunset, his body seen in silhouette as
the kids watch him from afar. While I
found the score to be just an average example of early orchestral fluff, the
use of the Christian hymn “Leaning on the Everlasting Arms” as a motif for
terror is quite an inspired, and another absolutely genius, artistic decision.
But while there’s no denying that Cortez’s images will sear
themselves into your brain, and hymns make a great backdrop to attempted
terror, the problem is everything else will drop out instantly. I will not remember a single scene of Willa Harper
alive, and the only way the children remain memorable, is for the sheer
stupidity of their performances. That
might sound harsh to say about the acting chops of a six-year-old girl, and
slightly older boy, but come on—pretty much the entire movie is centered around
them, so you would think they would have gotten children that could actually
emote. And if you think I’m
exaggerating, the fact that both of their careers were over by the end of the
‘50s (while both of them are still alive today) is only further proof of their
inability to carry a picture.
RECAP: Night of the Hunter is considered a “classic”, and
by badmouthing it, I think I have just rejected my American citizenship. But I don’t care; while this might have been
a perfectly frightening movie 60 years ago, just about everything, save for its
extraordinary visuals, and its excellent use of "Leaning on the Everlasting Arms", are incredibly dated today. Clearly, I’m in the minority in my beliefs
(it frequently holds a spot on the IMDb’s top 250 list), so take my opinion
with a grain of salt, but the acting (mainly from the two young leads) is
atrocious, and the writing leaves a lot to be desired. Maybe it’s just not my cup of tea, but I
found Night of the Hunter to be an overrated horror "classic".
RATING: 5/10
TRAILER
No comments:
Post a Comment