The Resurrected (1991) Reviews

• A hidden gem.

  Bynovekka12001-04-11

  Here's something you do not see everyday, a horror movie that actually remains faithful to book it was adapted from. Often film makers who alter the original product in the name of creativity needlessly dilute or destroy the story in the process. In 'The Resurrected' director Dan O'bannon wisely refrains from such tinkering. He takes H.P. Lovecraft's creepy classic, 'The strange case of Charles Dexter Ward', and places it amid late 20th century trappings. The result is a near perfect horror movie. The film starts off like a cheap detective novel. A hard boiled trench coat clad private investagator sits in his office waiting for his next case to come along. Enter a beautiful blonde who hires him to discover why her scientist husband is spending all of his time in his secluded lab. At first the P.I. believes the scientist, one Charles Dexter ward is having an affair. He soon finds Ward is involved not with a lover but a research partner. A mysterious fellow known only as Doctor Ash. The two are apparently engaged in highly secertive experiments involving tons of fresh meat. Shortly after this revealation, strange things begin happen in and around the Ward estate. Doctor Ash vanishes. Wards begins to conversing in antiquated speech. Ward's neighbors become the victims of grisley killings. As the case unfolds the detective follows these and other clues down a path that leads further and further into the preternatural. This film is something rare. A horror movie that is actually scary. It is probably the best ever adaptation of a Lovecraft story. The reason for this is simple. Unlike most filmakers director O'bannon had the common sense to let Lovecraft's masterful writing speak for itself.

  More

• Best adaptation of the Case of Charles Dexter Ward

  otto42004-05-13

  This movie is a must see, IF you've read the story and like it, and IF you've seen the other adaptation, "The Haunted Palace" with Vincent Price. Sure, this story is a bit different than the book. It's set in the modern day, and Charles Ward is a well-paid chemist at Belmar Cosmetics, not a young antiquarian débutante. And instead of Doctor Willet being the principle investigator, John Marsh P.I. is (nice nod to the Innsmouth stories with that last name). Aside from those differences necessary to bring this into the modern day, and aside from a very slight difference in how Joseph Curwen is ultimately dealt with, this follows the story in the book. It's all there: the portrait, the neighbor Fenner, the house in Pawtucket, and of course the underground labs of J.C. Curwen. There are story sequences set in Colonial times to build the story as well, and they are nicely done. But the real crowning glory of this movie is the sets they built for Curwens underground lab. They are MARVELOUS. Everything is there: the sanity blasting carvings, the "mistakes and screw-ups" raised from Imperfect salts, and the jars of Materia. I highly recommend this movie. I'm still treasuring my copy on Laser Disk and hoping that it someday comes out on DVD. Production is top notch, as is the music and of course the story.

  More

• You can almost smell the putrid flesh that fills this movie

  Freakest1999-03-09

  Here it is people! This is the best Lovecraft story adaptation for the big screen. It's also probably one of the best horror movies ever made, which makes it a must-see title for not only the genre fans, but to all of those who love this art. The story of a man who dared to fool around with death, finding a "cure" to it is certainly a tragic one. As in "Re-Animator", there are plenty of scary moments as well as extremely gory ones. It's always nice to watch movies that put the viewer "inside the action" to the point that at times, the smell of the action invades our homes. "The Resurrected" is certainly one of those movies!

  More

• An excellent adaptation of a classic Lovecraft tale!

  The_Void2006-06-08

  The nineties were a disappointing decade for the horror genre whichever way you look at it, so it's lucky that filmmakers like Stuart Gordon and Dan O'Bannon were on hand to adapt classic HP Lovecraft stories. Horror fans have got used to seeing a director's credit for the aforementioned Stuart Gordon and a starring role for the great Jeffrey Combs in Lovecraft films; but even though this one has neither, director Dan O'Bannon has succeeded in brining the classic "The Case of Charles Dexter Ward" to screen. Of course, this isn't the first screen adaptation of the classic story; as Roger Corman made a rather good one in 1963 with the classic 'The Haunted Palace'. The plot has shades of Re-Animator, and follows an investigation into a man who may have found a way to cheat death. The story starts when Charles Dexter Ward's wife visits a private detective, asking him to investigate her husband who has become a recluse; living in a house on their estate grounds. A strange smell of death permeates the air surrounding the retreat, and the neighbours are suspicious after seeing the amount of raw meat being delivered... The film doesn't contain a great deal of suspense, but the director masks this nicely with a great aura of mystery and intrigue. The film builds up to finally discovering the mystery behind what Charles Dexter Ward has been doing, and although it takes a while to get there - the film never gets boring because O'Bannon keeps the mystery bubbling. The special effects are a little silly, but they actually work quite well in the context of the film, and O'Bannon gets to show his twisted imagination with abominations such as a still-living mauled torso and many other otherworldly creatures. There's a lot of blood and guts too, and even though the film appears to be trying to imitate A-class horror, O'Bannon doesn't completely veer away from B-movie cinema. The acting is decent enough, but one of the few weak links for me. John Terry is more than a little unenthusiastic, while Chris Sarandon never completely convinces in the Vincent Price role of the villain. That really isn't important, however, as it's the atmosphere and the story that are the stars of the show here - and The Resurrected is strong in both those areas. This film is indeed a lost gem and one that deserves to be more seen!

  More

• What's everyone talking about?

  Jim-3822007-01-02

  I'm really confused by other users comments. After reading them I ordered a copy from the states as fast as my fingers could click to Amazon. I'm a huge fan of Lovecraft and to be told that this is the best film adaption of his work and that I'd never even heard of it made me think I was about to get my slime covered tentacles on a forgotten gem. Then it arrived and I must ask the other users, are you all completely bonkers? This is a terrible, terrible film. It's badly lit, shot, edited, acted and scripted. When the femme non fetale first arrives at the PI's office it's this dreadful side shot which just sits there for about five minutes while the two of them fail to act in each others general direction from the opposite sides of the screen. The rest of the film seems to consist of either seen it all before POV's or more of these overly lit side shots, I thought Dan O'Bannon could shoot films? Thank god the flashbacks break up the boredom. In a voice over Ward's wife says something like "He just left the party and said he had to do some work that couldn't wait", at which point Ward in the flashback says "I have to leave the party to do some work that cannot wait." Brilliant! It goes on like that for an hour and forty tedious minutes with a couple of goofy and gooey effects don't liven up the proceedings one bit, until it ends with Chris Sarandon hamming it up for all he's worth while I considered hanging myself from the tedium of it all. Come on guys, us Lovecraft fans have to be forgiving occasionally by the general low quality and/or budgets of his related movies, but we shouldn't let this film off the hook just because it sticks fairly close to the original story. I mean, Dagon is rubbish but at least it's FUN rubbish, this is just plain dull.

  More