This had to be one of the singularly worst adaptations of any work of fiction that I've ever seen. Seriously. Let me elaborate.
The majority of similarities between the story and the movie are mostly in the title: there is a house, there are dreams, and there is a witch. There are a few scenes that were transferred (Walter Gilman throwing flour on the floor to trace his somnambulism, purplish light appearing whenever the witch appears, and the very last event in the final scene). There were even several attempts at making signs of a genuine adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story including a seal for Miskatonic University, laughably (and poorly) edited from Brown University's own shield and cross. Several characters retain the same names and general roles, but the similarities end here.
There are random characters that were seemingly included just for the hell of it (namely Francis "Frankie" Elwood, atrociously portrayed by Chelah Horsdal). Not once in the movie are the witch or her "rat with a human face" familiar referred to by name, and yet somehow, they earn their respective names Keziah Mason and Brown Jenkin in the credits! There were many other huge departures from the story HUGE including a complete absence of any inter-dimensional jaunts by Gilman, which was THE main theme. And there are mentions of Satan in here no, no, NO!! Lovecraft NEVER incorporated Satan into his works, because beings like Satan (and the Other Guy) are just mankind's attempts at feeling there's some kind of reason and order to the world, when in fact we know NOTHING about the universe we live in! Lovecraft understood this concept, and he used it in EVERY one of his works. And even while this movie makes a focus on Gilman's studies on time and space, entering other dimensions, etc., his only "trips" are from one room of the house to another. Cheap? I'd say so! Oh, and to any fans of this flick might defend that it would be too costly or take too long to show alien worlds: if it was going to be such trouble, then why even TRY to make this into a movie, let alone a 55-minute made-for-TV one?!? H.P. Lovecraft had a knack for describing things that were so horrible, so alien, so inconceivable to people that he purposely left descriptions vague, simply because to comprehend some of his worlds and beings would be to go insane. It's next to impossible to describe HOW an alien could reduce a person into a gibbering, drooling maniac simply because of its size, let alone show it in a visual medium. If it was too much for Mr. Gordon to show, then why'd he even bother? There were also some pretty spotty production values, too, including a rat that looked like a rat, except close-ups showed a laughable amount of fake fur and two very fake-looking teeth pasted onto Yevgen Voronin's face. Add a smile and his Beavis laugh and you get a very pathetic excuse for a villain.
This installment of Masters of Horror is a film to be banished into oblivion along with two other terrible adaptations: "Bram Stoker's" Dracula and "Mary Shelly's" Frankenstein movies that claim to have faithful ties to their original works by including the author's name, but most likely as a cover for the huge liberties taken in the adaptation. Having "H.P. Lovecraft" in the moniker is an insult to the man, not only because he never wrote garbage like this, but never would.
Dear god, this movie was terrible. Just terrible. I don't even see how someone who ISN'T a fan of the original story could like it bad acting, bad directing, bad production, bad everything. My review includes one star simply because I can't rate with a zero which is what I honestly feel it deserves. Mr. Gordon? Shame on you.
The majority of similarities between the story and the movie are mostly in the title: there is a house, there are dreams, and there is a witch. There are a few scenes that were transferred (Walter Gilman throwing flour on the floor to trace his somnambulism, purplish light appearing whenever the witch appears, and the very last event in the final scene). There were even several attempts at making signs of a genuine adaptation of an H.P. Lovecraft story including a seal for Miskatonic University, laughably (and poorly) edited from Brown University's own shield and cross. Several characters retain the same names and general roles, but the similarities end here.
There are random characters that were seemingly included just for the hell of it (namely Francis "Frankie" Elwood, atrociously portrayed by Chelah Horsdal). Not once in the movie are the witch or her "rat with a human face" familiar referred to by name, and yet somehow, they earn their respective names Keziah Mason and Brown Jenkin in the credits! There were many other huge departures from the story HUGE including a complete absence of any inter-dimensional jaunts by Gilman, which was THE main theme. And there are mentions of Satan in here no, no, NO!! Lovecraft NEVER incorporated Satan into his works, because beings like Satan (and the Other Guy) are just mankind's attempts at feeling there's some kind of reason and order to the world, when in fact we know NOTHING about the universe we live in! Lovecraft understood this concept, and he used it in EVERY one of his works. And even while this movie makes a focus on Gilman's studies on time and space, entering other dimensions, etc., his only "trips" are from one room of the house to another. Cheap? I'd say so! Oh, and to any fans of this flick might defend that it would be too costly or take too long to show alien worlds: if it was going to be such trouble, then why even TRY to make this into a movie, let alone a 55-minute made-for-TV one?!? H.P. Lovecraft had a knack for describing things that were so horrible, so alien, so inconceivable to people that he purposely left descriptions vague, simply because to comprehend some of his worlds and beings would be to go insane. It's next to impossible to describe HOW an alien could reduce a person into a gibbering, drooling maniac simply because of its size, let alone show it in a visual medium. If it was too much for Mr. Gordon to show, then why'd he even bother? There were also some pretty spotty production values, too, including a rat that looked like a rat, except close-ups showed a laughable amount of fake fur and two very fake-looking teeth pasted onto Yevgen Voronin's face. Add a smile and his Beavis laugh and you get a very pathetic excuse for a villain.
This installment of Masters of Horror is a film to be banished into oblivion along with two other terrible adaptations: "Bram Stoker's" Dracula and "Mary Shelly's" Frankenstein movies that claim to have faithful ties to their original works by including the author's name, but most likely as a cover for the huge liberties taken in the adaptation. Having "H.P. Lovecraft" in the moniker is an insult to the man, not only because he never wrote garbage like this, but never would.
Dear god, this movie was terrible. Just terrible. I don't even see how someone who ISN'T a fan of the original story could like it bad acting, bad directing, bad production, bad everything. My review includes one star simply because I can't rate with a zero which is what I honestly feel it deserves. Mr. Gordon? Shame on you.