tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post3935668991214299541..comments2024-03-29T04:57:26.162-04:00Comments on John Kenneth Muir's Reflections on Cult Movies and Classic TV: The Films of 1958: The FlyJohn Kenneth Muirhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15629979615332893780noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-53499913067048191982016-11-30T15:15:04.107-05:002016-11-30T15:15:04.107-05:00John, I agree with your overall impression of &quo...John, I agree with your overall impression of "The Fly" and despite the plot holes you describe, I find it a dramatic movie. This movie--this story--is less about the fly itself than about *human* horror and the risks of toying with nature. As such, I find it more moving than Cronenberg's remake precisely because it is less literal: it tries less to dramatize the physical transformation than to depict the cost to the human psyche of rapid technological advancement. I am less invested, and therefore less interested in, the much more literal remake.<br /><br />The metaphorical approach to the material in the 1958 version, with the shroud you so rightly focus on, allows more emotional investment by enabling the audience's imagination--one of the ways in which the less-is-more school of filmmaking can be more fulfilling. It's what Hitchcock knew that so many filmmakers do not. I'm thinking of "The Elephant Man", where David Lynch made adroit decisions about not aiming the camera too directly at John Merrick until the drama called for it. He is mostly hooded, silhouetted, cast as a distorted shadow on walls, or viewed obliquely. It would have been unreasonable to expect Merrick to spend the entire movie behind a screen as in the stage play, which would have been totally uncinematic, but I think Lynch's choices with the camera and the use of shadowy black-and-white worked to highlight the fact that "The Elephant Man" is more about people's reactions to Merrick than it is about Merrick himself. The shroud in "The Fly" serves the same purpose: what frightens Helene is less her husband's physical changes than his cognitive and emotional ones.<br /><br />Vincent Price represents us in the narrative, as the person who is at first skeptical of the story while trying to help Helene, humoring her a bit at first and then progressing to full investment in the situation as he learns more--and then having to convince Charas as well as help Helen maintain her precarious sanity. The scene where the fly is initially spotted in the house but released by the housekeeper is excruciatingly suspenseful and so well placed in the story arc. Kathleen Freeman as the housekeeper is so excellent that I'm drawn right into her portrayal and forget her marvelous comedic turns in every Jerry Lewis movie made from Artists & Models onward! She was brilliant in both comedy and drama. <br /><br />I always found the little human-headed fly crying "Help meeeee!" to be not nearly as funny as Charas killing it with that huge rock! I mean, could he have found a bigger rock to hit it with? Maybe a safe to drop on it?Sherinoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-44183248834426368422016-11-29T21:21:43.707-05:002016-11-29T21:21:43.707-05:00Such a classic. The climax is still, to this day, ...Such a classic. The climax is still, to this day, one of the most disturbing, unsettling, sickest, climaxes in movie history. Real nightmare material. Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03097420555737415471noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12380553.post-33007204790570697752016-11-29T19:31:47.071-05:002016-11-29T19:31:47.071-05:00One of the most traumatizing scenes in movie histo...One of the most traumatizing scenes in movie history. The parody on The Simpsons Halloween Special did me a world of good.4thtroikahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13585399018986041295noreply@blogger.com