HODS Revisited

[Brandon Collins]

  

[Brandon Collins]

Okay, so I realized that my first post was deleted when I tried to put those new graphics at the end, which, hey, not nice.

I'm taking a film class this semester, and I have a paper due tomorrow about "sound in film." One thing we have to do is watch the first five or ten minutes of a film with no sound. So I picked HODS. Watched the first ten with no sound, and I can't believe how fast it moves. I mean, all that exposition and all those character introductions in that short amount of time! Imagine some one who isn't familiar with the material trying to keep all those people straight! It would be impossible!

Watched it back with sound (another requirement of the paper) and I was amazed at how much the score slowed the film down. I mean, I know that the music is slow and moody, but it really slows the screen action down. Try it and see if you see the difference. Maybe it's just me.

Also, I noticed what might be a continuity error. Watch the scene when Daphne is walking down the driveway. We cut away to see Barnabas' feet walking through the woods. Here his coat is short, and his boots don't look period. Then, watch the scene where Maggie is locked in the room in the Old House and we see Barnabas' feet walking towards the camera out in the hall. Here his boots look period, and his coat is MUCH longer. Not sure about the boots being different because it could just be the lighting or the camera angle, but the coat definitely looks shorter in the former scene.

[MagnusTrask]

Someone whom I'll protect legally by not giving the name sent me HODS weith Elvira recently.    The first thing she makes fun of is the fact that they just launch into things without setting up the characters or setting.   Who are these people?   where are they? she wonders.

It all seems more rushed than the series.

 

[Mysterious Benefactor]

Okay, so I realized that my first post was deleted when I tried to put those new graphics at the end, which, hey, not nice.

However did you manage that? 

Imagine some one who isn't familiar with the material trying to keep all those people straight! It would be impossible!

The first thing she makes fun of is the fact that they just launch into things without setting up the characters or setting.   Who are these people?   where are they? she wonders.

That's one of the major complaints with the film. Though much of the blame lies with the fact that nearly everything having to do with David hanging himself in Maggie's closet was subsequently cut out. It might not have made much difference if it had all taken place later in the film - but when practically all of the intended introduction ends up on the cutting room floor, it makes a big difference.

[Nancy]

HODS was an opportunity missed.  I agree with Elvira; if you do not know anything about the characters from the series or barnabas' history, it's hard to warm up to the characters, let alone care about what happens to them.

It was so rushed.  Other than lacking a sufficient set up for introducing the characters to the audience, the film starts to fall to pieces in the second half where Barnabas goes on a rampage and bites everyone in his path.  It's a shame the screenplay was not written any better or Curtis could not see how telling the story of Barnabas and how he became a vampire would be a new entry into the horror film genre particularly when barnabas bemoans his fate, wishing to become human again.

I have never understood why the second half of the script was written the way it was.

HODS seems like Curtis' chance to break off from the perceived "kiddie audience" that watched the series and start running with the adult crowd who had to be over 17 (or with a guardian) to see the film in all its bloody glory.  So many opportunities lost to make it a good film.

Someone whom I'll protect legally by not giving the name sent me HODS weith Elvira recently.    The first thing she makes fun of is the fact that they just launch into things without setting up the characters or setting.   Who are these people?   where are they? she wonders.

It all seems more rushed than the series.

[buzz]

I think Dan Curtis was attempting to copy the Hammer films that were then very popular. In doing so he took away the unique qualities that made the series a success and turned Barnabas into a Christopher Lee killing machine. A real disapointment since DC used the same characters from the series and could have either presesnted a new take or given the "big budget" (bigger certainly than the TV show) to a storyline, perhaps the 1795 storyline, or the introduction of Barnabus.

Nick      

[MagnusTrask]

DC got to do Barnabas as he had wanted originally--- a straight-ahead villain who gets staked.    Problem is, vampire stories like that are a dime a dozen.

 

[Nancy]

I am one of those people who believe Dan Curtis never understood the essential charm of Dark Shadows.  He didn't get it.  The subsequent movie made that clear.  Curtis succeeded with DS not because of his talent but in spite of himself.  I will say he was willing to take chances and try new things which is a big plus for a director and producer in my book.  He had nothing to do with the creation of the Barnabas character we all came to know on the series so it was no surprise the film took the direction it did.  It was DC's team of writers and the actor himself who created the vacillating vampire of DS!

nancy

I think Dan Curtis was attempting to copy the Hammer films that were then very popular. In doing so he took away the unique qualities that made the series a success and turned Barnabas into a Christopher Lee killing machine. A real disapointment since DC used the same characters from the series and could have either presesnted a new take or given the "big budget" (bigger certainly than the TV show) to a storyline, perhaps the 1795 storyline, or the introduction of Barnabus.

[Brandon Collins]

I consulted Darren Gross' passage in "The Dark Shadows Movie Book" for my paper and I believe even he said in what he wrote that because so much was chopped up from the beginning that it was hard for any new audiences who were not familiar with the material to distinguish between everyone. I remember reading something about how people may have even thought that Roger and Liz were husband and wife instead of brother and sister.

I think cutting the hanging-David gag scene really nixed the opportunity for people to get to know these characters and their respective roles at Collinwood, because if I remember correctly from reading the script, that scene did help out to distinguish people and their various statuses.

Hopefully the JD DS film will learn from past DS film mistakes. And maybe, if we're lucky enough that WB releases the two movies with all the cut material, we'll get to see how it was intended to be shown in the first place.

[Gothick]

The ironic thing about hoDS historically is that from what I have read (not my own research), the movie did boffo box office business.  So, even if it was a failure on other levels, commercially it was a huge hit--in an industry which has a history of total myopia beyond anything other than commercial success.  By market dictates, DC got it right on the money.

I do think the movie benefited from the cinematography of Arthur Ornitz.  He gave the proceedings a very lush visual style (although I think there were a couple of gaffes--notably the first shot in which we see Barnabas full-face, which is poorly, awkwardly framed and not properly lit at all--I'm quite sure that the speed with which they churned it out is to blame for this).
And, of course, Robert Cobert's score, not to mention Lela Swift's uncredited work as AD helped a great deal with atmosphere and tone.

Wasn't the axing of a lot of the introductory stuff the result of pressure from the MGM suits?  I believe that Dan deleted the later sequences establishing Barnabas and Julia's relationship before he delivered the final print to the studio, but I thought that on Darren's old site there was material about cuts that the suits wanted for the sake of conserving their 90 minute running time for drive-in showings and double bills.

hoDS and NoDS weren't the only films of that period ruined by excessive cutting.  Dr Phibes rises again is another example although I think it still holds up pretty well.  There are others that could be mentioned.

Another irony is that Hammer studios was on very shakey ground in 1970-71.  I think it was around this time that Warner Bros. decided not to renew the deal to distribute Hammer's product in the US--now that I think of it, I think this came a bit later, in '73?  I know this is why some of the final Hammers such as Satanic Rites of Dracula and To the Devil, a Daughter, took so long to play in the US and weren't exhibited very widely.

G.

[buzz]

Gothick,

I believe you're correct that there was studio interference regarding the screening time. The story and characters needed to be fleshed out, and a longer run time would have helped, although I don't think it would have changed the body count and the bloody ending.

Cinematography was nice. Its a shame that DS did not retain any of its personality and became just another vampire movie.

Nick

[Gerard]

HODS seems like Curtis' chance to break off from the perceived "kiddie audience" that watched the series and start running with the adult crowd who had to be over 17 (or with a guardian) to see the film in all its bloody glory.

The ironic thing is that when I saw it in the theater that Autumn day in 1970, virtually everyone in the audience were kiddies.  I stood in line with scads of them for two hours to get in.  Of course, it was a Saturday matinee, so that would make a difference.  All those kiddies, like me, were fanatical lovers of the series.  When the opening credits began to roll with that familiar theme, everyone jumped up and down, applauded and screamed.  In that particular audience, everyone was familiar with the characters.  As they appeared, voices shrieked out:  "There's Liz!...There's Roger!...There's Maggie!...There's Carolyn!...There's Willie!...There's you-name-'em!"

It would've been interesting to go to an evening viewing when the film-goers were undoubtedly of a much older species and see their reactions.  But then, my mom would've never allowed that.  It exasperated her enough that I went to a Saturday matinee to see the big-screen version of the show, which she called "that spooky crap," that destroyed her ability to watch Art Linkletter's House Party on another channel.

Gerard

[Brandon Collins]

MGM did say that they wanted cuts to be made, just like with NODS, to preserve running time. I'm unsure as to whether or not DC personally decided to cut the Barn/Julia relationship scenes, as Gothick suggested. The David hanging scene was cut due to poor testing results when the film was screened originally before release.

I agree that the cinematography was excellent, save for a few angles. One of my favorite shots in the entire film is when Barnabas and Maggie are walking during the daylight and we see them as shot from a high angle, in that beach tree, as they are walking underneath. I've always thought that shot was very inventive and beautiful.

[Nancy]

I agree with what's been said here about the editing choices of HODS.  Of course, we can't blame editing or lack thereof for the second part of the film.  It was a choice for Barnabas to go on a bloody rampage and kill almost every Collins in sight.  That's how the second half of the movie was written.

I remember the film being wildly popular at the time of its release.  I do remember not wanting to go see it a second time.  They got me in there the first time to see it, and that was it.

I was not old enough to get into the cinema without a guardian so I went with my older cousin.  I remember coming out of the theater and my father picking us up. When I got into the car, the first thing I did was complain "They killed Barnabas!"  I wondered if he was off the show too.  My father responded, "Honey, they are making too much money off that guy to kill him off for good."

That also reminds me of when Jonathan Frid made an appearance in the Philadelphia area at the prized Devon Horse Show.  I wanted my father to take me (I loved horses too!) but he would not predicting, rightfully "You'll never get near him and probably won't get a look at him with all the people."  Indeed, as it turned out, Frid's appearance did turn into a mob scene and the police had to rescue him from the throngs.  I think a helicopter was involved getting him out of there too but I'm not sure.

Nancy

[David]

 



Buzz is right on!
HODS is a Hammer film, & I love it for those reasons!

And I love the TV show for it's romantic elements.

DS & HODS are different entities that are not comparable to  each other.

BTW, in 1970, MGM was in dire financial straits.
HODS & Shaft are the two films that kept the studio from going under.
HODS was THAT big of a hit.

David