The Whisperer in Darkness

Some memorable, shivery moments--and Foyer's Crispin Glover-esque lead performance is on the money--but this is pretty talky and ultimately just a tiny bit unsatisfying, despite a valiant effort from all involved and some genuinely inspired, creative filmmaking. Lovecraft's work, like Poe's, simply doesn't translate well from page to screen, though you've gotta give this one mad props for what it does pull off.

disappointment

A bit too stagey and drawn-out for my tastes, and that's coming from a Lovecraft fanboy. Has some atmospheric moments that genuinely drew me in, but then something hokey happens that kills the mood again. Still waiting for that Cthulhu Mythos film that's genuinely, non-stop uncomfortably terrifying. Matt Foyer is a pretty awesome lead for the material though, he has that 'man constantly out of his league' look down pat.

An excellent production of H.P. Lovecrafts story of the same name. Even though it is unfortunately marred by cinematic license it will still satisfy fans.

Why is it trying to look like an old B-movie? That doesn't add anything to the atmosphere and ends up being even more distracting because of how fake it looks.

Starts and stutters narratively for awhile grappling with Lovecraft's original material before finally tapping out for a Flash Gordon finale. The acting is particularly strong here, production values only hinting at its low budget for the most part and direction to elevate it to the top of the heap for fan films. Unfortunately something still seems to hold it trapped in that seemingly amateur fringe. It may be that personal ownership of the material must be taken to get beyond simple mimicry.

Still good, but I enjoyed "Call of Cthulhu" much more. I guess shorter time suits better this kind of stories.

It somehow managed to go from a pretty good film using elements of 1930s-1940s cinema, to a very cheap looking, CGI exploiting, mess. Not awful, but certainly not "Call of Cthulu"

One of the most inconsistent movies I've seen in recent memory. The tonal change is so drastic that it's clear the different parts of the film were written in two completely disparate time periods. As such, this film is kind of a let down after "The Call of Cthulhu." I strongly recommend seeing that one over "The Whisperer in Darkness" and only recommend this one for hardcore Lovecraft fans.

Looks more like a 1950's SF movie SET in the thirties than the "made in the '30s" picture it claims to be, but that's a nitpick. This is just a great Matinee Movie, a real kick whether you are familiar with Lovecraft or not. I hope this team keeps at it -- they get better with each picture. Highly recommend!

Ambitious and likably retro but just too talky. "Call of Cthulhu" is much more engaging and spectacular.

Well shot and surprisingly well acted for such a small production, and the climax is really a wonderfully done bit of retro filmmaking, but like it's source it's remarkably slow and far too talky for its own good. Worth a watch, as like "Call of Cthulhu" it proves that Lovecraft on film can be done well, but not nearly as thrilling as one would hope.

Amazing what they could do with that budget. I loved it because of the Thriller more than the Horror.

It doesn't seem to know if it wants to be 30s horror, 40s crime drama or a 50s sci-fi B movie, but at least once it gets into either of those it does it well, and they (unsurprisingly) nail the Lovecraft feel.