Change Your Image
bige70
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Reviews
Daniel Came Home (2023)
Micro-Budget Cinema and the Successful Art of Less is More
Of course, the Internet Movie Database is littered with ill-considered wailing and gnashing of teeth regarding the inadequacies of low (or even micro) budgeted movies. This review is not for the likes of those people, rather it is for those of us that appreciate the difficulties of getting something on screen and love to see non-professional film-makers succeed.
Here, Brian Gregory adapts from his own short story 'Daniel' that was published in the 5th BHF Book of Horror Stories. In many ways, this is a modern British take on Bob Clark's 1974 Canadian classic Dead of Night. In other words, it's about a young man returning home from the battlefield. In both pieces, the audience cottons onto the idea that the soldier might not be all that he once was rather quicker than the parents.
Gregory makes the most of what he's got - the acting is good for a micro-budget project, but the director cleverly limits the amount that the performers have to do, and edits quickly and cleanly to emphasise effect.
The choice of black and white film also benefits the production greatly, light and shade, vague shapes, pulls in and out of focus that are not overplayed but add to a sense of ambiguity and surrealism. There is an easily established creepiness running through the sharp, stark look and the soundtrack rotates between eerie compositions, the sound of thunder and frequently spare dialogue.
There is a striking stillness to the early close-ups of Daniel (Adam Eveson) and a patient lack of speech, keeping the film short's powder dry until necessary.
David Keyes as Jack, the Dad, is a well-drawn character (not caricature) who is inherently racist, casually nasty and betrays a creepy need to invite everyone into his nauseous world view.
The make-up on Daniel does not overplay its hand (perhaps a successful mantra for the whole production). The ear is a surprise (I'm not telling you how!) but otherwise the battle-marked face is suitably suggestive without giving all the answers, even if we think we know where we are being led.
A final blast of gory colour leaves a lasting impact suitable for a film that overall does likewise.
Is it Hollywood standard? Well, no. But it offers a glimpse of talent and good movie-making sense on a shoestring and is well worth your time.
The Man from Nowhere (1976)
Modern Film Makers Could Learn something...
Nice to see that the BFI have released a decent copy of this on R2 DVD, along with two other spooky stories from the Children's Film Foundation. If I can get the negatives out of the way, CFF films obviously focused on kids and it's rare for a film of this ilk to have loads of top talent available as far as child actors are concerned. Clearly these films had little in the way of budget too. The good news is that these particular kids are, at the very least, a pleasant bunch and so the variable acting skills are easily forgiven - and there's good adult support from the likes of Ronald Adam and John Fforbes-Robertson (Dracula in hammers 'Legend of the 7 golden Vampires'. Regarding the budget, full marks to the crew for finding some great atmospheric locations - a fine looking period house, a station with a working steam train and perfect woodland. It all helps to make it look more expensive than it was. As for the story, well, it's very simple and this is a lesson for the modern film makers. Complicated doesn't mean good, necessarily. And simple doesn't mean bad. It's a fine line between genre iconography and cliché. Sometimes, when we want to watch a spooky story in an old dark house, the expected tropes are exactly what we seek. In this case, an orphaned young girl is sent to stay with her poorly Uncle but is immediately set upon by a frightening figure in black who warns her to leave the house. The figure always seems to vanish into 'nowhere'. Who is trying to scare the girl away and why? I dare say that you'll guess the answer well before the end (which is under an hour) but it really won't matter. Lesson 2 for modern film makers. You don't have to rely on lazy, mechanical editing of sudden moves and loud noises. That isn't scary anyway, just makes you jump. In this quaint old kids film, what happens is presented simply. The noises are not violently jarring, there are no special effects. But it manages to be a 100 times more atmospheric. If you're unable to view an old film within context, then you'll be disappointed. However, with the right frame of mind you may well feel that this short tale is a nostalgic treat, an uncovered treasure...and a clear lesson for the depressingly talentless laziness of the modern ghost story film maker.
Ten Little Indians (1989)
Far better than I expected
I like a bit of Christie, and love a lot of old dark house mysteries, and body count films are okay too. Should'nt really be able to go wrong here! Most criticism seems to be about the change of setting to an African Safari, and I agree, this really does lose some of the creepy atmosphere, just as the 74 version did with its proximity to a desert near Istanbul (was it??? Please feel free to put me right on that.) However, Harry Alan Towers produced 3 separate versions of this tale and, whilst I agree that the 1945 Rene Clair directed version is the best hands down, for setting, for staying true to the source material, for direction, at the same time, the others can also boast some great performances from actors you have just got to love. My first experience of the story was with the 1974 version starring Ollie Reed, Richard Attenborough, Herbert Lom, Gert Frobe. I was in my teens and it had me gripped. Last year I bought it on DVD and could see the weaknesses. However, I still love it. Still great actors and I love Peter Collinson's directorial work. The 65 version that Towers produced also took liberties with setting ( a ski lodge ) but at least, in black and white? maintained the big old house creepiness. This final version was the one I failed to track down until now... Acting-wise, you've got Donald Pleasence (sublime), Herbert Lom (brilliant but underused), Frank Stallone (not great but solid enough), Brenda Vaccarro (dependable) and Paul L Smith (crazy over actor, but always entertaining). The actors unknown to me were either great or acceptable. The new setting maintained the sense of isolation, the general story remained the same and, best of all...the director Alan Birkinshaw, managed to avoid what he did with Killer's Moon (1979) and Don't Open Till Christmas (1984) - which is to say, he didn't show off the directorial aplomb of a gorilla with a super 8 camera and a machete. Is it the best version - no! Is it fun - yes! Die-hard anoraks can weep and wail and gnash their teeth but I'd sooner have three reasonable film versions than none at all and, like a fellow poster, I think that giving Pleasence a crack at this one is always going to be worth it!