Thread #217766269 | Image & Video Expansion | Click to Play
File: Robert-Mitchum-The-Night-of-the-Hunter.jpg (214.4 KB)
214.4 KB JPG
Q: Is there a better depiction of good vs. evil in film?
A: No, there isn't
51 RepliesView Thread
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
File: ngrkllr.jpg (236.4 KB)
236.4 KB JPG
Charles Laughton, better known for being a fat zero on screen made this, and it is the amazing one hit wonder.
He probably liked to drink instead of tard wrangle his fellow dunkards.
IF YOU DON'T KNOW THIS MOVIE YOU DO NOT KNOW MOVIES.
Seriously.
>>
>>
>>
File: Adolph happy hitler.gif (1.6 MB)
1.6 MB GIF
>>217767500
That seems reasonable.
>>
>>217767617
>>217767830
Laughton quit because he was already rich and all the actors made fun of him for being amateur on set. The kid actor was the real director
>>
>>
File: fkgj.jpg (103.5 KB)
103.5 KB JPG
>>217767881
>amateur
Fuck off, capeshitter.
>>
>>
>>217767881
Mitchum lauded him in his AGI lifetime achievement award speech. I've never heard anything but praise for his work on this film. He didn't "quit" directing, he just didn't make any money at it and was essentially kept from ever trying again.
At any rate, the film is a masterpiece. Even Spike Lee paid homage to him. That's saying something.
>>
>>
>>217767859
Gish and Mitchum were the good and evil characters, the shepherd and the wolf. Everyone else was either a child or naive moralist. It's also inherently more Christian than LotR... but anyway, you're comparing a book to a film.
At least I hope..
>>
>>217766269
Night time footage of this was the most kino I've seen. Just college students holding onto their campus (+ legal system where rule of law is applied, not ppl going missing for bs reasons) while cicipee tried to drive them out. The Siege of HK Polytechnic Univ:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4E9qFiTc6go
>>
>>217768388
That touch of realism clouds the fantasy. Good guys should have a halo of light around them and bad guys should be utterly disgusting at all times, to reflect the symbolic nature of good and evil. Therefore the lotr FILM is a superior representation. If you want gritty grimy pomo shit, watch a gangster film
>>
>>
>>217768440
That good and evil are explicitly depicted the entire time is exactly why I like it so much. It doesn't have any grey areas to mull over. The line between good and evil, hero and villain, are neatly drawn. Maybe you should watch it again.
Btw Tolkien is one of my favorite authors.
>>
>>
>>
>>217768582
You may have a point if the opening scene wasn't the suave man confessing to murder. If your beef is that evil people have to be portrayed as ugly, I could understand that. Still wouldn't make me think Peter Jackson's junk is better than this by any metric.
>>
>>
>>217768620
Morally, this film exists in an uncomfortable gray area between fantasy like LOTR and reality. It's actually an underrated reason why the public couldn't handle it at the time, and why we see the masterpiece today: depraved serial killer fiction is much more popular now. There's an argument to be made that child killing psychopaths shouldn't be played by charming superstar actors, in the visual language of cinema etc., or that the story has no real leg to stand on in terms of a message -- today we see the beautiful emotions and performances, but "don't trust the bad guy" isn't a good enough message to support the brutal story. Is it even for kids, not really. It's much, much better with comfortable hindsight where we can put most of those concerns to rest.
>>
Beautiful cinematography but everything else sucks. Acting is Tommy Wiseau tier. People generally put all the blame on the kids but the adults are no better. The scene where the father is vocalizing his thought process about where to hide the money is straight out of a parody movie.
>>
>>217768432
>a nation reclaiming land that was stolen from it by the UK while a bunch of clueless young people brainwashed by literal CIA pro-american propaganda hold up signs is the best good vs evil story you've ever seen
It's morally grey at best and it's not even kino. You only posted this because you have China Derangement Syndrome from huffing too much American propaganda
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>217766269
let's be honest, the movie turns to shit after the kids go down the river and they end up at the old woman's house
>big bad serial killer chased off and defeated by a single old woman with a shotgun because he stupidly tries direct attacks on the house when that was never his style
did they just not know how to end the movie?
>>
>>217768825
It's like that through the entire fucking movie. Most of the actors rush through their lines with dogshit delivery. Mitchum has to carry the entire film on his back and even then they hamstring the guy by making him do shit like arm wrestle himself.
>>
>>
>>217768807
Anlot of that sort of thing was stylistic choice. It's very old fashioned for the time it was made, with lots of elements from silent films, stage acting and even vaudeville. That part is pretty funny to the modern ear, though. Surprised you mentioned that over say the exaggerated lurching arms chasing the children out of the cellar, or his yelping and screaming into the barn.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
Movie is very theological. One has to have a fairly solid understanding of Christian orthodoxy to not miss a lot of the themes. It's like when modern people read Moby Dick and just think it's gay and miss that the whale is a metaphor for God, lol. Anyway it's a pretty good flick.
>>
>>
>>
>>
File: yupp.jpg (31.5 KB)
31.5 KB JPG
>>217768473
Back. I liked it a lot. I do think that the acting is the worst part of the film, and weirdly enough the opening section is the weakest. John is an entertaining character and I enjoyed seeing him wrestle with Powell. Overall it was shot well and there were a couple fantastic scenes. That scene where John wakes up and sees Powell singing while riding across the horizon line was genuinely horrifying. Also the scene where he's walking around the house calling out for them. A lot of my gripes with this film come from personal preferences since i'm generally not too fond of the overly sappy dialogue/acting of this era. Still a great film