IMDb user comments for
Cthulhu (2007) More at IMDbPro »

Filter:

Best Chronological Prolific Authors Loved It Hated It Hide Spoilers:

Page 1 of 3:

[1] [2] [3]

Index

30 comments in total

---

58 out of 77 people found the following comment useful :-
Yet another NON-LOVECRAFT movie, 20 September 2007

Author: digitalshark from United States

I really wanted to like this, especially with the glut of direct to video adaptations of Lovecraft stories (Beyond the Wall of Sleep etc) that are essentially student project level non-movies. But this is yet another example of a film that heavily relies on Lovecraft and yet totally jettisons any real relation to the author or his works, much less the sensibility behind them. It owes more to The Shadow Over Innsmouth than anything, and unfortunately that world was already realized in far better (yet still in woefully inadequate) fashion in "Dagon." To someone who loves Lovecraft as much as I, it's rather insulting this film is called "Cthulhu." There are ideas the writer and director were far more interested in, such as the main character's confused sexuality, than anything written by Lovecraft. So, why not drop the illusion of being a Lovecraft adaptation, and simply make the film that was there without him, since little in this film relates much to his writing? Answer? Because if you use his name and the titles of his works you gain free publicity and legitimacy. You will also let down legions of HPL fans because once again someone has made a film that seems to think it's own very uninteresting and pedestrian ideas have any place mixed in with the cosmic horror of Lovecraft. And worse, viewers who don't know HPL will once again be left with the opinion that "Gee, I guess he wasn't that good a writer." And with this sad example, you can probably add "Was Lovecraft gay?" to those questions.

---

47 out of 70 people found the following comment useful :-
Disappointed, 15 June 2007

Author: SteveSeattle from Seattle, WA

I was just at the "world premiere" of Cthulhu at the Seattle Int'l Film Festival tonight so this comment IS actually about the correct film. Someone connected to the film previously commented that some posts are not relevant or are about some other film - and gave a score of 10 while at it.

To be blunt: Cthulhu is not a good film. I had high hopes going in, as I do with all films shown at SIFF, but I was disappointed throughout and I know others were as well. From the mediocre-to-outright-horrible acting (except, ironically, for Tori Spelling who plays a sexy, baby-seeking blonde), to the lackluster script, to the 2 hour running time (note to director: you should be GLAD you were forced to reduce it to this length).... starting at the half-way point I could not wait for it to be over. Had the film been written and shot as a tongue-in-cheek comedic version of the story with intentional sarcasm, etc, it might have worked. But the combination of trying to make a serious film, plus the bad acting, makes Cthulhu not quite worth the celluloid it's printed on.

Kudos for Gildark for making ANY first film, especially because this one was made in my neck of the woods (and my neck of the woods needs more films made in it). But unfortunately it didn't work out - and Cthulhu likely doesn't have any chance of being commercially viable. If you're a Lovecraft fanatic you might have a different take altogether, but your numbers are probably too low to make much of a difference to help the film succeed. The rest of us just want/ed to be entertained by a good film. Will need to look elsewhere.

---

43 out of 68 people found the following comment useful :-
Where's the Lovecraft?, 18 June 2007

Author: Filmetta Baskin from United States

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

OK, I'm a long-time reader of H.P. Lovecraft, and I'll admit I have been disappointed again and again with film adaptations of his works. But this extremely loose adaptation of "The Shadow Over Innsmouth" would have Mr. Lovecraft spinning in his grave. The protagonist is a gay professor who travels the long two hours to his estranged mother's funeral. His homosexuality takes up a disproportionately large part of the movie, and I'm not quite sure why. Does it MATTER that he is gay? Isn't it rather cliché and a negative stereotype to show him in bed with a "street kid" and to include random Gus Van Sant-ish scenes of moody (and way too clean) rent boys on the "mean streets" of Seattle at the beginning of the film? What does that have to do with Fish-Creatures and Unutterable Horror!!? And why is he hooking up with his (straight) childhood buddy halfway through the movie and indulging in a loving sex scene with lots of back-patting and kissy-face when he is supposed to be investigating the suspicious disappearances of the locals at the hands of eldritch, nefarious creatures? Why was I subjected to a scene of the two friends as teenagers jacking off together at sunset under a pier? Where's Cthulhu??? I feel like I went to see "Brokeback Beach" instead of a chilling thrilling tale of the macabre. Who CARES if the guy is gay? I don't care! He can do what he wants on his own time! I just wanted to see scary stuff. Total monster screen time for this picture clocked in at about 30 seconds, unless you count Tori Spelling, then maybe you can bump it up to 15 minutes. Sigh...I don't know what these idiots were thinking. I won't even begin to relay the plot, because there wasn't one. I read a quote from the filmmakers that said they "didn't know anything about the horror genre and had no respect for it when they started this project." Well then, why did you make the film? Why choose Lovecraft to massacre?

I feel like I lost two hours of my life yesterday.

---

12 out of 14 people found the following comment useful :-
Weird, but never quite comes together., 27 August 2008

Author: CorrinMcCool from United States

I really wanted to like this movie. I'm a big fan of the Cthulu mythos, and the preview actually looked pretty good.

Unfortunately, this is yet another disappointing release from HERE TV.

The frustrating thing is that the movie almost works. There are a lot of wonderfully creepy little details: the bizarre check out girl who passes the protagonist a warning note, the strange kids saying "I knew you'd be back", the crazy things being reported on the news.

Unfortunately, the film never really gels. I never felt scared, or even particularly interested in what was going to happen to the main character. About half way though the film, the plot breaks down almost completely and weird random events seem to take over everything.

The film was at least mildly interesting in a "what sort of weird stuff will they throw out next" sort of way, but never really worked as a story.

Cinematography varies from some very nice shots of the ocean to some very amateurish hand held stuff.

---

17 out of 27 people found the following comment useful :-
The Thing That Should Not Be, 15 August 2008

Author: roboto-arigato from United States

This is a terrible adaptation of H.P. Lovecraft's "The Shadow Over Innsmouth." The acting was weak, the direction was weak, and the original content has been butchered. I saw this movie at the Seattle International Film Festival, and that was the worst mistake I made all weekend. If you want to see a film based on "Shadow Over Innsmouth," Stuart Gordon's "Dagon" is mediocre, but it's certainly better than this botched attempt. If you want to see "Call of Cthulhu," the silent film adaptation is great. But this? This film is a waste of time. I suspect the people who are writing 10 out of 10 scores are either friends of the director or shills who worked on the film. There is no earthly way this film is a 10. It stinks like a rotten pile of fish.

---

5 out of 5 people found the following comment useful :-
Total disappointment, 10 April 2009

Author: azraeliz (azrael@simnet.is) from Reykjavik, Iceland

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

When I heard about this movie last year I was very excited, maybe this time they would make a good Lovecraftian movie. I've been a fan Lovecraft for over 20 years now, and have read all of his stories and seen almost all the movies based upon his work. And as a general rule, those movies have been pretty bad, with 2 or three exceptions. But lets talk about this movie. It's based loosely upon on "Shadow over Innsmouth". the good things about the movie are the underlying dread and the nihilistic view upon current world affairs. The settings are good(a gay main character is an interesting twist) and the filmmakers manage to make the movie look creepy in few places

But...the bad things are too many to ignore. The acting is very bad, the main protagonist gets very annoying as the movie goes on. The editing makes film disjointed in places. The photography is like on a America funniest home video and the script is badly focused. After 40 minutes you cant wait for the film to end. And I must mention Jason Cottle wig/hairpiece at the beginning of the movie, it's atrociously bad and very funny to look at. I realize that the movie was made on tight budget and I respect the filmmakers for trying to make the best movie they could. I see the potential but they are not there yet.

For me this movie was a total disappointment, because i made the mistake of having high expectations for it.

---

4 out of 4 people found the following comment useful :-
''Jurrasic Park'' with no dinosaurs, 6 June 2009

Author: CanEvrenol from Istanbul, Turkey

I was very impressed with the first hour of this movie. I thought.. finally, a very good Lovecraft film. But where is the Cthulhu monster??!!!! This is like a Jurassic Park remake with no dinosaurs. I was so disappointed. Especially with that stupid song at the end! I mean how misplaced a tune can be! I see the final music at the end as a warm welcoming and letting go feeling.. as the protagonist lets go and accepts his Cthulhu identity. But still... Hello??? ..The Lovecraft audience is expecting something much much more different here.

A Lovecraft story is, above all, about those that lurk beyond. A glimpse is not enough Lovecraft bluntly shows us these creatures or entities whatever they are. This is what makes him unique. This is also what makes him not taken very seriously during his life time. And now this movie completely ignores that aspect - which is like betraying Lovecraft, n regard to using the name Cthulhu as the film's title.

I am sure the director and the producer of this film are not trying to exploit the Lovecraft fans but unfortunately that's what it comes down to. I mean, at the very least, this film should not have been named ''Cthulhu'' man. This is wrong.

The gay theme is OK. Actually it fits very well considering the ''secret identity'' theme of the Inssmouth people and Cthulu cult. But overall, this film turned out to be a rather heartbreaking experience for me.

I bet Lovecraft himself would be most unsatisfied with this film.

---

1 out of 1 people found the following comment useful :-
Surprisingly good, subtle horror film, 16 May 2009

Author: flightsuit from Pacifica, California

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

This film may be too good for its own good. In reading the comments here on IMDb, I see that some people really hated it. Having just watched it myself, I feel compelled to offer a counter-point, because I was very pleasantly surprised by many aspects of Cthulhu.

I very recently listened to a radio play based on Lovecraft's "The Shadow Over Innsbrook," and Cthulhu does a fine job of updating the story for modern audiences. Is it slavishly faithful to the original material? No. Does the film take great liberties with the story, and change many details? Yes.

But it also succeeds as a spooky movie, and really conveys a wonderfully creepy atmosphere with its beautiful cinematography and interesting directing and acting choices.

One thing I really respect about Cthulhu is the decision to make the central character a gay man. You might see that in a comedy or some drama about AIDS, but it's not often that anybody making a serious action, sci-fi, or horror film is going to take the risk of portraying their hero as a homosexual. Rest assured this film never lets its hero's sexual orientation get in the way of the story.

For that matter, it doesn't even get in the way of the hero winding up in a sex scene with Tori Spelling.

With a name like Cthulhu, some folks might be disappointed by the lack of tentacle-faced, ancient, alien-monster-gods in this film, but there really weren't any monsters in the Lovecraft story upon which it's based, other than the creepy townsfolk themselves.

I'd love to see the people responsible for this film make more Lovecraft-inspired movies, and perhaps reveal some squid-like, fishy-monsters in one of those, but that's probably too much to hope for.

---

6 out of 11 people found the following comment useful :-
Bucket of Fail, 5 April 2009

Author: Dean Wiltmann from United States

Being a lovecraft fan, I was waiting for this movie for a year since I had first heard of it. Who do I sue to get the time I spent watching this horrible movie returned?

There was no point to making the protagonist a bologna smuggler. The acting in the movie wasn't just sub-par it was pathetic. The Old Man which was one of the coolest parts of the short story, was the worst. Almost as bad as the chick in the store.

Some of the scenes were framed horribly as if it were a first year film student.

They usually say that the book is always better than the movie, but in this case watching a Miley Cyrus video elicits more fear and dread than this abortion of a film.

---

13 out of 25 people found the following comment useful :-
Lovecraft done right!, 23 August 2008

Author: HarryWarden from United States

The best way to describe CTHULHU is "Kiyoshi Kurosawa's Shadow Over Innsmouth." It's a very deliberately-paced movie with long, moody takes and an emphasis on character drama. This film is a completely love-it-or-hate-it affair. People expecting gore and monsters will be disappointed, but art-house horror fans and David Lynch lovers will be in pure bliss.

H.P. fanatics will argue the merits of this one, but the filmmakers are the first to nail the bizarre fever-dream aspect of Lovecraft's writings. There's a lot of nightmarish imagery and nothing is explained or resolved by the end. And while this is a very loose adaptation, there are plenty of nods to the Cthluhu mythos to keep fans happy.

The acting is a little uneven and there are times when the movie feels TOO disjointed, but this cerebral effort is still the closest we've come to seeing true Lovecraft captured on film. Those sick of Stuart Gordon's camp-fests, will find much to love about Cthulhu.

---

---

Page 1 of 3:

[1] [2] [3]

Add another comment

---

Related Links

Plot summary	Plot synopsis	Ratings
Awards	External reviews	Official site
Plot keywords	Main details	Your user comments
Your vote history