The WHF Film Club

[richardw42]

I'm not altogether sure del Toro sees it as having particularly mythic properties.

I think he's rigidly stuck to it as a theme (some would say too much). But maybe he wanted to really emphasise the 3 distinct realms in the film.

3 does seem an efficient number for representing extremes. Take the porridge in Goldilocks. Too hot, too cold, just right.

Or the film The Good, The Bad & The Ugly. 🙂

 

[richardw42]

The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost?

oh yeah. That too.

 

[BenLaw]

I'm not altogether sure del Toro sees it as having particularly mythic properties.

I think he's rigidly stuck to it as a theme

I don't get what the 'theme' is then? Other than just having 3 of various things at various points.

 

[strapped for cash]

The Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost?

Though del Toro is a lapsed Catholic.

We're simply listing things that come in threes, a process that could potentially go on indefinitely (for instance "snap, crackle, and pop").

I was asking why del Toro (and/or others) might attach significance to this number. With no answer to this question, "three" becomes an arbitrary number. We could just as easily pick the number five and list assorted historical quintets.

Incidentally, MoC and the BFI have some really good upcoming BD releases. I already mentioned Eyes Without a Face and Wake in Fright, but these may be of interest, also...

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Werner-Herzog-Collection-7-disc-Blu-ray/dp/B00I7TXG7U/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1394747980&sr=8-1&keywords=werner+herzog+blu+rayhttp://www.amazon.co.uk/Harold-Maud...9&sr=8-6&keywords=eyes+without+a+face+blu+ray

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Nashville-Masters-Cinema-Edition-Blu-ray/dp/B00I5QVT2O/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1394745749&sr=8-3&keywords=eyes+without+a+face+blu+ray

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Harold-Maude-Masters-Cinema-Blu-ray/dp/B00I5PO8BY/ref=sr_1_6?ie=UTF8&qid=1394745749&sr=8-6&keywords=eyes+without+a+face+blu+ray

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Masters-Cinema-Blu-ray-Federico-FELLINI/dp/B00GWJSZXC/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1394746034&sr=8-1&keywords=roma+blu+ray

 

[strapped for cash]

Not sure what happened with the links above, which have been jumbled up somehow. Oh well, the titles are in the text...

 

[BenLaw]

On the subject of Eureka, I watched Island of Lost Souls the other day, having taken a punt on buying a blu ray I'd never seen before. What a film! Off the top of my head I can't think of a more well-known US horror from the period (in particular the Universal monsters you referred to earlier) that betters it. Genuinely troubling film, which 80+ years on is some feat. Great performance from Laughton and a marvellously restored transfer, apart from some soft focus early on it was remarkable,

I've also got part way through the DVD of Vampyr, need to get it finished this time.

Mark Kermode reviewed the Australian film we were discussing earlier, the animal cruelty stuff sounds like it may be a tough watch.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Not sure what happened with the links above, which have been jumbled up somehow. Oh well, the titles are in the text...

Very strange. It's a bit like that Malaysian Airways plane disappearing, or even weirder, people leaving clubs, then posting even more often than they did when they were still a member.

It's a strange world we live in. :twisted:

 

[BenLaw]

BBB, I watched Spanking the Monkey recently too, I was very impressed. From how you'd described it I was expecting something a little more, er, outlandish! Wasn't aware it was a David O, Russell film. Quite sensitively done but with obviously a very troubling subject matter, more troubling because most of the triggers leading to is problems seemed fairly mundane and ordinary, but nonetheless the results of them (incest, suicide attempts) didn't seem unbelievable.

 

[strapped for cash]

people leaving clubs, then posting even more often than they did when they were still a member.

You remember some of my official posts on this thread, right?

Truth told, I find myself at a looser end this week, hence the unofficial contributions. (And Ben asked for my opinion.) I'll return to "lurker" status in the near future.

 

[strapped for cash]

On the subject of Eureka, I watched Island of Lost Souls the other day, having taken a punt on buying a blu ray I'd never seen before. What a film! Off the top of my head I can't think of a more well-known US horror from the period (in particular the Universal monsters you referred to earlier) that betters it. Genuinely troubling film, which 80+ years on is some feat. Great performance from Laughton and a marvellously restored transfer, apart from some soft focus early on it was remarkable,

Better than both versions of The Island of Dr. Moreau, then!

I've also got part way through the DVD of Vampyr, need to get it finished this time.

I'm guessing you found this a less compelling watch.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

BBB, I watched Spanking the Monkey recently too, I was very impressed. From how you'd described it I was expecting something a little more, er, outlandish! Wasn't aware it was a David O, Russell film. Quite sensitively done but with obviously a very troubling subject matter, more troubling because most of the triggers leading to is problems seemed fairly mundane and ordinary, but nonetheless the results of them (incest, suicide attempts) didn't seem unbelievable.

The title is somewhat misleading isn't it, but it's a very good film, and definitely worth a watch by anyone who hasn't seen it.

It's a very simple story really, funny, in a very dark way, and I've no doubt, a very true to life storyline for quite a few families.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

people leaving clubs, then posting even more often than they did when they were still a member.

You remember some of my official posts on this thread, right?

Truth told, I find myself at a looser end this week, hence the unofficial contributions. (And Ben asked for my opinion.) I'll return to "lurker" status in the near future.

Well, your official posts were certainly of greater length, but I have to say, they seemed less frequent. 🙂

It's nice to have you contributing though, even if you're still leaving me completely flummoxed at times.

 

[Frank Harvey]

On the subject of Eureka, I watched Island of Lost Souls the other day, having taken a punt on buying a blu ray I'd never seen before. What a film! Off the top of my head I can't think of a more well-known US horror from the period (in particular the Universal monsters you referred to earlier) that betters it. Genuinely troubling film, which 80+ years on is some feat. Great performance from Laughton and a marvellously restored transfer, apart from some soft focus early on it was remarkable,

Love that film, despite only having seen it for the first time less than two years ago. Watched it a few times now, and enjoy it every time. Laughton was excellent. The story was way ahead if its time.

 

[richardw42]

The number 3 does come up a lot history, maths etc.

i don't particularly this it's got any significance and it's just happened that way.

Take ken a story for example 2 characters can be as different as night & day, black & white. Introduce a third and it adds balance. 4,5 or more just gets confusing. Story writers find it a good way of telling their story.

Del Toro has obviously noticed this and has expanded on it.

 

[strapped for cash]

That's essentially what I was getting at. Significance is only attached to the number three because it recurs across myths and fairy tales.

The number three therefore becomes an archetype. (As defined by the OED, "a recurrent symbol or motif in literature, art, or mythology.")

 

[richardw42]

Agreed. In the case of PL Significance is because of it's continuing occurrence (probably have to ask GdT on that).

But not why has it been used so much eg Pythagoras called it the perfect number.

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

Pythagoras called it the perfect number.

And Bob Dorough and De La Soul called it the magic number.

 

[strapped for cash]

Though there are many "perfect numbers," including odd perfect numbers that are indivisible by three.

I'm happy to conclude (drawing on linguistic theory) that the number three is only significant in myths and fairy tales through repeated use and emphasis. (In other words, it's not "the magic number," as De La Soul once stated.)

 

[strapped for cash]

De La Soul called it the magic number.

Doh!

 

[BenLaw]

On the subject of Eureka, I watched Island of Lost Souls the other day, having taken a punt on buying a blu ray I'd never seen before. What a film! Off the top of my head I can't think of a more well-known US horror from the period (in particular the Universal monsters you referred to earlier) that betters it. Genuinely troubling film, which 80+ years on is some feat. Great performance from Laughton and a marvellously restored transfer, apart from some soft focus early on it was remarkable,

Better than both versions of The Island of Dr. Moreau, then!

I've also got part way through the DVD of Vampyr, need to get it finished this time.

I'm guessing you found this a less compelling watch.

Have you seen Island of Lost Souls? I fell asleep 20mins before the end of Vampyr last night so I can't disagree with that. Of some academic interest given it's almost a silent film (lots of silent scenes, lots of written text) but with some scenes of dialogue. It also has a commentary from GDT so given the current discussion I will try to see what he has to say on that film.

 

[BenLaw]

On the subject of Eureka, I watched Island of Lost Souls the other day, having taken a punt on buying a blu ray I'd never seen before. What a film! Off the top of my head I can't think of a more well-known US horror from the period (in particular the Universal monsters you referred to earlier) that betters it. Genuinely troubling film, which 80+ years on is some feat. Great performance from Laughton and a marvellously restored transfer, apart from some soft focus early on it was remarkable,

Love that film, despite only having seen it for the first time less than two years ago. Watched it a few times now, and enjoy it every time. Laughton was excellent. The story was way ahead if its time.

Yes, I thought it was pretty remarkable. Ahead of it's time is an interesting comment as it was based (reasonably closely bar the sexual element, I believe) on the 19th century book by H.G. Wells. That nearly 120 years later some of the ideas still seem relevant is testament to his writing and imagination.

Also features a great horror film quote: 'don't tell him about me, don't tell him about The Law and don't tell him about the House of Pain'!!

 

[BIGBERNARDBRESSLAW]

I'm now multi-region, so I might have a look at one of the many dvds I bought later, or Delicatessen on blu-ray, which arrived yesterday.

Decisions. :?

 

[strapped for cash]

Have you seen Island of Lost Souls?

Admittedly not. Given the number of films in existence (not to mention the number of films lost), such oversights are probably inevitable.

I fell asleep 20mins before the end of Vampyr last night so I can't disagree with that. Of some academic interest given it's almost a silent film (lots of silent scenes, lots of written text)

Vampyr was made during an interesting period, when filmmakers were figuring out how to use new technology, and audiences were adapting to (and in some ways influencing) these changes. Many "hybrid" films were made at this time.

Silent cinema was never really "silent," since films were screened with accompanying music, even in nickelodeons before cinema cleaned up its act.

For the record, I haven't seen Vampyr, either. I now feel like a bad academic.

 

[BenLaw]

I don't expect anyone to have seen all the films! Quality not quantity anyway. Although given you seem to like your early horror then Island of Lost Souls should be high on your list - and indeed one I would say you can safely purchase without watching first.

I need to finish Vampyr before passing judgment. It seems highly renowned. At the moment it just seems a little in limbo between, say, Nosferatu and, say, Dracula. It doesn't help that I haven't read my copy of In a Glass Darkly.

 

[strapped for cash]

I don't expect anyone to have seen all the films! Quality not quantity anyway. Although given you seem to like your early horror then Island of Lost Souls should be high on your list - and indeed one I would say you can safely purchase without watching first.

I need to finish Vampyr before passing judgment. It seems highly renowned. At the moment it just seems a little in limbo between, say, Nosferatu and, say, Dracula.

Thanks Ben. Both have been on my radar for years. As always, it's finding time that's the problem.

It doesn't help that I haven't read my copy of In a Glass Darkly.

http://web.mit.edu/allanmc/www/freud1.pdf