The Haunting
1963
[1]
First thing I would note about the film surprisingly is the music used, which is what I liked most about The Haunting. Being a suggestive film (like Cat People, which Wise also has credit for) music is a heavily reliant factor when trying to build an eerie atmosphere, along with the creepy looking house etc. It is very dramatic when need be and definately builds tension in the scary scenes.
[2]The Haunting (1963), Eleanor & Theo
[3]The Haunting, 1963, Hill House
Hill House is the main attraction of the film ofcourse, with its cold eerie corridors, organic structure and spooky noises at night. [2]"A particularly interesting aspect of the film is that Hill House can be regarded as a character. It has its own wants and needs, and is an entirely foreboding figure, illustrated even more so by Humphrey Searle’s fearsome instrumental score (even if it is, admittedly, a little overdramatic at times)" (Voodoun Romance, 2010)..This statement can be backed up by the scene where Nell is looking at and reffering to the house saying "he wants me", which is then followed up by quick shots of the empty dark windows and then the door almost as if we are identifying a face. Also in some of the banging crashing scenes in the night you hear a ghostly voice talk to Nell and at one point we see an actual ghost when shes at the top of the spiral staircase.
[4]The Haunting, 1963, Dr Markway & Nell on staircase
The films visual quality is quite good and very effective in black and white, probably more so then if it had been in colour. A downside is that everything seemed to be in the same focus so there was no real sense of depth i.e when looking down long corridors. Also, for a film with the name "The Haunting" you would expect a more horrifying film, this film resides more in a dramatic love drama genre. [3] This is really a film about relationships and the complex triangle (which at various times becomes a weak quadrangle) between Theodora, Eleanor and Dr. Markway (Sponseller, 2001), this is really what the film is about.
Illustration List:
[1] The Haunting, 1963, The Haunting(1963). [electronic print] Available at:
http://www.fatally-yours.com/wp-content/uploads/The%20Haunting%20DVD%20cover.jpg
[2] The Haunting, 1963, Eleanor & Theo. [electronic print] Available at:
http://www.shadowsandscreams.com/storage/haunting3.jpg?__SQUARESPACE_CACHEVERSION=1253062686166
[3] The Haunting, 1963, Hill House. [electronic print] Available at:
http://flavorwire.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/10/haunting-of-hill-house.jpg
[4] The Haunting, 1963, Dr Markway & Nell on staircase [electronic print] Available at:
http://www.homevideos.com/photos4.00/scifi172.jpeg
Bibliography:
[1][2] Voodoun Romance, 2010, Fatally Yours for the love of horrors. [online] Available at:
[3] Brandt Sponseller, 2001, Classic-Horror.com. [online] Available at:
GREAT GREAT GREAT! It's so good to see you get your bibliography and illustration list going on - and your review is insightful - I too think it's a film about relationships - and loneliness and the need to belong. None of the characters are very sympathetic, really - and there's all these sparks and sexual tension that is never really explained. In this sense the film is ambiguous and brittle and shrill. (A bit talky however!)
ReplyDeleteJust one picky detail - you're not using the Harvard Method correctly for your quotes from websites:
Author of website or document [surname] + Date of website or document - and you put it all in round brackets
So this would be cited in your text as; (Sponseller, 2001) directly after the quote.
Oh alright, I was reading a guide on the Harvard method when I was writing this, theres a few ways showing how to reference the same thing. I'll change this now though thanks for the heads up.
ReplyDeleteSean - 'Fatally-yours' isn't the author, it's the name of the website - you need to know the author if you're going to use the quote!
ReplyDeleteAlso - I saw your comment on Katy's blog re. your confusion about Unit 3; due to technical problems, I can't upload the original briefing, but I suggest, if you want a clear insight into the project, then please visit this link on the group blog:
http://ucarochester-cgartsandanimation.blogspot.com/2010/11/fao-cgaa-year-1-unit-3environment_29.html
And go visit the student blogs and work backwards - actually reading their posts! Obviously, you can come and talk with me next week (hopefully after all the snow disruption is at an end).
also - one of your images has gone missing... at least on my view of this post.
ReplyDeleteThis is what i was following
ReplyDeletehttp://libweb.anglia.ac.uk/referencing/harvard.htm
If you go to Electronic Sources> Websites that is what i was following to quote from other online reviews. It says:
"For websites found on the worldwide web the required elements for a reference are:
Authorship or Source, Year. Title of web document or web page. [type of medium] (date of update if available) Available at: include web site address/URL (Uniform Resource Locator) [Accessed date]."
E.g.
NHS Evidence, 2003. National Library of Guidelines. [online] Available at: [Accessed 10 October 2009].
It says put authorship or source so I put the website as the source, because I dont know the author..?
For images I followed
Other Types Of Documents> Pictures, Images and Photographs
&
Electronic Sources> Electronic Images
I dont know how I would find out who the actual author was because not all reviews give that information.
not sure why you're looking at the University of Anglia, Sean - I have made sure that all the links you need are ON YOUR BRIEF!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ReplyDeleteAnyway - for your convenience...
Follow this link for ‘how to reference’ conventions for all kinds of sources.
http://community.ucreative.ac.uk/article/25881/Referencing-specific-sources-of-information/
Its still the Harvard method Phil, I thought the Harvard method would be the same everywhere?
ReplyDeleteAnyway, it looks very much the same as the link you sent me ( I followed the "website and online documents" referencing guide and made the fatally yours reference exactly the way they say it should be) I hope its all correct now.
It does say "Note: If there is no identifiable author, use the name of the organisation (or part of the organisation) instead,
for example, BBC or The Guardian." which is why I put Fatally-Yours as the author in the first place but I managed to find the actual author so thats rectified now.
Thanks for guiding me through this :).