Whistle and I'll Come to You

One of the rare films where I had to check that no one was stood behind me on first viewing.

One of the rare films where I had to check that no one was stood behind me on first viewing.

A Ghost Story for Christmas: 11

“A body that has outlasted the existence of the personality… is far, far more horrifying than any spook or ghoul”

This is incredible. Harkens back to the original run with the soft, fuzzy, gorgeous lighting and slow, static camera while carving its own ambling identity. Its movement away from the source material is welcome- we already have a good, faithful adaptation from ‘68- and John Hurt is mesmeric. It also maintains that slight, liminal peculiarity that comes from seaside towns in the off-season. 

However, I’m torn on its depiction of dementia. Sometimes it’s used as a key to unlock the aforementioned peculiarity, something that didn’t sit right with me, and other times it’s used to devastating effect. An inevitable rewatch (along with Clarke’s masterworks) will illuminate this. 

This is the scariest of all the A Ghost Story for Christmas entries. It also stands shoulder to shoulder with some of Clarke’s earlier entires, albeit for very different reasons. 

I’m finishing my watch-through here. There’s no way I’m touching Mark Gatiss’ work with a barge pole.

A Ghost Story for Christmas: 11

“A body that has outlasted the existence of the personality… is far, far more horrifying than any spook or ghoul”

This is incredible. Harkens back to the original run with the soft, fuzzy, gorgeous lighting and slow, static camera while carving its own ambling identity. Its movement away from the source material is welcome- we already have a good, faithful adaptation from ‘68- and John Hurt is mesmeric. It also maintains that slight, liminal peculiarity that comes from seaside towns in the off-season. 

However, I’m torn on its depiction of dementia. Sometimes it’s used as a key to unlock the aforementioned peculiarity, something that didn’t sit right with me, and other times it’s used to devastating effect. An inevitable rewatch (along with Clarke’s masterworks) will illuminate this. 

This is the scariest of all the A Ghost Story for Christmas entries. It also stands shoulder to shoulder with some of Clarke’s earlier entires, albeit for very different reasons. 

I’m finishing my watch-through here. There’s no way I’m touching Mark Gatiss’ work with a barge pole.

slightly better than the 1968 version I watched, despite there being some alterations in this adaptation. even by changing the object that was found, probably to make the message more symbolic than literal. this adaptation definitely had a better scare factor to it than the 1968 version which i appreciated greatly- however i understand due to the different times these were made the audience from the first movie would have probably found it more scary than i did

slightly better than the 1968 version I watched, despite there being some alterations in this adaptation. even by changing the object that was found, probably to make the message more symbolic than literal. this adaptation definitely had a better scare factor to it than the 1968 version which i appreciated greatly- however i understand due to the different times these were made the audience from the first movie would have probably found it more scary than i did