Movie Thoughts: The Changeling (1980)
Oct. 6th, 2008 07:11 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
jcfialaA while back I ordered 'The Changeling' (1980) from Netflix, and it sat on my shelf for a while until I finally felt like watching it last night. I had a great time, and so did Tammy, sitting, being spooked by spooky things and watching to see what happened next.
It had been a long time since I'd seen the movie, and I was a little surprised at how much I'd forgotten. Although I did remember the iconic scene with the ball bouncing down the stairs, and a bit about the basic idea of the film, I'd forgotten entirely huge swathes of it, including the accident at the start that makes a widower out of George C. Scott's character, John Russell.
I was even more surprised by how 1970s the film felt. From the cars, to the look of the scenes... to the fact that they had George C. Scott, 53 years old, as the leading man. These days if the story had been filmed, the leading man would have been in his thirties, or looked like his thirties.
Another thing that I found interesting was how abrupt the scene changes would be at times. In one scene, he discusses with old friends that he's moved to Seattle to force him into activity by teaching; then the scene changes to him entering a classroom, making a few comments, and then playing a composition; and then the music moves up a notch as suddenly you're watching a conductor whose orchestra is finishing the same composition, and John Russell is attending a concert with his friends. Another sudden scene change involved the love interest, Claire Norman, showing up with some old pictures at the house, dressed in riding clothes. After a bit of conversation, he brings up that she's about to go for a ride, and she asks in return if he likes to ride. Instead of an answer, the camera suddenly cuts to the pair of them riding horses through a forest. I'm curious how much these cuts were the idea or style of the director, and how much of them were dictated by the script, as there's a *lot* of story to get through with this movie, and the sudden cuts from scene to scene gives more time to present the meat of each part of the story.
But at it's base, it's a great ghost story told well - creepy and quiet at the start, moving on to grow more and more creepy as time goes on, following up with some genuine scares as the ghost inhabiting the house grows more and more impatient with its fate. This time of year it's a great movie to watch
It had been a long time since I'd seen the movie, and I was a little surprised at how much I'd forgotten. Although I did remember the iconic scene with the ball bouncing down the stairs, and a bit about the basic idea of the film, I'd forgotten entirely huge swathes of it, including the accident at the start that makes a widower out of George C. Scott's character, John Russell.
I was even more surprised by how 1970s the film felt. From the cars, to the look of the scenes... to the fact that they had George C. Scott, 53 years old, as the leading man. These days if the story had been filmed, the leading man would have been in his thirties, or looked like his thirties.
Another thing that I found interesting was how abrupt the scene changes would be at times. In one scene, he discusses with old friends that he's moved to Seattle to force him into activity by teaching; then the scene changes to him entering a classroom, making a few comments, and then playing a composition; and then the music moves up a notch as suddenly you're watching a conductor whose orchestra is finishing the same composition, and John Russell is attending a concert with his friends. Another sudden scene change involved the love interest, Claire Norman, showing up with some old pictures at the house, dressed in riding clothes. After a bit of conversation, he brings up that she's about to go for a ride, and she asks in return if he likes to ride. Instead of an answer, the camera suddenly cuts to the pair of them riding horses through a forest. I'm curious how much these cuts were the idea or style of the director, and how much of them were dictated by the script, as there's a *lot* of story to get through with this movie, and the sudden cuts from scene to scene gives more time to present the meat of each part of the story.
But at it's base, it's a great ghost story told well - creepy and quiet at the start, moving on to grow more and more creepy as time goes on, following up with some genuine scares as the ghost inhabiting the house grows more and more impatient with its fate. This time of year it's a great movie to watch
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2008-10-07 05:00 am (UTC)