Night of the Demon is a prime example of both the “complex discovery plot” and the “overreacher plot.” For the former we have our onset immediately in the movie; the demon makes himself apparent rather quickly and it’s pretty easy to state that this entity is most likely a monster considering its monstrous actions. Discovery occurs in the sense that Dr. Holden denies the existence of the creature but becomes more and more unstable. Other beings claim that the monster exists while Holden denies it. Confirmation occurs when Holden begins to believe in Karswell’s supernaturel affinities. Confrontation occurs when Holden attempts to pass off the runes, realizing the threat of the mystic runes and attempting to pass them off for fear of losing to an entity of unimagnable power. For the overreacher plot I believe it’s sufficient to point to Karloff as being the one who overreaches. He secures resources, experiments or applies the resources, loses control of the product, and then there is the ultimate confrontation with the product. Karswell doesn’t fare too well.
Considering the film’s ability to fit into these models of storytelling , it would seem that they might fit easily into Carroll’s theory of art-horror. But, the monster here may not be so unnatural. I am hesitant to state that the demon itself is scientifically impossible in this world. It appears to be a fantastic being in a natural world, but many more examples of supernatural activity exist that seem distinct and unique from the demon. I point to the hand on the railing in Karloff’s house and the medium who has spirits communicate through him. These events are not obviously related to the demon, which raises questions. It is a horrifying film but I still am uncertain as to whether it is a art-horror film as Carroll would wish.
From that point, I find this film to follow more closely with the sorts of concepts Lovecraft proposes in regards to horror. Some mysterious other-beings seem to be interfering in the lives of these mere mortals. Once again, the hand on the railing – it isn’t Karswell’s and seems far too tame to be that of the demon’s – and also the runes themselves. The runes seem to have a moving force of their own will, able to escape from any being that they wish. They are cursed, we are told, but by whom and for what purpose? Mysterious questions arise and little is told. Seems rather Lovecraftian to me.
Moving away from observing the content of the piece, it should be noted the techincal aspects used in the film to heighten the tensions present. Two of my most favorite scenes being Holden running through the woods with some sort of mist or steam pursuing him – a tactic that Tourner would’ve most likely kept as the exclusive means of presenting the demon had the producer not undermined his vision – and the wind storm that hits when Karswell and Holden are speaking. These special effects had an incredible impact in establishing the presence of some intangible product beyond the understanding of man. Controlling weather in particular seems sinister. Something so beyond humanity, at least when superficially considering it, would seem so intimidating if it was displayed as the tool for some entity.
Finally, I would like to remark on the possibility of a theme that permeates throughout the piece. The only one that seems rather reasonable is a moral one that I propose which is the observation of tensions between what is known and what is not known. When these two ideals, embodied by Holden and Karswell, antagonize each other then what results is just more chaos and uncertainty. It would seem that if they could reconcile their approaches that they would be able to at least unite against the evil forces that seem to be persecuting them. For example, and I understand how bad this may sound, they might have been able to figure out a way that neither of them would have had to die by finding some unfortunate prisoner awaiting execution as it was and damning him to the fate. Then again, it may just be beyond their control after all is said and done.
1 comment:
I love your (intentional?) substitution of "Karloff" for "Karswell" in a couple of lines here.
Post a Comment