Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror! in Classic Disney Scares Forum

0 Points

Forum Jump

Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!

Author	Comment
yendor1152	Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!	Lead	[-]
Sep 17 07 9:30 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	When Disney released "Watcher in the Woods" sometime in 1980 or 81, it quickly sunk and has since been a staple on a lot of cable stations. I never saw Watcher" in the theater, but I have caught it on the tube--and it wasn't until I saw the version on Anchor Bay's label that I came to truly appreciate the film. I think, in the right hands, this could've been a great movie. At its worst, Watcher resembles a made for TV flick. At its best, there's an eerieness that's pretty hard to beat. Anybody else have any love for Watcher? In the Anchor Bay version, we get to see the actual "watcher," which was excised from the film after preview audiences laughed. While an obvious puppet, it had potential. The "other world" sequence shows imagination (at least, in concept), though the fx are just terrible. And is it my imagination, or is the girl ("Karen") who finally reappears at the end a completely different actress than the Karen we see in the "other" world? Rod
	Remove this ad
JohnRozum	Re: Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!	#1	[-]
Sep 17 07 9:41 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I've never seen this, though this movie has some personal significance to me. The last remaining independant movie theater (and at the time, only movie theater left) in the town I grew up closed for a couple of months to renovate after a fire, from a left on popcorn machine, caused extensive damage to the lobby. This was the first movie to be shown when the theater reopened. I dutifully showed up opening day, to find myself waiting a long time outside a darkened structure. No one else was waiting with me. The theater never opened its doors again (its now a clothing store), and as far as I know never announced that it wouldn't be opening that freezing February night, either. This theater used to run Saturday kids matinees with 3 Stooges shorts, cartoons, Gamera movies, and even "The Creature From the Black Lagoon" in 3-D, with aurora model giveaways. After that movies were a lot harder to get to; about half an hour by car, and impossible if you were too young to drive. It would be a couple more years before a theater opened at the local mall, first with 2 screens, and now with way too many.
zogstar67	Re: Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!	#2	[-]
Sep 18 07 9:33 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The last independent theatre in our town eventually closed after it (with great fanfare) signed some kind of contract agreeing to show only the film ANNIE on both its screens for about 6 months straight. Never could figure that one out. Chris Herzog "What good can there be in a Hunchback?"--Torch-wielding villager in CONDEMNED TO LIVE VISIT ME AT MY SPACE: http://www.myspace.com/39159010
BijouBob8mm	Re: Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!	#3	[-]
Sep 18 07 10:33 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I remember being so pumped about going to see this, after hearing about it in Starlog. They talked about all the work going into the finale, and ran some preproduction art. Then we started hearing that the ending was being changed, new material shot, etc. Really had the curiosity aroused. Went to see it...and came away confused and disappointed. Didn't look like anything we'd been hearing about. The AB DVD was a very welcome release!!! Not to veer too off topic, but since the thread does say "Disney does horror," maybe we could also touch upon SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES while we're at it...?
yendor1152	Re: Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!	#4	[-]
Sep 18 07 11:46 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Oh, most definitely! Let's discuss "Something this way Comes!" I also remember reading about this in Fangoria, and certainly the photos looked enticing enough. I'd read Bradbury's book and was really looking forward to seeing it finally realizedon film. If memory serves me, I finally got that chance in October or November of 1982. Since then, I've seen the film approximately five more times, and each time, I want to like it. But I walk away ultimately disappointed. Aside from somewhat cheesy effects (the mirror house was especially awful), I absolutely detested the two kids who played the leads. They were just so "Little House on the Prarie" squeaky clean, every hair in place, their outfits neat and tidy. I never for once believed they were real boys involved in a weird adventure. I did like all the other actors, except for the lady who played the teacher--you know, "Ralph" from "Green Acres?" Awful. The ending was ok, but nothing truly spectacular--again, I remember reading (in Fango) that Disney had used computer imagery to create a bang-up conclusion. And don't you think the town was a little too "perfect," as well? Every building was made of brick and seemed to meld into the rest. No old-fashioned downtown looked that picture postcard perfect. I did like the fall imagery, though. And the train coming through the night was eerie, as was the cemetery statues that cracked when it pounded by. Rod
BijouBob8mm	Re: Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!	#5	[-]
Sep 18 07 2:28 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Rod, I was just the opposite in that, for me, I enjoyed it more as time went by. Guess it just kind of grew on me. During that first viewing, the two moments you mentioned (the train and the cemetary) really stood out. Had hoped we might see more done with the Dust Witch character. I know exactly what you mean by the "picture postcard" look of the film, and often wondered if that was done to create an "idealized" Midwestern town of the past, a stylized version of the area where Bradbury was a young boy (before his family relocated to California)...sort of how we sometimes repaint our past with nostalgia, making those times seem a bit more golden than maybe they actually were. I wonder if Bradbury's screenplay possibly suggested this? (I seem to recall reading Stephen King did a screenplay for it...somewhat curious about his take on the tale.) Bradbury had sounded Steven Spielberg out about possibly directing this...would love to have seen how THAT would have turned out. (Hmm, can you imagine a Tim Burton remake, with Depp as Dark?) I wish, like WATCHER IN THE WOODS, a number of the deleted material would be presented as extras on a more deluxe DVD. A flawed but fun film, as October creeps our way. (You know, it just hit me that WATCHER IN THE WOODS is almost a Disney-Meets-Hammer flick, given John Hough directed from a Brian Clemens screenplay.)
Spoiler II	Disney Horror	#6	[-]
Sep 20 07 9:35 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I think in any conversation about Disney horror,you must bring up Fantasias "Night on Bald Mountain" segment. There hasn't been a better vision of evil on an epic scale in film history and the fact that its completely hand rendered only magnifies it. 60 years have passed and even CGI can't hope to surpass it.
BijouBob8mm	Re: Disney Horror	#7	[-]
Sep 20 07 10:36 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The "Night on Bald Mountain" segment is a magnificent piece of work. I know the "Sorceror's Apprentice" segment is the icon piece for FANTASIA, and it's also well done, but I think it almost suffers from overexposure (in terms of repeated performance, not in terms of photography!) And, on the subject of Disney horror, the banshee in DARBY O'GILL is worth a word or two.
yendor1152	Re: Disney Horror	#8	[-]
Sep 21 07 11:03 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Darby's banshee gave me nightmares the first time I saw it in the theater! Still packs quite a wallop, what with the ghostly coach, the headless driver, etc. Very, very well done. I also thought the queen's transformation into the witch in Snow White stands as perhaps the most frightening transformation sequence ever, animated or live action. Disney's stuff always seemed to have a deliciously twisted side to it. Outside of the abject horror of "Watcher" and "Something Wicked," we have the nasty stepmother in Cinderella, Cruella deVille wanting to skin dogs for a coat, and Maleficent in Sleeping Beauty. And let's not forget Ursula, the sea witch. Great portrayal, but when she's finally done in, it's a masterpiece of animation! And scary, too! Rod
BijouBob8mm	Re: Disney Horror	#9	[-]
Sep 25 07 9:54 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	*Quote:* I also thought the queen's transformation into the witch in Snow White stands as perhaps the most frightening transformation sequence ever, animated or live action. Yeah, still a thrilling sequence. I know I've posted this elsewhere, but Vincent Price once said Disney's SNOW WHITE was the scariest film he'd ever seen.
yendor1152	Re: Disney Horror	#10	[-]
Sep 25 07 12:06 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	When you think about it, Bob, Snow White is extremely frightening! The Queen's "death plan" for Snow White has always been particularly vicious (her heart in a box? Yikes!), and the afore-mentioned transformation sequence is a sight to behold. But also the conclusion, where the dwarfs chase the witch is a masterpiece. And to think it was all hand drawn. Wow, amazing. And let's not forget Disney's "Dr. Syn" story. If I remember rightly (it's been literally decades), that had some great atmosphere. I even had the Gold Key comic book adaptation! Rod
	Remove this ad
BijouBob8mm	Re: Disney Horror	#11	[-]
Sep 25 07 1:31 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Get me started on DR. SYN!!! I love that film! Loved the books (the few I could find), loved the old George Arliss film, the Hammer version.... It was announced, a few years back, that the Disney production was coming to DVD, only to be dropped before the release date came around. I have heard, however, that the film needed to be restored more than was anticipated for a DVD, so maybe the Scarecrow will finally ride our way, one day. SNOW WHITE does have some rather shocking concepts for a cartoon (oops, "animated feature!") Can't imagine the studio doing anything quite that intense, today. (Although BLACK CAULDRON and LITTLE MERMAID had their moments.)
ByronOrlok	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#12	[-]
Sep 26 07 8:06 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	SOMETHING WICKED was a huge disappointment to me. I loved Clayton's THE INNOCENTS and was hoping SWTWC would have some of that film's eerie atmosphere, but pffft -- nothin'. You guys mentioned how the town felt "too perfect", but I think the word you're looking for is "phoney". It has that "obviously shot on the backlot" feel common to many late 70's / early 80's studio productions. Too clean, too brightly lit, not evocative at all. Jonathan Pryce is a big part of the problem as well. Terrific actor and all that, but simply the wrong TYPE -- too young, too good-looking, too well-groomed, not nearly creepy or menacing enough to be a credible Mr. Dark. Truthfully, the source material might be partially at fault too -- it's been ages since I've read the book, but it seemed to me the movie was pretty faithful to it. When you hear the basic premise, boy it sounds terrific, but the actual events of the story are a bit namby-pamby, it's not really all that scary. The desperate last-minute special effects "enhancements" don't help at all, either, and just underline how out-of-touch with the modern audience Disney still was at the time. The "bottom-lighting" stuff would be right at home in something like BEDKNOBS AND BROOMSTICKS or PETE'S DRAGON, but looked decidedly quaint -- if not downright lame -- up against contemporary movies like Carpenter's THE THING.
BijouBob8mm	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#13	[-]
Sep 27 07 1:38 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	*Quote:* Jonathan Pryce...too young, too good-looking, too well-groomed, not nearly creepy or menacing enough to be a credible Mr. Dark. Yet look at how he comes off, soon after this, in THE DOCTOR AND THE DEVILS. Not sure if Pryce, the script, the director or other factors played a greater part in his appearance in SOMETHING WICKED. To me, I thought it was intentional to present evil in an attractive fashion here, ala the seductive approach to evil often found in Hammer Films...but maybe I was putting too much thought into it, at the time.
ByronOrlok	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#14	[-]
Sep 27 07 2:23 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	No, I think you're right, that WAS the intent, a varation on Terry Fisher's old "The Charm Of Evil" schtick -- I just didn't think it worked in this case. Maybe if the rest of the movie wasn't so bland -- but it frankly IS. Mr. Dark should be a figure to inspire nightmares, and Pryce never really even gets near that benchmark. Imagine if Chris Lee played Dark -- a too-obvious casting choice perhaps, but it would have made a world of difference.
BijouBob8mm	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#15	[-]
Sep 28 07 8:43 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	And you know, since Lee had worked for Disney before (on their second WITCH MOUNTAIN film), it is a bit surprising that the studio didn't consider him. Instead, that year, Lee made HOUSE OF LONG SHADOWS and, alas, THE RETURN OF CAPTAIN INVINCIBLE. (Don't know if it's on the double feature release of ESCAPE TO WITCH MOUNTAIN/RETURN TO WITCH MOUNTAIN, but when those titles were being sold separately, RETURN had an obscure interview Lee did to promote the film, from way back when, done for the south of the border market.) Can you imagine how Bradbury's story would have been had Sam Peckinpah made it? I seem to recall reading that, before Disney, he had been interested in the book. Not a combination I would have ever thought of. ("Tickets? We don't need no steenking tickets!")
JimPV	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#16	[-]
Sep 28 07 4:17 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	*Quote:* SOMETHING WICKED was a huge disappointment to me. I loved Clayton's THE INNOCENTS and was hoping SWTWC would have some of that film's eerie atmosphere, but pffft -- nothin'. You guys mentioned how the town felt "too perfect", but I think the word you're looking for is "phoney". It has that "obviously shot on the backlot" feel common to many late 70's / early 80's studio productions. Too clean, too brightly lit, not evocative at all. The desperate last-minute special effects "enhancements" don't help at all, either, and just underline how out-of-touch with the modern audience Disney still was at the time. The "bottom-lighting" stuff would be right at home in something like BEDKNOBS AND BROOMSTICKS or PETE'S DRAGON, but looked decidedly quaint -- if not downright lame... I pretty much agree with ByronOrlok. Bradbury's tough to film, to be fair; but this was not a terribly worthy attempt. Definitely has that bland, TV-movie look to it. And he's right-on about the FX "enhancements". *Quote:* Can you imagine how Bradbury's story would have been had Sam Peckinpah made it? I seem to recall reading that, before Disney, he had been interested in the book. Not a combination I would have ever thought of. ("Tickets? We don't need no steenking tickets!") I think I heard Bradbury say that Peckinpah told him he wanted to "rip out the pages and cram them into the camera!" (meaning he wanted it to be extremely, enthusiastically faithful to the source, I presume). BTW, I think your referencing the line, "Badges? We don't need no steenking badges!" which is from Treasure of The Sierra Madre, a John Huston film. ;^) "How many cares one loses when one decides not to be something but to be someone" -Coco Chanel
Bill Warren	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#17	[-]
Sep 28 07 6:23 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	*Quote:* often wondered if that was done to create an "idealized" Midwestern town of the past, a stylized version of the area where Bradbury was a young boy I'm pretty sure that's what the intention was. The movie was indeed shot on Disney's back lot, where Bradbury himself gave me and my family a tour of the sets (at lunchtime, when the cast & crew were elsewhere). He seemed very hopeful about SOMETHING WICKED, but the movie just doesn't work, or at least doesn't work all the way through. (Christopher Lee did want to play Mr. Dark; I don't know why he didn't end up with the role.) Bradbury told me that same story about Peckinpah, but to my surprise, Peckinpah's biographer, David Weddle, knew nothing about it. I suspect Peckinpah knew the origin of the novel--Bradbury was commissioned to turn his short story "Black Ferris" into a feature film, and wrote a detailed scri pt. When the movie failed to get made, he turned the scri pt into a novel--SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES. As for WATCHER IN THE WOODS, I believe even the Anchor Bay edition doesn't include anywhere nearly all the material shot but not used in the theatrical print.
BijouBob8mm	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#18	[-]
Oct 1 07 1:18 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	*Quote:* I think your referencing...Treasure of The Sierra Madre, a John Huston film. You have no idea how red my face is; for some reason, at the time I wrote that previous post, I was linking it with THE WILD BUNCH! Too many movies, too few grey cells....
Bill Warren	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#19	[-]
Oct 1 07 7:47 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Of course, Sam Peckinpah DID say that he intended THE WILD BUNCH as a present for John Huston.
BijouBob8mm	Re: Something Wicked Etc.	#20	[-]
Oct 2 07 4:17 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	*Quote:* Bradbury himself gave me and my family a tour of the sets Wow, what a great treat! Bradbury had become friends with Walt Disney, years earlier. I wonder how a film version would have been, had it been made with Walt's supervision. *Quote:* Bradbury was commissioned to turn his short story "Black Ferris" into a feature film, and wrote a detailed scri pt. When the movie failed to get made, he turned the script into a novel--SOMETHING WICKED THIS WAY COMES I knew SOMETHING WICKED was a fleshed out version of BLACK FERRIS, but didn't realize it began life as a screenplay.
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Add Reply

Yuku free message boards

Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!

Watcher in the Woods! Disney does horror!