Rob McCarthy As a long-time HP Lovecraft fan, I tend to consume with an open mind as much of the related content as I can, and this was no different. I understand a lot of what is out there has only the most tenuous relationship to any Lovecraft story or mythos and the whole 'nameless horror' thing is simply used as a device. And this in many ways is no different.So, anyone expecting a full on Cthulhu Experience (tm) will be disappointed: Cthulhu itself is referred to in only the most general terms and only directly spoken of once; the Cult of Dagon an easily missed, fleeting reference early in the film; and the acolytes themselves, while not over-done, much to their credit, could easily be avid followers of any cult or fringe religion.There are many references to entities coming from or going back to the sea, to horrors committed by and to the locals, but again these are mostly indistinct mentions with no real fleshing-out to make the feeling of creeping dread really take ahold which just left me itching for more of the old fisherman and more backstory. Having said that, there are moments during the film of desolate foreboding that work, and at brief times reminded me of the first Silent Hill game, which for anyone whose played it is high praise indeed! And these points are to the films credit. Same too with some of the other cinematography, with good use of the seascape and threatening clouds, as well as the town itself to create the impression of a coastal colonial American town with some of the history that you might expect of a Lovecraftian horror.However, there were certain points that admittedly other reviewers have covered that I feel genuinely detracted from the film, not least the whole sexual aspect of it. The fact that the main protagonist was gay was semi-relevant to the storyline, so I can grant that, but the amount of time spent on it was inordinate to the amount of time spent on other, more important things like developing tension and moving the plot along. A few minutes less of him making cow-eyes at a truck driver and a few minutes more backstory would have paid dividends! Also, the sexual aggressiveness of Tori Spelling's character, while well done and performed well, smacked just a little of misogyny, as well as a huge missed opportunity for a grander plot device. I similarly felt other female characters were somewhat sidelined, with the sister given only the most cursory of parts. Given the set-up, I would imagine the protagonist and sister to have spent a LOT more time together, or at least that time to be much more emotional.In general, I had no massive problem with the film in that I have certainly seen worse Lovecraft adaptations and much worse acting. But considering how many of these get made that are at best amateur and at worst throwaway projects, seeing that this seemed to at least have the makings of a decent version is a sadly wasted chance at submitting to a niche genre already bloated with half-hearted attempts. Having said that, it by no means sinks without trace and does stand up by itself as a half-way decent film. Unfortunately that is mostly because it's pitched itself at a subgenre with precious little competition. It is ultimately worth watching, but as a Lovecraft fan there are other films I would get to first.

dutchchocolatecake I have no problem with yet another rehashing of the Shadow Over Innsmouth, the story this movie is very loosely based on. I thought it was one of the very few SERIOUS cinematic approaches to Lovecraft's work brought to our modern times.I honestly don't understand all the hate against this movie. The only conclusion I can come up with, is that most "Lovecraft fans" (a term used loosely) are used to seeing the typical trash that goes with the low budget genre. This usually includes big chested naked women throwing themselves around a room for the heterosexual male audiences' delight; or worse, being raped in a scene that looks disturbingly pornographic.So what does gayness have to do with Lovecraft? Nothing. But graphic female nudity or rape scenes don't have anything to do with Lovecraft either; and I don't see nearly the level of vitriol and disgust at *those* movies.I don't understand why the sex-obsessed are so attracted to Lovecraft. H.P. was very reserved, almost puritanical about sexuality. His books, IF the average viewer would actually read them, portray procreation and the family unit in a very jaded light. The family that stays together, gets strange together. You'd think, with so many "Lovecraft fans" out there, they would see how well this movie translated that to the big screen. This is an excellent movie IF you are mature and IF you are watching it to give it an honest chance. Some of the reviews I read (not just here, but on other sites) seemed to be written by people going with the attitude of "tee hee, we get to see gay men kiss and have butt sex." While that attitude isn't overtly homophobic, it certainly doesn't allow a viewer to give a movie the same kind of serious outlook a heterosexual centered movie would.I don't agree with other reviewers who think the gayness was so overwhelming that it ruins the movie. I didn't understand some of the scenes (like the mutual "pleasuring" one) but then I'm not gay so I wouldn't get it. I accept that. But I didn't think it was offensive. The chemistry between the two leads was very good, but didn't come across as invasive at all.Another complaint I see a lot is that this movie doesn't have enough blood, gore, or monsters in it. I didn't see anything in the trailer that would give me the impression of "blood! guts! gore! monster!!!!" Would it have added to the movie? Sure. But I didn't feel like it *needed* it either.With all the trash out there that craps all over Lovecraft's vision, any true fan or at least, REASONABLE person, would be grateful for this movie. It gives it dignity to a genre that is overall underfunded and unappreciated. It's funny to me how some people are saying "Lovecraft would have hated this!" when it's clear to me they have no understanding or respect for his work in the first place to be saying that. This movie immortalizes several key elements in his fiction, just because it's not your style does not mean it was not well done.

john-mcdowall This is really one of the most poorly made and written movies I have seen. The characterisations are weak and uninteresting, exposition is ham-fistedly thrown at you, conclusions bluntly presented and inconsistencies rife. The director failed to make even the simple decision in how to pronounce 'Cthulhu' which has the effect of making the uninitiated think a new character is introduced. The acting is weak, with the lead character switching between camp rage and comical bewilderment every other minute. The 'horrors of a gay man in small town' allegory is completely misfired - unless gay men are often asked to seek out missing children and be raped by randy housewives. HP Lovecraft seems to suffer from the eternal legacy of amateur fools attempting to make his works as Z-movies, of which 'Cthulhu' definitely falls into, and that is a shame as the original source material is so strong. In summary, this is a terrible movie that has nothing in common with the original source material except for the lifting of certain names and places.

obvious-spoof I put off watching this for a long time. It couldn't be good. After all, it's supposed to be a Lovecraft movie. With Tori Spelling. I downloaded it on the off chance that she would get the 'Dagon'-treatment.The first 20 minutes or so got my hopes up: So far, no Tori. Lots of strained shots, trying to be beautiful. It looked like a post-grad love project. Unfortunately, the following hour and a half can be summarised in bullet points:Tori drugs and rapes a guy. - The police chief quotes Yeats.and, in a negative sense, the following disappointments: - No Cthulhu - No story - No tentacled, naked women and/or naked women being savagely violated by tentacled beings from beyond. (Ok, I admit: this one is more of a personal hobby-horse.)All in all, this movie made me hope that Guillermo del Toro gets to produce that 'At the mountains of madness'-script he has purportedly been lugging around with for a number of years. That would probably be a worthy Lovecraft adaptation. This film is not. For my two hour's worth, just re-reading any Lovecraft story would have been infinitely better.