Watch unlimited films online for $6.99.
Try MUBI for FREE.
 

'The Last House on the Left' inspired by Bergman's 'Virgin Spring'

Penguin

about 3 years ago

I just read that this weekend’s blockbuster horror movie ‘The Last House on the Left’ was inspired by Ingmar Bergman’s film ‘Virgin Spring’ – great article in the NY Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/15/movies/15ande.html

Watch it for free on The Auteurs: http://www.theauteurs.com/films/372

Matt Parks

about 3 years ago

Yeah . . . well, technically it’s a remake of of Wes Craven’s 1972 which was inspired by Bergman’s film, but yeah.

Justin Biberkopf

about 3 years ago

They’d be better off re-releasing The Virgin Spring in art house run this summer, but that wouldn’t sell as many tickets as something bad.

Jordan H

about 3 years ago

I went to see The Last House on the Left remake out of a feeling of obligation being a horror fan, and some unrelated sense of masochistic curiosity.

And it is utterly worthless. The acting is pretty good (so I guess it’s not completely worthless), but it is just such an utter waste of time. Any merit present in the original film is removed and they’ve injected it with lots of bullshit. Completely asinine and unnecessary.

Joshua W

about 3 years ago

I’d disagree with you Jordan H, I’d say it is one of the few worthwhile remakes of the past few years. What’d you find so reprehensible about it?

Penguin

about 3 years ago

Ang Lee talks about “The Virgin Spring” on YouTube

ELGZ

about 3 years ago

Last House on The Left is a remake of The Virgin Spring. Nothing more, nothing less. Bergman’s film however is much better, but that’s a no brainer.

Jordan H

about 3 years ago

Joshua W:

I thought the original was effective in that it wasn’t just a bit of exploitation escapism, but with all of its unabashed grittiness, created a film from which you couldn’t escape, that knocked you back on your ass. It spared nothing in its depiction of evil.

This was lost in the original though, which was tailored and watered down (although not quite as much as I’d have thought) for mass consumption. So I was left asking, “What was the point? Why remake this?” I just felt that it was completely unremarkable, forgettable, and a waste of time. Again, I did find the performances impressive, though. Especially the parents and the leader of the group.

Why did you feel it was worthwhile?

Joshua W

about 3 years ago

Jordan H:

I like the original as well, its a gritty film that catered to a demographic eager for depraved filmmaking with little production value. In the translation to the modern mainstream, I think the effect was amplified, bizarrely enough. They ended up maintaining a large amount of the grizzly realism, but added the production value expected by a mainstream audience, which makes the gore that much more disconcerting, because no one really expects it to be as vicious as it turned out to be.

Jordan H

about 3 years ago

Joshua W:

That’s fair. Personally, it felt flaccid to me. I really wasn’t as impacted as I was with the original.
I definitely didn’t think it was any harsher than the majority of recent mainstream horror: ex. Saw movies, or Hostel, or the new Texas Chainsaw Massacre movies, or Rob Zombie’s Halloween, and so on.
Again, I was just angered by how pointless it was. With the countless great films out there waiting to be made, this one just seemed like such a waste of time and money.

Alex M

about 3 years ago

I think the better thing to do than a remake is do what both Bergman and Craven did…just add your own style to a well-tested,dramatic plot..it’s the basic “Revenge” story that been around for centuries, but each director changed the formula (Begman’s,pacing,religious tone and the twist of the killers finding “shelter” in the exact same house as the victim’s family, Craven’s update,ironic use of music,pushing the reality/gore up to almost unbearable..and..this is key..changing many specifics of the previous version so the tale stands on its own as something different )

Now, if whoever it was who directed the current remake gave the film a different title,and/or characters,location,twists and style…..would the film stand on its own? or does the strength of the film rest on the fact that it’s supposed to be a remake of a popular film of yesterday…title and all…and hence gain favor on that basis alone?

Cinemat​ic Cteve

about 3 years ago

In-depth look at The Virgin Spring:

http://cinemauprising.blogspot.com/2009/01/vengeance-is-mine-virgin-spring.html

Craven’s film is cheap, sleazy and unpleasant. It does lift major plot points from Bergman’s Oscar winner, then amps up the depravity.

I can discern no reason to look at the recent remake.

Cheers,

Steve
CinemaUprising.Blogspot.com