The Metropol Viewing Room presents: The Hunger
by Lori Bowen
So, why have I taken on this assignment and why would you want to listen to me after that confession? The first question is easy enough: there are a lot of really good vampire films out there that may get overlooked by a new fan heading to a video store for a fix, or an older fan looking for something to watch, and since I’m more likely to watch older vampire flicks than newer ones if it’s a film I’ve never seen, I might as well let you know if it’s something to avoid or something you should give a chance. The second question is a little more complicated. For one thing, I’m not going to automatically like every movie I pop into my DVD player just because it’s got vampires in it, but also I approach every film I see as a filmmaker who wants the filmmakers who made it to succeed, to make me feel like I can’t do better than they did with that material and/or that budget. I love movies and I think that will show in my reviews.
With that said, for my inaugural review I bring you one of my favourite films: 1983’s The Hunger starring David Bowie, Catherine Deneuve, and Susan Sarandon. The film marked Tony Scott’s feature film directorial debut after years in commercials and music videos and was adapted by Ivan Davis and Michael Thomas from the Whitley Streiber novel of the same name.
The film is about an ageless vampire named Miriam (Deneuve) and her lover, John (Bowie). When we meet John and Miriam, they’re on the prowl in a Punk/Goth club where Bauhaus are performing the classic “Bela Lugosi’s Dead,” setting the dark tone for the rest of the film. The victims are lured back to their apartment and we’re introduced to how John and Miriam feed; they’re fangless vampires and use a very small blade concealed in the body of an Ankh pendant to bleed their victims. For those unfamiliar with ancient Egyptian symbols, the Ankh represents eternal life.
When John starts to deteriorate after a century or so of life as a vampire, he seeks out the help of a doctor named Sarah Roberts (Sarandon), who happens to be doing ground-breaking research on sleep and aging. Of course, Dr. Roberts doesn’t believe John’s claims of aging rapidly, but after keeping him waiting for several hours and then seeing how he’s aged decades in that time she’s convinced. The problem is that it’s too late and he storms off.
John tries to feed once he leaves the clinic, but being so frail, his century-plus of living catching up with him, he’s unable to do what he thinks needs to be done until he arrives home to find Miriam’s protege Alice waiting for her for violin practice. When Miriam arrives home and sees the mess John had made, she picks him up and carries him upstairs. He begs her to kill him, to let him die, to release him. She denies him and puts him in a pine box in her attic with countless other boxes from countless other lovers, all of whom are still alive, trapped in their decaying bodies.
Feeling guilty for making him wait and not believing him, Sarah tracks John down so she might be able to help him and instead finds Miriam who starts grooming Sarah to be John’s replacement, not counting on the good doctor not wanting the gift the vampire queen wishes to give. In the movie, this proves to be Miriam’s downfall, but in the book it’s Sarah’s.
I read the book about ten years ago and don’t remember much so other than the ending, I can’t really vouch with any reliability on the quality of the adaptation, but the script is a bit overwrought and light on plot.
The film is long for only being an hour and a half. Meaning that it’s slow, but if you can get past the plodding pace, you’ll see a visually striking, almost operatic, film about love, loss, and the lengths to which one who has an eternity of life still ahead of them will go to to keep from being lonely forever. That’s kind of why the ending in the film doesn’t work, but it does work as sad irony. The change comes courtesy of the studio who thought they knew better what the audiences would want to see than the people involved in the making of the film.
Remember when I mentioned how I felt that most vampire films are just an excuse to film boobs and blood? Well, it should be noted that on the commentary track on the DVD, Susan Sarandon mentions that Tony Scott took three days to film the three minute scene where Miriam beds Sarah.
I loved everyone in this film. While it’s no surprise that no one won Oscars for their work, the cast performed beautifully. Interesting little bit of trivia: Cliff de Young, who plays Sarah’s boyfriend Tom, played Brad Majors a few years previous in the little known “sequel” to The Rocky Horror Picture Show called Shock Treatment. Susan Sarandon, of course, played Janet in the original film, but did not return for “Shocky.” Also, one of Sarah’s assistants was played by Rufus Collins played a Transylvanian in Rocky Horror and one of Neely’s crew in Shock Treatment.
Technically, the film is superb. The cinematography, by Stephen Goldblatt, is one of my favourite things about it. If you look at it with the jaded eye of a person who grew up watching 80s music videos, you can see the music video cliches all over it; flowing curtains, random birds, etcetera, but somehow it all seems to work. I love the stark, clean colours and strong contrast. Brilliant work.
Overall, it’s a beautiful, if flawed, film that deserves another chance in the spotlight. Warner Brothers agrees, but in the wrong way: they announced in late September 2009 that they were pursuing a remake written by Whitley Streiber.
