Review: "The Thing on the Doorstep," Salem Theatre

[teenybuffalo]

The production runs Sept. 17 through Oct. 4, at Salem Theatre, 90 Lafayette Street, Salem, MA. Dates and more details here.

I went to see the production on its second night, with my friend G. I had no idea what to expect, never having heard of Salem Theatre till this production occurred. The space is a tiny storefront theater, with no lobby and a

Comments

[sovay]

he's working on a stage adaptation of Robert W. Chambers' “The King in Yellow,”

WELL THAT COULDN'T POSSIBLY GO WRONG.

[teenybuffalo]

YES QUITE

"Indeed, sir, it's time. We have all unmasked but you."

[sovay]

And yet, even as the bad idea fairies applaud in wild approval, I'm tempted.

Teeny: I tend to think that exposition conflicts with the uncanny atmosphere which is the backbone of most good horror; after all, isn't horror about brushing up against the unknown and unknowable, creating a sense that there are forces in the universe which can wrench control of your life away from you? If you can explain it, it isn't scarey.

What are your thoughts?

[teenybuffalo]

Well, maybe, maybe not, but in this case the exposition wasn't even expositing the horror element; I was annoyed by the sheer fact of actors standing there onstage reciting the storyline instead of acting it out.

As to your comment, though, I sometimes agree with "If you can explain it, it isn't scarey" and sometimes not. For sure, I like a lot of horror stories and movies that are blatant about the nature of the horror. I'd say, for example, that Stuart Gordon's "Reanimator," most of Lovecraft's work in general, Charlotte Perkins Gilman's "The Yellow Wallpaper," and Shirley Jackson's "We Have Always Lived In The Castle" are all horror where you can explain it, and yet it's scary. (N

It depends what effect you're going for. I've also been reading a lot of Robert Aickman, and Shirley Jackson's "The Visit" aka "The Lovely House," and in those cases you can't explain it and the scariness does come from the fact that there is no explanation.

What should we call you, anon visitor?

[moon_custafer]

Mary Morris would have been a good Asenath had the story been dramatized in the 1930s; though I prefer her in weird but non-villainous roles because she had such an odd, striking face that using her as a villain would have been too obvious.

[sovay]

Mary Morris would have been a good Asenath had the story been dramatized in the 1930s; though I prefer her in weird but non-villainous roles because she had such an odd, striking face that using her as a villain would have been too obvious.

Agreed on both counts.

Did you know Ronald Colman starred in a 1945 radio dramatization of "The Dunwich Horror"? I didn't until yesterday. It was an episode of Suspense. I think it's the earliest Lovecraft adaptation I know about; I hadn't honestly thought there were any before the '60's.

[moon_custafer]

I suppose "The Thing from Another World" (1951) might count as an adaptation at one remove of "At the Mountains of Madness."

[sovay]

I suppose "The Thing from Another World" (1951) might count as an adaptation at one remove of "At the Mountains of Madness."

Interesting! "Who Goes There?" was influenced by Lovecraft? (I've never read the original novella; I've just seen two and a half adaptations of it.)