May 1, 2025 • 49 mins
That age-old question haunts every book lover who's watched their favorite novel get adapted to film: "Is the book really better?" For Shirley Jackson's masterpiece "The Haunting of Hill House" and its 1999 film adaptation "The Haunting," the answer is complicated by fascinating behind-the-scenes copyright issues that forced filmmakers to create something almost entirely different from both the source novel and the beloved 1963 film adaptation.
Orlando and I dive into this strange case study, exploring how a psychologically complex novel about a lonely woman named Eleanor finding belonging in a subtly unsettling house transformed into a bombastic late-90s horror film featuring ghost children, CGI griffins, and Catherine Zeta-Jones in increasingly revealing outfits. The discussion reveals how the film's inability to officially remake the 1963 version led to bizarre creative choices - from making Eleanor a direct descendant of the house's builder to filling the mansion with elaborate supernatural rooms that defy architectural logic.
What makes this comparison particularly interesting is how the changes shift the entire nature of the story. Jackson's novel leaves readers questioning how much of the haunting might exist in Eleanor's mind, creating an enduring sense of unease about Hill House itself. The film discards this ambiguity entirely, presenting explicit supernatural manifestations and a clear villain in Hugh Crane (not Craine, as in the book), culminating in an effects-heavy showdown involving the literal gates of hell installed in the mansion for reasons never adequately explained.
Despite their criticism of the adaptation, we both acknowledge our nostalgic attachment to the 1999 film and suggest it can be enjoyed as campy entertainment if viewed completely separate from its source material. Whether you're a literary horror fan or just curious about the adaptation process, this episode offers a fascinating look at how Hollywood transforms subtle psychological terror into something very, very different. Ready to decide which version of Hill House you'd rather visit? Listen now and join the conversation about books, movies, and the strange journeys between them.
All episodes of the podcast can be found on our website: https://booksvsmovies.buzzsprout.com/share
Connect with me: Instagram | Threads | Bookshop | Goodreads | Blog
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:03):
Welcome to Books vs Movies, the podcast where I set
out to answer the age-oldquestion is the book really
always better than the movie?
I'm Yuvia, an actress and booklover based out of New York City
and today Orlando, and I willbe talking about the Haunting of
Hill House by Shirley Jacksonand its 1999 adaptation, the
(00:23):
Haunting.
So let's just get the elephantout of the room.
We are aware that there is amuch better adaptation.
We've seen the originaladaptation from the 60s.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Yeah, 60s, my favorite, one of my favorite
movies of all time.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Yeah, so we're aware that it exists.
We recommend that's the one youwant you watch.
But this is what was availableon streaming, the 1999 version.
So that's the one that we'rereviewing.
And boy, oh boy, is it reallybad.
But you know, I remember we sawthe dvd, like my mom and I, when
(01:10):
we were at like target orsomething.
This is a while ago.
And she's like oh, I'm gonnabuy this movie for you because
it reminds me of you, because Iloved that movie as a kid.
That was like the first horrormovie.
Well, I was gonna say the firsthorror movie that I tolerated,
but that's not true because Iloved chucky as a kid.
(01:31):
Yeah, but, like, after mychucky phase, my demented child
phase was over and I couldn'twatch scary movies because I was
scared of them.
The haunting was like the firstone I remember watching and
tolerating and liking, and Ishowed it to like my cousin, I
(01:52):
showed it to everyone.
That was like coming over, Iloved it.
So, like my mom was like itreminds me of you, and I was
like I used to like that movie,but then I watched the original
in the 60s and now I don't likethis one anymore and she's like
oh, so she didn't buy it for me.
But now I'm kind of sad that Ididn't let her buy it for me
(02:13):
because it's really bad, but itholds a special place in my
heart.
So, yeah, I kind of wish I hadlet her buy it for me for me.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
That movie, oddly enough, gave me nightmares
that's so funny because we're soswitched now we're so opposites
.
But yeah, as a kid I rememberthat movie giving me nightmares
and my mom changed a lot but Iwill say I, I think I'm, I'm
(02:49):
discovering that I don't hatehorror films.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
I I do have my limits .
As I've said, if there'sdemonic possession, devils and
I'm out, I'm out like thatlegitimately terrifies me.
But I think it's not and Idon't like slashers.
I just think.
But you don't really likeslashers either no, they're not
my favorite genre.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
It's very rare that I see a slasher and I'm like that
was really good yeah, so Ithink I think for me it's.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
It's not that I don't like horror.
I think horror just irritatesme, because I hate when people
are making dumb mistakes, andthat's like what horror is.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
When 90% of slasher movies is that, yeah, running
the wrong way, getting yourselfstuck in the basement.
So it makes sense.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
So if it's like more of a psychological thriller or
psychological horror, that'swhat I'm really into.
Thriller or psychologicalhorror, that's what I'm really
into.
But anyway, that's not.
We're here to talk about thehaunting of hill house.
So, orlando, why don't you telleveryone what the haunting of
hill house by shirley jackson isabout?
Speaker 2 (03:59):
yeah uh, the haunting of hill house by shirley jack,
who has quickly become one of myfavorite authors.
It's about Eleanor, who gets aninvitation to be a part of this
experiment, this experiment byDr Montague.
Dr Montague is basicallygathering people who have either
(04:29):
had a close encounter withdeath or some sort of paranormal
life of some sort to kind ofconduct an experiment at Hill
House.
Eleanor has just come freshfrom the mother that she took
care of passing away.
She basically dedicated herlife to this and this is her
first time doing things on herown.
(04:50):
And things happen at the housewhich we'll get into.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
The 1999 version, the Haunting directed by Jan de
Bont, I think, is how youpronounce it, or Jan de Bont,
maybe.
It stars Lily Taylor, catherineSeda-Jones, liam Neeson and
Owen Wilson, and it's nothingwhat he just described.
(05:16):
So these four participants areasked to go to Hill House and
they are unknowinglyparticipating in a psychological
study on mass hysteria, butthey're told that it is a study
on insomnia.
But I discovered after watchingthe remake that there's a
(05:40):
reason why it's so different andthat is that, due to the rights
, due to copyright reasons, theywere not allowed to officially
call this a remake of theHaunting.
They weren't even allowed touse any like, pay homage to the
original in any way.
(06:01):
Like they couldn't, because youknow how a lot of like remakes
have like they recreate the oneiconic scene from the original
in any way.
Like they couldn't, because youknow how a lot of like remakes
have like they recreate the oneiconic scene from the original
yeah um, so they're not.
They were not allowed to likereference the original in any
way.
So essentially they had to saythis was a new interpretation of
(06:23):
the haunting impale house,which is how they got away with
it.
But that's why it's sodifferent and that is why the
adaptation is a really badadaptation, because it has
nothing to do with the bookreally that makes me wonder,
because there is a tv series,there's the netflix series um
same title, right haunting ofhill house.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
Um, I started it I only got two or three episodes
in because I got frustrated thatit was nothing at all like the
book.
But now I'm wondering if theyhad to deal with the same issue
I don't think so.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
I it's my understanding that this is that
was mike flanagan.
That was the direction hewanted to take it in.
I could be wrong, but I think,like the rights the copyright
infringement rights from theoriginal already expired so they
could have made a faithfuladaptation, but I think Mike
Flanagan just wanted to do hisown thing.
(07:21):
So, yeah, I haven't seen it.
He tried watching it, but it isEveryone that's seen it and
hasn't read the book says it's areally good TV show.
But because he said it was justsuch a bad adaptation, he
wasn't really interested inwatching it.
And I don't know that I'minterested in watching it for
(07:43):
that reason.
That isn't to say that it's abad show.
It's just a bad adaptation.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
I also had just finished reading the book, or,
and then decided, oh, I justfinished the book, not to watch
the series, so I haven't given.
I haven't tried watching itsince having space between stuff
.
So I don't know, maybe I needto give it again more time
before trying again, because nowwe're doing this.
(08:10):
So I'm still.
It's still gonna be fresh in mymind.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
Yeah, yeah.
So, wow, I don't even knowwhere to begin because this is
so, so different, and I guess II'll start off by saying that,
yeah, the the in the book, um,eleanor, theo and luke are all
(08:35):
aware of what they'reparticipating in.
They weren't tricked.
And in the in the film, they'rebeing told I said that they're
there to help them with theirinsomnia troubles, to maybe find
a cure for their insomnia.
It's a study on insomnia that'sgoing to benefit them with
better sleep.
(08:55):
And then they end updiscovering, once Eleanor starts
getting screwed up mentally,that it's a study on mass
hysteria.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Yeah, yeah, I don't know.
I have my notes.
I don't know how.
We want to go bit by bit.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
We can just talk about it.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
And like so in the in the film also, Liam Neeson is
the one that plays the characterof Dr.
Speaker 1 (09:35):
Montague, except in the film he's called Dr Merrill.
Yeah, in the this film thatweren't well so in in the book
there's um, it's, it's the coregroup of four of theo, eleanor,
(09:56):
luke and dr montague.
And then a few days later, drmontague's wife shows up along
with arthur, who's a teacher.
They're really good friends.
She's totally cheating on drmontague's wife shows up along
with arthur, who's a teacher.
They're really good friends.
She's totally cheating on drmontague with arthur like she.
They're really close friends butit's just no, they're more than
(10:18):
friends.
It's like your husband's notvery observant, but the wife is
in the original adaptation, butArthur isn't.
And then what?
Speaker 2 (10:32):
Yeah, Arthur's not.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
Yeah, arthur's not, but in the 1999 version there
are two characters.
They're not Mrs Montague andArthur, but I think they're
placeholders for them.
They're just random.
Her name is Mary and then Iforgot the name of the guy and
they're Dr Merrow's researchassistants, but they're gone
(10:57):
after the first night.
Speaker 2 (10:59):
I guess it's the opposite In the book.
They come at the end.
In this case, they come at theend.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
In this case, they come at the beginning and
quickly disappear yeah, and it'sone of those things where like
conveniently the, becausethere's two caretakers, mr and
mrs dudley.
Mr dudley's in charge of likethe grounds and mrs dudley is in
charge of the inside of thehouse, so they're the only ones
(11:26):
that have keys to the, to thelike main gates to Hill House,
and then when they leave at theend of the day they they lock up
and they they're out.
So like that's one of thethings they emphasize is like
once we're gone, like you're onyour own until we come back in
the morning, like you're on yourown until we come back in the
(11:47):
morning, but in the adaptation,conveniently, there's an extra
set of keys that um, after marysuffers an accident that
requires the male assistant tolike drive her into town, to the
hospital.
There they conveniently havethat extra pair of keys so they
can leave, but they never comeback, which is like her injury
(12:11):
would have just requiredstitches, so theoretically she
could have come back in themorning.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
but yeah, and this is also.
I feel like that this was a 90strend of taking old movies and
glorifying them, and this is anexample of it in the adaptation
and even in the original.
But in the book there's reallyno major gory deaths, there's no
blood, there's no gore, andthis one there is a couple of
(12:39):
instances of it happening.
That's the first one wherebasically a piano wire hits her
in the eye, but, like you said,it's a cut.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
And probably get stitched up, go home.
It's not a spend the rest ofthe night away.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Well, spend the rest of the week away.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
That's right.
They never come back andthey're there for a whole week.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
Yeah, so it's yeah.
So it's like what's the pointof these characters?
Just to get injured and showthat the house is haunted?
I guess yeah, pretty much.
And the other we're going tojump way ahead in the film.
The other death is Luke's death.
Luke dies in this adaptation,but he doesn't die in the book.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
No, and in the book one of the cool things about
Luke is that he's actuallyrelated to the people who own
the house and part of his thingis proving that there's no such
thing as ghosts in this house.
Because he's a non-believer, hedoesn't believe it, so he has
(13:45):
that emotional tie to the houseand kind of a little bit of a
business interest in it.
In this one, luke is I made thejoke of a random backpacker who
just kind of showed up but he'sthe other death when he decides
to challenge the house.
Speaker 1 (14:03):
Yeah, he's the other death when he decides to
challenge the house.
Yeah, there's Now, is now.
Or Eleanor, Eleanor, now is thesame person.
So if we call her Eleanor, ifwe call her now, it's the same
character.
But yeah, in the in thebeginning of the book she has
(14:26):
like the worst sister.
I mean she just has like theworst relationship with her
family.
But she's invited toparticipate in the study Like
her mother.
She was her mother's caretakerfor many years.
Her mother just died and sowhen she gets the invitation to
(14:47):
go to Hell House she's tellingher sister like please, let me
take the car so I can go to HellHouse, and her sister's like
hell, no.
So essentially she steals hersister's car and drives herself
to Hell House, and in the filmshe has the car already yeah,
(15:10):
like the sister's so nice.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
At the beginning of the film she's like here's the
car.
Um, I think you should move inwith us, because she knows,
she's aware that you know, thiswhole thing happened with the
mom.
It's a very different dynamic.
In the book the sister is mean.
The brother-in-law is horribleto her.
I cannot not talk about thatkid though.
(15:36):
Jeez Louise, that kid isannoying.
Oh my god.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
We're talking about Eleanor's nephew.
We have three nieces and onenephew and, like, they're about
this kid's age and they are notannoying and we're we're not
being biased like if I had anannoying nephew I'd I'd say it.
I mean maybe not because notpublicly in the podcast, because
(16:08):
, like my brother listens, butif, like, I would definitely
tell Orlando and I'd be like yo,that kid is a spoiled brat and
I can't stand them.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
If that kid was my nephew, I'd willingly live in
her house.
I'd rather deal with the littleghost children than that kid,
which leads to anotherdifference Ghost children.
Speaker 1 (16:31):
There's no ghost children in the book.
There's no children in the book.
Yeah, there's no childreninvolved at all.
The children are such a majorplot point of the 1999
adaptation, this whole thing oflike hugh crane wanted to fill
the house with the sounds ofchildren and he like carved
(16:53):
these really scary lookingchildren everywhere in the house
and yeah, there's no, there'sno ghost children.
There's no children there's.
I mean, hugh crane does didlose a child, uh, in the in the
book, but it wasn't.
He wasn't so obsessed withfilling the house with the
(17:14):
sounds of children and his wifejust kept or his children just
kept dying on him, and so heresorted to killing and
kidnapping children the way hedid in this adaptation yeah,
yeah, that was a weird changeand there's so many ghost
children and the cgi image ofthe what.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
What is that?
The bed?
The?
Is it the?
The bed frame that has the kid?
Speaker 1 (17:40):
carvings, yeah, yeah sometimes got funny it did.
But on, like I don't know howanyone could sleep in that, but
like if that was, if all theselike scary children carvings
were like just above my head, Iwould not be able to sleep.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
I think I'd I'd, yeah , yeah, um yeah, uh, one of the
changes that bothered me at thebeginning also was um eleanor
(18:17):
gets a phone call that tells herlook at this ad on the
newspaper and that's where shefinds the ad of this experiment.
They're calling it insomnia andthat's what motivates her to
call and participate.
The reason it ends up botheringme is because, towards the end,
obviously you the plot twistdiscovery is um, it's not even a
(18:40):
plot twist because the audiencehas known, not along, but
that's when um dr monk, montague, dr merrill, dr merrill reveals
, reveals what's actually beenhappening and she's like no, but
you called me and told me.
So he's like nobody called youand I'm like the house called
her, the ghost children calledher, like who called her then?
Speaker 1 (19:03):
Well, I guess I'm guessing it was Hugh Crane that
called her because she thinks DrLike if she heard the voice of
a child.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
True, so it would have to be so ghost Hugh Crane
calls her.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
And tells her look at the ad in the newspaper.
But one thing I forgot to bringup when you were talking about
how mean the sister and thebrother-in-law are in the book
everyone is so mean to Eleanorin the book it really bugged me
(19:37):
Like they were so mean to herfor no reason.
So I will say that is.
One change I liked in thisadaptation and in the original
adaptation is that people were alot nicer to her because
they're like theo is like niceto her when they initially meet
and then out of nowhere in thebook is just like can you stop?
(19:59):
Like I don't like you don't gowith me, I don't like, I don't
like you, like just just.
She just like gets mean to herout of nowhere.
Yeah, and that just like therewas.
I mean I don't know, therewasn't anything about eleanor.
That was like why is everyonejust hating on this lady so much
(20:20):
?
She's?
Speaker 2 (20:20):
so, yeah, like she's a strange person, but because of
you know what she's dealt withwith the mother.
She's not as socially whatshe's dealt with with the mother
.
She's not as socially.
What's the word?
Normalized I guess.
But there's nothing reallywrong.
She never says anything wrongPeople.
Just she seems to be the kindof person that people just hate
(20:42):
for no reason.
So I will agree, I did like thechange in Theo, because Theo
was mean in the book and therewere scenes where I was like,
why do you care about Theo?
And in the movie you do see alot of care, focusing
specifically on this adaptation.
Theo cares a lot.
(21:04):
Theo actually cares a lot abouther.
There is some issues with Theo'scharacter in this adaptation.
Um, there's always been aconversation of the underlying
bisexuality of theo.
Uh, that has been somethingthat's been studied in the book,
which kind of briefly gets intothat in the movie.
(21:26):
Um, in this movie though, inthe 1990 movie, it felt like
they were, they needed to stateit.
Every other sentence it waslike did I mention I'm bisexual?
By the way, I like women?
It was like every othersentence.
Um, also, it's captain sedajones, so let's, let's put her
as revealing as we possibly can,every single second.
(21:49):
Let's over sexualize thischaracter as much as we can yeah
, for sure, and there.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
There another thing that's very different in this
adaptation.
Is that?
Um so any of the uh hauntingaspects, the paranormal aspects
(22:18):
that's what I'm looking for anyof all the paranormal things
happen at night only.
In the film they happen duringthe day and sometimes at night
mainly at night, but there aresome like incidences that happen
during the day, and in the bookit's pretty much exclusively
just at night.
I think the only thing thathappens during the day is they
(22:39):
find the Welcome Home, eleanor.
Yes, painting yeah, but that'sit Everything.
Like there's so many likeEleanor sees something in the
chimney and then she one of HughCrane's ex-wives talks to her
(23:01):
through in the form of a bookthat happens in the day.
Hugh Crane did have a wife thattragically died very young in
the book, but there was nosecond wife, right.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
No.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
Yeah, there was no second wife who ran away with
the baby that ended up beingEleanor's ancestor.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Yeah, because that's another difference, and this one
, eleanor's, related to yeah,because that's another
difference.
In this one, eleanor's relatedto Ukraine.
I don't really know what thepurpose behind that was, because
it leads to a really funny lineat the end, where what does she
say?
Come and get me, grandpa, yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:50):
She's talking to ghosts to ukraine and is just
like come on, grandpa, orsomething I don't know I was
expecting that from ukraine, um,but yeah, that is uh.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
so, because of all the changes, you don't really
get to know that the tree wherethe carriage had an accident and
that is where the wife diesends up being the same tree that
Eleanor crashes into at the endand dies so in in in the film
(24:39):
she so, yes, in the book shedies by after crashing to the
same tree that hugh crane'swife's carriage crashed into.
Speaker 1 (24:47):
So they die the same way.
In the film she dies, sheconfronts.
I don't know why this.
There's okay, hugh Grant, hughGrant, hugh Grant, hugh Crane
built everything in this house.
He, like hand, chose it,selected it to keep the wonder
of the children alive, orwhatever.
(25:09):
There's one thing that's out ofplace and that is this door
that represents, um, mainly hell.
Speaker 2 (25:18):
There's like a little like a glimpse of heaven at the
top, but then, um, it mainlyrepresents like purgatory and
then hell, and there's like twoguards, hell guards yeah, I
think it's supposed to be likethe divine comedy, right, it's,
it's hell, purgatory and heaven,and then the quote I believe is
(25:38):
straight out of the divinecomedy okay um but the there's
children carvings in hell andit's just like oh, the, these
hell guards are preventing thechildren from going to heaven.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
And so at the end, when Eleanor's like, come and
get me grandpa Again, I don'tknow why this man built, like,
why would you build doors inyour house that represent the
gates of hell?
Because that's how they end updefeating Hugh Crane.
(26:16):
Eleanor leads him to the doorsand he gets caught by the hell
guards and so he becomes part ofthe door.
Speaker 2 (26:24):
And it's the children .
Right, the children goes likeit's the door.
Lead him to the door.
Speaker 1 (26:30):
Yeah, and it's the door.
Lead him to the door.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Yeah, and it's like wait.
So hugh crane built this houseand added a door that he said
this is going to capture me oneday or just maybe he didn't, he
wasn't thinking it was going tocapture him, but like, why, I
don't know what?
Speaker 1 (26:52):
like maybe he was trying to scare the children, I
don't know, but I'm just likethat.
Why would, why would you builddoors that are metaphorically
and ultimately literally, thegates to hell in your house?
I don't know, but, um, uh, yeah, so that's, that's so.
(27:18):
She leads into the door, hegets caught by the guards of
hell and then, once he's caught,and all the, all the little
ghost children that are trappedin these hell doors start coming
out and are just like thank youEleanor, thank you Eleanor.
And then she just dies, she'sjust like.
(27:39):
And then she floats up toheaven with the children.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
I think you're meant to believe that Hugh Crane
launched her into the door andthat's how she died.
It never was clear why exactly.
She just kind of died.
Speaker 1 (27:56):
Yeah, she's just.
She leads Hugh Crane to thedoor and then she just dies.
Maybe she went the route ofPadme Amidala and lost her will
to live.
Or it was like she completed her, been her, she finished her
business and then she wanted tobe with the children, um,
(28:20):
because that she didn't want tostay on earth with her family,
which I would understand in thebook, but in the film, like Theo
actually offered her to likeyou don't need to go back to
your sister if you don't want to, like come back and live with
me, and so like she has like anice prospect of like I have a
(28:40):
friend and and yeah, so yeahbecause that's another big
character change where, like inthe book, she really really has
nothing.
Speaker 2 (28:50):
The sister hates her, the brother-in-law hates her,
she's probably going to get introuble for stealing the car,
theo hates her, luke doesn'tcare.
So she really has nothing.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (29:04):
And the only thing that's brought her some sort of
what's the word I'm looking forSome sort of importance, are
these ghosts that she's seeingin this house and this belief
that to the house she isimportant In the movie you don't
have that.
She's got a lot of prospects.
(29:24):
She could really move on.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
Yeah, so it's not really clear.
She just she dies, her heartstops.
Maybe she was more scared thanshe realized and her heart
stopped, I don't know.
But anyway, there is a veryimportant scene that happens in
the library, and there's nolibrary in this, in this hill
house.
it's like ukraine you builteverything except the library no
(29:47):
, instead this scene happens ata greenhouse yeah, so there's
like a spiral staircase that inthis house is really old in both
the book and the film, but init in the book, like the, the
spiral staircase startsdetaching itself from the wall
(30:08):
and eleanor has managed to climball the way up to the top and
luke is the one thatbegrudgingly goes to save her.
In the adaptation, it's drmarrow who, like the, the spiral
staircase, just like startsseparating from each other.
It's not attached to the wall,it's just hanging from the air
(30:34):
and it starts detaching and thecables start falling apart.
So then, dr Mero is the one thatgoes up the stairs to save her.
Speaker 2 (30:44):
Which again that scene in the book.
It serves its purpose.
They're trying to rescueEleanor, but I remember in the
movie part of the funny thing isthat it starts falling apart
and it ends up being Eleanorhaving to rescue Montague and
(31:06):
then, once she rescues them,they're still at the top and
then all of a sudden cut to thenext scene.
They're safe.
We never see how they got down.
Speaker 1 (31:13):
Yeah, there was no.
In the book the stairs arecoming to become detached from
the wall, but Luke and Eleanormanaged to make their way up and
back down by going very, veryslowly.
So they do manage to get downwithout those staircase falling
on them.
In the in the film there's theyreach the top and then there's
(31:36):
nowhere to go.
So it's like how did they getdown?
Did they like find vines upthere that they just swung down
tarzan style?
Speaker 2 (31:45):
I don't know and if there was another opening, it's
why did you go up that openinginstead of going up that
dangerous spiral staircase thatmakes zero?
Speaker 1 (31:52):
sense?
Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (31:57):
I guess another character that I found
differences in is the house.
I'm going to call the character, the house, a character.
In the book.
The house is very muchdescribed as a regular creepy
looking house and part of thehouse is very much described as
a regular creepy looking house,and part of the description is
that this house is massive andbecause of the way the house
(32:20):
feels, you easily get lost.
It's just that it feels heavy.
It's a very intense building soyou can easily get lost in
there, and there's a lot ofscenes in which they're like I
don't even know how I got here.
These rooms are confusing.
They took that very literallyin the movie.
(32:40):
Now, the exterior is gorgeous,the exterior is very beautiful,
but once you're inside, suddenlythere's a room that's a river
that you have to jump overblocks to get to.
The other side there's a roomthat's like a mirror maze and
then there's the what is it?
The carousel?
Speaker 1 (33:01):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
There's a carousel inside a room and then there's
the nursery, which the nurseryis important in both book and
the movie, but they took a weirddesign for the interior of the
house.
There's a lot of statues, likeyou already mentioned, the
little girl, and one of myfavorite moments now fighting a
(33:22):
griffin, now straight up, isfighting a stone griffin,
because the griffin comes tolife, and I think that's where,
towards the end of the movie,I'm like, wow, we got there.
She's straight up attacking agriffin yeah, um, and her uh.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
Her attachment to the house is literal in the film in
that she's the descendant ofHugh Crane and like this whole
backstory that we kind oftouched upon.
But Hugh Crane had a secondwife that no one knew about
somehow, and that second wifegave birth to what ended up
(34:11):
being Eleanor'sgreat-great-grandma.
But after she gave birth sheran away somehow without Hugh
Crane knowing, and theneventually, along the line, I
guess she'd probably nevertalked to her kids about Hugh
Crane, because he would talkabout that man to them and yeah,
(34:32):
so until Eleanor was born andall of a sudden Eleanor's the
one that Hugh Crane is.
Like that's the one I'm gonnacall back to the house.
I don't know why I've nevercalled anyone else to come to
the house.
But yeah anyway.
So yeah, it's.
It's a very literal attachmentand Orlando can talk more about
the attachment in the book, butit's not a literal like she's
(34:56):
related to the house the way sheis in the film.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
Yeah, and in the book again it's a little bit more
psychological, as we havementioned, like now has dealt
with taking care of the mom forthe rest end of her life and
unfortunately this is somethingthat is very serious, that
(35:22):
happens to a lot of people.
They end up spending the restof their life taking care of a
parent, at which point they'reno longer living their life and
that is what now was living.
She was living for her motherand part of the guilt that now
feels is that the mom was likeringing the bell for help and
now decided this time I'm notgoing and that's when the mom
(35:46):
dies.
So there's also like a lot ofpsychological sense going on
inside.
Now she well, as we mentioned,she has nothing at home, the
sister doesn't like her andthere's no friend that's
offering her a place to stay.
So she literally has nowhere togo and this house becomes an
(36:08):
invitation for her and and shesuddenly feels the purpose, she
feels the reasoning to liveessentially is through this
house.
And then you have the housepopping up with signs that say
it doesn't say welcome, it saysher name and she's starting to
feel that these attachments aregetting for her specifically,
(36:32):
these manifestations are lookingfor her specifically and she
realizes that this house iswhere her future kind of lives,
and so that's where you get intolike a little bit of
psychological uh, thepsychological thriller of it,
where you begin to wonder howmuch of it was haunting, how
(36:52):
much of it was actually inEleanor's head, how much of it
was her desperately wanting tobecome part of the house, until
you get to the end where shepermanently becomes part of the
house by dying in it, so thatit's a very different attachment
.
And sure, psychological thingscan be difficult in movie, but
(37:16):
they did it in the 60s so it ispossible, but that's, that was a
very major difference yeah.
Speaker 1 (37:25):
So I don't know if there's any other notes that you
want.
I'm, I've gone through my notes, but I, I guess one thing.
I mean we, we already talkedabout the one thing we like,
which is Theo's change, but isthere any other, uh, any other
(37:48):
change that you liked and you'relike?
You know what?
Whatever I like it, I, I, yeah,I think for me it's, it's.
I liked all the random rooms inthe house.
It just made it fun for me,that's just me.
Speaker 2 (38:08):
That's just me.
I think I can like this moviefor what it is and what it was
when I first watched it.
If I try to compare it to thebook, I'm just not going to like
the movie.
If I see it as a separateentity, it was still bad, but
it's a fun kind of bad.
It's a silly kind of bad.
(38:31):
It's a silly kind of bad.
Um, some of my notes weremaking you laugh because when we
finally see hugh crane, like hefinally manifests, I was like,
okay, mcu baddie, like hestraight up looks like the next
dr doom with his cloak and theway they the cgi.
Um.
So if I see it as somethingseparate, I can enjoy it as a
(38:53):
silly fun movie.
There's one of the things wealways talk about in the horror
community is not all horrorneeds to have a purpose.
Some horror is just for fun.
And this is a movie where, ifyou're cleaning and you need
some mindless entertainment justto laugh at, just to silly
enjoy, it's a good one for that.
Speaker 1 (39:16):
So I don't hate the movie, it's just silly yeah, and
what is the change that annoyedyou the most?
Speaker 2 (39:29):
re-watching.
It was, and I get it.
Catherine Zeta-Jones is agorgeous woman, but the overly
sexified tone of it.
Like luke just couldn't keephis hands off her.
Every comment he had was oh mygosh, she's so hot, I'm gonna go
(39:49):
see what she's up to becauseshe's hot.
And then dropping in a bisexualline and mind you, this was the
90s where bisexuality was kindof um, was the word fetishized
as opposed to respected.
Those little things reallybothered me.
I did like that they make theonice um.
(40:10):
But it got to the point where Iwas like I'm surprised at the
end Theo's clothes is not morerevealing, like surprised they
didn't tear right here on herchest, a little bit on the legs.
Yeah, I was half expecting thatto happen because just I didn't
understand the need to overlysexify that character.
Speaker 1 (40:32):
I'm surprised you didn't say the hand line, oh the
hand.
Say the hand line oh the handline.
Speaker 2 (40:36):
The hand line is also one of my favorite moments in
the book.
So basically in the bookthere's this really intense
moment where they're obviouslyin the room, they're in the dark
and I say it's Nell and Theo,because at this point they're
trying to sleep together becausethey're so freaked out and they
start hearing the noises.
(40:57):
The house is getting scary andthere's this whole internal
monologue with Nell because shefeels Theo grab her hand.
And as things get scarier, nellkeeps saying like she's
squeezing so hard, she's goingto break my hand because she's
squeezing so hard, she's gonnabreak my hand because she's
squeezing so hard.
Once everything stops and theyturn the lights on, she looks
(41:18):
and nobody was holding her handand she says the line who was
holding my hand in the movie?
How do I even describe thatscene?
Speaker 1 (41:29):
she's getting I don't know.
She she's getting haunted inher room and at one point she
gets like the children arecoming alive and they're just
like, oh my gosh, watch out,eleanor, it's Hugh Crane.
And Hugh Crane's likemanifesting through like stained
glass in the room and at onepoint he like shoots her out of
(41:52):
the bed and then she's just likelike who is holding my hand?
And that's it.
Speaker 2 (41:56):
She's literally crawling on the floor being like
who was holding my hand?
It's like there was no instanceof you thinking someone could
hold your hand, like you justgot flung across the room I yeah
, uh, I mean, but yeah, this,this movie is so, so silly and
(42:18):
one of the the things.
Speaker 1 (42:20):
This is really really , really nitpicky, but it really
bugged me once I noticedbecause I'd never noticed this
before and then this is thefirst time I noticed it, so now
it just really bugged me nowthat I did.
But so you open, so the gatesof Hill House it's, it's raw
iron gates, fine.
(42:41):
And then there's the crest, theHill House crest, and there's
like spikies or surrounding thecrest, but you open the gates
and the crest splits in half toopen so you can open the gates.
So like the design is on thegates but it's it's it can split
(43:04):
in half so the gates can open.
At one point luke is trying tolike get out, is like trying to
smash the gates down so they canleave.
He drives nell's car out ofnowhere.
He's like now I need your carand it's like you can't use your
own car.
But okay, um, so he takes hercar and he smashes it into the
(43:27):
gates and this just causes thefull crest to fall on the door,
on on the roof of the the car.
I mean it's like how could thefull crest intact fall into the
car when it splits in half, likeif it should, at least if it.
(43:51):
You want the whole thing tofall, at least half of it should
like this, should split, Idon't know, yeah that is so
nitpicky, but that just reallybugged me, yeah.
But you know what, though I?
I still had a fun time watchingit, it's a terrible, terrible
adaptation, but I I still likeit.
(44:17):
Honestly.
Speaker 2 (44:18):
I'm still gonna tell you to go watch it because it's
fun yeah, and don't watch itwith the expectation because
it's a good book.
It is a great book.
Don't watch it with theexpectations of an adaptation of
a great book.
Watch it for a silly horrormovie, silly Silly fun time.
The only other thing that I puton my notes I wish they kept
(44:40):
the house evil, because that'spart of what the book talks
about and it leaves it that way,that it's evil and Luke has
that really cool closing line.
Speaker 1 (44:51):
The Hill House has stood for 80 years and will
stand for 80 more.
Speaker 2 (44:56):
Because it gives that characteristic.
And in this movie it's likeWell, there's even a scene of
the Dudleys Coming back andSeeing Theo and Montague and
Meryl Meryl Meryl.
Why was that the only change,like the only character name
(45:19):
change, I don't know, but anyway, and you get the idea that it's
all over.
They were able to traumatize.
Stay in the house until theDudleys came again to open the
gate, but the evil is over,because the evil got caught in
the house until the Dudleys cameagain to open the gate, but the
evil is over.
Speaker 1 (45:35):
Because the evil got caught in the gates of hell.
Speaker 2 (45:38):
The evil got caught in the gates of hell, but in the
book you're still feelingunsettled about the house, and
the house will continue to liveon being the evil bitch that it
is.
Speaker 1 (45:49):
Yeah.
So, that being said, I ratedthe book four stars I think I
read the book five stars.
It's one of my favorite booksand I rated the film two and a
half stars.
Speaker 2 (46:08):
I think two and a half no, you rated it two I
rated it two.
Okay, I rated two.
Speaker 1 (46:13):
I was just looking at a set of box scores so I know
it was two stars.
So, that being said, the winneris the book, obviously it's
going to be the book.
This is a terrible film, but Istill think, like I said, watch
it it's a fun time, like it'smindless entertainment, and
(46:38):
sometimes films don't need to beanything other than mindless
entertainment.
Speaker 2 (46:43):
Exactly.
Sometimes you just need tolaugh.
Speaker 1 (46:48):
And you will A lot With this film.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (46:55):
That's a good one.
It's a fun one.
Yeah, yeah, that's a good one.
Speaker 1 (46:57):
It's a fun.
It's yeah, it's a fun.
I I still think you shouldwatch the film.
Read the book.
The book is clear winner.
There's not no contest.
But read the book because it'sgood and actually I think the
read.
I rated the film, the book,three stars.
I don't know, I rated it eitherthree or four stars.
Either way, the book is theclear winner.
Speaker 2 (47:18):
Yeah, for sure.
Speaker 1 (47:21):
But I still recommend the film.
But I recommend the 60s versioneven more than the 1999
adaptation than the 1999adaptation.
Speaker 2 (47:33):
If you want a good scary movie kind of intense,
makes you wonder what's reallygoing on the 60s one Just want a
fun kind of horror movie thenwatch the 90s one, yeah.
Speaker 1 (47:52):
So thank you for tuning in to this week's episode
of books versus movies.
Next time I will be talkingabout mickey 7 and its 2025
adaptation.
Mickey 17.
If you like this podcast, leaveit a rating and a review, tell
your friends all about it and Iwill see you next time.
(48:13):
And you will see Orlando.
Next time we talk about eithercomics or horror.
Expect him to be a guestanytime I talk about those
things, just because I know hethat's his bread and butter and
he just he makes it fun thankyou, thank you Appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (48:35):
Thank you for this one, too, because this is really
one of my favorite.
The 60s one is one of myfavorite movies and this is
generally one of my favorites.
I was really excited to talkabout it.
Speaker 1 (48:44):
Of course I mean I feel like it would be mean to
not include you, Just like itwould be so mean to include you
to not include you if I ever doa crow episode that's exciting
(49:05):
I'm not promising anything, I'mstill.
I'm catching up a little bit,or?
Speaker 2 (49:11):
you're gonna make me do the corey me I'm not gonna
have this.
Speaker 1 (49:17):
I don't, I have no, no, no, we're doing the one with
brendan yeah, okay I have mylimits.
I I this one.
I would have loved to havetalked about the 60s version,
but I wasn't opposed to talkingabout the 90s version because I
(49:41):
do have a lot of nostalgia forit.
I have no nostalgia towards theCrow remake yeah so alright,
see you next time.
Welcome to Books vs Movies, the podcast where I set
out to answer the age-oldquestion is the book really
always better than the movie?
I'm Yuvia, an actress and booklover based out of New York City
and today Orlando, and I willbe talking about the Haunting of
Hill House by Shirley Jacksonand its 1999 adaptation, the
(00:23):
Haunting.
So let's just get the elephantout of the room.
We are aware that there is amuch better adaptation.
We've seen the originaladaptation from the 60s.
Speaker 2 (00:39):
Yeah, 60s, my favorite, one of my favorite
movies of all time.
Speaker 1 (00:43):
Yeah, so we're aware that it exists.
We recommend that's the one youwant you watch.
But this is what was availableon streaming, the 1999 version.
So that's the one that we'rereviewing.
And boy, oh boy, is it reallybad.
But you know, I remember we sawthe dvd, like my mom and I, when
(01:10):
we were at like target orsomething.
This is a while ago.
And she's like oh, I'm gonnabuy this movie for you because
it reminds me of you, because Iloved that movie as a kid.
That was like the first horrormovie.
Well, I was gonna say the firsthorror movie that I tolerated,
but that's not true because Iloved chucky as a kid.
(01:31):
Yeah, but, like, after mychucky phase, my demented child
phase was over and I couldn'twatch scary movies because I was
scared of them.
The haunting was like the firstone I remember watching and
tolerating and liking, and Ishowed it to like my cousin, I
(01:52):
showed it to everyone.
That was like coming over, Iloved it.
So, like my mom was like itreminds me of you, and I was
like I used to like that movie,but then I watched the original
in the 60s and now I don't likethis one anymore and she's like
oh, so she didn't buy it for me.
But now I'm kind of sad that Ididn't let her buy it for me
(02:13):
because it's really bad, but itholds a special place in my
heart.
So, yeah, I kind of wish I hadlet her buy it for me for me.
Speaker 2 (02:26):
That movie, oddly enough, gave me nightmares
that's so funny because we're soswitched now we're so opposites
.
But yeah, as a kid I rememberthat movie giving me nightmares
and my mom changed a lot but Iwill say I, I think I'm, I'm
(02:49):
discovering that I don't hatehorror films.
Speaker 1 (02:54):
I I do have my limits .
As I've said, if there'sdemonic possession, devils and
I'm out, I'm out like thatlegitimately terrifies me.
But I think it's not and Idon't like slashers.
I just think.
But you don't really likeslashers either no, they're not
my favorite genre.
Speaker 2 (03:12):
It's very rare that I see a slasher and I'm like that
was really good yeah, so Ithink I think for me it's.
Speaker 1 (03:20):
It's not that I don't like horror.
I think horror just irritatesme, because I hate when people
are making dumb mistakes, andthat's like what horror is.
Speaker 2 (03:31):
When 90% of slasher movies is that, yeah, running
the wrong way, getting yourselfstuck in the basement.
So it makes sense.
Speaker 1 (03:40):
So if it's like more of a psychological thriller or
psychological horror, that'swhat I'm really into.
Thriller or psychologicalhorror, that's what I'm really
into.
But anyway, that's not.
We're here to talk about thehaunting of hill house.
So, orlando, why don't you telleveryone what the haunting of
hill house by shirley jackson isabout?
Speaker 2 (03:59):
yeah uh, the haunting of hill house by shirley jack,
who has quickly become one of myfavorite authors.
It's about Eleanor, who gets aninvitation to be a part of this
experiment, this experiment byDr Montague.
Dr Montague is basicallygathering people who have either
(04:29):
had a close encounter withdeath or some sort of paranormal
life of some sort to kind ofconduct an experiment at Hill
House.
Eleanor has just come freshfrom the mother that she took
care of passing away.
She basically dedicated herlife to this and this is her
first time doing things on herown.
(04:50):
And things happen at the housewhich we'll get into.
Speaker 1 (04:56):
The 1999 version, the Haunting directed by Jan de
Bont, I think, is how youpronounce it, or Jan de Bont,
maybe.
It stars Lily Taylor, catherineSeda-Jones, liam Neeson and
Owen Wilson, and it's nothingwhat he just described.
(05:16):
So these four participants areasked to go to Hill House and
they are unknowinglyparticipating in a psychological
study on mass hysteria, butthey're told that it is a study
on insomnia.
But I discovered after watchingthe remake that there's a
(05:40):
reason why it's so different andthat is that, due to the rights
, due to copyright reasons, theywere not allowed to officially
call this a remake of theHaunting.
They weren't even allowed touse any like, pay homage to the
original in any way.
(06:01):
Like they couldn't, because youknow how a lot of like remakes
have like they recreate the oneiconic scene from the original
in any way.
Like they couldn't, because youknow how a lot of like remakes
have like they recreate the oneiconic scene from the original
yeah um, so they're not.
They were not allowed to likereference the original in any
way.
So essentially they had to saythis was a new interpretation of
(06:23):
the haunting impale house,which is how they got away with
it.
But that's why it's sodifferent and that is why the
adaptation is a really badadaptation, because it has
nothing to do with the bookreally that makes me wonder,
because there is a tv series,there's the netflix series um
same title, right haunting ofhill house.
Speaker 2 (06:44):
Um, I started it I only got two or three episodes
in because I got frustrated thatit was nothing at all like the
book.
But now I'm wondering if theyhad to deal with the same issue
I don't think so.
Speaker 1 (06:59):
I it's my understanding that this is that
was mike flanagan.
That was the direction hewanted to take it in.
I could be wrong, but I think,like the rights the copyright
infringement rights from theoriginal already expired so they
could have made a faithfuladaptation, but I think Mike
Flanagan just wanted to do hisown thing.
(07:21):
So, yeah, I haven't seen it.
He tried watching it, but it isEveryone that's seen it and
hasn't read the book says it's areally good TV show.
But because he said it was justsuch a bad adaptation, he
wasn't really interested inwatching it.
And I don't know that I'minterested in watching it for
(07:43):
that reason.
That isn't to say that it's abad show.
It's just a bad adaptation.
Speaker 2 (07:49):
I also had just finished reading the book, or,
and then decided, oh, I justfinished the book, not to watch
the series, so I haven't given.
I haven't tried watching itsince having space between stuff
.
So I don't know, maybe I needto give it again more time
before trying again, because nowwe're doing this.
(08:10):
So I'm still.
It's still gonna be fresh in mymind.
Speaker 1 (08:12):
Yeah, yeah.
So, wow, I don't even knowwhere to begin because this is
so, so different, and I guess II'll start off by saying that,
yeah, the the in the book, um,eleanor, theo and luke are all
(08:35):
aware of what they'reparticipating in.
They weren't tricked.
And in the in the film, they'rebeing told I said that they're
there to help them with theirinsomnia troubles, to maybe find
a cure for their insomnia.
It's a study on insomnia that'sgoing to benefit them with
better sleep.
(08:55):
And then they end updiscovering, once Eleanor starts
getting screwed up mentally,that it's a study on mass
hysteria.
Speaker 2 (09:07):
Yeah, yeah, I don't know.
I have my notes.
I don't know how.
We want to go bit by bit.
Speaker 1 (09:18):
We can just talk about it.
Speaker 2 (09:33):
And like so in the in the film also, Liam Neeson is
the one that plays the characterof Dr.
Speaker 1 (09:35):
Montague, except in the film he's called Dr Merrill.
Yeah, in the this film thatweren't well so in in the book
there's um, it's, it's the coregroup of four of theo, eleanor,
(09:56):
luke and dr montague.
And then a few days later, drmontague's wife shows up along
with arthur, who's a teacher.
They're really good friends.
She's totally cheating on drmontague's wife shows up along
with arthur, who's a teacher.
They're really good friends.
She's totally cheating on drmontague with arthur like she.
They're really close friends butit's just no, they're more than
(10:18):
friends.
It's like your husband's notvery observant, but the wife is
in the original adaptation, butArthur isn't.
And then what?
Speaker 2 (10:32):
Yeah, Arthur's not.
Speaker 1 (10:32):
Yeah, arthur's not, but in the 1999 version there
are two characters.
They're not Mrs Montague andArthur, but I think they're
placeholders for them.
They're just random.
Her name is Mary and then Iforgot the name of the guy and
they're Dr Merrow's researchassistants, but they're gone
(10:57):
after the first night.
Speaker 2 (10:59):
I guess it's the opposite In the book.
They come at the end.
In this case, they come at theend.
Speaker 1 (11:04):
In this case, they come at the beginning and
quickly disappear yeah, and it'sone of those things where like
conveniently the, becausethere's two caretakers, mr and
mrs dudley.
Mr dudley's in charge of likethe grounds and mrs dudley is in
charge of the inside of thehouse, so they're the only ones
(11:26):
that have keys to the, to thelike main gates to Hill House,
and then when they leave at theend of the day they they lock up
and they they're out.
So like that's one of thethings they emphasize is like
once we're gone, like you're onyour own until we come back in
the morning, like you're on yourown until we come back in the
(11:47):
morning, but in the adaptation,conveniently, there's an extra
set of keys that um, after marysuffers an accident that
requires the male assistant tolike drive her into town, to the
hospital.
There they conveniently havethat extra pair of keys so they
can leave, but they never comeback, which is like her injury
(12:11):
would have just requiredstitches, so theoretically she
could have come back in themorning.
Speaker 2 (12:15):
but yeah, and this is also.
I feel like that this was a 90strend of taking old movies and
glorifying them, and this is anexample of it in the adaptation
and even in the original.
But in the book there's reallyno major gory deaths, there's no
blood, there's no gore, andthis one there is a couple of
(12:39):
instances of it happening.
That's the first one wherebasically a piano wire hits her
in the eye, but, like you said,it's a cut.
Speaker 1 (12:49):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (12:50):
And probably get stitched up, go home.
It's not a spend the rest ofthe night away.
Speaker 1 (12:55):
Well, spend the rest of the week away.
Speaker 2 (12:58):
That's right.
They never come back andthey're there for a whole week.
Speaker 1 (13:02):
Yeah, so it's yeah.
So it's like what's the pointof these characters?
Just to get injured and showthat the house is haunted?
I guess yeah, pretty much.
And the other we're going tojump way ahead in the film.
The other death is Luke's death.
Luke dies in this adaptation,but he doesn't die in the book.
Speaker 2 (13:24):
No, and in the book one of the cool things about
Luke is that he's actuallyrelated to the people who own
the house and part of his thingis proving that there's no such
thing as ghosts in this house.
Because he's a non-believer, hedoesn't believe it, so he has
(13:45):
that emotional tie to the houseand kind of a little bit of a
business interest in it.
In this one, luke is I made thejoke of a random backpacker who
just kind of showed up but he'sthe other death when he decides
to challenge the house.
Speaker 1 (14:03):
Yeah, he's the other death when he decides to
challenge the house.
Yeah, there's Now, is now.
Or Eleanor, Eleanor, now is thesame person.
So if we call her Eleanor, ifwe call her now, it's the same
character.
But yeah, in the in thebeginning of the book she has
(14:26):
like the worst sister.
I mean she just has like theworst relationship with her
family.
But she's invited toparticipate in the study Like
her mother.
She was her mother's caretakerfor many years.
Her mother just died and sowhen she gets the invitation to
(14:47):
go to Hell House she's tellingher sister like please, let me
take the car so I can go to HellHouse, and her sister's like
hell, no.
So essentially she steals hersister's car and drives herself
to Hell House, and in the filmshe has the car already yeah,
(15:10):
like the sister's so nice.
Speaker 2 (15:12):
At the beginning of the film she's like here's the
car.
Um, I think you should move inwith us, because she knows,
she's aware that you know, thiswhole thing happened with the
mom.
It's a very different dynamic.
In the book the sister is mean.
The brother-in-law is horribleto her.
I cannot not talk about thatkid though.
(15:36):
Jeez Louise, that kid isannoying.
Oh my god.
Speaker 1 (15:42):
We're talking about Eleanor's nephew.
We have three nieces and onenephew and, like, they're about
this kid's age and they are notannoying and we're we're not
being biased like if I had anannoying nephew I'd I'd say it.
I mean maybe not because notpublicly in the podcast, because
(16:08):
, like my brother listens, butif, like, I would definitely
tell Orlando and I'd be like yo,that kid is a spoiled brat and
I can't stand them.
Speaker 2 (16:19):
If that kid was my nephew, I'd willingly live in
her house.
I'd rather deal with the littleghost children than that kid,
which leads to anotherdifference Ghost children.
Speaker 1 (16:31):
There's no ghost children in the book.
There's no children in the book.
Yeah, there's no childreninvolved at all.
The children are such a majorplot point of the 1999
adaptation, this whole thing oflike hugh crane wanted to fill
the house with the sounds ofchildren and he like carved
(16:53):
these really scary lookingchildren everywhere in the house
and yeah, there's no, there'sno ghost children.
There's no children there's.
I mean, hugh crane does didlose a child, uh, in the in the
book, but it wasn't.
He wasn't so obsessed withfilling the house with the
(17:14):
sounds of children and his wifejust kept or his children just
kept dying on him, and so heresorted to killing and
kidnapping children the way hedid in this adaptation yeah,
yeah, that was a weird changeand there's so many ghost
children and the cgi image ofthe what.
Speaker 2 (17:35):
What is that?
The bed?
The?
Is it the?
The bed frame that has the kid?
Speaker 1 (17:40):
carvings, yeah, yeah sometimes got funny it did.
But on, like I don't know howanyone could sleep in that, but
like if that was, if all theselike scary children carvings
were like just above my head, Iwould not be able to sleep.
Speaker 2 (17:56):
I think I'd I'd, yeah , yeah, um yeah, uh, one of the
changes that bothered me at thebeginning also was um eleanor
(18:17):
gets a phone call that tells herlook at this ad on the
newspaper and that's where shefinds the ad of this experiment.
They're calling it insomnia andthat's what motivates her to
call and participate.
The reason it ends up botheringme is because, towards the end,
obviously you the plot twistdiscovery is um, it's not even a
(18:40):
plot twist because the audiencehas known, not along, but
that's when um dr monk, montague, dr merrill, dr merrill reveals
, reveals what's actually beenhappening and she's like no, but
you called me and told me.
So he's like nobody called youand I'm like the house called
her, the ghost children calledher, like who called her then?
Speaker 1 (19:03):
Well, I guess I'm guessing it was Hugh Crane that
called her because she thinks DrLike if she heard the voice of
a child.
Speaker 2 (19:11):
True, so it would have to be so ghost Hugh Crane
calls her.
Speaker 1 (19:16):
And tells her look at the ad in the newspaper.
But one thing I forgot to bringup when you were talking about
how mean the sister and thebrother-in-law are in the book
everyone is so mean to Eleanorin the book it really bugged me
(19:37):
Like they were so mean to herfor no reason.
So I will say that is.
One change I liked in thisadaptation and in the original
adaptation is that people were alot nicer to her because
they're like theo is like niceto her when they initially meet
and then out of nowhere in thebook is just like can you stop?
(19:59):
Like I don't like you don't gowith me, I don't like, I don't
like you, like just just.
She just like gets mean to herout of nowhere.
Yeah, and that just like therewas.
I mean I don't know, therewasn't anything about eleanor.
That was like why is everyonejust hating on this lady so much
(20:20):
?
She's?
Speaker 2 (20:20):
so, yeah, like she's a strange person, but because of
you know what she's dealt withwith the mother.
She's not as socially whatshe's dealt with with the mother
.
She's not as socially.
What's the word?
Normalized I guess.
But there's nothing reallywrong.
She never says anything wrongPeople.
Just she seems to be the kindof person that people just hate
(20:42):
for no reason.
So I will agree, I did like thechange in Theo, because Theo
was mean in the book and therewere scenes where I was like,
why do you care about Theo?
And in the movie you do see alot of care, focusing
specifically on this adaptation.
Theo cares a lot.
(21:04):
Theo actually cares a lot abouther.
There is some issues with Theo'scharacter in this adaptation.
Um, there's always been aconversation of the underlying
bisexuality of theo.
Uh, that has been somethingthat's been studied in the book,
which kind of briefly gets intothat in the movie.
(21:26):
Um, in this movie though, inthe 1990 movie, it felt like
they were, they needed to stateit.
Every other sentence it waslike did I mention I'm bisexual?
By the way, I like women?
It was like every othersentence.
Um, also, it's captain sedajones, so let's, let's put her
as revealing as we possibly can,every single second.
(21:49):
Let's over sexualize thischaracter as much as we can yeah
, for sure, and there.
Speaker 1 (21:58):
There another thing that's very different in this
adaptation.
Is that?
Um so any of the uh hauntingaspects, the paranormal aspects
(22:18):
that's what I'm looking for anyof all the paranormal things
happen at night only.
In the film they happen duringthe day and sometimes at night
mainly at night, but there aresome like incidences that happen
during the day, and in the bookit's pretty much exclusively
just at night.
I think the only thing thathappens during the day is they
(22:39):
find the Welcome Home, eleanor.
Yes, painting yeah, but that'sit Everything.
Like there's so many likeEleanor sees something in the
chimney and then she one of HughCrane's ex-wives talks to her
(23:01):
through in the form of a bookthat happens in the day.
Hugh Crane did have a wife thattragically died very young in
the book, but there was nosecond wife, right.
Speaker 2 (23:18):
No.
Speaker 1 (23:19):
Yeah, there was no second wife who ran away with
the baby that ended up beingEleanor's ancestor.
Speaker 2 (23:30):
Yeah, because that's another difference, and this one
, eleanor's, related to yeah,because that's another
difference.
In this one, eleanor's relatedto Ukraine.
I don't really know what thepurpose behind that was, because
it leads to a really funny lineat the end, where what does she
say?
Come and get me, grandpa, yeah.
Speaker 1 (23:50):
She's talking to ghosts to ukraine and is just
like come on, grandpa, orsomething I don't know I was
expecting that from ukraine, um,but yeah, that is uh.
Speaker 2 (24:06):
so, because of all the changes, you don't really
get to know that the tree wherethe carriage had an accident and
that is where the wife diesends up being the same tree that
Eleanor crashes into at the endand dies so in in in the film
(24:39):
she so, yes, in the book shedies by after crashing to the
same tree that hugh crane'swife's carriage crashed into.
Speaker 1 (24:47):
So they die the same way.
In the film she dies, sheconfronts.
I don't know why this.
There's okay, hugh Grant, hughGrant, hugh Grant, hugh Crane
built everything in this house.
He, like hand, chose it,selected it to keep the wonder
of the children alive, orwhatever.
(25:09):
There's one thing that's out ofplace and that is this door
that represents, um, mainly hell.
Speaker 2 (25:18):
There's like a little like a glimpse of heaven at the
top, but then, um, it mainlyrepresents like purgatory and
then hell, and there's like twoguards, hell guards yeah, I
think it's supposed to be likethe divine comedy, right, it's,
it's hell, purgatory and heaven,and then the quote I believe is
(25:38):
straight out of the divinecomedy okay um but the there's
children carvings in hell andit's just like oh, the, these
hell guards are preventing thechildren from going to heaven.
Speaker 1 (25:56):
And so at the end, when Eleanor's like, come and
get me grandpa Again, I don'tknow why this man built, like,
why would you build doors inyour house that represent the
gates of hell?
Because that's how they end updefeating Hugh Crane.
(26:16):
Eleanor leads him to the doorsand he gets caught by the hell
guards and so he becomes part ofthe door.
Speaker 2 (26:24):
And it's the children .
Right, the children goes likeit's the door.
Lead him to the door.
Speaker 1 (26:30):
Yeah, and it's the door.
Lead him to the door.
Speaker 2 (26:31):
Yeah, and it's like wait.
So hugh crane built this houseand added a door that he said
this is going to capture me oneday or just maybe he didn't, he
wasn't thinking it was going tocapture him, but like, why, I
don't know what?
Speaker 1 (26:52):
like maybe he was trying to scare the children, I
don't know, but I'm just likethat.
Why would, why would you builddoors that are metaphorically
and ultimately literally, thegates to hell in your house?
I don't know, but, um, uh, yeah, so that's, that's so.
(27:18):
She leads into the door, hegets caught by the guards of
hell and then, once he's caught,and all the, all the little
ghost children that are trappedin these hell doors start coming
out and are just like thank youEleanor, thank you Eleanor.
And then she just dies, she'sjust like.
(27:39):
And then she floats up toheaven with the children.
Speaker 2 (27:44):
I think you're meant to believe that Hugh Crane
launched her into the door andthat's how she died.
It never was clear why exactly.
She just kind of died.
Speaker 1 (27:56):
Yeah, she's just.
She leads Hugh Crane to thedoor and then she just dies.
Maybe she went the route ofPadme Amidala and lost her will
to live.
Or it was like she completed her, been her, she finished her
business and then she wanted tobe with the children, um,
(28:20):
because that she didn't want tostay on earth with her family,
which I would understand in thebook, but in the film, like Theo
actually offered her to likeyou don't need to go back to
your sister if you don't want to, like come back and live with
me, and so like she has like anice prospect of like I have a
(28:40):
friend and and yeah, so yeahbecause that's another big
character change where, like inthe book, she really really has
nothing.
Speaker 2 (28:50):
The sister hates her, the brother-in-law hates her,
she's probably going to get introuble for stealing the car,
theo hates her, luke doesn'tcare.
So she really has nothing.
Speaker 1 (29:03):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (29:04):
And the only thing that's brought her some sort of
what's the word I'm looking forSome sort of importance, are
these ghosts that she's seeingin this house and this belief
that to the house she isimportant In the movie you don't
have that.
She's got a lot of prospects.
(29:24):
She could really move on.
Speaker 1 (29:26):
Yeah, so it's not really clear.
She just she dies, her heartstops.
Maybe she was more scared thanshe realized and her heart
stopped, I don't know.
But anyway, there is a veryimportant scene that happens in
the library, and there's nolibrary in this, in this hill
house.
it's like ukraine you builteverything except the library no
(29:47):
, instead this scene happens ata greenhouse yeah, so there's
like a spiral staircase that inthis house is really old in both
the book and the film, but init in the book, like the, the
spiral staircase startsdetaching itself from the wall
(30:08):
and eleanor has managed to climball the way up to the top and
luke is the one thatbegrudgingly goes to save her.
In the adaptation, it's drmarrow who, like the, the spiral
staircase, just like startsseparating from each other.
It's not attached to the wall,it's just hanging from the air
(30:34):
and it starts detaching and thecables start falling apart.
So then, dr Mero is the one thatgoes up the stairs to save her.
Speaker 2 (30:44):
Which again that scene in the book.
It serves its purpose.
They're trying to rescueEleanor, but I remember in the
movie part of the funny thing isthat it starts falling apart
and it ends up being Eleanorhaving to rescue Montague and
(31:06):
then, once she rescues them,they're still at the top and
then all of a sudden cut to thenext scene.
They're safe.
We never see how they got down.
Speaker 1 (31:13):
Yeah, there was no.
In the book the stairs arecoming to become detached from
the wall, but Luke and Eleanormanaged to make their way up and
back down by going very, veryslowly.
So they do manage to get downwithout those staircase falling
on them.
In the in the film there's theyreach the top and then there's
(31:36):
nowhere to go.
So it's like how did they getdown?
Did they like find vines upthere that they just swung down
tarzan style?
Speaker 2 (31:45):
I don't know and if there was another opening, it's
why did you go up that openinginstead of going up that
dangerous spiral staircase thatmakes zero?
Speaker 1 (31:52):
sense?
Yeah, I don't know.
Speaker 2 (31:57):
I guess another character that I found
differences in is the house.
I'm going to call the character, the house, a character.
In the book.
The house is very muchdescribed as a regular creepy
looking house and part of thehouse is very much described as
a regular creepy looking house,and part of the description is
that this house is massive andbecause of the way the house
(32:20):
feels, you easily get lost.
It's just that it feels heavy.
It's a very intense building soyou can easily get lost in
there, and there's a lot ofscenes in which they're like I
don't even know how I got here.
These rooms are confusing.
They took that very literallyin the movie.
(32:40):
Now, the exterior is gorgeous,the exterior is very beautiful,
but once you're inside, suddenlythere's a room that's a river
that you have to jump overblocks to get to.
The other side there's a roomthat's like a mirror maze and
then there's the what is it?
The carousel?
Speaker 1 (33:01):
Yeah.
Speaker 2 (33:02):
There's a carousel inside a room and then there's
the nursery, which the nurseryis important in both book and
the movie, but they took a weirddesign for the interior of the
house.
There's a lot of statues, likeyou already mentioned, the
little girl, and one of myfavorite moments now fighting a
(33:22):
griffin, now straight up, isfighting a stone griffin,
because the griffin comes tolife, and I think that's where,
towards the end of the movie,I'm like, wow, we got there.
She's straight up attacking agriffin yeah, um, and her uh.
Speaker 1 (33:48):
Her attachment to the house is literal in the film in
that she's the descendant ofHugh Crane and like this whole
backstory that we kind oftouched upon.
But Hugh Crane had a secondwife that no one knew about
somehow, and that second wifegave birth to what ended up
(34:11):
being Eleanor'sgreat-great-grandma.
But after she gave birth sheran away somehow without Hugh
Crane knowing, and theneventually, along the line, I
guess she'd probably nevertalked to her kids about Hugh
Crane, because he would talkabout that man to them and yeah,
(34:32):
so until Eleanor was born andall of a sudden Eleanor's the
one that Hugh Crane is.
Like that's the one I'm gonnacall back to the house.
I don't know why I've nevercalled anyone else to come to
the house.
But yeah anyway.
So yeah, it's.
It's a very literal attachmentand Orlando can talk more about
the attachment in the book, butit's not a literal like she's
(34:56):
related to the house the way sheis in the film.
Speaker 2 (35:00):
Yeah, and in the book again it's a little bit more
psychological, as we havementioned, like now has dealt
with taking care of the mom forthe rest end of her life and
unfortunately this is somethingthat is very serious, that
(35:22):
happens to a lot of people.
They end up spending the restof their life taking care of a
parent, at which point they'reno longer living their life and
that is what now was living.
She was living for her motherand part of the guilt that now
feels is that the mom was likeringing the bell for help and
now decided this time I'm notgoing and that's when the mom
(35:46):
dies.
So there's also like a lot ofpsychological sense going on
inside.
Now she well, as we mentioned,she has nothing at home, the
sister doesn't like her andthere's no friend that's
offering her a place to stay.
So she literally has nowhere togo and this house becomes an
(36:08):
invitation for her and and shesuddenly feels the purpose, she
feels the reasoning to liveessentially is through this
house.
And then you have the housepopping up with signs that say
it doesn't say welcome, it saysher name and she's starting to
feel that these attachments aregetting for her specifically,
(36:32):
these manifestations are lookingfor her specifically and she
realizes that this house iswhere her future kind of lives,
and so that's where you get intolike a little bit of
psychological uh, thepsychological thriller of it,
where you begin to wonder howmuch of it was haunting, how
(36:52):
much of it was actually inEleanor's head, how much of it
was her desperately wanting tobecome part of the house, until
you get to the end where shepermanently becomes part of the
house by dying in it, so thatit's a very different attachment
.
And sure, psychological thingscan be difficult in movie, but
(37:16):
they did it in the 60s so it ispossible, but that's, that was a
very major difference yeah.
Speaker 1 (37:25):
So I don't know if there's any other notes that you
want.
I'm, I've gone through my notes, but I, I guess one thing.
I mean we, we already talkedabout the one thing we like,
which is Theo's change, but isthere any other, uh, any other
(37:48):
change that you liked and you'relike?
You know what?
Whatever I like it, I, I, yeah,I think for me it's, it's.
I liked all the random rooms inthe house.
It just made it fun for me,that's just me.
Speaker 2 (38:08):
That's just me.
I think I can like this moviefor what it is and what it was
when I first watched it.
If I try to compare it to thebook, I'm just not going to like
the movie.
If I see it as a separateentity, it was still bad, but
it's a fun kind of bad.
It's a silly kind of bad.
(38:31):
It's a silly kind of bad.
Um, some of my notes weremaking you laugh because when we
finally see hugh crane, like hefinally manifests, I was like,
okay, mcu baddie, like hestraight up looks like the next
dr doom with his cloak and theway they the cgi.
Um.
So if I see it as somethingseparate, I can enjoy it as a
(38:53):
silly fun movie.
There's one of the things wealways talk about in the horror
community is not all horrorneeds to have a purpose.
Some horror is just for fun.
And this is a movie where, ifyou're cleaning and you need
some mindless entertainment justto laugh at, just to silly
enjoy, it's a good one for that.
Speaker 1 (39:16):
So I don't hate the movie, it's just silly yeah, and
what is the change that annoyedyou the most?
Speaker 2 (39:29):
re-watching.
It was, and I get it.
Catherine Zeta-Jones is agorgeous woman, but the overly
sexified tone of it.
Like luke just couldn't keephis hands off her.
Every comment he had was oh mygosh, she's so hot, I'm gonna go
(39:49):
see what she's up to becauseshe's hot.
And then dropping in a bisexualline and mind you, this was the
90s where bisexuality was kindof um, was the word fetishized
as opposed to respected.
Those little things reallybothered me.
I did like that they make theonice um.
(40:10):
But it got to the point where Iwas like I'm surprised at the
end Theo's clothes is not morerevealing, like surprised they
didn't tear right here on herchest, a little bit on the legs.
Yeah, I was half expecting thatto happen because just I didn't
understand the need to overlysexify that character.
Speaker 1 (40:32):
I'm surprised you didn't say the hand line, oh the
hand.
Say the hand line oh the handline.
Speaker 2 (40:36):
The hand line is also one of my favorite moments in
the book.
So basically in the bookthere's this really intense
moment where they're obviouslyin the room, they're in the dark
and I say it's Nell and Theo,because at this point they're
trying to sleep together becausethey're so freaked out and they
start hearing the noises.
(40:57):
The house is getting scary andthere's this whole internal
monologue with Nell because shefeels Theo grab her hand.
And as things get scarier, nellkeeps saying like she's
squeezing so hard, she's goingto break my hand because she's
squeezing so hard, she's gonnabreak my hand because she's
squeezing so hard.
Once everything stops and theyturn the lights on, she looks
(41:18):
and nobody was holding her handand she says the line who was
holding my hand in the movie?
How do I even describe thatscene?
Speaker 1 (41:29):
she's getting I don't know.
She she's getting haunted inher room and at one point she
gets like the children arecoming alive and they're just
like, oh my gosh, watch out,eleanor, it's Hugh Crane.
And Hugh Crane's likemanifesting through like stained
glass in the room and at onepoint he like shoots her out of
(41:52):
the bed and then she's just likelike who is holding my hand?
And that's it.
Speaker 2 (41:56):
She's literally crawling on the floor being like
who was holding my hand?
It's like there was no instanceof you thinking someone could
hold your hand, like you justgot flung across the room I yeah
, uh, I mean, but yeah, this,this movie is so, so silly and
(42:18):
one of the the things.
Speaker 1 (42:20):
This is really really , really nitpicky, but it really
bugged me once I noticedbecause I'd never noticed this
before and then this is thefirst time I noticed it, so now
it just really bugged me nowthat I did.
But so you open, so the gatesof Hill House it's, it's raw
iron gates, fine.
(42:41):
And then there's the crest, theHill House crest, and there's
like spikies or surrounding thecrest, but you open the gates
and the crest splits in half toopen so you can open the gates.
So like the design is on thegates but it's it's it can split
(43:04):
in half so the gates can open.
At one point luke is trying tolike get out, is like trying to
smash the gates down so they canleave.
He drives nell's car out ofnowhere.
He's like now I need your carand it's like you can't use your
own car.
But okay, um, so he takes hercar and he smashes it into the
(43:27):
gates and this just causes thefull crest to fall on the door,
on on the roof of the the car.
I mean it's like how could thefull crest intact fall into the
car when it splits in half, likeif it should, at least if it.
(43:51):
You want the whole thing tofall, at least half of it should
like this, should split, Idon't know, yeah that is so
nitpicky, but that just reallybugged me, yeah.
But you know what, though I?
I still had a fun time watchingit, it's a terrible, terrible
adaptation, but I I still likeit.
(44:17):
Honestly.
Speaker 2 (44:18):
I'm still gonna tell you to go watch it because it's
fun yeah, and don't watch itwith the expectation because
it's a good book.
It is a great book.
Don't watch it with theexpectations of an adaptation of
a great book.
Watch it for a silly horrormovie, silly Silly fun time.
The only other thing that I puton my notes I wish they kept
(44:40):
the house evil, because that'spart of what the book talks
about and it leaves it that way,that it's evil and Luke has
that really cool closing line.
Speaker 1 (44:51):
The Hill House has stood for 80 years and will
stand for 80 more.
Speaker 2 (44:56):
Because it gives that characteristic.
And in this movie it's likeWell, there's even a scene of
the Dudleys Coming back andSeeing Theo and Montague and
Meryl Meryl Meryl.
Why was that the only change,like the only character name
(45:19):
change, I don't know, but anyway, and you get the idea that it's
all over.
They were able to traumatize.
Stay in the house until theDudleys came again to open the
gate, but the evil is over,because the evil got caught in
the house until the Dudleys cameagain to open the gate, but the
evil is over.
Speaker 1 (45:35):
Because the evil got caught in the gates of hell.
Speaker 2 (45:38):
The evil got caught in the gates of hell, but in the
book you're still feelingunsettled about the house, and
the house will continue to liveon being the evil bitch that it
is.
Speaker 1 (45:49):
Yeah.
So, that being said, I ratedthe book four stars I think I
read the book five stars.
It's one of my favorite booksand I rated the film two and a
half stars.
Speaker 2 (46:08):
I think two and a half no, you rated it two I
rated it two.
Okay, I rated two.
Speaker 1 (46:13):
I was just looking at a set of box scores so I know
it was two stars.
So, that being said, the winneris the book, obviously it's
going to be the book.
This is a terrible film, but Istill think, like I said, watch
it it's a fun time, like it'smindless entertainment, and
(46:38):
sometimes films don't need to beanything other than mindless
entertainment.
Speaker 2 (46:43):
Exactly.
Sometimes you just need tolaugh.
Speaker 1 (46:48):
And you will A lot With this film.
Yeah, yeah.
Speaker 2 (46:55):
That's a good one.
It's a fun one.
Yeah, yeah, that's a good one.
Speaker 1 (46:57):
It's a fun.
It's yeah, it's a fun.
I I still think you shouldwatch the film.
Read the book.
The book is clear winner.
There's not no contest.
But read the book because it'sgood and actually I think the
read.
I rated the film, the book,three stars.
I don't know, I rated it eitherthree or four stars.
Either way, the book is theclear winner.
Speaker 2 (47:18):
Yeah, for sure.
Speaker 1 (47:21):
But I still recommend the film.
But I recommend the 60s versioneven more than the 1999
adaptation than the 1999adaptation.
Speaker 2 (47:33):
If you want a good scary movie kind of intense,
makes you wonder what's reallygoing on the 60s one Just want a
fun kind of horror movie thenwatch the 90s one, yeah.
Speaker 1 (47:52):
So thank you for tuning in to this week's episode
of books versus movies.
Next time I will be talkingabout mickey 7 and its 2025
adaptation.
Mickey 17.
If you like this podcast, leaveit a rating and a review, tell
your friends all about it and Iwill see you next time.
(48:13):
And you will see Orlando.
Next time we talk about eithercomics or horror.
Expect him to be a guestanytime I talk about those
things, just because I know hethat's his bread and butter and
he just he makes it fun thankyou, thank you Appreciate it.
Speaker 2 (48:35):
Thank you for this one, too, because this is really
one of my favorite.
The 60s one is one of myfavorite movies and this is
generally one of my favorites.
I was really excited to talkabout it.
Speaker 1 (48:44):
Of course I mean I feel like it would be mean to
not include you, Just like itwould be so mean to include you
to not include you if I ever doa crow episode that's exciting
(49:05):
I'm not promising anything, I'mstill.
I'm catching up a little bit,or?
Speaker 2 (49:11):
you're gonna make me do the corey me I'm not gonna
have this.
Speaker 1 (49:17):
I don't, I have no, no, no, we're doing the one with
brendan yeah, okay I have mylimits.
I I this one.
I would have loved to havetalked about the 60s version,
but I wasn't opposed to talkingabout the 90s version because I
(49:41):
do have a lot of nostalgia forit.
I have no nostalgia towards theCrow remake yeah so alright,
see you next time.
Popular Podcasts
On Purpose with Jay Shetty
I’m Jay Shetty host of On Purpose the worlds #1 Mental Health podcast and I’m so grateful you found us. I started this podcast 5 years ago to invite you into conversations and workshops that are designed to help make you happier, healthier and more healed. I believe that when you (yes you) feel seen, heard and understood you’re able to deal with relationship struggles, work challenges and life’s ups and downs with more ease and grace. I interview experts, celebrities, thought leaders and athletes so that we can grow our mindset, build better habits and uncover a side of them we’ve never seen before. New episodes every Monday and Friday. Your support means the world to me and I don’t take it for granted — click the follow button and leave a review to help us spread the love with On Purpose. I can’t wait for you to listen to your first or 500th episode!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.
Cardiac Cowboys
The heart was always off-limits to surgeons. Cutting into it spelled instant death for the patient. That is, until a ragtag group of doctors scattered across the Midwest and Texas decided to throw out the rule book. Working in makeshift laboratories and home garages, using medical devices made from scavenged machine parts and beer tubes, these men and women invented the field of open heart surgery. Odds are, someone you know is alive because of them. So why has history left them behind? Presented by Chris Pine, CARDIAC COWBOYS tells the gripping true story behind the birth of heart surgery, and the young, Greatest Generation doctors who made it happen. For years, they competed and feuded, racing to be the first, the best, and the most prolific. Some appeared on the cover of Time Magazine, operated on kings and advised presidents. Others ended up disgraced, penniless, and convicted of felonies. Together, they ignited a revolution in medicine, and changed the world.