The Curse of the Fly is a 1965 British science fiction horror film directed by Don Sharp and starring Brian Donlevy. It is the third and final entry in the Fly film series, following The Fly (1958) and Return of the Fly (1959). While the first two films focused on the character of Andre Delambre, played by David Hedison, The Curse of the Fly features a new cast of characters and explores different aspects of the fly mutation storyline. Brian Donlevy plays Henri Delambre, the son of Andre Delambre, who continues his father's experiments in teleportation. He has inherited the family estate, which includes a secret laboratory where he conducts his experiments. However, Henri's experiments involve teleporting living creatures, which results in horrific mutations.
The original had the better ending, no question. I mentioned earlier that it was surreal to see the wife's story confirmed, and it was very memorable to see a fly turned more into a man after seeing the man turn into a fly. The remake's ending was effective and an ode to classic monster movies.
I can excuse Brundle falling for Veronica in a short time because he s supposed to be a reclusive nerd though a handsome and shredded one , but Veronica is harder to believe, especially since she just got out of a relationship. To start off, I want to say that both films were good, and I appreciated that the remake attempted to make a new story and forge its own path a little.
However, Henri's experiments involve teleporting living creatures, which results in horrific mutations. The main idea of The Curse of the Fly revolves around the tragic consequences of scientific experimentation and the inability to control the power of teleportation. Henri's experiments lead to the creation of mutant creatures, known as "the flies", which threaten the lives of him and his family.
The Fly (1958) vs. The Fly (1986)
I just finished The Fly ('86) and wanted to do a little comparison and verdict. Spoilers are probably inbound.
To start off, I want to say that both films were good, and I appreciated that the remake attempted to make a new story and forge its own path a little. I'm not keen on the idea of shot for shot remakes.
The films were essentially different genres: the original being a suspense thriller/horror and the remake being a romance and body horror.
The original was structured non-chronologically, and was structured better overall. The idea of showing the "murder" first and what lead up to it after was a good way to hook in the audience for the murder mystery. The end felt surreal confirming the wild story told by the murder suspect, the wife. The remake was told chronologically and was more about developing the romance (I'll get into this later) and seeing the relationship getting strained due to miscommunication and the accident with the fly. The original has the edge in structure, feeling more deliberate and meaningful, while the remake is very meandering; part of this is the editing.
The original is edited like many of the great old movies were: every scene having a purpose. Everything was tight and moved along nicely. The remake could've been a little more refined. Things like the gymnastics and the arm wrestling went on a little too long, while the romance and interaction before the accident could've used more time.
As far as pacing, the original is far better in this regard. It was never too slow or too fast. The remake was all over the place, though. I was shocked how early Brundle went into the teleporter because I knew that the rest of the movie was about Veronica seeing Brundle, whom she loved, deteriorate. Like I mentioned earlier, the romance needed more time to develop. A few sex scenes happened, and now Brundle and Veronica were supposed to be in love. Maybe, but the fact that Veronica just got out of a relationship with her boss (he still had her apartment key) really strains believability.
Effects-wise, I won't compare them directly because the technology had advanced a lot in 30 years. The original wasn't impressive, even for the 50s. Boris Karloff and Lon Chaney, Sr. and Jr. had better effects decades earlier. The effects weren't bad, just a little unimpressive. The actor, Al Hedison, admittedly elevated them with his performance (looked like there were two minds battling in one body), and the script used them intelligently (hiding the head and arm to invoke curiosity). The remake had great effects. The progression and leprosy of them were very cool. But, as with many 80s movies, it sometimes went over the top and focused more on gross-out rather than moving the story forward (melting Stathis's leg).
Acting-wise, they are both good. The original has the legend, Vincent Price, and everyone else was good, Al Hedison, Patricia Owens. It's been a while, but I remember that I quite liked Hedison as The Fly because he really showed the fly vs. the man and was sympathetic. The remake had Goldblum in an intense nerdy performance that was fascinating to watch even before the makeup. I think Hedison and Owens had a better chemistry than Goldblum and Davis.
Cinematography-wise, I can't weigh in on either side. Both were effective. Who can forget the Phantom of the Opera moment and then the Fly-eye view of the wife in the original, and what about the wall-crawling in the remake?
The original has the better characters. They were, as far as I remember, all somewhat well-developed and consistent with themselves. In the remake, there were much less main characters, only 3. Brundle was good, though he was a little shredded for a nerd. Veronica wasn't very realistic. She decides to go into a stranger's home, and then she falls in love with that guy after a few nights together. I can excuse Brundle falling for Veronica in a short time because he's supposed to be a reclusive nerd (though a handsome and shredded one), but Veronica is harder to believe, especially since she just got out of a relationship. Stathis wasn't consistent. He goes from sleazy creep to sensitive protector for no reason at all. He's just there to indirectly make Brundle jealous early on and then bring a shotgun in the end of the movie, and his inconsitency reflects that. Nothing else he does with Veronica has a purpose, despite taking up a decent chunk of time.
The original had the better ending, no question. I mentioned earlier that it was surreal to see the wife's story confirmed, and it was very memorable to see a fly turned more into a man after seeing the man turn into a fly. The remake's ending was effective and an ode to classic monster movies.
My vote goes to the original. The original was more deliberate and punchy. I don't get why people call it schlocky; even though the effects are dated, it gets very tense, and death is not treated lightly. The remake was also good, but it suffered from being more style than substance. It needed a better foundation, but it was decided to spend more time showing the decay of the relationship rather than the actual relationship.
Effects-wise, I won't compare them directly because the technology had advanced a lot in 30 years. The original wasn't impressive, even for the 50s. Boris Karloff and Lon Chaney, Sr. and Jr. had better effects decades earlier. The effects weren't bad, just a little unimpressive. The actor, Al Hedison, admittedly elevated them with his performance (looked like there were two minds battling in one body), and the script used them intelligently (hiding the head and arm to invoke curiosity). The remake had great effects. The progression and leprosy of them were very cool. But, as with many 80s movies, it sometimes went over the top and focused more on gross-out rather than moving the story forward (melting Stathis's leg).
Although The Curse of the Fly did not receive as much critical or commercial success as its predecessors, it is still an intriguing addition to the Fly film series. The film explores themes of obsession, scientific ethics, and the dangers of playing god. The performances by the cast, including Brian Donlevy, are generally praised although the plot lacks the same depth as the previous films. In conclusion, The Curse of the Fly is a lesser-known entry in the Fly film series, but it continues to explore the themes of scientific experimentation and the consequences of tampering with nature. The performance by Brian Donlevy and the exploration of new characters and storylines make it a worthwhile watch for fans of the original films..
Reviews for "Unveiling the Monsters: The Stars of The Curse of the Fly"
1. John - 2 stars - I was really disappointed with "The stars of the curse of the fly." The plot was confusing and hard to follow, with too many unnecessary twists and subplots. The acting was also subpar, with wooden performances that lacked emotion. The special effects were outdated and laughable. Overall, I found the film to be a waste of time and would not recommend it.
2. Sarah - 1 star - "The stars of the curse of the fly" was a complete disaster. The story was poorly developed, leaving me confused and uninvested in the characters. The dialogue was cheesy and forced, making it difficult to take the film seriously. The pacing was off, with long stretches of boredom punctuated by exaggerated action scenes. The visual effects were lackluster and added nothing to the film. I regret wasting my time watching this movie and would advise others to avoid it at all costs.
3. Michael - 2 stars - "The stars of the curse of the fly" had potential, but it fell flat in execution. The editing was choppy, making it difficult to follow the storyline. The actors seemed disinterested and lacked chemistry, making the interactions feel forced and artificial. The film tried to incorporate too many genres, resulting in a messy and unclear overall tone. The ending left me unsatisfied and frustrated. Overall, the movie had some interesting ideas, but failed to deliver a cohesive and engaging experience.
4. Emily - 1 star - What a waste of time! "The stars of the curse of the fly" was a confusing mess. The plot was convoluted and hard to follow, and the pacing was all over the place. The characters were one-dimensional and lacked depth, making it impossible to care about their fates. The visuals were dated and the special effects were laughably bad. I was left scratching my head at the end, wondering what I had just watched. I would not recommend this film to anyone.