book way better
Added 8/3/2009
movie very bloody. didn't even really start out like the book. book much better. It started out that the mother & the boy were in the parking lot of Bullocks South Coast Plaza when the evil woman came up to them. At the very time I was reading the book, I was sitting in the parking lot of Bullocks south coast plaza. I worked there & was at lunch sitting in my car. Was VERY creepy.
Movie ok. But book way better.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Terrible!
Added 10/14/2007
Yes, I found this movie terrible. The acting was often over the top, but they mostly failed to convey the sense of impending danger that was warranted. Nor did they make me interested in the story. The violence was extreme. The ending was totally unbelevable--it was never even in the slightest forshadowed as a possibility. The directing was bad--moving much too fast for the viewer to develop the empathy and compassion necessary to feel for the little boy. Sound and fury was this director's apparent goal. In the book a genuine love relationship was developed between the two protagonists, but here we get nothing more than a one-night stand. The characters were hollow--there was no real substance here and no motivation given for the male protagonist's overinvolvement in the case.
With appropiate talent, the book could have been converted into a great thriller, but all we get here is commercial claptrap. Don't waste your time and money on this. If you loathe logic and credibility, you'll love this movie.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Departure From The Novel
Added 7/15/2005
The movie version of Dean Koontz's novel contained many changes; that is to be expected. A novel won't translate to the big screen verbatim. The problem here is that many of the changes were ineffective in that they didn't help to develop the characters or progress the story. I don't think that I would've liked the movie at all if I hadn't read the book and that should not be required protocol in order to enjoy a film.
This movie had the feel of a made for TV movie, and by that I mean one of the older B rate TV movies, kind of like a cheesie Lifetime movie. It was a combination of unknown actors spewing bad dialogue -written simply for the sake of exposition - while wearing horrible wardrobe filmed in overdone lighting. The actors, who seemed pretty credible, never had a chance.
This could have been good, actually it could have been very good. Some of the changes from the novel should have translated excellently on screen. The screenpaly would have benefited from a rewrite. Too many scenes were repetitive. How many times do we need to see gunmen sneak up on the boy? Eliminate a few of those scenes and develop some backstory. How about some character development?
If you read the book, it's worth it to see how it translated to film. It only takes up 90 minutes of your life.
5 out of 5 people found this helpful.
|
Hollywoods misfortunes
Added 5/24/2004
It is unfortunate that Hollywood cannnot do a writer justice, they usually change the script so repetively that the author's true genius is lost. If Midnight or Lightning had been made into movies Hollywood would have botch them.This movie comes dangerously close to it. Thank God it is only fictional or they would have totally castrated it, as they did with Black Hawk Down and We were soldiers once and young. With the exception of Pixar Studios and a few select films Hollywood castrates everthing they touch. My advice read the books, and carefully choose your movies. I mean how many times have you said aloud, whether you have cable or satelite there is nothing on worth watching. My god look at horrible the news is done, no more true hardball reporting, just reporting for couch potatoes to damn lazy to read the news and get an in depth report.
2 out of 9 people found this helpful.
|
Ending Rather Freaky
Added 9/28/2003
Okay, I thought Jarrett Lennon (who portrayed "Joey") was extraordinarily REAL and natural. Wish he'd get more acting jobs! I hated that the ending wasn't true to the book's ending... but it wasn't bad. I greatly appreciated Grace Zabriskie's contribution to this movie. The special effects were also surprisingly good.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
book way better
Added 8/3/2009
movie very bloody. didn't even really start out like the book. book much better. It started out that the mother & the boy were in the parking lot of Bullocks South Coast Plaza when the evil woman came up to them. At the very time I was reading the book, I was sitting in the parking lot of Bullocks south coast plaza. I worked there & was at lunch sitting in my car. Was VERY creepy.
Movie ok. But book way better.
0 out of 0 people found this helpful.
|
Terrible!
Added 10/14/2007
Yes, I found this movie terrible. The acting was often over the top, but they mostly failed to convey the sense of impending danger that was warranted. Nor did they make me interested in the story. The violence was extreme. The ending was totally unbelevable--it was never even in the slightest forshadowed as a possibility. The directing was bad--moving much too fast for the viewer to develop the empathy and compassion necessary to feel for the little boy. Sound and fury was this director's apparent goal. In the book a genuine love relationship was developed between the two protagonists, but here we get nothing more than a one-night stand. The characters were hollow--there was no real substance here and no motivation given for the male protagonist's overinvolvement in the case.
With appropiate talent, the book could have been converted into a great thriller, but all we get here is commercial claptrap. Don't waste your time and money on this. If you loathe logic and credibility, you'll love this movie.
1 out of 1 people found this helpful.
|
Departure From The Novel
Added 7/15/2005
The movie version of Dean Koontz's novel contained many changes; that is to be expected. A novel won't translate to the big screen verbatim. The problem here is that many of the changes were ineffective in that they didn't help to develop the characters or progress the story. I don't think that I would've liked the movie at all if I hadn't read the book and that should not be required protocol in order to enjoy a film.
This movie had the feel of a made for TV movie, and by that I mean one of the older B rate TV movies, kind of like a cheesie Lifetime movie. It was a combination of unknown actors spewing bad dialogue -written simply for the sake of exposition - while wearing horrible wardrobe filmed in overdone lighting. The actors, who seemed pretty credible, never had a chance.
This could have been good, actually it could have been very good. Some of the changes from the novel should have translated excellently on screen. The screenpaly would have benefited from a rewrite. Too many scenes were repetitive. How many times do we need to see gunmen sneak up on the boy? Eliminate a few of those scenes and develop some backstory. How about some character development?
If you read the book, it's worth it to see how it translated to film. It only takes up 90 minutes of your life.
5 out of 5 people found this helpful.
|
