Throwback Thursday Review: PET SEMATARY (1989)

RATED- R

RUN TIME- 103 Mins

WRITER(S)- Stephen King

STARRING- Dale Midkiff, Denise Crosby, and Fred Gwynne 

DIRECTOR- Mary Lambert

Synopsis taken from IMDb

Behind a young family's home in Maine is a terrible secret that holds the power of life after death. When tragedy strikes, the threat of that power soon becomes undeniable.

"Pet Sematary" is one of the first genre pictures I ever saw, and I was only a child at that time. The film had been out for a few years already by that time, and I can't recall how old I was, but I know I was in the single digits age-wise. I also don't remember how or why I watched it at such an impressionable age, but the nerd in me is glad that it happened. I have a lot of memories with this one, my entire family are huge Stephen King fans, so this was a hot topic in my neck of the woods.

My older sister saw it when it was released in theaters, and she also was only a child when she experienced it. A story that I grew up hearing about is how my sister urinated herself in the theater at the first appearance of Pascow, played to perfection by Brad Greenquist. I also have a story that might be funny to other people, but it sure as hell wasn't funny to me at the time. As a child, I had a three foot tall Power Ranger plush toy of the Red Ranger. My dads maniacal mind deviated a plan to pose the toy in my doorway, and out of any light source, so all I could see was its silhouette.
My father quoted (at the time) young actor Miko Hughes' memorable line as Gage, "now I wanna play with you...". It was the middle of the night, and when I heard the words spoken, and turned to see what looked like a child standing in the doorway to my bedroom, I screamed out and damn near wet myself. My dad got a good laugh out of it, and I guess you can say I get my twisted sense of (torture) humor from him.

I'd probably be too scared to listen to anything this guy said. 

I mean, even the opening credits are creepy. The children's singing along with the dark, demented tombstone visuals sets the mood, but doesn't prepare you for what you're about to experience. Ya know, aside from Rachel's (Denise Crosby) father, I don't think there's a single character that isn't likable. I mean, the second they move into their new accursed home, Judd Crandall (Fred Gwynne) saves Gage from an oncoming truck, and becomes a fan favorite. You just know you're going to like him, he seems genuine.

When Louis (Dale Midkiff) can't save Victor Pascow at his new job as a doctor at the University of Maine, he's soon haunted by his image. Only Pascow doesn't want to bring harm or bad luck to Louis, instead he wants to warn him of coming events, and save Louis' life for trying to save his. Louis thinks he's just dreaming until he awakes and finds his bare feet covered in mud after dreaming of walking through the Pet Sematary. After learning of the gravesite for children's deceased animals, the door opens for the Creed's lives to change for the worse. Especially after Judd tells Louis the truth about the cemetery; that it's an old Indian burial ground with the ability to bring dead animals back to life when buried there

I wonder if Church would still be pissy if he'd been given catnip?

So when his daughter, Ellie's (Blaze Berdahl) cat Church is hit by oncoming traffic, Louis does the only logical thing there is to do: he buries the cat in the cursed Indian land that lays beyond the children's Pet Sematary. When Church arrives home, he's a changed cat. He's mean, calculating, and dreadful. Not to mention he stinks...

We get some character time between Louis and his wife Rachel, and we see that they're making ends meet, but like all family's, they have their issues and drama. We get small hints at why Louis is hated by Rachel's father, and subtle things like that that fill in gaps nicely, and add a lot to the overall story and the way we view characters. Rachel's backstory is actually possibly the scariest scene in the entire feature. I don't think there's a single person out there who isn't somewhat creeped out by Rachel's sister, Zelda, who is actually played by a man named Andrew Hubatsek. While I think we can all agree that Rachel wasn't completely wrong with letting her sister die, she also wasn't right. So with complex storytelling like that, we get the black, white, and grey areas in their lives that allow us to sympathize with them.

Screw the brains, Gage goes straight for the throat!

Then of course, poor little Gage gets hit dead by a freight truck after chasing his kite through the grass. A co-worker of mine, and avid horror fan, told me once that the scene at Gage's funeral when his casket tips is the scariest scene ever. While I disagree, I can agree that it is unsettling, and scary in an unconventional way. It's more just uncomfortable for me, really. Judd tells Louis of a past story involving a man burying his son, who died in the war, in the land beyond Pet Sematary. The story includes details of that son coming back from the grave, and savagely attacking his family, only to be stopped by townsfolk burning his house down with everyone in it.
However, logic is beyond Louis, so he doesn't take a hint. While Rachel and Ellie are at Rachel's parents house, Louis digs up Gage from his peaceful plot, and takes him up to the dreaded land and buries Gage anyway. This is where it gets really, really good.

When Gage returns from the grave, it's nothing but bad news for everyone in sight. Starting with Judd, Gage goes on a eerie killing spree. The scene in which Judd Crandall is murdered by Gage is horrifying, and it defiles the innocence of a child. Breaking down such a delicate barrier, Stephen King is really able to reach for your heart and squeeze it. While he may look cute, Gage is an animal, and kills in ruthless ways. When Rachel leaves Ellie behind, she is guided subconsciously by Pascow.
Since Louis didn't listen to his advice, he seeks the hope that Rachel will heed his warning. Only she ends up being Gage's second victim, and while her demise happens off screen, we still get to see the after effects of it.

They say beauty is only skin deep, about as deep as that knife's about to be in Louis' back

When Louis awakens to find that his friendly neighbor Judd, and his wife have met their end at the hands of his now-evil son, Louis again, does what any man would do: kills his son, burns his neighbors house down, and buries his wife, saying that she hasn't been dead long enough yet to come back messed up. At this point in the film and story, Louis has gone mad, and actually plans on picking up his life the way it was, nevermind the fact that Rachel only has one eye now, and she's rotting. But his plans don't work out in the end anyway, because Rachel makes Louis her first victim. I remember seeing Denise Crosby in her final makeup on screen for the first time, and I didn't sleep right for weeks. I used to turn my head every time it shows her at the end with her leaking eye and vehement grin. It wasn't until a few years of watching the film that I could brave fully watching the end.

"Pet Sematary" has the credit of being one of the only films to ever really scare me. Not only that, it was another lovely entry into the genre that I'd grow up to be obsessed with. It's creep factor is still intact, and it hasn't lost it's touch. I consider King to be one of my biggest idols but, I have to admit that I think the film outdid his novel in this rare case. Though the book has more details, and the ending is more open, I think the cinematic representation told the story better, and in an everlasting way. It remains one of my favorite horror movies of all time, and I recently bought the Blu-ray with the sweet holographic cover of Church.
If my house were burning down, and I could only grab a few movies before it all turned to ash, "Pet Sematary" would be one of the few picked. I've got memories with this movie, and I just genuinely think it's an amazing horror film. I also didn't mind the sequel, "Pet Sematary II", although it's nothing compared to the original.

4.5 out of 5 stars

CARRIE is a bloody mess

RATED- R

RUN TIME- 100 MINS

WRITER(S)- LAWRENCE D. COHEN AND ROBERTO AGUIRRE-SACASA 

STARRING- CHLOE GRACE MORETZ, JULIANNE MOORE, AND GABRIELLE WILDE
DIRECTOR- KIMBERLY PEIRCE



Synopsis taken from IMDb
A re-imagining of the classic horror tale about Carrie White, a shy girl outcast by her peers and sheltered by her deeply religious mother, who unleashes telekinetic terror on her small town after being pushed too far at her senior prom.

Almost everyone knows about "Carrie" and how the story plays out. If by chance you're not knowledgeable of the tale, I advise you to not read this review. I'm going to specifically mention things that may ruin it for anyone not familiar with the content.

For starters, Kimberly Peirce, the director of 1999's controversial film "Boys Don't Cry", and most recently, "Stop-Loss" (2008), took on the task of directing this re-imagining of the bloody tale. I find it only fitting that this movie is directed by a female, honestly. From where I'm coming from, I would think that logically, having a woman behind the camera could help put a new sense of realism and urgency to the situations at hand. That's what I thought, anyway...

The first thing that stood out to me was how everything is modernized. I expected it to be done, and I'm glad that it wasn't overdone. The girls locker room scene being uploaded on YouTube is a nice touch, and definitely sets the movie up right. However, aside from this flick being successfully placed in modern time, there's not much else it exceeds at. In fact, it comes up short in a lot of ways.

Such as, Carrie (Chloe Grace Moretz) and her relationship with her mother, Margaret White (Julianne Moore) is totally disappointing and flawed. I understand the need for a new take on the situation, but I'm not too happy with how this was done. From the go, Carrie is defiant and back talks her mom. The relationship between these two characters is the foundation of the entire story. So to have Carrie not be submissive and scared of Margaret doesn't work. I guess, to put it more simply, Carrie is too lively and not beaten down enough.

Not to mention, after Carrie realizes her abilities and overuses them to death, she uses them on her mom to basically throw her around and control her. Taking the control out of Margaret's hands and giving it to Carrie is a big mistake. The character of Carrie doesn't work as a strong and empowered person, it kind of takes away the point of the revenge at the end. And she uses her telekinetic abilities so much, that if you don't know what's coming at the end of the movie, you can tell it's going to involve her powers. The payoff is null and void because of how fabricated and fake everything is made to seem.

I dislike her semi-friendship with Sue Snell (Gabriella Wilde) as well. What should have been a key relationship in the story felt flat and hollow, with no heart and soul. Completely unconvincing acting.

 Also, I really didn't like how the prom scene was executed. The setting looked good, and looked like a genuine school prom. I also like Carrie's relationship with Tommy Ross (Ansel Elgort), and the differences there. But, the way Carrie's revenge is done is just downright watered down and lame. First of all, I hated the movements she made when she was using her abilities against her schoolmates. I also dislike how she saved certain people from her reign of terror, such as Ms. Desjardin (Judy Greer).

I didn't feel the rage and hatred, and hurt. It wasn't authentic. Add to that, the worst thing of all about this flick is the fact that Carrie flies. I literally face-palmed myself in the theater! I found it utterly stupid. Doing something that has such a high cheese factor has to be done elegantly, and in a way to make it seem even less ridiculous. 

Overall, I didn't like the cast. This motion picture has the cast of a PG-13 movie. Everyone is so Hollywood and fake, none seem like real characters that you can relate to. I like Chloe Grace Moretz as an actress, but I feel that her talents were wasted in a film that she wasn't suitable for. Even though she's made to look homely, it still doesn't work because she's too attractive. 

All I can really say is that I'm disappointed like hell with this one. I had people telling me that it was going to "suck", but that's what everyone says when a remake is coming out. So, I went in with an open mind, expecting it to be good, hoping it to be good. And I came out extremely let down. Maybe, if this film were on it's own, and had no predecessor, I could like it. But, when you have an existing film done by the great Brian De Palma, I can't help but compare. 

I understand why this movie went in the direction it did. It was the only logical step to take in putting a new take on the story. However, there's hardly any worthy advancements, and what is there is forged and expected.

I would say that this is a remake of the original film, not a re-imagining. The De Palma film is a re-imagining of the book by Stephen King.

In the end, this is just another remake that doesn't live up to it's name. 

CARRIE: THE MUSICAL

Although the "Carrie" remake did pretty well this past weekend, coming in third and grossing $16, 101, 552, I'd say it's opening weekend was a success. However, I wasn't at a showing of the film, because I was one state over, in North East, Maryland at The Milburn Stone Theater attending the musical adaptation of the tragic story. I'll be seeing the new movie later this week, but with a musical of this criteria, I had to prioritize. 

Not much to my surprise, there's some serious talent involved in this stage performance! And with such a broad cast, it was a genuine relief to see it go over so well. AJ Melendez, a former American Idol Juniors finalist plays Tommy Ross, Carrie's prom date. Melendez not only is convincing in his performance, but has a great voice for the role. 

Then you have Christy Wyatt, who plays Carrie's only friend, Sue Snell. Christy not only plays the biggest role in the act, but also was narrator of the entire show. With a solid stage presence, and elegant vocals, she carries the show quite well. Add to that, Wyatt is also a resident of Delaware, like me, and many others of the cast. Having graduated high school as a vocal and musical theater major, she's been in numerous stage performances and is currently a freshman studying the Elementary Education major at the University of Delaware. 

When I asked Christy what preparations she had to make in order to get into the role of Sue, she said, "I think I'm a lot like Sue in real life. I'm very studious and I often keep to myself. Like any teenager, I can relate to making bad decisions and wanting to make things right after the fact, so it was easy to draw from that for my character." 

And of course, you have the main focus of the musical, Carrie, played by Megan Valle. The high school senior has a dance background of 14 years, and plans to go to college for a BFA in musical theater. And if her singing and acting in this musical have anything to say, she's going far, I hope. She plays the character of Carrie with almost perfection. She's got the look, and really is suitable for the role. She's utterly convincing in her execution of the character! 

Valle told me, "I tried to pull from certain events or feelings that related to Carrie. Everyone in their life has been bullied or called certain names, and I took that emotion that I felt during that certain incident, and exemplified it during the show." 

All around, being entirely truthful, the entire cast is phenomenal, and it's easy to tell they work for it. Throughout the entire show, there wasn't one hiccup in a single performer! This really stood out to me, because I usually always encounter some sort of screw up amongst the cast whenever I attend things like this. So, it was a serious relief and surprise to see this local show done with such precision. Everyone on stage should give themselves a pat on the back. It's no surprise that every performer, individually and collectively, received a massive standing ovation when it all ended! 

The music is great, and really gets the audience going, and keeps them interested and invested. Although some of the lyrics can be a bit dark, this musical never loses it's quirkiness due to the high-energy acting and vocals of every single person on the stage. 

If I were to use criticism, all that I can really muster to mention is that although the music is big, the effects aren't. And I would have liked to see a more fitting stage setup. But, the thing is, the tunes and showmanship out weigh any negatives that you can find or point out. It's a whole hell of a lot of fun, and everyone in the crowd enjoyed themselves, just like I did. It's worth seeing over the music alone, but you get so much more. I'm really glad that I got to see a film that I hold dear, turned into a show that is done with complete professionalism. 

But don't take my word for it, take Christy Wyatt's. "I don't think there's a kid out there who wouldn't find some part of this show that they like. It is really unlike anything out there..."

If you didn't get to see it last weekend, it's not to late! This coming weekend there will be another show from Friday to Sunday. If you're in the area, check it out. Trust me, you've got nothing better to do. Swing over and show some support. And enjoy yourself.

For tickets and other information, click here.

THE BEST STEPHEN KING FILM ADAPTATIONS by Brandon Engel

NOTE FROM GRIMM:
The following post was intended to be posted Saturday on Stephen King's birthday. However, it's late on my end due to lack of internet connection the past few days. 

On the 21st, Stephen King will be turning 66, and by the looks of it, he’s still going strong. Sure, the famed horror author has attempted to retire in the past, and the injuries he sustained after being hit by a vehiclist has made it physically difficult for King to sit and write for extended periods of time. Nevertheless, King has forged ahead. Dr. Sleep, the long awaited sequel to The Shining, will be released just days after his birthday, on the 24th. Not only that, but a second film version of King’s Carrie will hit theaters just a week before Halloween, on October 18th. The new film will star Chloë Grace Moretz, the young scene stealer from Kick-Ass and Kick-Ass 2. We can hope, too, that if Dr. Sleep proves successful, it too will eventually make the jump to big screen. King’s work has a long history of film adaptations inspired by his novels.

Here’s a look at some of the best film adaptations of King’s writings:

 The Shining (1980) 

It’s true, Stephen King himself was not a fan of this film. He felt that the work downplayed the supernatural elements of the the story in order to highlight Jack Torrance’s insanity. And King felt that even Jack Torrance’s descent into madness was botched - since Jack Nicholson had already built a reputation playing mad men, Stephen King felt audiences would easily predict where the plot was going. But despite King’s complaints, and the lukewarm critical reception the film received upon it’s first run, and the fact that the film wasn’t entirely faithful to the book (i.e., there are no supernatural hedge animals in the film, and Jack Torrance’s death is switched from a heated boiler room to the freezing hedge maze), the movie is heralded today as one of the best horror films of all time. The film features many memorable scenes: the rotting old lady in the bathtub; the mutilated twins in the hallway; the blood pouring out of the elevator. Fans of the supernatural aspect will be delighted to know that Dr. Sleep will feature young Danny Torrance grown up, still using his abilities on a daily basis.

Christine (1983)

Forget Herbie. The most memorable living car came from Christine. Only Stephen King could write a story about a murderous, possessed car without producing something accidentally laughable. However absurd the premise may sound, Christine works, and the red and white bloodthirsty Plymouth is truly terrifying. It’s a testament to King’s popularity, the film was already in production prior to the book’s initial release. Kevin Bacon was originally offered the lead role in the film, but he opted to star in Footloose instead. King revisited this trope in later works, but they’re hardly worth viewing; Trucks and Maximum Overdrive don’t really stand up to this tale of a serial killer vehicle.

Misery (1990) 

Misery marked the beginning of an excellent working relationship between Stephen King and Kathy Bates. The book follows an author, Paul Sheldon, played by James Caan, who survives a car crash only to be kidnapped by an obsessed fan, Annie Wilkes, played by Bates. Annie then hides the author in her home in order to torture him and she forces him to write for her. Kathy Bates did such a phenomenal job of playing the terrifying, stalkerish Annie that King began to write roles specifically for Bates. Another notable collaboration between the two was the film Dolores Claiborne, starring Bates in the titular role as a New England woman who murdered her abusive husband to protect her daughter.

The Green Mile (1999) 

This one is a bit of a departure from the rest of the list, as it’s hard to classify as a horror film, since both the novel and movie have the tendency to tug on heart strings. Regardless, this is one of the most emotionally complex and enriching pieces of writing from King, and it translated to the screen beautifully. Then, John Coffey, played by Michael Clarke Duncan, opens his mouth, a swarm of bugs pours out, and we remember that he’s on death row and two little girls have been raped and murdered. The Green Mile induces a fear quite similar to Misery, a fear that spurs from the wrongdoing of other people, and the horrible unfairness that can get someone killed. The film was an important one also for Tom Hanks, who played prison guard Paul Edgecomb. Edgecomb discovers both Coffey’s innocence and his supernatural abilities, but cannot save him from his unfortunate fate.

Carrie (1976) 

Carrie not only shot Stephen King into the limelight, it was also the first film Brian De Palma directed. Sissy Spacek originally played Carrie, the geeky telekinetic who falls for a grotesque practical joke at the hands of her high school classmates. In an extreme response to her humiliation, Carrie destroys the town using her newfound powers. Carrie in the book was described as being overweight, but in typical Hollywood fashion both Sissy Spacek and Chloë Grace Moretz are more appealing to the camera. While Piper Laurie offered a harrowing performance in the original film as Carrie’s mother, Margaret White, the new film has Julianne Moore filling in for Laurie (and rumor has it that Jodie Foster was initially considered to play the part.) We have to wonder whether the film will follow it’s predecessors twist on the ending - leaving the parents alive to grieve - or if the second version will return to the book’s original ending which saw Carrie’s entire town burned to the ground.

Author Bio: Brandon Engel is an entertainment blogger with DirectTVcomparison.com whose interests include vintage pulp novels and black and white horror films. Among his favorite authors are Arthur Machen, Stephen King, Oscar Wilde, and H.P. Lovecraft.

"The Shining" prequel "The Overlook Hotel" is in development!

The Overlook Hotel is the story of the grisly murders that happened in the hotel leading up to the events in the classic 1980 The Shining. This news comes in addition to the fact that Stephen King just finished his prequel to The Shining, titled Doctor Sleep. The book centers around Danny as an adult and what's come of him after losing his father and leaving the hotel.

The Overlook hotel is currently in development by Warner Bros. But no clue as to when it'll be hitting the big screen. After parting ways with The Walking Dead, Glenn Mazzara is writing the script for the prequel. It's speculated that Glenn left The Walking Dead due to differences between he and The Walking Dead graphic novel creator Robert Kirkman.

I'm ready to find out what the story is with the old woman in the tub (who still scares the hell out of me), as well as the twins. I've read the book by Stephen King, but I doubt this'll be true to what happened in the book since Stanley Kubrick changed so much for the 1980 film. This is big shoes to fill for Warner Bros. and Glen Mazzara, so let's hope we can get a good movie out of this.

Unearthed & Untold: The Path to Pet Sematary (Documentary)

For those of you who love Pet Sematary keep your eyes peeled because an in-depth documentary is being made. There is one on one interviews with the actors and film makers involved with the movie.

I'm very excited to see this! I love Pet Sematary, it's a classic. And so after talking with the director John Campopiano, the co-director of this documentary, I decided I'd put something on my site to help spread the word. I'm always supportive of anyone trying to do something in the name of horror movies, and this has got my full attention.

Fangoria posted an article on it recently.

http://www.fangoria.com/index.php/home/all-news/1-latest-news/7805-qpet-semataryq-documentary-rises

To find out more about this documentary follow them on Facebook! Show support for our fellow horror hounds!

http://www.facebook.com/UnearthedandUntold

FIRST IMAGES FROM CARRIE (2013)

First images just released last week thanks to Entertainment Weekly magazine.

Stephen King's Carrie (Book 1974)

This was a book that I've had on my list for a while. And since I'm always chipping away at the Stephen King books I still need to get through, I figured it only fit that I finally bump Carrie to the top of my list.

This book surprised me by it's size. For those of you who don't know, Carrie is a small book. It looks more like a short story, especially since most of King's books are gigantic. Not as thin as say Cycle Of The Werewolf (my favorite short story by King) but t's still a slim book.

Instantly what I liked about this book was how it was a past-telling book. It starts off with everything that happens at prom and all already having happened. And while you're reading about Carrie, the book breaks off into segments from magazines and books as well as interview segments all depicting incidents that occurred that night and how they're lives have changed. And there's segments about the condition Carrie has.

Carrie however, was depicted as looking totally different from movie Carrie. Movie Carrie is slim, skin and bones and long blonde hair. In the book Carrie is chubby, has bad acne and has red hair. So that was an instant notice for me because I've seen the movie dozens of times so Sissy Spacek was the face of that character to me.

The book starts off with Carrie being picked on in the locker room for getting her first minstrel cycle and due to her mom being a religious fanatic Carrie was never told what a period was. So the movie was true to the opening scene in the book.

Carrie's relationship with her mom is pretty much the same, only a little crazier and a little more harsh. Carrie's mom is a friggin' whack job. The conditions in which Carrie was forced to live her life were cruel and unfair for any child. There's no wonder she was 'the weird kid' at school.

Everything pretty much goes down the same with the bully's in Carrie's gym class being punished for picking on her and Chris, the lead and main Bully instantly wanting revenge when she loses her opportunity to go to prom.

Carrie gets hooked up with Tommy, the cutest boy in school and they go to prom together. The bucket scene was the same but since it was a book it had great detail and made for a better visual in your head than on screen. The humiliation at this moment for Carrie is horrible, for once in her miserable life she got to be the center of attention only to have blood dumped on her.

I like the way it goes down in the book more than the movie because in the book she actually leaves prom hysterical. And then she kinda realizes that they should all be punished for proving her mom right that they'd all laugh at her and never accept her. Carrie actually looks the doors from the outside and is outside of prom looking in as shes murdering people with her mind causing all sorts of devastation. The visual of her standing outside the doors looking in covered in blood and murdering people. Great story telling and I liked that more than her being in the prom while doing it. However, I can see how being inside would make a better scene visually.

I thought the book over all was great. Another King classic.

THIS BOOK GETS 3 REAPERS OUT OF 4

The Stand (TV mini-series 1994)

The Stand was a made-for-TV movie, or otherwise considered a mini-series of 4 90 minute episodes. It is based off of Stephen King's ground breaking and best selling novel about the end of the world. When a nasty flu starts spreading and killing off civilization only few survive, and it's up to them to take a stand against Lucifer from ending the world. The survivors are split up between followers of sister Abigail, an old woman touched with visions of what's to come and fights on the side of God, and Lucifer, the king of the damned, trying to deceive the survivors and make them follow him and lead them to their ruin.


EPISODE 1: "The Plague"

When a deadly virus escapes from a government research facility, few prove to be immune to its effects. With symptoms similar to the flu, those who come into contact with it quickly die. One survivor is Stu Redmond, a gas station attendant from Texas, who suffers no ill effects what so ever.  Kept in a medical research facility in Vermont, doctors try to determine why he is still alive. Others that also survive include Frannie Goldsmith who lives with her dad; Nick Andros, a deaf mute; a rock musician, Larry Underwood; and Lloyd Henreid, in jail for murder. Survivors...

EPISODE 2: "The Dreams"

The plague has taken its toll and only those immune to the virus are alive. The forces of good and evil are slowly taking shape. Those that have been dreaming about Mother Abigail are slowly making their way towards her in Nebraska. Stu Redmond joins up with Frannie Goldsmith and others. When Nick Andros and the first of the travelers arrive, Mother Abigail tells them they will soon be moving further west, to Colorado. Randal Flagg is gathering his own forces as he releases Lloyd Henreid from jail. Through her dreams, he also recruits Nadine Cross, who had been...

EPISODE 3: "The Betrayal"

Hundreds are now in Boulder, Colorado with Mother Abigail but Randall Flagg has sent Nadine Cross to infiltrate the group. Unable to seduce Larry, she then sets her sights on Harold. So just as the citizens begin to organize their lives, Mother Abigail leaves Boulder. The residents do become concerned about what Randall Flaggl, based in Las Vegas, may be up to  and decide to send three people west to find out.

 EPISODE 3: "The Stand"

The final confrontation between good and evil takes shape. Tom Gathers information and tries to return to Boulder. With Mother Abigail gone and several members of the committee killed in an explosion, Stu, Larry, Glen and Ralph set off west as instructed. Nadine and Harold set off for Las Vegas but Randall Flagg has something special in store for both of them.  Flagg's group starts to fall apart. Trashcan Man decides to set the biggest fire of his life.

I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, it was something special. The cast and acting was well done and the film leaves a deep powerful mark on you. The mark of hope.

Now, I've never read the book but I have plans on doing so late this year/early next, but even I could tell you that this movie was cut down alot. There was hardly any real character development and I know in the book there will be. It was the time restraint that hurt this movie. There was too much going on and too many characters for such a short run time. This movie should be 6 or 7 hours long.

That being said I am eagerly awaiting to read the book and being able to compare them. I loved this movie so I know I'll love the book.

THIS MINI-SERIES GETS 3 REAPERS OUT OF 4.

Stephen King's IT-Book and Movie review/ Comparison

THE BOOK

In 1986 the undisputed master of horror Stephen King released his masterpiece, IT. At this point in King's career he had already published Carrie, Salem's Lot, The Shining and The Stand as well as some other greats. IT sold a million first-run copies, his most to date, and won the British Fantasy Award in 1987. IT was also the best-selling book in the United States in 1986 and was nominated for several other awards. There's even been a 25th anniversary special edition version released that's very pricey.
http://www.amazon.com/25th-Anniversary-Special-Stephen-King/dp/1587672707/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1341003689&sr=1-1&keywords=stephen+king+it+25th+anniversary

Now you're probably asking "why is he reviewing a book that's over 20 years old?", and the answer is simple. I just got around to reading it a few months ago. And during the process of reading the book I watched the movie twice and noted the similarities and differences between the book and the movie. That's why I decided to do a review/comparison.


So the inevitable question: Was the book or movie better?

Even though I grew up with the movie and love it I'd have to go with the book. The book had more detail and more character development. I felt that I personally knew the kids in the book. Bill with his stutter, Eddie with his asthma, Richie with his jokes, Stan with his birds, Mike with his history obsession and Bev with her family issues. Real characters. Real problems.


And just to think that they had to fight an evil entity plaguing their town who disguised itself as a clown named Pennywise. And all they had to rely on was their friendship and courage. Very powerful story-telling done with beautiful and descriptive detail.

After finishing the book I was torn because I had the awesome feeling that comes with finishing a good book and the disappointment that it was over and I didn't have anymore pages to continue the journey I lost myself in day after day. Even having to put it down at times due to being creeped out. Not a book to read at night.

Now for those of you who don't know what this books about let me explain it to you. The town of Derry is plagued by an evil entity that disguises itself as a clown to lore little children and eat them. The cycle repeats itself every 27 years and children turn up dead and missing. One day IT claims a little boy named George, and George's older brother (stuttering) Bill gathers his childhood friends in an attempt to kill IT. And after what they thought was a successful cease and destroy mission they discover IT's back 30 years after they faced it as children. Making Bill and his friends come together again one last time.

I really have nothing but praises for this book although I did find it dragged out a bit in some parts, mostly the Derry interludes, but it didn't drag on enough to hurt the book. The book stands strong. It's an adventurous, scary, funny, sad, endearing, empowering and most of all at it's core IT is a story of friendship and the bond it carries.

I give the book 4 stars.


THE MOVIE

RATING-NR
RUN TIME-192 MINS
WRITERS-STEPHEN KING, LAWRENCE D. COHEN, TOMMY LEE WALLACE
STARRING-HARRY ANDERSON, DENNIS CHRISTOPHER, RICHARD MASUR, ANNETTE O'TOOLE, TIM REID, JOHN RITTER, RICHARD THOMAS AND TIM CURRY
DIRECTOR-TOMMY LEE WALLACE


Synopsis taken from IMDb
In 1960, seven outcast kids known as "The Loser Club" fight an evil demon who poses as a child-killing clown. 30 years later, they are called back to fight the same clown again.




This movie is awesome! Such a classic! Everyone is afraid of Tim Curry's Pennywise, I used to watch this film as a kid and I always remembered the George scene with the paper boat. Heavy stuff for a kid to see and still creepy for and adult me now.

I always thought this movie had good acting in IT was good and very believable. And had a very good cast.

Even though this was a 4-part TV movie they ran with it. There isn't alot of gore but they scare you in a classy traditional way. Pennywise is enough to scare us without gore.


Like the book the movie is scary, funny, sad, endearing, empowering and adventurous.

I give the movie 3 1/2 stars.

BOOK VS. MOVIE COMPARISON

Now as I mentioned earlier, the book is clearly better. But I'm not degrading the film at all for that. It happens most of the time when a book succeeds the movie

The movie had the advantage of not getting boring and slow in areas where the book did. The movie was more steady and consistent.

The book had the advantage of not having a time restraint like the movie and because it was a book it allowed for so much more detail. IT is probably the most detailed book I've ever read and the movie did a good job interpreting it and as good as the movie was it was a watered down version of the book.

The book was scarier even though the movie did a great job with the scares. The parts that scared me the most were where Bev was hearing voices in the bathroom sink drain. This occurred several times in the book and in the movie there was only 1 scene.

After reading the book I realized how different Pennywise was in the book. A huge chunk of the book he only appears as the clown here and there, he mostly gets kids as Frankenstein or The Teenage Werewolf or The Creature From The Black Lagoon and other odd things. The movie made it seem like IT was always a clown. He was the clown way less in the book.

Pennywise was more terrifying in the book but Tim Curry did a great job as the character.

There's a scene in the book where Bev lets the crew of boys from The Loser Club to make love to her to bring them all close as a group when she feels they may fall apart. I don't know how they could have done this in the movie since she was a young teenager in the book when she did this act. So although the scene made a good part in the book I don't think viewing that scene in a movie would be necessary.

And by far the scariest part in the film for me was when Bev goes to visit her father as an adult and ends up drinking tea with the old lady who eventually becomes her dead, decomposed father and chases her around the house. In the book the old woman became a witch and the house Bev was in was made of sweets and she realized that she was caught in Hansel and Gretel's story. I thought this scene would have been way better if they followed the book. It's one of those things where you don't know why they didn't make it that way.

There were characters that I didn't think the movie portrayed properly. Mostly Ben Hanscom (John Ritter) and Richie Tozier (Harry Anderson). They're appearances in the movie didn't match up.

Movie's a classic and a close 2nd but the book's simply a masterpiece.

THE REMAKE


I recently read some news online talking of a remake and as of now it looks as if there will be a remake of IT and Pet Semetary. IT is said to be more like the book but still having the trouble of a time frame, you can only do so much in a cramped time period. And Pennywise is said to be more like in the book and not as comically funny as Curry's portrayal but more savage and scary with dark humor. And I also heard that it would be taking place in modern time and not following the book's timeline. I guess we'll see...

I'd like to see the remake portray the characters as good (with the exception of Ben and Richie) and I'd like to see Pennywise be more scary and horrific. I also'd like them to elaborate on some of the details better, like how in the book George's scrapbook went all crazy twice and only once in the original film. I remain optimistic about the film but only time will tell if I'm right right or wrong in doing so.