Rating: 
Summary: Catch Dreamcatcher...
Review: Make no mistake about it, "Dreamcatcher" is a really strange film. It's so strange, in fact, that despite the cash it may pull in at the box office, it will find success primarily as a cult movie. Given the presence of director Lawrence Kasdan ("The Big Chill," "Grand Canyon"), author Stephen King (who wrote the book on which the film is based), screenwriter William Goldman ("The Princess Bride," "The Ghost and the Darkness"), and actors as fine as Morgan Freeman, Jason Lee, and Tom Sizemore, "Dreamcatcher" is not a classy thriller like "Signs." No, indeed, "Dreamcatcher" is a straight-on creature feature overflowing with gore, twisted humor, and out-and-out strangness. Think "Evil Dead" meets "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," with a little "Stand By Me" thrown in for good measure. To say this film has a limited audience is a bit of an understatement. Its zany take on the alien invasion genre is sure to alienate certain moviegoers (no pun intended). But horror fans with a taste for dark comedy - don't miss this one. It's sure to become a cult classic.
Rating: 
Summary: What Might Have Been
Review: I admit it. I was actually intrigued by a Steven King movie for the first thirty minutes. Now I'm intrigued by whatever psychosis is evidenced in my repeated viewings of King movies, despite their lousy history. A few observations follow:1. Stephen King is a flake, and brings his flakiness to his dialog. I believe Dreamcatcher is probably the movie most faithful to the pecurliar idioms that he applies to his characters. The little trivialities he throws in to make his characters' dialog lifelike makes me wince. Hint to Stephen: The little girl in Sleepless in Seattle who speaks in acronyms is a clever addition. Your thirtyish New Englanders speaking in acronyms is banal. 2. Stephen King's plots survive through about half of the book (or movie). He creates sinister, ominous undertones that hint at apocolypse. Then he's unable to pull it off. Seeing John-Boy & Friends beating the giant spider to death in the "It" miniseries was pretty lousy. Such ludicrous imagery is almost overcome by the final conflict sequence in Dreamcatcher. 3. Let's see... group of youngsters, bound together by childhood friendship, queer magic, bullies and physical maladies forget their "golden days" and grow up to be successful civilian nobodies, only to be drawn back together by mysterious forces and confronted by an evil that threatens mankind. Only by recapturing their childhood innocence and magic can they ultimately defeat that evil. OK, Steve, we've got it. Think up a new plot. 4. The special effects were excellent in some cases, pathetic in others. It wasn't until I saw the giant alien killer leech that I realized the full comedic potential of Dreamcatcher. 5. Why were Morgan Freeman & crew attacking the aliens with helicopters? Why did the aliens just stand around and get shot? Why do creatures who can master interstellar flight have no offensive weaponry? How can a guy on a snowmobile, speaking in an english accent, escape a secure military perimeter by hijacking a truck (since most military folks have already seen this happen in First Blood)? 6. I applaud the actors in that they seemed to actually take their roles seriously. If you can work with that script, you've got to have talent! In summary, if you haven't seen this movie yet, don't bother. Go rent The Shining and long for the good old days when Stephen King's novels served as the inspiration for real professionals to create a work of actual worth.
Rating: 
Summary: TRASH
Review: This movie was so stupid and boring that I fell asleep while watching it. People I seriously do not recommend this movie. It is just stupid and nasty. WTF is the point of giving the children special powers when they get slaughtered anyway? Completly and udderly TRASH
Rating:
Summary: L.E.V.
Review: Though the beginning of the movie sparks some initial interest with the relationship of the four main characters and their special "gift", not much is done with this (or not enough) and it's only a couple of scenes that give this movie very Limited Entertainment Value! In otherwords, a dud!
Rating:
Summary: Long Awaited King Adaption Pays Off
Review: This is one of the best adaptions of a Stephen King book to come along in some time. The special effects really enhanced the movie, the worm creatures and Mr. Gray were pretty scary looking, and the action scenes were pulled off quite well. Lawrence Kasden did a good job of keeping the pace and making the gory scenes keep you on edge. The cast works well as an ensemble and the chemistry between the leads is very believable. Everyone plays off each other and, as in the book, it is a shame to see some of them go. It is interesting to see them use their special abilities, and Goldman did a good job translating so much of the book's text into dialogue and action. Most of the dialogue is straight from the book. Morgan Freeman is over the top as Curtis, Kurtz in the book, and Tom Sizemore turns in his usual good performance as second in charge of the military operatives. Thomas Jane, Timothy Olymphant, Jason Lee, and Damian Lewis play the four main characters, and Donnie Wahlberg is Duddits, their friend from childhood. Jane and Lewis carry most of the film, which never lags or tries to overdo itself. The background story about meeting Duddits and what happened during their childhood is stripped down to a couple of key flashback scenes, and Mr. Gray's journey at the end is considerably shortened from the book, but this is necessary in order to give the characters the development they need early on to make them people the audience will care about as the action progresses. The ending is something that will be new to everyone, even fans of the book. I would have liked to see more of the secret room inside of Jones's head because it played so much of a key role in the book's resolution, but I can see why a lot of it was stripped for purposes of pacing. I'm glad they shortened it to a feature length rather than watering it down into a television miniseries like so many King books of late. The feel of the novel is there, and the script stays true to it throughout. A lot of talent went into making this work, and it was worth waiting so long for it to come out. I would recommend it to anyone, and any King fan should love it.
Rating: 
Summary: maybe 3 and a half stars for an okay movie
Review: I didn't plan on watching this movie, but I ended up anyway. I have to say I agree with many of the customer reviews written on here. Yes, Dreamcatcher will make you laugh a few times, and no, most likely, it will not scare you. Dreamcatcher recycles many of the plots of former Steven King movies (or novels, I should say). Has anyone noticed how about half of the Steven King books that ended up being a movie feature the same friggin' plot line? Four good male friends are the main characters, and they have known each other well since childhood. King's work often has flashbacks to their childhood, and there are a few in Dreamcatcher... (*cough* Stand By Me *cough*)... Look, Steven, I know the idea of four great friends who stay buddies for over 20 years and have special powers which help them save mankind is pretty cool, but often in life, things don't work out like that. Nonetheless, I admit I enjoyed Dreamcatcher at some moments. I mean, how could you not love poor Duddits, with his scooby-doo lunchbox? Forget what everyone who gave this one star said, I think Dreamcatcher made for a mildly entertaining movie. Not scary or lifechanging, just plain entertainment.
Rating:
Summary: A movie imploding on itself - starts great and then crumbles
Review: WOW. This movie is amazingly awful but at the sametime, a fascinating study of how a movie with all the right ingredients -- A-List cast, crew and big budget -- can go so very wrong. It's almost comical to watch it happen. It would have been an easy movie to dismiss if the whole movie was awful but the start was sugared with such promise of a good movie that it makes the following 2nd half of the movie all the more disappointing. The good part, the 1st half, has the makings of a "Stand By Me" with a "Twilight Zone" twist. Sounds like a great combo, right? It is...for awhile. The acting here is good, you're revealed interesting things about how these four friends are different, and you get a wonderful sense of the strange and possible dangerous elements lurking in the background. And moreover you've got some genuinely funny dialog here that balances the anticipation of horror in the air. All this falls apart in 2nd half with the introduction of the military and the following events that lead to a hilariously inept climax (entirely different from the novel). I've read the book beforehand, which I surprisingly enjoyed (not King's best but was fun), and I wish the Director and screenplaywriter decided to have taken more liberties and been less faithful to the book. Yes. Maybe even to the point of rewriting the whole second half so they could make it dwell more on the four friends, which was the strength of the book anyway. So few filmmakers get Stephen King's right-on, its not the plot, which is sometimes clunky and implausible, but King's characters and his unique ability to get into thier heads and to make the reader like or hate them with passion. Take that aspect away and you get a mess, as we watch here in the 2nd half of the movie. What is frustrating, was that we get this done right in the 1st half. See "Stand by Me" and "Shawshank Redemption" for character driven film adaptations of King's work. Damian Lewis (from Band of Brother mini-series) who plays Jonesy does a splendid job in a very difficult role, and the cinematography is wonderfully filmed by James Newton Howard (you might remember his great camera work from M. Night Shyamalan's "Signs" and "Sixth Sense"). If you must see it, watch for the bathroom scene. Its classic Stephen King -- everyday life gone oh-so-wrong. Only he can make a toilet an object of both fear and humor.
Rating:
Summary: Cliche', cliche', cliche.......
Review: Starts good, but fall on it's face past half of the movie. Definitely another Stephen King film. Never again.
Rating:
Summary: there's awful and then there's awful, this is both
Review: Well, if you've seen the trailer, you expected a decent horror/sci-fi movie. However, this movie belongs in the 'horrible movie' genre. I cant believe Morgan Freeman was in such an awful movie. My biggest pet peeve in movies is when characters do something stupid, and in this movie, you might have the stupidest character in history. Yes, I'm talking about the toilet scene. Basically, there's blood everywhere and some crazy alien thing is trapped underneath the toilet lid by some idiot. If i was the alien, I would have just come out the back of the toilet and bit the idiot's head off, but apparently, the alien knew this guy was an idiot, so it waited for him to do something stoopid. Idiot proceeds to drop his toothpick onto blood-filled floor and then reach for toothpick while maintaining some of his weight on the toilet. Gawd what an idiot. About 15 minutes later I was asleep after some unbelievable bad helicopter scene. At least Regal Cinema had comfortable seats.
Rating:
Summary: IT: OFFENSIVE ME: DEFENSIVE
Review: At first I found this movie offensive, then - I found it offensive... I'm a latecomer to S. King's novels, I've only read The Shining - which was great.
(Personally, I preferred the mini series to the movie with Jack Nicholson). I was looking forward to watching Dreamcatcher, but from the get go, it was no dice. I was very offended by one of the character's view of the women he encountered, and call me old fashioned, there was too much "bad/filthy language".
I never made it to the gore and violence, I switched it off after 15 minutes.
| 
