Rating: 
Summary: Read the book!
Review: Okay, first off...I have not seen this movie yet but, I have read the book. It is soooooooo good. It's almost 900 pages & yes, that's a little hard to squeeze into a 2-hour movie...I can't wait to see the movie,just to see how they were able to bring this book to life...everyone that says that this movie is horrible, you should read the book. You might actually like the movie!!
Rating: 
Summary: Movie good, Book AWESOME
Review: I disagree wholeheartedly with the bad reviews. Did you not watch the previews before purchasing your ticket? I read the book first and I have to say that it is on top of my favorite Stephen King books with The Stand and Desperation. Of course in a movie changes are going to be made for time, but it followed the book pretty well. The only reason I did not rate it a 5 is because the ending was just wrong. If you read the book, be prepared because it's a little different. As for the actors, I thought that they brought all of these unforgettable characters to life. And that includes Donny Whalburg as grown up Duddits. Jason Lee as Beaver was right on, even though when I first learned he took this role I could not envision it. I do highly recommend reading the book first because you know it's always better. That way you know what's going through each character's head during each scene.
Rating:
Summary: Have any of you reviewers' read the book?
Review: As with most Stephen King movie adaptions, it would make the movie better if the book is read.
This book was very good (Between 4-4.5 stars) in my opinion.
There was a lot to the book which, from how the reviewers are complaining, was probably left out due to the time constraints of "run time."
I can understand how the movie probably is hard to understand if you didn't read the book.
Next time, if the movie is an adaption from a book, read the book before you write a review.
Too keep the ratings for the movie fair, I am giving the movie 5 stars even though I didn't see it, just like the other reviewers are giving the movie a low rating without reading the book. My rating is high because the book was good.
Rating: 
Summary: This is a complete abomination - the worst movie of 2003
Review: God, I can't even begin to describe how BAD this movie is. I mean, seriously. Some movies, you can sit through, enjoy a few moments, and generally feel okay about spending the 5 or 6 bucks to see it. Not so much for (generally good) director Lawrence Kasdan's sloppy, horribly written (by William Goldman, the guy who bashed "Gangs of New York" but made a movie that makes "Gangs" look like "Citizen Kane") adaptation of hack writer Stephen King's novel. It's not even that the acting is so bad, or other technical elements of it fail. The plot is so diffuse and preposterous, first of all, and the movie mainains absolutely no focus whatsoever. The group of guys and the Morgan Freeman-as-the-jerk-army-guy subplot don't mix well, and then Donnie Wahlberg as the grown-up Duddits is perhaps the saddest display of "look at how far my career has gone downhill" I've ever seen. I think the main problem with the film is the way that Goldman adapted it for the screen, so I won't lambast Kasdan too much for it. Nonetheless, it's an abominably horrible film, and he should be ashamed to say he directed "The Big Chill" AND this. Not to mention the actors that show promise but end up playing evil twins with British accents and get mauled in the crotch by a giant slug-thing. Is it really as bad as it sounds? YES, and more. Save yourself the money and don't buy it. Save yourself the time and don't rent it. Save yourself period and never watch the single worst movie of 2003.
Rating:
Summary: garbage,plain and simple!
Review: minus the brief moments of gore,this movie is pure junk!maybe,just maybe,pre teens or the lemmings who make up the MTV/ TRL crowd might enjoy this and find it scary.and let me add now that jeepers creepers 2 was also a waste of money(unless youre a lobotomized lemming).between these 2 [movies],i got in some needed sleep.
Rating: 
Summary: A difficult sell
Review: Having read the book before seeing the movie, I found myself wondering why anyone thought they could make a good movie from the book. While it may not be fair to expect a movie to conform to the exact plot of a book, this undertaking was impossible from the start. Many of the struggles in the book take place in the minds of the character(s), something that cannot be conveyed well on screen. The characters have deep, long lasting relationships...also not easy to show in 2 hours. And the telepathy which develops is very specific. Having said that I believe the movie leaves a bit to be desired in plot development, I think the acting was great. If you have seen Damian Lewis in Band of Brothers, you can certainly appreciate how good he is in this movie. I enjoyed his skill in switching back and forth from good and evil and his American accent is wonderful. His ability to be sinister is chilling. Donnie Wahlberg is also good. So good in fact, that you may not even realize it's him until the end of the movie. The other actors also do a fine job given what they had to work with.
Rating:
Summary: Dreamcatcher
Review: Excellent movie. I liked the story by Stephen king and the special effects.
Rating:
Summary: This movie bites worse than a rectal alien.
Review: Awful. Fall-on-the-floor-in-pain awful. Lawrence Kasdan, how on Earth is such a movie even possible from a director of your caliber? How can you assemble such a grand cast of up-and-coming stars like Thomas Jane and Timothy Olyphant and strand them in this bad, bad, bad movie? What is Donnie Wahlberg doing as a retarded man who shouts "SCOOBY-DOOBY DOO!" before engaging in hand-to-hand combat with a creature from outer space? And what on Earth is Morgan Freeman doing wearing prosthetic eyebrows and going all psycho as a deranged military man? I understand he's always wanted to play a villain, but, my God, did he read this script? The best movies made from Stephen King books deal with normal people facing down the scariest of human horrors, like "Misery," "The Dead Zone," "Dolores Claiborne," "The Stand," "Stand by Me" and the superb "Shawshank Redemption." The monster movies, like "Silver Bullet" or "Pet Sematary," have always been less successful and/or hokey. Why was it necessary to make another one? Worse, why did Kasdan film it like it was "The Big Chill" meets "Predator?" Granted, the aliens look creepy, and their choice of gestation location, though straight out of "Ghoulies," is grotesque. But this movie is a pointless, implausible, overacted and not-particularly-frightening mess.
Rating: 
Summary: A film of two halves - One Good, One very Bad
Review: Not having read the best selling novel, I was fairly unsure about this movie but then in the first 40 minutes, I was absorbed, compelled and very impressed. Four young boy's almost unwittingly save a retarded school mate from a bullying by using their brains to outwit the older thugs, and in doing so become "connected" from the event. Their saved victim (who is more than he seems, as well as more than a little strange) bestows powers on each of them, which help them hear and feel each other member in the group telepathically, as well as other visionary skills. We then see how the four men (now several years on) each having problems in their own adult lives (not least caused by the powers they possess) meet up, as they do every year at a hunting lodge in mid winter to talk, drink and relive old memories. Up to this point the movie is excellent, the characters are strong and very well acted (by relative newcomers) and the story really pulls you in. One especially enjoyable aspect of the film is the on screen depiction of the "memory warehouse" one of the four has, which is constantly updating, and always in need of tidying, and filing. It's at this juncture that the movie turns sadly very silly, from a slick psychological nail biter, into something you would expect to see in a David Cronenburg movie of the 70's. An army of aliens have arrived, and reproduce by human impregnation, followed by a disgusting "birth" process (I'll leave that one unmentioned) and are chased by Silver Colt 45 toting, gung ho and "kill em all" Morgan Freeman and his band of "special army unit" goons.
Will our friends make it? Will they stop the aliens? Will they escape the evil clutches of the army? - To be honest, you really don't care at this point, and just hope the movie will end very quickly, which unfortunatley it doesn't. The story turns fantastical, and what was a great idea gets ruined by a schlock horror alien style movie, that is laughable at best. A real -Shame
Rating:
Summary: WICKED!
Review: Having both read the book and seen the movie, I can vouch that
this was a very good adaption. It's not as good as the book, but what movie ever is? A book has no limits and can go into great depths of character development and plot, whereas a movie has limits and can only show about 2 to 3 hours worth of development.
In a book one can know what each characters thinking, whereas in a movie it would have to have those voice-over thoughts which come across as comical and are mainly only seen in sitcoms. So, judge the movie on its entertainment value which was very good. I was certainly on the edge of my seat and refused to take a bathroom break. I was never dulled by it, even though I saw it around midnight, and I left not a bit disappointed. Even my girlfriend loved it, and she doesn't even like Stephen King that much. I admit, some parts can gross you out (it gives a whole new meaning to "prairie-dogging"), but it has a high entertainment value, and the acting is good. I highly recommend it.
|
