Rating: 
Summary: Will leave you wondering.
Review: And not in a good way. There were so many things that were not explained in this movie even though it was over 2 hours long. Perhaps the book could help to fill in the clues. Also, there are weird parts in the movie that I assume are supposed to be funny (ie., the one guy uses a gun like a telephone to communicate through esp) but they just wind up being strange. This movie was not at all like I expected it to be.
Rating: 
Summary: Entertaining, suspenseful, though unrealistic
Review: I have not read this book so did not know what to expect with the movie. I was reasonably entertained by the characters and their dialogue. It becomes creepy and sort of trite when the aliens show up and start incubating in and inhabiting human bodies. The story remains suspenseful, as long as you don't try to reason too much and logically explain the events occurring. It includes the usual alien activity. The take over humans, hatch in humans, exercise mind control, hijack cars, etc. The aliens in this movie are vicious but have a sense of humor. Morgan Freeman lends authenticity to the story but still does not make it realistic. I think you can expect to entertained and creeped out bu don't expect any meaningful story or realism when it comes to the aliens' involvement. It is a mix of many of King's previous movies, the good and the bad.
Rating:
Summary: Dreamcatcher - Not as good as it could've been!
Review: While I found this movie to be mildly entertaining, it most certainly doesn't live up to the expectations one has when it comes to a Stephen King movie adaptation. Granted, the CGI visualizations provided by Industrial Light & Magic (ILM) and the cast bring this movie up from a one or two star performance, thematically, it's a dismal failure compared to what it could have been. I would venture to say that it would be difficult to determine whether it was the screenplay or the directing that failed this movie or a combination of both. As mentioned above, the performance by leading actors, Morgan Freeman, Tom Sizemore, Donnie Wahlberg and others held this movie up despite the screenplay. Of note is the performance by Damian Lewis of "Band of Brothers" fame, who performs spectacularly. The Premise: As youths, four best of buddies stumble across a seemingly mentally challenged youngster who is being harassed by some older kids. They save him from his plight and as they grow up together, he imparts upon them some rather unusual abilities. Twenty years later, these same four buddies are still best of friends, but they've grown away from their other friend, Duddits (Donnie Wahlberg). They make for the woods and their annual dear hunting trip only to discover some strange people who appear to be suffering from something rather strange. As they soon discover, these same people give birth to aliens. Enter Morgan Freeman and Tom Sizemore as the military who are trying to contain these aliens. The connection between Duddits and the four friends soon comes into play. What follows from there is, not the best of movies but not the absolutely worst of movies either. This one runs pretty much right down the middle of the road; you can take it or leave it. {ssintrepid} Special Features: - The original ending plus four other deleted scenes
- 3 Documentaries
Dream Writer: An interview with Stephen King
Dream Weavers: The visual Effects of Dreamcatcher
Dream Makers: A journey through production
- Teaser trailer
Rating:
Summary: Would've Been Better On TV
Review: This movie would have been much better if it had been done as a Mini-series for a major network, rather than a feature film. The production looks great, and the film's plot and dialogue reek of Stephen King. If you have ever read a King novel, you know what I mean. However, the film felt rushed, and there was just way too much information and story packed into 2 hours and 10 minutes of film. The movie does have some rather neat moments - the bathroom scene with Damian Lewis & Jason Lee, the animal migration out of the woods, and a wonderfully evil performance by Morgan Freeman. The book itself was not one of King's best, but it did touch more on the relationships of the four leads and "Duddits." The movie did show a good amount of this, but in most scenes it was just two characters together, not all four. The movie version left me a little confused because of all the things that were left out. I realize that the producers couldn't have made a 6 hour movie out of this, but what they chose to leave out was important to the story. The creature effects were rather hokey too. The "weasels" looked cartoonish, as did the big aliens. I think that they were to CGI, and not at all believable. A good movie to rent and see if you are a King fan, but I wouldn't go out of my way to watch it again. The film is not as scary as it means to be, but it is entertaining.
Rating:
Summary: Another miserable adaptation of King
Review: "Dreamcatcher" is approximately what you'd get if you crossed "Starship Troopers" with "Stand By Me" and told it with all the comic complexity of a fart joke. Four friends, bound since childhood by a psychic connection forged when they rescued a retarded companion from grade-school bullies, are now disgruntled thirtysomethings enjoying their annual weekend hunting trip in the Maine woods when along comes a bunch of cavity-invading aliens and a maverick paramilitary outfit to spoil their day. Caught between the over-zealous quarantiners (played with unintentional "Catch 22"-like comedy by Morgan Freeman and Tom Sizemore) and an all-consuming alien fungus, our friends start to get picked off one by one. But will their retarded pal - who may or may not be an alien - be able to save them and the planet in time? Do we even need to ask? Movies adapted from Stephen King's stories fall into two categories: brilliant or utterly appalling. The brilliant ones - "Misery", "The Shawshank Redemption", "Apt Pupil" and "Stand By Me" - all succeed because they ditch most of the grossness and emphasise something which King's stories are often quite good at but for which they're rarely admired: character. I'm assured by its readers that this novel is one of King's most complex, thematically and structurally. It shows. As with Scott Hicks' stunningly slight "Hearts In Atlantis", you get the feeling that most of the important bits have been left out. Condensing 900-odd pages into 120 minutes is probably impossible, even with veteran screenwriter William Goldman at the keys. Maybe it would have worked better as a mini-series. Ironically, "Dreamcatcher" is both too small AND too big. The themes it wants to play with - male friendship, child psychology, the victory of the weak over the strong - demand an intimate scale. But the sci-fi element demands a big budget, and in Hollywood a big budget dictates a big audience, and a big audience requires a one-size-fits-all movie. The risk is that one size fits nobody, as it clearly does here. To be fair, there are some inspired moments, like when Kasdan literalises the metaphor of "the memory warehouse" and has Jonesy (Damian Lewis, slumming it here) running around a Borgesian library, and there's an alien invader which looks for all the world like a nightmarish Freudian fusion of male and female genitalia - with teeth. (But maybe that says more about me...) The best thing about this film is John Seale's cinematography, which is typically marvellous - it's so good it looks out of place. This is a disappointing film, not only for its inherent flaws, but because of the talent that's been squandered on it. Kasdan and Goldman are so much better than this.
Rating: 
Summary: Dreams Turn To Nightmares
Review: Based on horror master Stephen King's novel of the same name, Dreamcatcher, is a movie that had all the earmarks of a hit when I saw the trailer. But instead, falls flat, and suffers from a weak adaptation. Of course, having said that, certain elements of the original story feature themes that are King staples. In the end though, the book still wins out over the film, by leaps and bounds. Four friends shared a unique childhood experience and a random act of heroics that gives each of them the power of telepathy. Little do they realize that these special gifts are connected to something far more sinister. When Dr. Henry Devilin (Thomas Jane), Joe Clarenden (Jason Lee), Gary Jones (Damian Lewis), and Pete Walker (Timothy Olyphant) gather at a cabin in the backwoods of Maine, for a get together. They soon find themselves confronted by a blinding snowstorm and an alien invasion. It's up to Colonel Abraham Curtis (Morgan Freeman) to find out what's really going on. Directed by Lawrence Kasdan and adapted by William Goldman (who also wrote the script for Misery), the movie is a lot like cotton candy, it looks good on the outside but after a bit, it still leaves you empty. Sure the film has plenty of "goo 'N gore", but gone are the rich characterizations that hallmark the book or even some of the recent King miniseries. It seems like Kasdan and his team took the easy way out. The cast is rather lifeless, not even the dependable Freeman, can save this disappointing movie. The extras on the DVD are pretty slim, and like the movie itself, are all flash and no substance. Of course you get the fairly usual theatrical trailers, TV spots, filmographies and such. There's also the original intended ending and four other edited scenes. None of which adds to much in the way of enhancing the film. Of the three featurettes, two of which concern the making of Dreamcatcher (filming on the set and visual effects), the best and most watchable though, is an interview with author Stephen King. It's always nice to hear from him--no matter what the final product turns out to be. Topping everything off is some DVD-ROM stuff (weblinks). Stephen King is no stranger to having his books turned to schlock on film. Still, I expected better for Dreamcatcher, given some of those involved and despite the horrible reviews
Rating:
Summary: Save Your Time and Money...
Review: ...and I say this with a heavy heart, because I love Stephen King, and I am fan of Lawrence Kasdan, ever since he impressed me greatly with his masterpiece impressive debut Body Heat.
But Dreamcatcher was actually awful!
First of all it was as scary and exciting as watching cricket, and instead we get scene after scene of digital special effects that after a while become so tiresome to watch.
The film looks like Alien, Independence Day, Signs,even Men In Black and an assortment of earlier King adaptations,without really having an identity and character of its own,or coherence for that matter.
King's themes do occur yet again in abundance, the kids/grown-ups with powers/gifts,which was so sporadically treated,it became quite insignificant to the whole plot.The Dreamcatcher itself which I thought would have a greater significance (catching nightmares..), was too just a 'passing gimmick'.
The monsters and aliens got the biggest crunch of the script, and this is where the main problem lies. While the monsters were very well digitally constructed,there was simply too much of them to leave any room for suspense, tension or imagination.
I think Kasdan tried to compensate the digital overdose with the beautiful scenery of the woods and the snow, shot from different angles, but it was a case of too little too late
Another point that baffled me is the fact that the main evil alien has an inexplicably English accent!!??!It was totally unnecessary and devoid of any cheeky humour as probably intended.
And, this is by far Morgan Freeman's worst role. His character was so cliched and way over the top: I really cringed at some of the scenes we was in!
Dreamcatcher was King's first novel after his accident, and as he admits in an interview, there was a lot of the physical and psychological effects he endured as a result in it,which is not a bad thing in itself since he is one of the greatest authors of our time, but nevertheless it does in places reflect how tired and affected he was by his ordeal.
But let me stress that the main problem with the film is not the book itself,(which, although I have yet to read,I have no doubt that it is much better) but with its adaptation to the screen, the script, and direction!
I personally have enjoyed a lot of King's adaptations, especially (with the exception of Kubrick's Shining) his non horror stories, most notably Shawshank Redemption, Dolores Clairborne, Stand By Me, and Apt Pupil.But having said that,I have always appreciated his genuis gift for story telling, character study and development in all his books.
If,like me, you too share this appreciation then you should avoid Dreamcatcher at all costs, and just forget the names King, Kasdan, Freeman or Goldman attached to it, for given the nothing but short of masterpiece expected from such talents, to be given such awfulness is quite unforgivable.
Rating: 
Summary: couple of hours of escapist but interesting movie watching
Review: I like Stephen King, i don't read many novels and have only seen his movies. This one is suspenseful and right on the border between sci-fi and horror. Like all of the movies of his i have seen, he builds suspense in 2 neat ways: First is to involve the ordinary in extraordinary and suspenseful ways. The bathroom scene, the matches and toothpicks for instance. This is a lot like Hitchcock, where the ordinary takes on a macabre colored glass look that pretends that we are seeing through King's or Hitchcock's extraordinary and talented eyes rather than our own. Second, he gives us just enough information to be tantalizing and interested, gets the creative juices flowing, something like the clues on Perry Mason, not quite enough to spoil the surprise but enough to get us involved in the plot and the characters. Maine, in snowy winter, with 4 friends and a strange story back 20 years. Coupled with a ET crash and lots of animals and bodily functions humor. Just a nice evening, partially shut down rational thinking and enjoy the scenery.
Rating:
Summary: Awful Awful Awful
Review: This film gets my vote as one of the worst films I've ever seen in my entire life and that's saying a lot. I've not read the book so I'm sure whatever was done here was not Stephen King's fault! What is Morgan Freeman doing in this moronic piece of crap? I cannot believe, at this juncture, that this film has three stars on Amazon.com!!!! If I could give it less than one star, I would! Avoid avoid avoid!
Rating:
Summary: No No No No No
Review: How disappointing. Its extremely rare when you see a film that is faithful to the novel. Apparently they didn't want to remain faithful to story. Can someone please make a good adaptation of a stephen king novel? Does any studio exist that will take the time to do this? Please lord. Good to see more upcoming actors like Jason Lee and Timothy Olyphant get more screen time although the film doesn't do them much justice. Watch this one with no expectations and you may like it. That and I hope you didn't read the novel first.
|
