Los Tommyknockers

The novel Tommyknockers was one of Steve King's earlier attempts to do sci-Fi, and it was only moderately successful. King fused his usual horror plot structure formula to a basic alien possession plot and added his standard strong character development. The characters were, in this case, better than the plot deserved. John Power's three-hour TV adaptation leaves most of the story intact, but drops some of the crazier and more absurd elements of the original work. Even without reading the original, those familiar with King's work will notice the restrained manner in which the climax takes place.

In the woods behind Bobbie Anderson's (Marg Helgerson) house, something is buried. Some say it is an Indian curse, some say it's a holy place, but in general, the members of the little New England town of Derry don't go there. But one day, while her recovering alcoholic boyfriend Jim Gardner (Jimmy Smits) is out doing a poetry reading, Bobbie and her dog Pete start digging. Before long, Derry starts experiencing miracles, accompanied by green glowing lights.

The casting is superb, and with the exception of an overcooked performance by Traci Lords, the acting is fairly good. Smits and Helgerberger are very good. The characterizations in this three hour long film fairly represent the original work, but the script lacks some of the original's punch. The cinematography is solid for a TV movie and the special effects are good. Tommyknockers is well edited, competently directed and fairly entertaining, but, like the original novel, it is not one of King's better works.

Recommended for King fans. Weakly recommended for Sci-Fi fans.

First part of it seemed promising then it all fizzled away. The movie is very chopped up and at times makes no sense or the drama and horror that needs to be there is just not there...poor job all around with acting, directing, editing, etc

Believe me, if you want to know what its all about, read the book by King instead..don't waste 4hrs on the SciFi channel watching this garbage

One of King's lesser novels is transformed into one of the worst adaptations of his work so far. King's incredible imagination has always proved difficult to translate to the screen, which seems too small to contain everything on the page. There have been, literally, a handful of decent adaptations of his work, but it is usually the less graphic stories, or those dealing with a psychological horror rather than a physical presence that transfer best.

'The Tommyknockers' treads familiar King ground, and is very reminiscent if 'Needful Things', with an unknown force entering the lives of the community and turning one against the other for it's own end. There is a tormented and fallible hero, innocence is lost and found, there's an old codger with tales to scare the kids, and strange goings-on down at the old Indian burial ground. All par for the course then. The version I've seen was a shortened video version, which made no sense at all. Characters and events seemed to materialise without warning and act without any compulsion at all. It appears that most of the plot development has been removed too, but, to be honest, sitting through another 60 minutes would've only induced more boredom, not enlightenment. The result is an amateurish, uninteresting, and frightless mess.

Stephen King's bestseller "The Tommyknockers" is adapted for television in a form of mini-series, three hours long movie aired as two hour and a half long episodes. The film is full of well-known faces, which are not famous enough for me to know their names, but which leave the impression of dear friends that I have not seen for a long time. The only face I immediately linked with the name is the face of Traci Lords, although the first association to this name definitely isn't a face. The first hour and a half introduces us to the Haven, a small town in New England, brings us closer to its inhabitants and slowly introduces us to the story through a series of inexplicable events. Near the end of the first part, these events are getting more and more serious, but altogether it can not be classified as horror. The film is based almost exclusively on characterization, while only indications of the real plot test our patience in anticipation of the second part. Although it captured King's atmosphere well enough, to many of you it will probably be boring, for what most movies pack in the first ten minutes this one stretches to ninety. However, I quite enjoyed it. In the second part, the story gradually accelerates, culminates, and ultimately disappoints with the outcome that essentially makes sense, but is made in an over-the-top manner that is inconsistent with the rest of the film. And once again a good movie is spoiled by an explicit display of unconvincing creatures and an action finale that is naive and stupid. If the end had been left indecisive, only implying what happened and leaving us to wonder and speculate, the film would have been more balanced and stronger. But I'm not surprised, because spoiling a potentially good story in this way is quite common, and when it comes to adaptations of Stephen King, one can say that it's a tradition.

5,5/10

Aside from the odd exception, Stephen King has rarely transfered well to the big or small screen, and along comes this little mini-series which is a by-numbers example of what actually gets lost in translation. Firstly: when these novels are adapted for the screen, fundamental elements of the plot are excised or replaced, and this is true of even the better King-flicks ("The Shining" and "Carrie" are just as guilty as pulp trash like "Needful Things" and "Cujo"). "The Tommyknockers" begins as if it's going to buck the trend, establishing the majority of the usual King misfits early on, and actually adds a little suspense by not showing its hand too early - for example, this adaptation does not make clear what's buried out back in Bobbie's farm straight away. But as the town begins to be affected by said item, it's off into it's own world, and toss the novel out the window. Granted, some of the more imaginative gimmicks the township dreams up cannot be translated to screen with the appropriate panache, especially with the meagre budget allocated to this project - but does everything need to look so cheap? Much of the dialogue at best doesn't ring true, at worse stinks. Witness the actually quite good Marg Helgenberger delivering some awful lines ("Gard, let's experience it together!") but in an offhand way that suggests that she's really aware that she's not in a Mamet play, but, Hell, let's make the best of it anyway. Any good points? Well, Joanna Cassidy is always worth watching, but an actress of her class still can't make a thrown together middle-age romance look realistic. Helgenberger and Allyce Beasley come out of it with the least mud sticking. Worst crimes? Jimmy Smits completely miscast, terrible dialogue, cheap effects, complete massacre of the source material, Traci Lords all at sea outside of a John Waters movie or skinflick ... the list goes on.