La Part des ténèbres

The Dark Half is a very good horror movie which is not surprising considering the novel was written by Stephen King. George Romero a man who has done a wonderful job with horror movies is the man in charge of taking this from a novel to a movie and he delivers.

The plot revolves around author Thad Beaumont. Beaumont had written several best selling novels under the pseudonym George Stark. However a law student makes the connection and threatens to reveal it to everyone. Before this can happen Beaumont goes public and tells everyone he is Stark, essentially killing off his pseudonym. Stark isn't content with being dispatched and he comes to life determined to stick around. Stark then goes around killing those responsible for his demise. Beaumont must fight Stark because only one of them can survive.

Timothy Hutton does a spectacular job as both Beaumont and Stark. He really makes you believe the two are separate people but are tied together. The plot is suspenseful and full of unexpected twists. There are also supernatural elements such as the sparrows or bringers of the living dead.

So to sum it up The Dark Half is one of the better adoptions to Stephen King's works. It follows the story accurately and succeeds in scaring the audience which is the aim for horror movies.

The Dark Half is great. Put two of the masters of horror together in a box, shake ‘em up, and you get this very entertaining and darkly humorous story. Can you believe this is the latest film from George Romero? 1993? It's a crime that this man isn't doing movies on a regular basis anymore. I hear he has a couple of projects on the horizon, but seven years is just too long, George! Stephen King movie adaptions can be pretty damn good, or really, really awful depending on who's behind the camera. Well, no worries here, King and Romero have had a great working relationship in the past (and I expect good things in the future).

But give credit where credit is due, it's Timothy Hutton's outstanding performance that really makes this film special for me. He's good enough as ordinary Thad Beaumont, with just a hint of evil underneath his nice husband and father persona, holding back the nasty as best he can. Then Hutton is George Stark, and he doesn't even look like the same person. That's why Hutton is so damn good. With just a few minor changes, slicked-back hair and some facial stubble, he's a completely different person. You have to see it to believe it, he's that good. And he delivers the films darkly humorous lines perfectly ("What's going on out here?", "Murder. Want some?"). I know, the murderous joker has been done to death, but Hutton's good enough that we can forgive it. I love, love, love horror movies and this is one of the reasons why. 8/10 stars. G'night!

Thad Beaumont (Timothy Hutton) had a brain tumor as a child that was an undeveloped twin. Now, as an adult, the twin returns, fully formed and violent. The source is a bit supernatural, but real enough to kill.

The story goes over ground that should be familiar to Stephen King fans. The idea of a child growing up to confront something from his childhood. The theme of a writer, explored numerous times ("Misery", "The Shining") but most closely to this in "Secret Window". Howard Maxford calls it a cross between "Misery" and "The Birds", which I do not fully accept but see his point.

Interestingly, Stephen King is not known for good movie adaptations, and George Romero has had his slew of below average films (though, if you stray from his zombie films, you will find an assortment of goodies). But together, they seem to have made a decent movie here. I really enjoyed it. I also enjoyed "Creepshow" -- maybe these guys bring out the best in each other? Michael Rooker is here (with hair) playing the role played by Ed Harris in "Needful Things". I would have liked to see some consistency in casting, but how do you choose between Rooker and Harris? Both top notch. Another Harris, Julie Harris, does appear, though... And the music is from Christopher Young, perhaps best known for his "Hellraiser" score.

Some of the factual information I found to be a bit questionable. Does a military service record really go into an FBI fingerprint database? I suppose it might, but the idea struck me as odd. And the idea that one in ten people start off as twins seemed too exaggerated (and then they said that was at the very least). I would like to know the truth on that.

Overall, though, a really decent film. It is not Oscar or Golden Globe material by any means, but a horror fan should enjoy the mix of gore and dark humor. Rue Morgue has called it "a middling Romero film based on a middling King novel", which really sells it short.

Unfortunately, the film did not get the proper respect in 1993, because its distributor (Orion) was fighting a bankruptcy battle and promoted it poorly. But now (2015), it has a second chance thanks to the fine folks at Scream Factory who have loaded up the Blu-ray with everything possible, including the kitchen sink.

Somewhere in the dark recesses of over-fluffed and processed Stephen King movie adaptations, there lies this jewel of a film: "The Dark Half."

After having it watched it about three times, I'm still quite at a loss as to why this movie has been, more or less, forgotten or simply passed over by the horror movie community. Not only is it a fairly neat adaptation of a great King novel, but it's also directed and written by a true horror movie icon: the one and only George Romero. Isn't this the kind of "team-up" that fans would, under normal circumstances, go absolutely bananas over? I know that I did.

Anyway ... the movie is about a writer, Thad Beaumont (Timothy Hutton), whose past - quite literally - comes back to haunt him. As a young man, he wrote pulpy crime novels (that I can only imagine were directly inspired by Richard Stark's hardboiled, master thief, Parker) that sold well ... though his literary yearnings tended to veer toward a much less marketable direction. We learn that when he was writing those pulps, his personality suffered. He drank, yelled at his wife, probably slept around, too. Having successfully exorcised that particular demon, when we meet him, Beaumont has a couple kids and an office at some New England university, teaching - you guessed it - creative writing. But when the bodies of folks close to him (i.e.: his agent, biographer) begin cropping up, the small-town police fun finger is pointed at Beaumont. But ... there's a much more sinister twist in this jet-black yarn. We learn that Beaumont indeed has a "dark half."

The direction is perfect, the writing is perfect, the acting is perfect. What more do you want in a film? I'm not exactly certain what King's response was to this film ... I've heard rumors that if he's not directly involved in the production process, he generally scoffs at the final film product. (For example ... he's all but urinated on all the goodness that was Stanley Kubrick's adaptation of "The Shining," which not only marked a substantial turning point in horror cinema, but it's also one of my personal favorites.) Then again ... from what I understand to be true of King and Romero both ... they're friends. Hell, they made "Creepshow" together ... which is another favorite of mine, though I'm more than just a little bit guilty about it.

"The Dark Half" also does one hell of a job at creating a genuinely creepy atmosphere. And who could listen to "Are You Lonesome Tonight" again the same way ... after hearing its soft melodies during a particularly uncomfortable dream sequence?

All of this, compounded with the fact that Timothy Hutton is a damned fine actor (albeit sinfully unknown by most these days) ... makes "The Dark Half" an explosively well made horror/thriller. The proverbial mind meld of King and Romero made "Creepshow" an instant cult classic. So, I ask again ... why was "The Dark Half" a blink-or-you'll-miss-it flop? Maybe these horror titans just can't share the same marquee, anymore.

I dunno.

The Dark Half is a film I wouldn't go out of my way to show to my friends for the first time like other films by George A. Romero (Living-dead pictures, and some of the obscurities), or a few choice Stephen King adaptations (The Shining and Shawshank Redemption being tops). But if it shows up on TV I tend to take a gander for a few, and end up watching it till the unusual, nerve-chilling ending. There's some part of King's writing that at times goes too much for the cheap scares, or rather, doesn't do enough to earn them. This time, however, Romero does catch enough of the smoke in the fire of King's book here; I'd love to sit down and actually read the whole book myself, to see how much was incorporated from King's often brilliant, if perpetually odd, writing, into the final project. It's also territory for Romero that isn't very new, though isn't one of his worst pictures either.

Timothy Hutton, usually in lesser quality pictures, stars here as a writer who happens to have a certain 'alias' in his writing. Unfortunately, whenever he hears a certain calling card- being the sparrows- it sets him off into territory he's afraid to go into, especially with a wife and family. The divide between Thad Beaumont, the common garden-variety writer of Hutton's character, and George Stark, the madman writer of pulp fiction also played by Hutton, makes for the more intriguing parts to the film. Thankfully, unlike Secret Window, the sort of duality of man, or of the writer in this case, isn't saved up for some over-the-top climax. Here it's meant more as a psychological study, and it's here that Romero scores his best points in his adapting the material. Like his film Martin, he knows how to up the ante on the terror involved inside of the mind. In fact, it's scenes showing Beaumont/Stark writing ala the birds that end up becoming more chilling than those with the usual horror violence in them.

Thanks to Hutton, a solid supporting cast, and an ending that does keep one guessing more than could be expected of the material, Romero has a pretty decent work here, and a King adaptation that shouldn't be as much of an embarrassment as some of the others. Individual scenes end up even being mini-masterpieces, even amidst a script that loses its energy and goes into the mundane and usual. Besides, any film with a line like this: "You always were the clumsy one, old hoss", deserves a little recognition, however minor. Under-appreciated and very watchable, though nothing wildly spectacular. 7.5/10