raejeanowl
A rejoint le août 2004
Bienvenue sur nouveau profil
Nos mises à jour sont toujours en cours de développement. Bien que la version précédente de le profil ne soit plus accessible, nous travaillons activement à des améliorations, et certaines fonctionnalités manquantes seront bientôt de retour ! Restez à l'écoute de leur retour. En attendant, l’analyse des évaluations est toujours disponible sur nos applications iOS et Android, qui se trouvent sur la page de profil. Pour consulter la répartition de vos évaluations par année et par genre, veuillez consulter notre nouveau Guide d'aide.
Badges3
Pour savoir comment gagner des badges, rendez-vous sur page d'aide sur les badges.
Avis7
Note de raejeanowl
I hardly know where to begin. Not at all true to the story, really, except in the most superficial ways.
The screenplay writers took a fairly scary and almost believable yarn and ruined it. Billy Halleck was reduced to an unsympathetic, fat and selfish clown, a waddling caricature of the tortured protagonist in the book. The Gypsies play out the facile racist stereotypes of nastiness and evil incarnate instead of mysterious bohemians with a paranormal approach to vengeance.
The most egregious change, however, was the re-worked ending. The story's real conclusion was never going to win a popularity contest; had the writers remained true to the original plot, the authentic ending would have seemed as precisely chilling as it was intended to be, instead of comedic twist on a "Tales From the Crypt" episode.
King was probably more ashamed of this than Kubrick's version of "The Shining." If you saw this mincemeat of a film first, I hope you will give the book a chance someday.
The screenplay writers took a fairly scary and almost believable yarn and ruined it. Billy Halleck was reduced to an unsympathetic, fat and selfish clown, a waddling caricature of the tortured protagonist in the book. The Gypsies play out the facile racist stereotypes of nastiness and evil incarnate instead of mysterious bohemians with a paranormal approach to vengeance.
The most egregious change, however, was the re-worked ending. The story's real conclusion was never going to win a popularity contest; had the writers remained true to the original plot, the authentic ending would have seemed as precisely chilling as it was intended to be, instead of comedic twist on a "Tales From the Crypt" episode.
King was probably more ashamed of this than Kubrick's version of "The Shining." If you saw this mincemeat of a film first, I hope you will give the book a chance someday.
I found this film virtually unwatchable when it was originally released and it hasn't improved upon my recent viewing.
It was a spoiled rich kid's cherry-picked and clueless version of hippiedom and the cultural movement of the time, and failed badly at conveying its own self-important conclusions. Embarrassing to those who were actually out on that road or living in those communes or just sincerely doing the lifestyle(s).
The only spots of interest to me were seeing the young, (pre-crazy) Phil Spector and Toni Basil. The bloopers and continuity problems were manifold, but the one I didn't see mentioned elsewhere on this site was the constantly changing length of Wyatt's (Peter Fonda)hair: long, short, longer again, very short...
Much was made about the dramatic final scene. I thought it merely gratuitous and stereotyped (which is in itself ironic given the tacit motivations).
It was a spoiled rich kid's cherry-picked and clueless version of hippiedom and the cultural movement of the time, and failed badly at conveying its own self-important conclusions. Embarrassing to those who were actually out on that road or living in those communes or just sincerely doing the lifestyle(s).
The only spots of interest to me were seeing the young, (pre-crazy) Phil Spector and Toni Basil. The bloopers and continuity problems were manifold, but the one I didn't see mentioned elsewhere on this site was the constantly changing length of Wyatt's (Peter Fonda)hair: long, short, longer again, very short...
Much was made about the dramatic final scene. I thought it merely gratuitous and stereotyped (which is in itself ironic given the tacit motivations).