Whispers

I actually saw the movie before I read the book. When I saw the movie I was upset because I wondered why Dean Koontz had made such a bad book/movie. The movie was confusing and didn't have a flow at all, it was choppy and made me want to throw a rock at the TV. I couldn't connect with the characters at all, so i didn't care about what happened to them(normally I love the characters because I can relate to their personality or problems). Then I read the book and loved it. I often re-read the book, and the movie is collecting dust. I wish someone would make a Koontz movie that follows the plot of his books, then the movies wouldn't suck so much. DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE UNLESS YOU NEED TO WASTE MONEY!

The problem is that in the book you have lots of thought going in in peoples heads and that is what keeps the book so interesting you are always learning something about the characters and you get a chance to fall in love with them but the movie just does not let you get involved with the characters. Still I use the movie as a way to let my husband see a little about the book I have been reading so that he knows what was going on. Some things were changed quite a bit but it is easy to see why. you can not turn a 400+ page book into an OK length movie without changing some things to fit in the plot. My point is it will not kill you if you see this movie, but then again just read the book instead. OK.

Try to imagine a Lifetime movie and an afternoon soap combined into one. How Koontz allowed this mess to happen is beyond me. Stay away.

Have now seen this tvice and would not agree with the very low ratings the movie have got. Not that great acting, not the best story (did enjoy the book better) but still a enjoyable watch. Some nice occult stuff and all fans of a swedish car will have som nice driving scenes.

My review was written in December 1990 after watching the movie on Live video cassette.

Direct-to-video release "Whispers" is a superior thriller, with potential as a sleeper success in the home video market. Name of novelist Dean R. Koontz co9uld be a boost.

In a field glutted with predictable would-be chillers, Canadian made pic delivers a truly novel storyline and a very satisfying payoff.

Steve Martin's wife Victoria Tennant is well-cast as a patrician writer who's attacked in the opening scene by Jean Leclerc, a rich guy she met briefly. The police, led by Chris Sarandon and his sexist partner Peter MacNeill, take a lackadaisical attitude until a second attack occurs and Leclerc is killed by Tennant in self-defense.

With plenty of intriguing details and foreshadowing, film evolves into a maybe he' a vampire picture, as Leclerc returns to wreak havoc. Explanation of what's really going on is offbeat and ingenious. In fact, if this film had received a theatrical release, it would probably have been advertised with a "Don't reveal the ending" warning like such classics as "Diabolique".

Often in satin lingerie, Tennant is an ideal lady in distress while Leclerc has the rugged good looks to personify her nemesis. With old-age makeup on, Canadian actress Jackie Burroughs is terrific in a single scene as a former brothel madam recounting the story of Leclerc's boyhood. It's a perfect example of how to inject exposition without boring the audience.

Finale explains the film's title as the chirpings of cockroaches in an extremely gruesome scene.