Reviews (256)

Through the Eyes of Children - Great Movie!
This movie I believe was one of the first mini series I have seen by Stephen King. I watched from start to finish I was so interested in the kids in this film. Two who are played by popular actor's today Seth Green (Young Richie Tozer), and Jonathan Brandis (Young Bill Denbrough). The children band together and call themselves "The Looser's Club" they face being different from their classmates and they also face their parents. But what they must ultmiately face is the monster who kills children called "Pennywise the Clown." Together and only together as a team can they defeat the monster.
In the first half of the film we learn of the Clown (Played by the great Tim Curry) and the history with the town of Derry, Maine. We see the kids meeting for the first time and the fun they all have. But the serious times comes when they band together to stand up for themselves against a few of the classmates namly Henry Bowers who likes to torment the other kids in the school. They then come together to form a circle and defeat the clown/monster. With a promise that if it wasn't dead they would all come back to destroy it.
In the second part of the film we see whats happened to them career wise and love life wise. Its a tad slower, but it is definately funny and has its serious moments as well. The kids all grown up are now played by a great cast: Henry Anderson (Richie Tozer), Dennis Christopher (Eddie Kaspbrak), Richard Masur (Stan Uris), Annette O' Toole (Beverly Marsh), John Ritter (Ben Hascom), Tim Reid (Mike Hanlon), and Richard Thomas as (Bill Denbrough). Again the second part starts off slow. But its fun to see them all come together again. And to try and remember the good and bad times and defeat the "clown."
I was very much interested to see Stephen King use children to believe in this monster to where the adults couldn't. It's also interesting to see this sort of similarity in some of his other where the children are the key. Which I find really grand in a way. This movie did; however, really turn me off of clowns. So it does have its creep factor in the movie. I would definately recommend it! Athough the book does give more great detail and is better, and the book is different in most parts. But for a mini series this was my first love of Stephen King.

"They All Float Down Here!"
STEPHEN KING'S IT is arguably the best of the TV films based on a Stephen King work. While devoid of countless details from the novel that would have made the plot more understandable to those viewers who don't actually READ King, the movie is nonetheless engaging and downright SCARY!

One reason STEPHEN KING'S IT rises above standard TV-movie fare is the excellent cast. John Ritter, Annette O'Toole, Richard Thomas, Tim Reid, and Harry Anderson deliver stellar performances in their roles of adult versions of the story's protagonists, and Jonathan Brandis (later the teen-heartthrob co-star of TV's SEAQUEST DSV), Seth Green, and Emily Perkins do an excellent job of evoking childhood crisis and trauma in the flashback segments. But it is Tim Curry (yes, THE Tim Curry of ROCKY HORROR fame), as antagonist Pennywise the Clown, who really chews the scenery and steals the show. If Curry's marvelously malevolent merry-andrew doesn't make you develop coulrophobia (fear of clowns), he will at least haunt your nightmares for a night or two after your first viewing.

Another reason this flick rates so highly is that it is, simply put, a ripping good horror story. King is a master at realistically recreating the wondrous ambiance of youth and childhood, and in spite of the minor shortcomings in the film's recreation of King's plot, the atmosphere of the novel is perfectly translated to the screen. Besides that, King is also keenly aware that the things that scared us when we were kids are probably still lurking deep down in our grown-up psyche, just waiting to find a little mental crack to jump out of and give us a case of goose bumps and chills. The film version of STEPHEN KING'S IT finds that same little crack...then pries it wide open!

The long-awaited DVD version of STEPHEN KING'S IT is sparse on frills, but it does have an excellent feature commentary with stars John Ritter, Richard Thomas, Tim Reid, Dennis Christopher, and director Tommy Lee Wallace. Of course, the picture quality is beautifully crystal clear, especially when compared to the VHS version, but purists should consider a few caveats before purchasing. First, the picture has been cropped a bit to simulate theatrical widescreen format. In comparison to the VHS version, which offers the original 1.33:1 aspect ratio, there are small slivers of image missing from both the top and bottom. (To be fair, it should also be noted that the picture on VHS appears to be scrunched a bit horizontally to fit it into the TV "square," so it really doesn't seem as if all that much has been removed to create the faux widescreen on DVD.) Also, gone are the "To be continued" message and the second set of credits, both of which originally appeared between the first half and second half of the original two-part movie (these were included on the VHS).

So the new DVD version of this excellent movie should, for the most part, please King fans and general horror fans alike. For the movie alone, STEPHEN KING'S IT would easily rate 5 stars. But taking into account the adulterated aspect ratio and the slightly altered transition from Part 1 to Part 2, this DVD gets an overall rating of 4 stars.

It traumatized a whole generation about clowns
The second best translation of a Steven King novel into a movie (the best being Carrie). It caused a whole generation of people afraid of clowns. The other option is reading the 1500 page book.

Welcome to Derry, Maine...
I have read many reviews and they all complain about the novel being TOO long, "over 1000 pages long" they say. Well excuse me but many of the great literary works are extensive. This novel in particular is extensive due to the perfect description of places, chacarters, thoughts, etc.

Taking into account the enormous amount of detail and description put into this book, I think it would be more than clear to anyone that MAKING A GOOD MOVIE OUT OF THIS NOVEL IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!!

-Please save yourself some money.
-Watch "The Shining", that's good acting
-Read the book when you are 11, 12 or 13
-Read it again 10 years later
-Read it at night

great book, ultra bland 'made for tv' movie
I'll put it like this: if your expectations are to see an 'ABC/CBS/NBC Movie of The Week' type thing , then you may be MILDY entertained by this. Yep, this DVD is actually a 'made for TV' movie done in 1990 or so. These things are at best, usually hokey, sappy, shlock filled semi-entertaining fare, where your constantly reminded how every shot, dialogue, scene ,script and action sequence could have been done SPECTACULARLY better as a 'big budget movie' movie. This DVD is no exception! Horror movies just don't have the horror , imo, in a made for TV format. And to make matters much worse, I don't think even a big blockbuster could even touch the magical depth and character the book has. It truly is one of Stephen King's best, imo. ... Read more

Reviews (260)

Halloween III is....different
"Halloween III: Season of the Witch" is a different side of the "Halloween" series. Sure, it doesn't have Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Pleasence or killer Michael Myers in it, but it stands alone as a creepy film. The plot introduces us to druid warlock Conal Cochran (Dan O'Herlihy), who plans to kill millions of children with his rigged Halloween masks. Dr. Dan Challis (Tom Atkins) and Ellie Grimbridge (Stacy Nelkin) stumble on the plan and travel to the small town of Santa Mira to try to stop the killer scheme. This one has robots wearing suits, bugs and snakes spewing out a kid's head, a nice scene where a man's head is literally ripped off his body and Stonehenge! Although it seemed like a good idea to John Carpenter and Debra Hill, "Halloween III" bombed big time at the box office in 1982 cause people were expecting Michael Myers to be seen. The only time he is seem is briefly during a commercial for the original Halloween. The acting is decent, the music is creepy, but some sequences are gross. (Ala the kid's head spewing bugs and snakes) "Halloween III" is actually a good film, if it isn't compared so much to the other ones.

It's not THAT bad.
My first exposure to the Halloween movies was when I was a pre-teen. I loved the first one and really liked the rest of the sequels, which I watched non-sequentially. Halloween 3 was the last entry on the roster (mainly because it was so hard to find back then). My cousin finally got a hold of it, we both watched it and never spoke of it again. A Halloween movie without Michael Myers? Humbug! Blasphemy! How dare they! What a garbage movie!

Well, I'm 22 now and decided to buy Universal's re-issue on DVD. Not because I had any fond memories of the film; I'm simply a completist and it drove me BONKERS whenever I saw that one inch gap between my Halloween 2 and 4 DVD's. So, I reluctantly opened up the packaging, put the disc in the DVD player and just laid back with remote in hand. When it was all over, I realized the film is still no masterpiece.

However, it's been years since I've gotten over the fact that Michael isn't in it, so at least I was (ironically) able to watch it for the second time with a fresher perspective. And I have to say, it really isn't that bad. I actually like it better than Resurrection, but I guess that's not really saying much. The story drags sometimes, but the overall concept is interesting. Cochran, the villain, makes for a cool thorn in Tom Atkins' side. I also give the filmmakers kudos for allowing that annoying kid to just shut up and die a really horrible death.

Much has been said about the theme song. You know... "X more days till Halloween, Halloween, Halloween..." And it really does kind of grate on your nerves after you hear it for what seems like fifty times in ten minutes. But, I guess horror buffs can credit Halloween 3 for contributing at least ONE classic attribute to the genre, annoying or not.

If you're not a completist like me, I'd definitely suggest renting before buying. Just watch it with an open mind.

WILDLY UNDERRATED!
This film is so underrated because there is no Michael Myers! Well, that doesn't mean this is a BAD film! It had a very good plotline! The acting wasn't to great but other than that, this is a good non-sequel! I give it a 6 out of 10!

Am I the olny one who likes this movie?
Halloween 3 is one the best of the halloween saga, but everyone bashes it because it doesn't have Myers, well I found it fun and somewhat creepy, if you're an open minded person see this movie otherwise I think you'll just think it's a bad film like everone else because there is no Myers, of corse it's not as good as the first 2 but hey it's better than the rest.

Can we say "random"?
Yes, as we've all figured out, there's no Michael Myers. That's not what bothers most normal people so much.

What should bother normal people is not only is there no Mike Myers, there is absolutely NOTHING in this movie that remotely has ANYTHING to do with the rest of the series.

The plot is ridiculously eccentric, and yet the director treats the audience like a collection of complete idiots. Personally, after the first time that horribly annoying commercial was played ("X more days til Halloween, Halloween, Halloween" to the tune of "London Bridge"), I got the idea that this commercial was somehow the source of all evil in the movie. This is because the toy store owner who dies in the beginning reacts dramatically to the commercial, and we know he's got it all figured out already.

But we are still put through torture when this incredibly annoying commercial is played about 10 more times in the first 15 minutes of the movie. We get it. We're not dumb.

If you want a comedy, this is the movie for you. I was hysterical laughing at all of the horrible special effects.

Or if you're like me and make almost a sport out of watching every horror film (the good, the bad, and the ugly) known to man, then go for it.

But if you actually want to watch an entertaining or scary movie, save your money. ... Read more

Reviews (260)

Halloween III is....different
"Halloween III: Season of the Witch" is a different side of the "Halloween" series. Sure, it doesn't have Jamie Lee Curtis, Donald Pleasence or killer Michael Myers in it, but it stands alone as a creepy film. The plot introduces us to druid warlock Conal Cochran (Dan O'Herlihy), who plans to kill millions of children with his rigged Halloween masks. Dr. Dan Challis (Tom Atkins) and Ellie Grimbridge (Stacy Nelkin) stumble on the plan and travel to the small town of Santa Mira to try to stop the killer scheme. This one has robots wearing suits, bugs and snakes spewing out a kid's head, a nice scene where a man's head is literally ripped off his body and Stonehenge! Although it seemed like a good idea to John Carpenter and Debra Hill, "Halloween III" bombed big time at the box office in 1982 cause people were expecting Michael Myers to be seen. The only time he is seem is briefly during a commercial for the original Halloween. The acting is decent, the music is creepy, but some sequences are gross. (Ala the kid's head spewing bugs and snakes) "Halloween III" is actually a good film, if it isn't compared so much to the other ones.

It's not THAT bad.
My first exposure to the Halloween movies was when I was a pre-teen. I loved the first one and really liked the rest of the sequels, which I watched non-sequentially. Halloween 3 was the last entry on the roster (mainly because it was so hard to find back then). My cousin finally got a hold of it, we both watched it and never spoke of it again. A Halloween movie without Michael Myers? Humbug! Blasphemy! How dare they! What a garbage movie!

Well, I'm 22 now and decided to buy Universal's re-issue on DVD. Not because I had any fond memories of the film; I'm simply a completist and it drove me BONKERS whenever I saw that one inch gap between my Halloween 2 and 4 DVD's. So, I reluctantly opened up the packaging, put the disc in the DVD player and just laid back with remote in hand. When it was all over, I realized the film is still no masterpiece.

However, it's been years since I've gotten over the fact that Michael isn't in it, so at least I was (ironically) able to watch it for the second time with a fresher perspective. And I have to say, it really isn't that bad. I actually like it better than Resurrection, but I guess that's not really saying much. The story drags sometimes, but the overall concept is interesting. Cochran, the villain, makes for a cool thorn in Tom Atkins' side. I also give the filmmakers kudos for allowing that annoying kid to just shut up and die a really horrible death.

Much has been said about the theme song. You know... "X more days till Halloween, Halloween, Halloween..." And it really does kind of grate on your nerves after you hear it for what seems like fifty times in ten minutes. But, I guess horror buffs can credit Halloween 3 for contributing at least ONE classic attribute to the genre, annoying or not.

If you're not a completist like me, I'd definitely suggest renting before buying. Just watch it with an open mind.

WILDLY UNDERRATED!
This film is so underrated because there is no Michael Myers! Well, that doesn't mean this is a BAD film! It had a very good plotline! The acting wasn't to great but other than that, this is a good non-sequel! I give it a 6 out of 10!

Am I the olny one who likes this movie?
Halloween 3 is one the best of the halloween saga, but everyone bashes it because it doesn't have Myers, well I found it fun and somewhat creepy, if you're an open minded person see this movie otherwise I think you'll just think it's a bad film like everone else because there is no Myers, of corse it's not as good as the first 2 but hey it's better than the rest.

Can we say "random"?
Yes, as we've all figured out, there's no Michael Myers. That's not what bothers most normal people so much.

What should bother normal people is not only is there no Mike Myers, there is absolutely NOTHING in this movie that remotely has ANYTHING to do with the rest of the series.

The plot is ridiculously eccentric, and yet the director treats the audience like a collection of complete idiots. Personally, after the first time that horribly annoying commercial was played ("X more days til Halloween, Halloween, Halloween" to the tune of "London Bridge"), I got the idea that this commercial was somehow the source of all evil in the movie. This is because the toy store owner who dies in the beginning reacts dramatically to the commercial, and we know he's got it all figured out already.

But we are still put through torture when this incredibly annoying commercial is played about 10 more times in the first 15 minutes of the movie. We get it. We're not dumb.

If you want a comedy, this is the movie for you. I was hysterical laughing at all of the horrible special effects.

Or if you're like me and make almost a sport out of watching every horror film (the good, the bad, and the ugly) known to man, then go for it.

But if you actually want to watch an entertaining or scary movie, save your money. ... Read more

Reviews (7)

A Movie that is "Comfort Food"
What can I say. Filmed in Hawaii, representing a "simpler" time. Friends finding love, resolving conflict etc. during their "Aloha Summer". I really enjoyed this movie just like I enjoy "comfort food". And, though I really liked the movie, I would have bought it even if I hadn't. Just for the great surfing scenes near the end! I watch those over and over!

An innocent gem of a film
I purchase this film back in the 80's and was amazed that the Studio never heavily promoted this obscure gem. Surfing and light racial overtones add depth to this fine family or teenage flick. The beautiful Hawaii cinematography is amazing. Mike Greco's script and Tommy Lee Wallace's direction is wonderful. Check out the stupid looking guy selling beach mats and stuff on the beach. The 1950's music soundtrack is also a winner. Buy it if you can find it! Great nostalgic fun.

Aloha!!!
I have not thought about this movie in a long time. I recently purchased this movie and it is as great then as it is now. It is such an innocent movie that anyone can watch and enjoy. This movie is about a much simpler time were friends honored each other, summers felt like eternity, and your first love is always memorable. I enjoy watching this movie and recommend it to anyone.

classic aloha vacation
This movie epitomizes the summer vacation movies.
Nothing tops it.
every guy's dream.

Good natured family film
This is one of those movies that left me feeling happy. Call me corny, but in this day-and-age it's hard to find a movie that the entire family can watch and enjoy. I loved the nostalgia of the 50's and imagining Waikiki as it once was. The movie portrayed a time in life when families and friends were loyal and committed to one another, even when their lives weren't perfect. I would recommend this movie to families with kids in their early to mid-teens, not to soul searching, Adrenalin junkies looking for the perfect wave. ... Read more

Reviews (52)

Not nearly as good as the first but that'd be hard to beat!
FRIGHT NIGHT II picks up a few years after the first film and finds Brewster (William Ragsdale) in college and in therapy where his therapist has convinced him that vampires don't exist. Brewster ends up believing again soon enough though when Jerry Dandridge's sister (Julie Carmen) comes after him seeking blood. So, Brewster enlists the help of fearless vampire killer Peter Vincent (the late-great Roddy McDowal) land they're off to do battle once gain.

While not nearly as good as the original, FRIGHT NIGHT II is a lot of fun. As a matter of fact this maybe the only horror sequel not totally trashed by director Tommy Lee Wallace who trashed HALLOWEEN III years earlier and VAMPIRES: LOS MUERTOS years later. This sequel is full of effective humor and horror none of which however live up to anything in the first movie. That's understandable though. The first FRIGHT NIGHT is a classic as far as vampire genre pictures go and it's always hard to follow in the footsteps of that. So if you're a fan of the first movie or just a fan of the good old fashioned horror comedy then give FRIGHT NIGHT II a try. I don't think you'll be disappointed.

C

This is DVD quality?
I have bought a few cheapie $3.99 DVD movies. Though the picture was far from great, thery were no worse than VHS picture quality. I recently bought Fight Night Part II on DVD for $10.99 and the picture quality is atually worse than the VHS that I have! What the hell happened! Don't get me wrong, I'm glad that Artisan Entertainment is digging and releasing some old classics from their vaults, but if your going to release them like this then don't bother! This is by for the worst from Artisan. Bride of Re-Animator, Waxwork, and Lair of the White Worm were disappointents because of the poor picture quality, no widescreen formats, and lack of supplemental material, but Fright Night Part II takes the cake as their worst release! MGM may be getting lazy too and only releasing their titles only in Full Screen format, but at least their movies have good picture quality! Artisan needs to shape up or get out! Artisan should sell the rights of their older movies to Anchor Bay Entertainment so they could be properly released!

For cryin' out loud...
Stop posting more than once for a movie, it's very annoying and unfairly tips the balance of the review ratings.

Bad, Boring, Stupid Sequel
If the idea of an evil killer transvestite vampire on rollerskates really does it for you, this is your movie. Otherwise, watching this film will use up 101 minutes of your life that you'll never get back.

Total DVD Disappointment
This is by far the worst DVD I have ever bought. The quality is worse than a VHS and this is a pan and scan version of a movie that was clearly shot in widescreen!

After the original movie, and its comical wit my expectations were high for this one. I was sorely let down. 80's gore replaced the fun that was a huge part of the first 'boy who cried wolf' concept. Too bad - the only good that came out of this purchase was a cool DVD cover case.

No more Artisan (the name is an oxymoron) titles - period. ... Read more

Description

Sparky Smith is a baseball coach with a future in the game - behind him. Now Sparky?ll work for anyone who?ll hire him - and that just happens to be a Russian baseball team who barely know their way around a diamond! ' 'Sure to drive home some laughs.' ' - Chicago Sun Times ... Read more

Reviews (4)

This one was very funny !
Come on guys ! This one was very funny ! Joe Mantegna teaching baseball to Russians ?! In Russia !? I am already louphing !
And some of the russians get offended ??? It is a comedy , with using GROTESQUE at it's best ! The " russian party " , after winning a game against cubans ( the fact itself - russians beat cubans in baseball , already hilarious ), when they drink vodka out of the bottles , than everybody sleeping and snoring ! Isn't it already a clue for you - it is A comedy . And it is a good one .

not horrible
a fun movie. my biggest problem was with joe mantegna...i just couldn't picture him as a baseball player. i'm a huge baseball fan, and think you would like this film more if you are not really into baseball, but just have a general knowledg of the game. it certainly wasn't a "good" movie but it has funny scenes, and is playful. certainly not in the league of other baseball movies, though.

Another Great Baseball Movie
This is not the greatest movie of all time, but whenever it replays on HBO, I can't NOT watch. Joe Mantegna is great in this, and it has a wonderful, sappy appeal. Why are movies about baseball so good, and the sport itself so booooring?

Comrades of Summer RULES!!!
This is the best movie of all time. Watch for the guy who jumps about 30 feet after hitting a home run with his mom watching. And when Boris cleares a 20 foot fense to catch a foul ball and falls 30 feet to the concrete and still holds on to the ball. This is the most realistic movie ever!!! ... Read more

Reviews (4)

TV PILOT ALERT
THE PRESENCE is a 1992 tv-pilot for NBC that never sold; watching it you can see why. A typically stereotypical group of survivors end up on a deserted (not really, though) island which once housed a facility where genetic breeding was conducted. In the mishmash of the plot, one never knows what really happened, and by its "open ending", you can see how it would have been a series. The cast is wasted, with only flashes of talent from Gary Graham and Joe Lara. Otherwise, its effects are mundane and its suspense level virtually non-existent.

Presence: Lord of the Flies Meets Gilligan's Island
All too frequently, big budget Hollywood films sport an impressive cast of well-known actors whose talents go to waste is a mess that leaves the audience shaking its head at its ineptitude. Such a waste of big stars can happen on a low budget film too. In PRESENCE, director Tommy Lee Wallace takes the acting ability of popular film and television star June Lockhart (LASSIE, SERGEANT YORK), Joe Lara, and future bimbo star Nikki Cox and totally misuses their talent in a movie that was supposed to fighten but wound up as merely amusing. The plot involves the time honored cliche of a group of scientists, military men, and bikini wearing CPAs stranded on a lost island when their plane crashes only to find that the island had been inhabited by CIA spooks running forbidden bioharazrd experiments. Naturally, the experiments had gotten out of hand, creating scaly-like creatures right out of THE CREATURE FROM THE BLACK LAGOON. As if this was not incredible enough, the survivors meet a tribe of natives who seem to have wandered off from the set of GILLIGAN'S ISLAND. You would think that with so many model types in bikinis, such a movie ought to have at least one or two love interests. Model Kathy Ireland bounces her locks around without entangling any man. PRESENCE is so full of cheesy scripting and unbelievable plotting that the eggs that Hollywood lays in its big budget disasters are not limited to them alone. The best part: Kathy Ireland in a bikini. The worst part: everything else.

PRESENCE OF DANGER ISLAND
RELEASED AS A PILOT FOR A SERIES "DANGER ISLAND" AS THE ORIGINAL TITLE. REASON FOR MY 5 STARS IS BECAUSE MY OLDEST BROTHER PLAYED FRANK. AND JUNE LOCKHART WAS MARRIED TO ONE OF MY MOTHERS BEST FRIENDS FROM HER CHILDHOOD DAYS. ANYWAY, THE MOVIE IS WORTH WATCHING BUT PLEASE ONLY EAT FRESH FRUIT WHILE WATCHING IT, DAY OLD FRUIT SPOILS FAST. THE FILM, WELL THINK OF IT AS ED WOODS VERSION OF GILLIGANS ISLAND

Incredibly ridiculous
Whoever wrote this script must've watched too many Gilligan's Island eps. Joe Lara's incredible talent was wasted in this film.The other actors/actresses deserve hazard pay for attempting to act in a film suitable only for the limited intelligence of a pubescent l2-year-old. ... Read more

Reviews (31)

Sexy Slayer
Jon Bon Jovi plays incredibly sexy vampire bounty hunter Derek Bliss of the Van Helsing Group. Derek gets hired by an anonymous client to go on an expedition to Mexico and eradicate a colony of vampires, the only catch is the client wants a hunter team and Bliss is a loner. The only problem is the hunters on Bliss's list have been exposed and the vampires are one step ahead of him eliminating his teammates.

Along the way, he meets Sancho (Diego Luna), a teen whose willing to join the team because his mother needs the money, Zoe (Natasha Gregson Wagner), a woman who was bitten during sex but is under control due to an experimental drug she obtained in Mexico City, Rodrigo (Christian De Le Fuente), a priest from the Mt. Grace Monastery from the original film, and Raf Collins, a hunter from Memphis sent by his agent. They become his team.

Their opposition is a master vampire (Arly Joyer), who is after the Black Cross, which through a ritual has the power to give vampires the ability to walk in the daylight unharmed.

I agree with many of the other reviews that this movie didn't go beyond the original as far as storyline; but Jon Bon Jovi's performance makes it worth seeing anyway. I'd say it's one of the better B-Movies. I hope they make a sequel!

Better Then Vampires
This is one of the only times I can actually say the sequel is better then the original. Although James Woods is a cool bad [...] on film it seemed that Jon Bon Jovi just played this part better. Bon Jovi had a more lack-a-daysical and loner type attitude toward the whole business of vampire hunting. In this movie there is also a little bit more to the plot then the orignal, although it does have drawing power from the original. All the actors did a good job and I'm not even sure I would call this a B-Movie, you just don't get that cheesy feeling when you watch it. If you're a fan of "Vampires" or the genre I would definately buy this movie.

WHY??!WHY?!?!WHY?!?!
Why did they do this? why did they make a direct to video sequel to a movie that made money?It screams for a big screen sequel that starts off where the original ended.not a flick that takes a simple premise and dumbs it down,and cant pull off the decent vampire body burns achieved in the original.The thing that was cool about the original was that the vampire slayers were meaner than the monsters they hunted.In this one they are weak and it becomes your average cheap vamp flick.not to mention carpenters good name wasted on the box.And whats with that awful wooden steak gun bon jovi uses,its sad.this vampire flick sucks.

Lost in Mexico
What to say about this movie. As a story line, I really liked what the intention of the movie was about. As the actual movie, I felt there was just a bit too much time spent getting Bon Jovi's crew together and not on really developing the story like it was done in the first movie. In the first movie, we got the chance to know the history behind the vampire and what he was after. This one seemed touched lightly on the topic, and from that point on it was like you were expected to guess what was going on, rather than developing it fully. There were some pretty silly mistakes made too that just seemed unrealistic for their part in the movie.
Still, if you can follow along and see through all of Bon Jovi's head shots and the skipping around to find the real story as it develops, its not a bad flick.

Badly miscast, lame sequel, with one wasted good idea
"Vampires: Los Muertos" is a sequel of sorts to "John Carpenter's Vampires," which means that it inhabits the same world. James Woods and his over the relentless and entertaining chewing of each and every scene has now been replaced by Jon Bon Jovi's lethargic turn as vampire hunter Derek Bliss. I guess he is supposed to be a bad ass just like Woods' character, but he only gets the role half right (the first half people, be nice). This was just a mondo bad casting decision and writer-director Tommy Lee Wallace dug his 2002 film into a hole on that basis alone. The second strike is Arly Jover as the master vampire Una, not just because the name strikes me as silly but also because she is no where near as scary or as sexy as she is supposed to be. If the hero and the villain are essentially boring, what hope can a vampire spaghetti-western have?

Whereas Woods headed an organized group of vampire hunters that was decimated early in the film forcing the hero to go almost solo, Bon Jovi does the reverse. Bliss is a free-lance vampire hunter for hire who has to put together a crew, so there are all sorts of trust and competency issues. If Bliss cannot count on Father Rodrigo (Cristián de la Fuente) then his merry little group and the audience are in for a long hole. We are still in the world where vampires explode into flames when exposed to sunlight, even when you use one of their heads as a hood ornament, but that is also something old and something new along with everything borrowed from the first film. The idea of being able to communicate through the shared blood of the vampire from Stoker's "Dracula" comes back and works in with the more contemporary idea that vampirism is essentially a blood disease.

"Vampires: Los Muertos" is a bad film, but it picked up its third star because of one intriguing idea off of the blood disease idea. Having established that a drug cocktail has stopped Zoey (Natasha Gregson Wagner) the requisite damsel in distress from turning into a vamp despite having been bitten, Wallace does come up with an interesting twist by having Una use the magic medicine to help her take a walk in the sunlight like she was wearing the Gem of Amarra. The execution is not as exciting as the idea and you really wish it had been used in the service of a much better film. Here it is just too little, too late in terms of saving this film from driving off the cliff, but it does stand out as the one bright spot in this dreary little film which continues the idea that vampires are flourishing south of the border. ... Read more

Reviews (256)

Through the Eyes of Children - Great Movie!
This movie I believe was one of the first mini series I have seen by Stephen King. I watched from start to finish I was so interested in the kids in this film. Two who are played by popular actor's today Seth Green (Young Richie Tozer), and Jonathan Brandis (Young Bill Denbrough). The children band together and call themselves "The Looser's Club" they face being different from their classmates and they also face their parents. But what they must ultmiately face is the monster who kills children called "Pennywise the Clown." Together and only together as a team can they defeat the monster.
In the first half of the film we learn of the Clown (Played by the great Tim Curry) and the history with the town of Derry, Maine. We see the kids meeting for the first time and the fun they all have. But the serious times comes when they band together to stand up for themselves against a few of the classmates namly Henry Bowers who likes to torment the other kids in the school. They then come together to form a circle and defeat the clown/monster. With a promise that if it wasn't dead they would all come back to destroy it.
In the second part of the film we see whats happened to them career wise and love life wise. Its a tad slower, but it is definately funny and has its serious moments as well. The kids all grown up are now played by a great cast: Henry Anderson (Richie Tozer), Dennis Christopher (Eddie Kaspbrak), Richard Masur (Stan Uris), Annette O' Toole (Beverly Marsh), John Ritter (Ben Hascom), Tim Reid (Mike Hanlon), and Richard Thomas as (Bill Denbrough). Again the second part starts off slow. But its fun to see them all come together again. And to try and remember the good and bad times and defeat the "clown."
I was very much interested to see Stephen King use children to believe in this monster to where the adults couldn't. It's also interesting to see this sort of similarity in some of his other where the children are the key. Which I find really grand in a way. This movie did; however, really turn me off of clowns. So it does have its creep factor in the movie. I would definately recommend it! Athough the book does give more great detail and is better, and the book is different in most parts. But for a mini series this was my first love of Stephen King.

"They All Float Down Here!"
STEPHEN KING'S IT is arguably the best of the TV films based on a Stephen King work. While devoid of countless details from the novel that would have made the plot more understandable to those viewers who don't actually READ King, the movie is nonetheless engaging and downright SCARY!

One reason STEPHEN KING'S IT rises above standard TV-movie fare is the excellent cast. John Ritter, Annette O'Toole, Richard Thomas, Tim Reid, and Harry Anderson deliver stellar performances in their roles of adult versions of the story's protagonists, and Jonathan Brandis (later the teen-heartthrob co-star of TV's SEAQUEST DSV), Seth Green, and Emily Perkins do an excellent job of evoking childhood crisis and trauma in the flashback segments. But it is Tim Curry (yes, THE Tim Curry of ROCKY HORROR fame), as antagonist Pennywise the Clown, who really chews the scenery and steals the show. If Curry's marvelously malevolent merry-andrew doesn't make you develop coulrophobia (fear of clowns), he will at least haunt your nightmares for a night or two after your first viewing.

Another reason this flick rates so highly is that it is, simply put, a ripping good horror story. King is a master at realistically recreating the wondrous ambiance of youth and childhood, and in spite of the minor shortcomings in the film's recreation of King's plot, the atmosphere of the novel is perfectly translated to the screen. Besides that, King is also keenly aware that the things that scared us when we were kids are probably still lurking deep down in our grown-up psyche, just waiting to find a little mental crack to jump out of and give us a case of goose bumps and chills. The film version of STEPHEN KING'S IT finds that same little crack...then pries it wide open!

The long-awaited DVD version of STEPHEN KING'S IT is sparse on frills, but it does have an excellent feature commentary with stars John Ritter, Richard Thomas, Tim Reid, Dennis Christopher, and director Tommy Lee Wallace. Of course, the picture quality is beautifully crystal clear, especially when compared to the VHS version, but purists should consider a few caveats before purchasing. First, the picture has been cropped a bit to simulate theatrical widescreen format. In comparison to the VHS version, which offers the original 1.33:1 aspect ratio, there are small slivers of image missing from both the top and bottom. (To be fair, it should also be noted that the picture on VHS appears to be scrunched a bit horizontally to fit it into the TV "square," so it really doesn't seem as if all that much has been removed to create the faux widescreen on DVD.) Also, gone are the "To be continued" message and the second set of credits, both of which originally appeared between the first half and second half of the original two-part movie (these were included on the VHS).

So the new DVD version of this excellent movie should, for the most part, please King fans and general horror fans alike. For the movie alone, STEPHEN KING'S IT would easily rate 5 stars. But taking into account the adulterated aspect ratio and the slightly altered transition from Part 1 to Part 2, this DVD gets an overall rating of 4 stars.

It traumatized a whole generation about clowns
The second best translation of a Steven King novel into a movie (the best being Carrie). It caused a whole generation of people afraid of clowns. The other option is reading the 1500 page book.

Welcome to Derry, Maine...
I have read many reviews and they all complain about the novel being TOO long, "over 1000 pages long" they say. Well excuse me but many of the great literary works are extensive. This novel in particular is extensive due to the perfect description of places, chacarters, thoughts, etc.

Taking into account the enormous amount of detail and description put into this book, I think it would be more than clear to anyone that MAKING A GOOD MOVIE OUT OF THIS NOVEL IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!!

-Please save yourself some money.
-Watch "The Shining", that's good acting
-Read the book when you are 11, 12 or 13
-Read it again 10 years later
-Read it at night

great book, ultra bland 'made for tv' movie
I'll put it like this: if your expectations are to see an 'ABC/CBS/NBC Movie of The Week' type thing , then you may be MILDY entertained by this. Yep, this DVD is actually a 'made for TV' movie done in 1990 or so. These things are at best, usually hokey, sappy, shlock filled semi-entertaining fare, where your constantly reminded how every shot, dialogue, scene ,script and action sequence could have been done SPECTACULARLY better as a 'big budget movie' movie. This DVD is no exception! Horror movies just don't have the horror , imo, in a made for TV format. And to make matters much worse, I don't think even a big blockbuster could even touch the magical depth and character the book has. It truly is one of Stephen King's best, imo. ... Read more

Reviews (1)

will you pay to watch the guilty pay for their crimes?
This TVM about the evil lords of pay-for-view TV hooks into the bread and circuses level of entertainment, but taking us where Jerry Springer is yet to go - live coverage of the execution of death row criminals. That the company who forms an agreement with politicians is called Tycom may be a reference to Viacom, with Sean Young as the head of programming, Len Cariou as her boss, and Timothy Daly as the convicted killer chosen for his appeal to women, who we are told control the remote in American households. Although Daly's Sean Penn Dead Man Walking bouffant gives him a sociopathic suggestion, to Young he is a pussycat, which leads her to believe that he is innocent, so director Tommy Lee Wallace gives us a race against the "countdown to justice". The teleplay by Thomas Baum hasn't decided what we ultimately should believe about Daly. It has Young leaning towards his innocence which would make her want to pull the program, but the case it offers in his defense is hardly believable and represented by Dee Wallace Stone in a I'm making the most of my few scenes performance. This therefore works against Young's character, who has been previously established as cynical and savvy, and Wallace skimps on any romance between Young and Daly. Looking very beautiful, Young gives some surprising line readings, and provides a memorable howl. Wallace cuts between the film and video stock so that the TV coverage is striking, there is an amusing scene of an on-the-scene reporter being jostled by the crowd who she reports have been denied access to the event, and the climactic execution set reminded me of something from Triumph of the Will via Network, with the Big Brother/Big Business implications chillingly realised. ... Read more

Reviews (4)

This one was very funny !
Come on guys ! This one was very funny ! Joe Mantegna teaching baseball to Russians ?! In Russia !? I am already louphing !
And some of the russians get offended ??? It is a comedy , with using GROTESQUE at it's best ! The " russian party " , after winning a game against cubans ( the fact itself - russians beat cubans in baseball , already hilarious ), when they drink vodka out of the bottles , than everybody sleeping and snoring ! Isn't it already a clue for you - it is A comedy . And it is a good one .

not horrible
a fun movie. my biggest problem was with joe mantegna...i just couldn't picture him as a baseball player. i'm a huge baseball fan, and think you would like this film more if you are not really into baseball, but just have a general knowledg of the game. it certainly wasn't a "good" movie but it has funny scenes, and is playful. certainly not in the league of other baseball movies, though.

Another Great Baseball Movie
This is not the greatest movie of all time, but whenever it replays on HBO, I can't NOT watch. Joe Mantegna is great in this, and it has a wonderful, sappy appeal. Why are movies about baseball so good, and the sport itself so booooring?

Comrades of Summer RULES!!!
This is the best movie of all time. Watch for the guy who jumps about 30 feet after hitting a home run with his mom watching. And when Boris cleares a 20 foot fense to catch a foul ball and falls 30 feet to the concrete and still holds on to the ball. This is the most realistic movie ever!!! ... Read more

Description

Merle Hammond, (Michael McKean) a sleazy attorney uses corrupt tactics and convinces a jury to acquit his client who is a killer. Gwen, the murdered victim's sister, (Annette O' Toole) knows the real truth and plots revenge against the attorney. Out of desperation, she kidnaps the attorney in an attempt to make him confess to his unscrupulous him confess to his unscrupulous tactics. The cards twist when he escapes and puts her on trial for his kidnapping. COURTROOM DRAMA. 96 Minutes. ... Read more

Reviews (2)

Annette O'Toole SHINES in this movie!
If you love Annette, you'll love this movie. She is awesome in it. If you don't love her, it is still a great movie. If you've ever secretely dreamed of getting revenge, then dream on. I love it when she makes him.... ah "wet himself". I laughed till I cried. Oh by the way, she later married the creep in real life.
This is one of Annette's better movies.

FANTASTIC Courtroom Drama
This was the film that real life husband & wife Annette O'Toole (Smallville) & Michael McKean (Laverne & Shirley) met on! This movie is about a school teacher who finds out that her gay brother was murdered, and then the killer is wrongfully set free...b/c one of the best lawyers in the country (played by McKean) shows that his client is innocent. Annette O'Toole is so furious, that she decides to make the lawyer (McKean) suffer..by kidnapping him..taking him up to a secluded cabin...and torturing him!!! Is this final justice? NO! More happens! I'm not going to ruin the movie, but I wish I could! This is a movie with lots of twists and turns, and is truly enjoyable. ... Read more

Reviews (31)

Sexy Slayer
Jon Bon Jovi plays incredibly sexy vampire bounty hunter Derek Bliss of the Van Helsing Group. Derek gets hired by an anonymous client to go on an expedition to Mexico and eradicate a colony of vampires, the only catch is the client wants a hunter team and Bliss is a loner. The only problem is the hunters on Bliss's list have been exposed and the vampires are one step ahead of him eliminating his teammates.

Along the way, he meets Sancho (Diego Luna), a teen whose willing to join the team because his mother needs the money, Zoe (Natasha Gregson Wagner), a woman who was bitten during sex but is under control due to an experimental drug she obtained in Mexico City, Rodrigo (Christian De Le Fuente), a priest from the Mt. Grace Monastery from the original film, and Raf Collins, a hunter from Memphis sent by his agent. They become his team.

Their opposition is a master vampire (Arly Joyer), who is after the Black Cross, which through a ritual has the power to give vampires the ability to walk in the daylight unharmed.

I agree with many of the other reviews that this movie didn't go beyond the original as far as storyline; but Jon Bon Jovi's performance makes it worth seeing anyway. I'd say it's one of the better B-Movies. I hope they make a sequel!

Better Then Vampires
This is one of the only times I can actually say the sequel is better then the original. Although James Woods is a cool bad [...] on film it seemed that Jon Bon Jovi just played this part better. Bon Jovi had a more lack-a-daysical and loner type attitude toward the whole business of vampire hunting. In this movie there is also a little bit more to the plot then the orignal, although it does have drawing power from the original. All the actors did a good job and I'm not even sure I would call this a B-Movie, you just don't get that cheesy feeling when you watch it. If you're a fan of "Vampires" or the genre I would definately buy this movie.

WHY??!WHY?!?!WHY?!?!
Why did they do this? why did they make a direct to video sequel to a movie that made money?It screams for a big screen sequel that starts off where the original ended.not a flick that takes a simple premise and dumbs it down,and cant pull off the decent vampire body burns achieved in the original.The thing that was cool about the original was that the vampire slayers were meaner than the monsters they hunted.In this one they are weak and it becomes your average cheap vamp flick.not to mention carpenters good name wasted on the box.And whats with that awful wooden steak gun bon jovi uses,its sad.this vampire flick sucks.

Lost in Mexico
What to say about this movie. As a story line, I really liked what the intention of the movie was about. As the actual movie, I felt there was just a bit too much time spent getting Bon Jovi's crew together and not on really developing the story like it was done in the first movie. In the first movie, we got the chance to know the history behind the vampire and what he was after. This one seemed touched lightly on the topic, and from that point on it was like you were expected to guess what was going on, rather than developing it fully. There were some pretty silly mistakes made too that just seemed unrealistic for their part in the movie.
Still, if you can follow along and see through all of Bon Jovi's head shots and the skipping around to find the real story as it develops, its not a bad flick.

Badly miscast, lame sequel, with one wasted good idea
"Vampires: Los Muertos" is a sequel of sorts to "John Carpenter's Vampires," which means that it inhabits the same world. James Woods and his over the relentless and entertaining chewing of each and every scene has now been replaced by Jon Bon Jovi's lethargic turn as vampire hunter Derek Bliss. I guess he is supposed to be a bad ass just like Woods' character, but he only gets the role half right (the first half people, be nice). This was just a mondo bad casting decision and writer-director Tommy Lee Wallace dug his 2002 film into a hole on that basis alone. The second strike is Arly Jover as the master vampire Una, not just because the name strikes me as silly but also because she is no where near as scary or as sexy as she is supposed to be. If the hero and the villain are essentially boring, what hope can a vampire spaghetti-western have?

Whereas Woods headed an organized group of vampire hunters that was decimated early in the film forcing the hero to go almost solo, Bon Jovi does the reverse. Bliss is a free-lance vampire hunter for hire who has to put together a crew, so there are all sorts of trust and competency issues. If Bliss cannot count on Father Rodrigo (Cristián de la Fuente) then his merry little group and the audience are in for a long hole. We are still in the world where vampires explode into flames when exposed to sunlight, even when you use one of their heads as a hood ornament, but that is also something old and something new along with everything borrowed from the first film. The idea of being able to communicate through the shared blood of the vampire from Stoker's "Dracula" comes back and works in with the more contemporary idea that vampirism is essentially a blood disease.

"Vampires: Los Muertos" is a bad film, but it picked up its third star because of one intriguing idea off of the blood disease idea. Having established that a drug cocktail has stopped Zoey (Natasha Gregson Wagner) the requisite damsel in distress from turning into a vamp despite having been bitten, Wallace does come up with an interesting twist by having Una use the magic medicine to help her take a walk in the sunlight like she was wearing the Gem of Amarra. The execution is not as exciting as the idea and you really wish it had been used in the service of a much better film. Here it is just too little, too late in terms of saving this film from driving off the cliff, but it does stand out as the one bright spot in this dreary little film which continues the idea that vampires are flourishing south of the border. ... Read more

Reviews (22)

Great
I saw this movie when it first came on on ABC when I was three. I have to say it didn't scare me much, mostly because I didn't understand it. Then my brother rented again when I was 7 (he still regards this movie as being the first one ever to scare him) and it scared me almost to death. 5 years later I bought the book (I was 12 at this time) and read It. I've been a King fan ever since.

Great Book, Acceptable Movie
Firts of all, let me say that I've not yet finished the book, I'm on page 600 and advancing, but I've seen the movie a couple times.

Ok, that's real, It's sometimes not a good mirror of the book, however I think it is quite good, I'm 18, and I saw it for the first time when I was 15, and every time I went to my room, I've to run for the light before feeling the clown's presence, I mean, I was scared to hell with it.

Tim Curry is great as Pennywise, I discovered it was him jus a few minutes ago, because I had never seen the movie credits before, and now I admire him a lot more than before.

I've already ordered this item, and I recomend both, movie and book. If you really liked the movie, read the book, if you really liked the book, think it twice but see the movie.

Nothing Like the Book
I've read the book, and I did't think it was the greatest thing in the world but I thought it was worth my time. I was highly dissapointed to see this movie which did not follow the book at all. Not only that but the movie doesn't really explain anything that happens, nor is it particularily scary to anyone over the age of 13.

Does little justice
I thought this film was downright irritating! Not only just because the acting was wooden and the interpretation was anything but dynamic and scary, but also because it does absolutely no justice to the book. I read the book first and was transfixed by it, but the film wanders whimsically from moment to moment with little regard for plot or character development, and completely ignored the magnitude of what IT is, and where it comes from. Trust me, in the book it was more then just a giant plastic spider! Sorry for spoiling the ending, but really, if you watched the film, you wouldn't mind. Conlusion: possibly the best book I've ever read, but an appaling film.

Pennywises yummy meal of children
Great movie......but a bad ending. Tim Curry was great and he made the movie. Read the book ... Read more

Reviews (256)

Through the Eyes of Children - Great Movie!
This movie I believe was one of the first mini series I have seen by Stephen King. I watched from start to finish I was so interested in the kids in this film. Two who are played by popular actor's today Seth Green (Young Richie Tozer), and Jonathan Brandis (Young Bill Denbrough). The children band together and call themselves "The Looser's Club" they face being different from their classmates and they also face their parents. But what they must ultmiately face is the monster who kills children called "Pennywise the Clown." Together and only together as a team can they defeat the monster.
In the first half of the film we learn of the Clown (Played by the great Tim Curry) and the history with the town of Derry, Maine. We see the kids meeting for the first time and the fun they all have. But the serious times comes when they band together to stand up for themselves against a few of the classmates namly Henry Bowers who likes to torment the other kids in the school. They then come together to form a circle and defeat the clown/monster. With a promise that if it wasn't dead they would all come back to destroy it.
In the second part of the film we see whats happened to them career wise and love life wise. Its a tad slower, but it is definately funny and has its serious moments as well. The kids all grown up are now played by a great cast: Henry Anderson (Richie Tozer), Dennis Christopher (Eddie Kaspbrak), Richard Masur (Stan Uris), Annette O' Toole (Beverly Marsh), John Ritter (Ben Hascom), Tim Reid (Mike Hanlon), and Richard Thomas as (Bill Denbrough). Again the second part starts off slow. But its fun to see them all come together again. And to try and remember the good and bad times and defeat the "clown."
I was very much interested to see Stephen King use children to believe in this monster to where the adults couldn't. It's also interesting to see this sort of similarity in some of his other where the children are the key. Which I find really grand in a way. This movie did; however, really turn me off of clowns. So it does have its creep factor in the movie. I would definately recommend it! Athough the book does give more great detail and is better, and the book is different in most parts. But for a mini series this was my first love of Stephen King.

"They All Float Down Here!"
STEPHEN KING'S IT is arguably the best of the TV films based on a Stephen King work. While devoid of countless details from the novel that would have made the plot more understandable to those viewers who don't actually READ King, the movie is nonetheless engaging and downright SCARY!

One reason STEPHEN KING'S IT rises above standard TV-movie fare is the excellent cast. John Ritter, Annette O'Toole, Richard Thomas, Tim Reid, and Harry Anderson deliver stellar performances in their roles of adult versions of the story's protagonists, and Jonathan Brandis (later the teen-heartthrob co-star of TV's SEAQUEST DSV), Seth Green, and Emily Perkins do an excellent job of evoking childhood crisis and trauma in the flashback segments. But it is Tim Curry (yes, THE Tim Curry of ROCKY HORROR fame), as antagonist Pennywise the Clown, who really chews the scenery and steals the show. If Curry's marvelously malevolent merry-andrew doesn't make you develop coulrophobia (fear of clowns), he will at least haunt your nightmares for a night or two after your first viewing.

Another reason this flick rates so highly is that it is, simply put, a ripping good horror story. King is a master at realistically recreating the wondrous ambiance of youth and childhood, and in spite of the minor shortcomings in the film's recreation of King's plot, the atmosphere of the novel is perfectly translated to the screen. Besides that, King is also keenly aware that the things that scared us when we were kids are probably still lurking deep down in our grown-up psyche, just waiting to find a little mental crack to jump out of and give us a case of goose bumps and chills. The film version of STEPHEN KING'S IT finds that same little crack...then pries it wide open!

The long-awaited DVD version of STEPHEN KING'S IT is sparse on frills, but it does have an excellent feature commentary with stars John Ritter, Richard Thomas, Tim Reid, Dennis Christopher, and director Tommy Lee Wallace. Of course, the picture quality is beautifully crystal clear, especially when compared to the VHS version, but purists should consider a few caveats before purchasing. First, the picture has been cropped a bit to simulate theatrical widescreen format. In comparison to the VHS version, which offers the original 1.33:1 aspect ratio, there are small slivers of image missing from both the top and bottom. (To be fair, it should also be noted that the picture on VHS appears to be scrunched a bit horizontally to fit it into the TV "square," so it really doesn't seem as if all that much has been removed to create the faux widescreen on DVD.) Also, gone are the "To be continued" message and the second set of credits, both of which originally appeared between the first half and second half of the original two-part movie (these were included on the VHS).

So the new DVD version of this excellent movie should, for the most part, please King fans and general horror fans alike. For the movie alone, STEPHEN KING'S IT would easily rate 5 stars. But taking into account the adulterated aspect ratio and the slightly altered transition from Part 1 to Part 2, this DVD gets an overall rating of 4 stars.

It traumatized a whole generation about clowns
The second best translation of a Steven King novel into a movie (the best being Carrie). It caused a whole generation of people afraid of clowns. The other option is reading the 1500 page book.

Welcome to Derry, Maine...
I have read many reviews and they all complain about the novel being TOO long, "over 1000 pages long" they say. Well excuse me but many of the great literary works are extensive. This novel in particular is extensive due to the perfect description of places, chacarters, thoughts, etc.

Taking into account the enormous amount of detail and description put into this book, I think it would be more than clear to anyone that MAKING A GOOD MOVIE OUT OF THIS NOVEL IS IMPOSSIBLE!!!!!!

-Please save yourself some money.
-Watch "The Shining", that's good acting
-Read the book when you are 11, 12 or 13
-Read it again 10 years later
-Read it at night

great book, ultra bland 'made for tv' movie
I'll put it like this: if your expectations are to see an 'ABC/CBS/NBC Movie of The Week' type thing , then you may be MILDY entertained by this. Yep, this DVD is actually a 'made for TV' movie done in 1990 or so. These things are at best, usually hokey, sappy, shlock filled semi-entertaining fare, where your constantly reminded how every shot, dialogue, scene ,script and action sequence could have been done SPECTACULARLY better as a 'big budget movie' movie. This DVD is no exception! Horror movies just don't have the horror , imo, in a made for TV format. And to make matters much worse, I don't think even a big blockbuster could even touch the magical depth and character the book has. It truly is one of Stephen King's best, imo. ... Read more