Did you like this movie?

[MyLife4YouSK]

I've heard lots of people say that they hated this movie. I'm trying to figure out why. The book is fantastic but I thought the movie was pretty decent an adaption. Especially when you compare it to all the clunkers(The Mangler, The Night Flier, The Langoliers, The Lawnmower Man, The Running Man, ok there's a theme going on here! You can't put THE Green Mile in that category though! ;)

So what was it that you hated about Needful Things? :down:

[JohnDalglish]

Hi,

The complete absence of Ace Merrill ruined an otherwise very good adaptation for me.

Long days and pleasant nights

[Perse Jr.]

I liked the movie, though I didn't like it enough to see it more than once (or twice). It had a "darkness" and a "dampness" to it that I completely had imagined when I was reading it. It's hard to explain...just that sad and lonely-type feel of dread in the pit of your stomach.

[Seneca_V]

The uncut 3 or 4 hour version is excellent compared to the version you can get on DVD, but I like both versions, I don't hold my breath with adaptations, I just take them for what they are, and try not to think about what they changed from the book. I'd love to know why that longer version isn't available to buy, I taped it off TNT years ago, but I no longer have a VCR to watch it, and it would be nice to see without all the commercials.

[blunthead]

What I liked most about the movie Needful Things was Ed Harris's performance, which is one of my favorites.

[marew1]

The uncut 3 or 4 hour version is excellent compared to the version you can get on DVD, but I like both versions, I don't hold my breath with adaptations, I just take them for what they are, and try not to think about what they changed from the book. I'd love to know why that longer version isn't available to buy, I taped it off TNT years ago, but I no longer have a VCR to watch it, and it would be nice to see without all the commercials.

Why don't you get the tape copied to DVD? Your local video store or a friend might be able to help you with this.

[MyLife4YouSK]

Hi,

The complete absence of Ace Merrill ruined an otherwise very good adaptation for me.

Long days and pleasant nights

Oh yea he wasn't in it, was he? That would have made it ten times better, good call, John!

[robdraggoo]

The uncut 3 or 4 hour version is excellent compared to the version you can get on DVD, but I like both versions, I don't hold my breath with adaptations, I just take them for what they are, and try not to think about what they changed from the book. I'd love to know why that longer version isn't available to buy, I taped it off TNT years ago, but I no longer have a VCR to watch it, and it would be nice to see without all the commercials.

I wasnt even aware such a version existed. whats different and new about it?

[Matthew.Degnan]

It was simply an average adaptation, i thought Ed Harris worked well in it.

[kingfanalaska09]

I wasnt even aware such a version existed. whats different and new about it?

There's an hour of extended footage with major character development Ms. Mod you know why this longer version hasn't been released?

[Moderator]

I'd suggested to Steve one time that they should release it as a Director's Cut DVD after I'd seen it on TNT(?) and he thought it was a great idea so called his film agent to suggest it but apparently the DVD distributors didn't agree.

[Bev Vincent]

I keep waiting for this to air on TNT again, because I've never see the full-length version, but when it does show up, I seem always to miss it.

[Lina]

I re-watched this movie yesterday. And I can say I like it very much. Unfortunately, I haven't read the book so I don't know if the movie better or worse. But anyway, I liked it.
I like Ed Harris's performance and in general I like the idea of this story. I began to think what price people are ready to pay for only one thing they need. That's really awful that sometimes we destroy our lives ourselves!

[hipmamajen]

I liked Max von Sydow in this. I think he did a good job of being evil, without the over the top theatrics you sometimes see.

[Micke]

Max von Sydow(Sweden :D ) did a great job in this movie. It's not the best King-movie but okay. I would give it 6/10.

[Jojo87]

The movie was great. Max von Sydow was good in his role.

[karend3]

Thank you I agree, Ace Merrill is missing out of a couple of movies.

[karend3]

I didn't like the movie when I first watched it after reading the book. They kept some of the best stories out of the movie like the two women fighting over Elvis Presley, that would have been classic.

[TheHelgo]

does anyone know where to get a copy of the extended version? has anyone taped it and would be kind enough to supply a copy?

[Checkman]

The extended version needs to be released. I've seen it and it's a more complete movie. Wish I had thought to tape it when TNT aired it.

[thymeoperator]

i think a lot of these movies are better if you see them before reading the book - and often the stories were changed so much it doesn't ruin anything reading the book afterward anyway! well, 'needful things' was like that for me. i saw the movie first, then years later read the book, and yes the book was much better, but i did like the movie, thought it was an excellent dark comedy. the book was much more serious and meaningful, obviously. oh and i love that in the movie one of the priests is played by a former 'days of our lives' villain, playing almost the same role in 'needful things'!! i keep seeing that guy turn up in things and wondering how on earth he got a career.

[lessanguish9]

As for me, I liked the movie. I think Van Sydow was a great choice for Leland Gaunt, and the rest of the cast fit pretty well. But what was missing was that steely atmosphere that Stephen had set so well in the first chapter.

[sai slone]

Teh only two SK related movies that get a resounding death toll from me are The Mangler and Kubrik's The Shining(no harm intended Kubrik fans).

[littleone328]

I've heard lots of people say that they hated this movie. I'm trying to figure out why. The book is fantastic but I thought the movie was pretty decent an adaption. Especially when you compare it to all the clunkers(The Mangler, The Night Flier, The Langoliers, The Lawnmower Man, The Running Man, ok there's a theme going on here! You can't put THE Green Mile in that category though! ;)

So what was it that you hated about Needful Things? :down:

I loved this movie but as always the book is always better. Back stabbing was never done so well.

[dejolane]

One of my favorites.

[Space Hitler]

Ed Harris.....how CAN it be bad? I loved the book more, but I also proudly own this on DVD.

[Jake Featherston]

Excellent book, one of his better novels, in my opinion. Crappy movie that doesn't do any justice to the book, alas.

[bryantburnette]

I like the movie; it's got good performances by a great cast, is generally well-made on a technical level, and has a fine score by Patrick Doyle. Sure, a lot gets cut out from the novel (and that's true even in the extended cut, which is, as others have pointed out, well worth seeing and long overdue on DVD) ... but what remains is very entertaining, in my opinion.

[dejolane]

Are you kidding ? I love this movie.One of SK best.

[johnny39]

There have only been a few movies I have turned off before it ended.

Thinner was one. This was another.

I got through about 15 minutes before I stopped it. The musical score alone just felt all wrong, and as soon as I saw that silly fake lightning I couldn't take any more.

It felt like a jaunty version of what was an ominous novel.

[TexasChick76543]

This was by far IMO one of Mr. King's better adaptation's. It had gore, blood, most of the elements of the book. I was not disappointed.

[gunslingerdude]

I liked the movie, though I didn't like it enough to see it more than once (or twice). It had a "darkness" and a "dampness" to it that I completely had imagined when I was reading it. It's hard to explain...just that sad and lonely-type feel of dread in the pit of your stomach.

I sort of felt the same way, especially the darkness.
But I Enjoyed the film, have seen it like 3 times so far.

[MrBildango]

I just finally picked this up recently and I really enjoyed it. Max Von Sydow and Ed Harris are brilliant. This, like some of King's other theatrical releases, could really benefit from a good quality miniseries remake though. There are so many little things in the book that they definitely had to leave out because of the time limitation. I'd have loved to see more with Brian's teacher, the state police, Ace Merrill, church stink bombs and so on.

[lilydust76]

I thought the movie was pretty good, too. Max Von Sydow was deliciously devilish...

[dejolane]

Love this movie.

[bhill]

The Running Man was alright except for Auuuuunuld!!!

[mouse213]

I'm a horror flick and book junkie and have been since childhood. I teethed on movies like "Creature From the Black Lagoon" etc... but of course they were re-runs lol. I don't want to tell my age here.

I enjoyed the movie very much, because it defined that need equals greed most of the time. And sometimes what we think we need is confused with what we want. I loved the theme in "Needful Things" that the price of the item was the cost of one's soul and a little dirty deed to boot. lol

[annetacey]

Loved it a lot, read the book before i saw the film. Ed Harris was excellent casting me thinks. So much in it that he stopped you from getting bored or restless (as sometimes happens with books to films). Watched it a few weeks ago for the 6th time (ish) and it never gets dull!

[ashiepoo84]

I loved it, i watched it for the first time about a year ago and thought it was a very good adaptation. I've watched it several times since. Even my husband, who always lets me know what he doesnt like about movies, enjoyed it.

[Ebony]

I have to admit that I neither liked the movie, nor the book...;P
The book was so...don´t know the word..."verbose"?
THe movie was just boring...hm...I hope nobody will hate me for this... ;P

[Shadow of the Tower]

I think this was a great movie. Though not the best adaptation ever done of one of his books, still well played, especially by Van Sydow

[Jenn*]

I just watched Needful Things last night. It took me awhile to understand what was going on. I thought it was good.

[no bounce no play]

I thought the fight scene between Nettie and Wilma made the movie well worth the watch lol

[Gavvo1976]

Needful Things is a brill film!!! I'm still really wanting to see the TV version tho that ran for 3 hours. Apparently it was only broadcast on U.S TV and contained many scenes featuring Cora Rusk and her Elvis sunglasses and more about the treasure Island book and the map. Hoping a nice extended DVD will appear some day :biggrin2:

[Gavvo1976]

I thought the fight scene between Nettie and Wilma made the movie well worth the watch lol


Deffo! Great fight scene...and the Ave Maria playing in the background makes it really sad yet more shocking IMO.

[shipoffools]

I've never seen the 3 hour version, but I just watched the movie online. I thought it was excellent! :) No, it doesn't follow Stephen King's book, it's actually pretty far from the book, but it's one of the few instances where a movie (that strays far away from the book) is just as good as the book.

I also thought that the actors were well cast. The actor who played Leland Gaunt wasn't scary like in the book, but he was convincing. Ed Harris was fantastic as Alan, the actors and actresses who portrayed Nettie, Wilma, Keeton, Polly Chambers, and Norris Ridgewick were also exactly as I imagined them in the book.

Yeah, it was a bummer that they left out Ace, but there was a lot of things that they left out (and added in.) It still was a fantastic film, despite straying from SK's vision of the story.

[Mark R]

I really enjoyed this movie. After reading the book I was curious how some of the parts would be acted out, especially the fight scene lol. Good movie and one I plan to see again very soon :grinning:

[NeuralDefekt]

This adaptation of the novel was rather good, in my opinion, although there will always be some little things that leave me unsatisfied. I loved the depth to Alan Pangborn given in the novel which is, more or less, absent in the book. But I thought the character portrayals were done very well, especially Buster, and I enjoyed watching it. I suppose it's just those normal things that annoy me which can never be avoided with a movie. There isn't enough time to include so much, haha!

- ND

[little_runaway2005]

I loved the movie, It's also my fav sk book.

[sarar]

Needful things is my favourite book, and i was kinda disappointed in the film!
I have nothing new to add as to why, you guys have pretty much summed up the reasons as to why it was disappointing. It's probably just because it is such a brilliant book that any film would have to be awesome to be on par

[MandyMonster]

The original movie "stinks". The book is AWESOME!!!!!! :)

[A Plymouth's Fury]

Are we all in agreement that we need the TNT version?[That is those of us who do not have it] Did we all watch it at the same time or what? I remember it too and I didn't record it either though I wish I had. I'm sure someone somewhere has it and is more-than willing to sell a DVD copy of it [though I don't promote bootlegging]. I don't hate this film at all, in fact I love it. I think it is just a masterful film and the acting couldn't have been better. I think the filmmakers had quite a daunting task on their hands here. The novel is quite a multifacited thing itself with all these people and stories interweaving together all centered around a quaint and mysterious little shop that just sort of blew into town. King could be more free with the story and write reems and reems of dialogue if he chose. Yet, those making the movie had to really compress all of the elements of the novel into a certain time frame. If the movie was too long audiences may reject it, especially in theaters. When it made its way to television it's sort of expected that any movie of a certain length [90min to 2hrs or so] can be stretched out to be 3hrs and TV viewers are more willing to accept this. They expect commercials and they are home and not in a theater so they don't mind it as much. And thanks to the network executives cutting out questionable material it was replaced with deleted scenes. I like this film; it's one of my favorites.

[Manxkitti]

:dizzy::dizzy:Actually, I loved the movie. I think it was very well made. Of course, the book was better, but I did enjoy yje movie. In fact, I'm re-reading it now. I'm actually enjoying it more the second time around. Go figure, huh? :dizzy:

[Montreal$ingle]

This movie worked satisfactorily when I watched it. It was about the same time of year as was set in the book, and the area I was living in at the time -- Morganton, North Carolina -- lent an equally chilling atmosphere to my viewing of this adaptation. But the novel was boss, sans doute. One of Stephen's all-time masterpiece's and more than proof that he is very well deserving of his legacy in literature as the King Of The Horror genre. Happy Thanksgiving Week all!:)

[Silhouette86]

Needful Things was a good adaptation. For a movie that was just two hours long, they did a really good job. They had to cut out the ocassional character, but I've seen this and mixtures of this happen in several other Stephen King movies. Max Von Sydow was a perfect pick for Leland Gaunt, IMO.

[Rapunzel]

Loved this movie. I thought Max von Sydow and Ed Harris were great choices for their characters. The book is always better, but this movie was pretty good.

[krs72]

I thought the movie was pretty good, it def. wasn't the best SK. adap. by a long shot . Like everyone else said I enjoyed Ed Harris' performance and Max Von Sydows' too . The book is really cool though and that's all that matters to me .

[doc_hall81]

I first read the book in Iraq, and i loved it. One of my favorites. i own the movie, and like a lot of the movies, it was mediocre. i was really disappointed in how much was left out.

[CoolhandLocke]

Really liked the movie to be honest. I liked the casting, especially the two crazy ladies lol. Had a very creepy atmosphere and Leland Gaunt was pretty well done i think. Overall i thought it was one of the better adaptions, not the best but alot better than most lol

[Christiane17]

I liked the movie, but I imagined Brian Denehy as Alan Pangborn's character. I guess it was the only problem I had with the cast. Not that I don't like Ed Harris. On the contrary, but as I was reading de book I had this impression that Brian would have been great in the role. I imagined the character like a big guy. I love Brian Denehy's looks. Always had. Otherwise the movie was well made. :smile2:

[Uncle Waldo]

The movie was so-so, out of 4 stars I'd give it 2 1/2. It is one of my favorite books, though.

[Sundrop]

Liked the movie, but not nearly as much as I loved the book

[Insomniac1976]

Christ on a pony, after reading the book about 3 times, I finally saw the movie last night. I thought the only thing it had going for it was the casting. I really think they smucked this one up, big time. I should know better than t have high hopes for sK's adaptations...but wow. Like John Daldlish said, the lack of Ace Merrill [who was a great characteto read and follow] was the clincher. Gaunt had lame lines, Cora Rusk inly had a brief camei, Hugh Priest's Needful Thing was changed, Polly in bed with Gaunt, Brian Rusk's suicide, half the characters with strange Irish-like accents, wierd Buster/Alan embezzlement sideplot,no magic for Alan, a completely skewed ending...I could go on...

[dsurrett]

I probably would've like the movie better if I hadn't read the book first. There was much in the book, the movie would've had to have been 5 hours long to do it justice. And of course, that ain't happening except in Lord of the Rings extended editions, and even those didn't cover the books, but that's for another forum topic.
Like others, I thought the casting for the movie was pretty good, especially Max Von Sydow. I saw commercials for the movie years ago and pictured him as Leland Gaunt as I read the book.

[doowopgirl]

Christ on a pony, after reading the book about 3 times, I finally saw the movie last night. I thought the only thing it had going for it was the casting. I really think they smucked this one up, big time. I should know better than t have high hopes for sK's adaptations...but wow. Like John Daldlish said, the lack of Ace Merrill [who was a great characteto read and follow] was the clincher. Gaunt had lame lines, Cora Rusk inly had a brief camei, Hugh Priest's Needful Thing was changed, Polly in bed with Gaunt, Brian Rusk's suicide, half the characters with strange Irish-like accents, wierd Buster/Alan embezzlement sideplot,no magic for Alan, a completely skewed ending...I could go on...Like yourself, I must agree completely. Left out all the interesting sides. Totally smucked up!

[MemnochTheDevil]

If anyone sees the extended version pop up on TV, can someone send me a PM and let me know. Or if it is available online somewhere to watch, I link would be useful. I can't turn up anything searching Google, TNT, or HDNet. I'll be keeping an eye out, but I had never even heard of a longer version of this movie. I had taped it a year or two back on my DVR, but I am pretty sure that was just the two hour version. I appreciate any help. Thanks!

[bryantburnette]

If anyone sees the extended version pop up on TV, can someone send me a PM and let me know. Or if it is available online somewhere to watch, I link would be useful. I can't turn up anything searching Google, TNT, or HDNet. I'll be keeping an eye out, but I had never even heard of a longer version of this movie. I had taped it a year or two back on my DVR, but I am pretty sure that was just the two hour version. I appreciate any help. Thanks! I've been hoping that version would pop up, but no dice so far. It's considerably better. I used to have it recorded on VHS, but the tape got damaged at some point and is no longer playable. Grr!!!