I actually liked the book much better than this movie. I thought it could have been much better if they had followed the book more closely. Why do directors feel the need to butcher Stephen King's stories when they make them into movies? They're popular as books for a reason. Many of the changes in this movie seemed completely unnecessary. I will give Walken credit though, he made a great Johnny Smith.
It took me YEARS to re-appreciate this movie. When I first saw it I was amazed, but then a week later got a job at a movie theater where it was playing and saw the first ten minutes and last ten minutes so often that I was turned off to the film until....I want to say two years ago when I got it on DVD.
Still cannot watch Footloose for this reason.
It must be so difficult to recreate SKs books on film, the stories have a magic all their own and often find their home within each individual imagination.Casting can be difficult for the same reasons but I thought Christopher Walken brought something to the roll that added to the story in a positive way, even though he was not my imagined Johnny Smith.
Whats cowbell about????
I read the posts on the “underrated” thread.
"The Dead Zone" is very, very underrated
I too feel that “The Dead Zone” movie is one of the best, if not the best adaptations of Mr. King’s works. It is true to the book and everything and everyone fit in this movie.
Further it completely captures the tone of the book: a Cassandra-ish feeling of doom. Johnny knows what is to happen, but would anyone believe him?—No. He knows he will be doomed to regretting any inaction he may take (and thus bringing on horrendous war) or he must take action, sacrificing himself and his life to the prevention of the future that he knows is certainly assured if he should not act. Talk about “damned if you do and damned if you don’t!”
This theme was also explored in another favorite book of mine: “Dune,” by Frank Herbert. In “Dune” Paul Atriedes, an un-planned for and unexpected messiah of sorts is fated to leading a holy war across the universe, whether or not he likes it. Short of killing himself very early on, no matter what he does will lead to a holy war, the war is a given. BUT, Paul does have a choice: to try to stay alive at the head of the holy warriors and thus be able to mitigate some of the war’s atrocities or he can be dead martyr to the Holy War, and thus the cause of every sort of possible atrocity in his name.
Both of the above books have movie versions, but I feel the best is “The Dead Zone.”
Chris Walken was brillant, and he was so special with his androgyn look.
I think the lack of effects was one of the best thing for this movie.
the dead zone was my first book also =)
"the green mile" my second
I agree as far as the movie it was extremely underrated. What I love about the series is that it resurrected the careers of one of my my favoriite actors when I was a kid, Anthony Michael Hall. And as far as the movie WOW! It was the first Christopher Walken movie I ever saw and he's been my favorite actor ever since. I prefer the movie because it went for the tragic ending.