Novelist Thad Beaumount has buried his alter ego George Stark, a pseudonym he used when writing fiction of a darker nature than he would write using his real name. He even stages a mock burial of George for the benefit of the press. When a local man is killed, evidence leads Sheriff Alan Pangborn to Georges grave, and he begins to suspect Thad. Meanwhile Thad is beginning to have visions of sparrows flying, something that hasnt occurred for twenty-three years since he had brain surgery. As the string of gruesome murders continue, someone claiming to be George Stark starts calling Thad on the phone. Thad fears for his familys safety, and Pangborn cant decide whether or not Thad is the murderer.
|The Dark Half Movie(DivX)||Resolution: 656x352 px||Total Size: 1065 Mb|
|The Dark Half Movie(iPod)||Resolution: 480x256 px||Total Size: 317 Mb||
Thad Beaumont is a very successful writer who had a twin removed fromhis brain, when he was a child. Now, he is going under an assumed name,"George Stark". Now Years later, Thad is the prime suspect in a seriesof murders that he suspects were committed by his alter ego. Dark, andedgy, with few (if any) jumps,The Dark Half is a perfect example of agood idea, gone wrong. Which is a shame because I so enjoyed the book,and I was very excited when I heard about the movie, but I wasthoroghly disappointed with this dragging, and considerably boring,sequel. I am a general fan of Stephen King's work, (Kingdom Hospital,Night Flyer, IT!, ....)but unfortunately, this one didn't click. I givethis one a 3 ~SonerBoy~
This film had a pretty good idea behind it, but should've been better planned. Basically, you can't anylize this movie or you'll end up frustrated.Tim Hutton does a great job, and he's pretty darn cute, so he makes up for the poor plot.
I just finished reading the lackluster book, and coincidentally themovie came on Encore today. I'm really disappointed with both of them.Stephen is one of my absolute favorite writers but this one was quitedull for me. Even still I stopped to watch the film anyway because I'dheard some good things about it.I'm well aware that some of King's screen adaptations are hit or miss.But I'm a huge fan of such films as Misery, Pet Sematary, Carrie, TheShining, and more. So I'm always willing to give King's films a chance.Let's say this is one of his misses. The whole thing reminded me of aLIfetime Movie that I would catch on Halloween. It's not truly scary atall. And with King as the writer and Romero as the director, how theheck did this happen? This is movie-of-the-week TV fluff. Pass on it.
Many critics have panned films taken from Stephen king books and not alwaysjustifiably . There have been great films such as Misery and the Green Mileand lousy ones such as The Tommyknockers and most of the films that havefeatured King's short stories.The Dalk half sits in the middle of these. The film isnt brilliant (neitheris the book) but it is watchable and quite scary at times.You dont need to take to much notice of the story because is silly but thesuspense makes up for the sillyness. The acting is good from Timothy Hutton and poor from Michael Rooker who inmy opinon is always poor.Sit down , turn your brain off and enjoy.6 out of 10.
I wish Stephen King and George Romero did more work together. Each has a god-given instinct for the macabre. Both CREEPSHOW and THE DARK HALF are masterful collaborations. DARK HALF concerns writer Thad Beaumont (Timothy Hutton from THE KOVAK BOX, THE ALPHABET KILLER, and THE KILLING ROOM) and his alter ego / non De plume, George Stark (Hutton). In true King fashion, Stark takes on a life of his own, sadistically murdering Beaumont's friends one by one. Romero handles this story well, and I actually like the film more than the book! The main elements are present without any bloat. Hutton is quite good as the eeevil Stark. He truly gives him a personality and comes across as very dangerous instead of some over-the-top, maniac. Watch for Julie Harris (THE HAUNTING) as Thad's friend, and Royal Dano (MESSIAH OF EVIL) as a cemetery caretaker! Buy immediately...
out of all the stephen king adaptations put to screen The Dark Half is the best one it is a disturbing and unsettling pyscho thriller with astounding performances especially timothy hutton much like secret window but the ending is better a great film and great adaptation
This review is from: The Dark Half (DVD) This was a good movie I recall. It was purchased so long ago I no longer have it--recycled it instead to save some space in my library.
Funnily, given the fact that they're both King adaptations, Dark Halfreminds me a lot of The Dead Zone. Granted in comparison the Dark Halfis less subtle and much more demented, but they both have a similarpace and feel. The Dark Half is a slow, creepy horror, dealing more inchills and scares you'll think about afterwards than special effectsand cheap shock tactics.For instance, there's no gore to speak of here. It does have a serialkiller in it, but if you're expecting overwrought Jason style 'kill'sequences, you're in for a disappointment. This guy isn't a slasher,he's a murderer, and this is painted out in the unpleasant andrealistic way he kills. There's no gratuitous violence here, and as aresult the movie is that much more realistic and believable.The plot is, though believable via some excellent acting, completemadness. Effectively, it goes like this. Main character Thad had atumour that turned out to be his unborn twin, and his family buried itas a dead relative instead of having it destroyed. After a chain ofevents causes Thad to dump an alter-ego he'd been writing cheapothriller novels under, the tumour takes on the alter-ego and goes onthe rampage having inexplicably grown into a full size doppelganger.Weird? Don't get me started, but damn if it isn't a great ride.It's intelligently told, and is honestly a movie that wouldn't get madenowadays, being as it is a well written horror movie that gives it'saudience credit for intelligence. At no point did I feel that I wasgetting the movie spoon-fed to me, and I genuinely felt that I wasallowed to do my own detective work during it. As a result, you comeout of the movie feeling like it really involved you.In these days of remakes, sequels and clones, a horror movie thatinvolves should be held up like some DVD holy grail. You owe it toyourself to check the Dark Half out. You'd be crazy not to.
THE DARK HALF is about a famous writer, Thad Beaumont (Timothy Hutton), who has been writing very successful thrillers under a different name, George Stark. When a little weasle from out of town threatens to blackmail Beaumont and blow his cover, he decides to let the world know that there is no George Stark and that he has been writing the best-selling books all along. But, what if there really is a George Stark? And what if George Stark wasn't totally real, but a part of Thad that was cut away a long time ago? And what if that George Stark came to life and starting killing people like the characters in his books do? That pretty much sums up the plot of THE DARK HALF. The movie ends in a climatic battle of the wills between Thad and George.The film contains some pretty decent acting, especially by Timothy Hutton who plays both Beumont and Stark. The directing is done by horror master George Romero and is almost faultless. Nevertheless, more so because of a lackluster script than anything else, the movie never reaches it's full potential. The movie has a great premise, an interesting plot, and begins as an enthralling thriller. However, about a third of the way through, things start to loosen up and fall apart. The mood changes and instead of an enthralling thriller, the movie feels more like a semi-suspenseful dark comedy. In the last act, the movie picks up steam again, but not enough to overcome the shortcomings of the second act. It's not a film I would recommend to buy, but it's a great movie to rent.
There are only a small handful of films based on works by Stephen Kingthat can without a doubt be classified as 'great movies.' They are'Carrie,' 'The Shining,' 'Misery,' 'Dolores Claiborne,' 'The DeadZone,' 'Stand By Me' and 'Cujo.' All the others range from 'flawed' to'awful.' Despite it's decent cast, and respected horror director Romeroat the helm, 'The Dark Half' lies more towards the awful end of thespectrum. The filmmakers gave it their best shot but things just didn'twork out. It fails as a horror film in terms of suspense, plausibility,and narrative.When Thad Beaumont (Hutton) was a child, he had an operation to removea tumor from his brain. During the operation, it was discovered thatfar from being a tumor, the growth was a twin brother of Thad's thatnever developed. Years later, Thad is a successful author, writing hisserious books under his own name, and his trashy money-makers under thepseudonym 'George Stark.' When blackmailed by someone who hasdiscovered his secret, Thad publicly 'buries' George Stark. From thatpoint on, Thad increasingly becomes the prime suspect in a series ofgruesome murders.Of all the King adaptations I've seen, this is one of the dullest. Themain character is unsympathetic, his alter ego is two dimensional andtotally hammy, you don't care about any of the victims (much less evenknow who they are at some points,) and there is hardly any horror andnext to no tension.However, there is some good production design and cinematography ondisplay here, as well as some striking images. Huge flocks of sparrowsgathering as an omen of doom is a haunting sight. But that alone can'tsave this film, which is just another King adaptation from a periodwhere almost everything he'd write would end up being made into amovie.
I saw this movie after i read the book and i have to say pretty much ofthebook was also in the film, although not all. Some parts with the sparrowsfor instance weren't in the film, probably because the budget wouldn'tallowspecial effects that elaborate. And the murders, although violent enoughinthe movie, were particularly more gruesome in the book.Ultimate conclusion: great acting from top notch actors/actresses whousually are nowhere to be found in horror (if you discount MichaelRooker'sperformance in "Henry"), pretty good special f/x and direction from adirector who has made his mark in horror.
I really liked this movie. I saw it for the first time a few weeks ago, and I thought it was really good. I own it now. In some way, it does compare to Secret Window, but I think The Dark Half is better. Timothy Hutton does a great job on playing both Thad and George. Hutton does an awesome on playing the bad guy. Its the same way he did in Playing God. Hutton gives a solid dual performance in The Dark Half, its one of his best performances. To me, The Dark Half is now among the list as one of the best movies adapted from a Stephan King novel. Along with Carrie, The Shining, Christine, Stand By Me, Misery, Delores Claiborne, It, The Green Mile, 1408.
This is Timothy Hutton's best performance, for he was born to play George Stark and Thad Beaumont. Yes, it did do some changes to the storyline, but it was overall faithful to the book. They pulled off King's conclusion greatly. This is a great film, but the title of the best adaptation goes to Stanley Kubrick's The Shining. This film does the book perfect justice and it is as good as the novel. Well shot, acted, and directed. Recomended to fans of horror, George Romero, and Stephen King.
This project is based on a Stephen King novel, written for the screen anddirected by George A. Romero. This collaboration could have achievedmore...but hey, a little bit of gore mixed with your sometimes depressingdrama equals biting your nails and squirming a lot. Scary moments at timesand even some very dry humor saves this story about a writer(TimothyHutton)being plagued by his alter ego.Also in the cast are: Amy Madigan, Julie Harris, Larry John Meyers andChelsea Field. Better than average mood music from Christopher Young. Ienjoyed the last thirty minutes the best.
The Dark Half is a film I wouldn't go out of my way to show to myfriends for the first time like other films by George A. Romero(Living-dead pictures, and some of the obscurities), or a few choiceStephen King adaptations (The Shining and Shawshank Redemption beingtops). But if it shows up on TV I tend to take a gander for a few, andend up watching it till the unusual, nerve-chilling ending. There'ssome part of King's writing that at times goes too much for the cheapscares, or rather, doesn't do enough to earn them. This time, however,Romero does catch enough of the smoke in the fire of King's book here;I'd love to sit down and actually read the whole book myself, to seehow much was incorporated from King's often brilliant, if perpetuallyodd, writing, into the final project. It's also territory for Romerothat isn't very new, though isn't one of his worst pictures either.Timothy Hutton, usually in lesser quality pictures, stars here as awriter who happens to have a certain 'alias' in his writing.Unfortunately, whenever he hears a certain calling card- being thesparrows- it sets him off into territory he's afraid to go into,especially with a wife and family. The divide between Thad Beaumont,the common garden-variety writer of Hutton's character, and GeorgeStark, the madman writer of pulp fiction also played by Hutton, makesfor the more intriguing parts to the film. Thankfully, unlike SecretWindow, the sort of duality of man, or of the writer in this case,isn't saved up for some over-the-top climax. Here it's meant more as apsychological study, and it's here that Romero scores his best pointsin his adapting the material. Like his film Martin, he knows how to upthe ante on the terror involved inside of the mind. In fact, it'sscenes showing Beaumont/Stark writing ala the birds that end upbecoming more chilling than those with the usual horror violence inthem.Thanks to Hutton, a solid supporting cast, and an ending that does keepone guessing more than could be expected of the material, Romero has apretty decent work here, and a King adaptation that shouldn't be asmuch of an embarrassment as some of the others. Individual scenes endup even being mini-masterpieces, even amidst a script that loses itsenergy and goes into the mundane and usual. Besides, any film with aline like this: "You always were the clumsy one, old hoss", deserves alittle recognition, however minor. Under-appreciated and verywatchable, though nothing wildly spectacular. 7.5/10
Thad Beaumont is an aspiring dramatic writer, who pays the bills bywriting pulp crime fiction under the pseudonym George Stark. When ablackmailer discovers he and Stark are one and the same, Beaumont goespublic and "kills off" Stark. Suddenly, the blackmailer and several ofThad's friends and colleagues turn up dead, viciously murdered, withThad's fingerprints at the crime scenes. It seems George Stark hassomehow come to life, and is not pleased at the turn of events. Thadmust confront Stark before everything he holds dear is destroyed.The idea is brilliant, and comes from author Stephen King's ownexperience (he published several books under the pen-name RichardBachman). Many writers publish different styles of fiction underdifferent names; the practice makes some business sense but is alsomore than a little schizoid. What if a pseudonym somehow came to life,and challenged its alter-ego to deny it ? Romero's film is a fabulousexploration of a man's sinister dark side, and one of the very bestadaptations of King's books. It's exciting, beautifully-crafted, moodyand completely terrifying. Hutton gives by far the bestdouble-performance I've ever seen - he effortlessly plays twocharacters who are poles apart but are essentially the same person.Stark looks different to Thad thanks to some very effective makeup, butalso moves, walks, talks and even thinks differently. The rest of thecast throw themselves into the movie with great abandon; Rooker iswonderfully cast against type as the straight-laced sheriff, unwillingto credit Thad's story but unable to prove otherwise. The wonderfulDano, in his last movie, has a great bit as a spooked gravedigger.Harris is a hilariously batty old academic ("The police wanted me toconfirm that you were a person of good character. I lied and said thatyou were."). The movie also has an incredibly unsettlingpiano-and-choir score by Christopher Young, great photography, andfantastic optical effects by Richard Kuran. There are severaltremendous set-pieces - the hair-raising opening in the hospital, thehorrifying scene where Hutton (as Stark) murders Alda, and theincredible bird attack finale - but the film is also an assured drama,painting its characters in tremendous detail and filled withthought-provoking themes. Outstanding film-making.
If anyone besides Mick Garris (although he's made his mistakes) couldand should attempt a Stephen King book adaptation it would be GeorgeRomero. I love Stephen King, in fact hands down he is my favoriteauthor, and in addition to that I love King films but it seems likethey have misstepped King films as of late so I went back and checkedout The Dark Half. It has been a long time since anyone truly capturedthe King spirit in film like they seemed to accomplish in the eightiesand early nineties but Romero did a terrific job with The Dark Half.Disturbing, gory, with the tinge of the Supernatural that King does sowell. Granted I have not yet read The Dark Half but it seems like itstays pretty true to it's original concept. The movie reeks of King andthat is exactly what differentiates a great King movie from a not sogreat one. Romero also respects the key elements that make King'snovels so brilliant. The world around them, Castle Rock, thecharacters, their lives, a lot of directors and film makers havecomplained that King is too this and too that and make the filmdifferently (Kubrick?) but King sells millions upon millions of novelsso maybe they should respect his work and I think Romero does that.Timothy Hutton is a great actor, and I think very under rated. He neverreally hit huge stardom and it's unfortunate because he has thepotential and is a very emotionally driven actor. Hutton really shinesin the role of author Thad Beaumont but also has his disturbed maniacalalter ego George Stark. Hutton's Beaumont is the ultimate good guy,family man, creative, and smart and Stark is just twisted and evil andjust crazy. Hutton is a great King actor and he should have done moreStephen King films. Amy Madigan, a terrific character actor over thelast few decades, plays Beaumont's strong headed wife. She balances hermale counterparts very well Hutton included. She's not stunningbeautiful or curvy but she's a girl next door type, the average girland that makes her really good at her role. Her and Hutton have greatchemistry together. Michael Rooker is great in a small role as StephenKing character favorite Sheriff Alan Pangborn (played also by Ed Harrisin Needful Things.) Also enjoyed Julie Harris in a small role asBeaumont's friend and mentor. I wish she had a bigger part in thepicture.The Dark Half film achieves what is necessary to make a great StephenKing movie. It's dark, gruesome but also creepy, there is just thisstrange aura around it and everything unfolds perfectly. There isplenty of blood splattering gore for the horror fanatics and creepygenre inducing thrills for the thriller lover out there. It isn't thebest Stephen King movie...I think any time you narrow one of his booksdown into less than two hours you're missing the point but it does verywell with what it gives and it's absolutely worth seeing!! 8/10
Many transfers of books to movies are less than perfect. "Misery" by Steven King - great book - poor adaptation on film, but viewable. "The Firm" by John Grisham - could not put the book down - movie: poor ending, but good acting, and enjoyable. "The Dark Half" is by far the weakest book to film I have seen. The book is excellent - descriptive, vivid, horrifying at times, one of King's best. I am not even sure if those who produced the screenplay even read the book - perhaps they picked up Cliff's notes. Anyone who enjoyed this film did not read the book. I did. That's what ruined it for me. If Hollywood wanted to package this with a different title, this incredibly short film may be palatable. Be forewarned: If you've read the novel, and you purchase this movie, you will be putting it up on the secondary market soon!
This was a good movie. It is one of the better Stephen King adaptationsinmy opinion. It wasn't anything great, but it's enjoyable. I think itstayed pretty close to the book, but it's been awhile since I read it so Idon't really remember. All the basic stuff from the book is there though.I think people who haven't read the book would like this movie more thanpeople who have. Timothy Hutton was great in this. The ending was justlike the ending to the book. This is a good movie, but it's no GreenMile.
Granted I was not all that wild about the novel in this case, however Istill prefer it over this movie made by one of the master's of horrorGeorge Romero. Not all of the problems I had with the flick though arethe source material or anything that George could have donedifferently. From what I understand, the company behind this movie wentbankrupt so parts of this movie are underdeveloped and the music in thelast third of the film is just looped music from the first two thirdsof the film. So what is this film about? Well a writer who writes undertwo names has essentially revealed and buried his alter ego namedStark. A guy who writes a bit more violently than the other half. Wellsomething happens and the alter ego seemingly comes to life and beginsto stalk the writer and kill those who get in his way. Meanwhile, thewriter learns things relevant to the fictional Stark taking on a lifeof his own. As for following the book this film does rather well,unfortunately the book is not the greatest so the film being not quiteup to the book becomes not good or bad. You will see when watching thisfilm it is a lot like other stories in Stephen King's collection as itmirrors to some extent "The Shining" and "Secret Window" as you willfind common themes of people with duel personalities.