The Dark Half (1993)

The diabolical alliance of George A. Romero and Stephen King quietly delivered expectations but it's not certainly a great horror film.

"The Dark Half" is pretty interesting and well directed but it's something you've seen before. There's a decent amount of gore, suspense is well crafted, an effective score and regular acting. Maybe the fact that I grew with the 80's Slasher movies made me think every minute about "Basket Case" and compare it with "The Dark Half".

A decent horror movie with a thrilling ending. Deserves a watch.

6/10.

Fmovies: This is one of the few horror movies in which I was truly frightened. Unlike most horror movies these days, this one was serious from beginning to end. I saw this movie before I read the book and knew very little about it. I was on the edge of my seat all night. Timothy Hutton is wonderful as the evil George Stark and the good Thad Beaumont. Amy Madigan was good as his confused wife, too. This movie is a wonderful adaptation of the Stephen King book. Very little is left out. If you haven't seen this movie, which many people have not, you should rent it. I give it a ten out of ten.

George Romero didn't translate King's book to the letter when he made this screenplay; perhaps for the better because his version is an equally interesting take.

Starring Timothy Hutton as a famous pulp novelist writing under the name of George Stark, the main character works; Thad Beaumont is clumsy, intelligent and quite the family man. Married to Amy Madigan and a father of twins.

When someone threatens to expose Thad for the pulp writer he is, Beaumont decides to let the world know he is George Stark. Good call you'd think, but George disagrees.

Thad's friends and family become the target of a guy going by the name of "George Stark". Like the characters in the books he has a taste for underground killings and a flair for rock 'n' roll one liners.

As the killings continue, Thad becomes entangled in an investigation directed at him.

This material is at fist glance unknown territory for George Romero, having spend too much time writing dialogue for zombie victims. Sure, Martin and Monkey Shines were proof the man could write a good script, but "the dark half" is as clever in its writing as it is to the point.

Add to that a wonderful score by Christopher Young (you haven't lived until you've heard the main theme, reprized at full glory in the end credits) The American DVD is full screen, the European (UK) has the widescreen, so avoid that US edition.

Dark Half is an inventive thriller that relies very much on the steps of belief (it builds the fiction, which few horror films do).

The Dark Half fmovies. This is one strange, surreal literate piece of psychological horror pulp in the tradition of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde by film-maker George Romero who adapted it from novelist Stephen King. Thad Beaumont is a successful novelist who decides to literally bury his alter ego George Stark, who he used as a pseudonym for his overly violent pulp novels. This occurs because someone tries to blackmail him. But after putting an end to this alter ego, people are starting to be killed off and these are people who are somehow tied in to seeing George Stark finish up. However the evidence at every murder scene points to Thad and something is happening to him that he hasn't experience for almost twenty years. The sparrows are calling. Underrated work from Romero, which can be atmospheric in its vivid visuals, computer effects are ably done, the jolts are nastily macabre (the graphic climax of when sparrows attack) and the steadfast narrative gradually builds up its dread-filled suspense and stinging matter with precise control. Timothy Hutton plays the dual roles with outstanding ticker. Then there is solid support by Amy Madigan, Michael Rooker and a tiny part for Robert Joy.

"We shouldn't be writing trash."

I saw this movie after i read the book and i have to say pretty much of the book was also in the film, although not all. Some parts with the sparrows for instance weren't in the film, probably because the budget wouldn't allow special effects that elaborate. And the murders, although violent enough in the movie, were particularly more gruesome in the book.

Ultimate conclusion: great acting from top notch actors/actresses who usually are nowhere to be found in horror (if you discount Michael Rooker's performance in "Henry"), pretty good special f/x and direction from a director who has made his mark in horror.

Thad Beaumont (Timothy Hutton) had a brain tumor as a child that was an undeveloped twin. Now, as an adult, the twin returns, fully formed and violent. The source is a bit supernatural, but real enough to kill.

The story goes over ground that should be familiar to Stephen King fans. The idea of a child growing up to confront something from his childhood. The theme of a writer, explored numerous times ("Misery", "The Shining") but most closely to this in "Secret Window". Howard Maxford calls it a cross between "Misery" and "The Birds", which I do not fully accept but see his point.

Interestingly, Stephen King is not known for good movie adaptations, and George Romero has had his slew of below average films (though, if you stray from his zombie films, you will find an assortment of goodies). But together, they seem to have made a decent movie here. I really enjoyed it. I also enjoyed "Creepshow" -- maybe these guys bring out the best in each other? Michael Rooker is here (with hair) playing the role played by Ed Harris in "Needful Things". I would have liked to see some consistency in casting, but how do you choose between Rooker and Harris? Both top notch. Another Harris, Julie Harris, does appear, though... And the music is from Christopher Young, perhaps best known for his "Hellraiser" score.

Some of the factual information I found to be a bit questionable. Does a military service record really go into an FBI fingerprint database? I suppose it might, but the idea struck me as odd. And the idea that one in ten people start off as twins seemed too exaggerated (and then they said that was at the very least). I would like to know the truth on that.

Overall, though, a really decent film. It is not Oscar or Golden Globe material by any means, but a horror fan should enjoy the mix of gore and dark humor. Rue Morgue has called it "a middling Romero film based on a middling King novel", which really sells it short.

Unfortunately, the film did not get the proper respect in 1993, because its distributor (Orion) was fighting a bankruptcy battle and promoted it poorly. But now (2015), it has a second chance thanks to the fine folks at Scream Factory who have loaded up the Blu-ray with everything possible, including the kitchen sink.