Saturday, November 16, 2024

Stir of Echoes: Book versus Movie

The book was originally published in 1958. Written by one of my faves, Richard Matheson. Among many others he was responsible for I am Legend, The Twilight Zone episode with capt Kirk Nightmare at 20,000 feet, Little Girl Lost (which if you haven’t seen it, it’s the plot for Poltergeist.) Shrinking Man, Hell House, What Dreams May Come, Trilogy of Terror, and the teleplay for Kolchak the Night Stalker. What a resume!

The movie came out in 1999. Screenplay by David Koepp who also wrote the screenplays for Jurassic Park, Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull, Mission Impossible, Spiderman and others.

I read a 2000s edition with a boring cover so when we’re talking about the book we’re going to use the Hector Garrido painted 1969 Avon edition.

Basic plot

A family of three- Husband, Wife, toddler son- move into a rental house. The parents along with the wife’s sibling go over to the neighbor’s house for a little party. The wife’s brother (book)/ sister (movie) hypnotizes the husband. While under hypnosis there is a suggestion that his mind will be open to everything. He comes out of it. Jokes are made. They go home. He’s feeling funny. Goes to bed. Nightmare. Wakes up in the middle of the night, goes out into the living room and sees a female apparition standing in his living room. Along with this vision he also has psychic feelings and visions of friends and family. He spends the rest of the story trying to solve the mystery of who this ghostly woman is and what the hell is going on with his mind.

Time and Location.

The book: It’s the end of the 50’s. We are in Southern California. It’s sunny and bright and I imagine the neighborhood looks like the Edward Scissorhands neighborhood. Easter egg-colored houses with perfectly manicured lawns.

The movie: It’s the end of the 90’s. We are in Chicago. It’s a downtown area where the houses are all bunched in and probably built in the 1920’s. It’s summertime so we have block parties but most of the action takes place at night avoiding that pesky sun atmosphere.

The movie wins this one hand down. How are you going to have a ghost story with fresh cut grass ambiance? I want musty smelly basements, plaster walls, and old creaky floors. To be fair, around the time of the novel I imagine California and Hollywood in particular, was a pretty popular interest in middle America. It was new and exciting. Around ’99 Hollywood idolization is played out. People want to see stories they relate to and most of the country is BACK EAST.

The two Toms.

In the book we have Tom Wallace. All American guy, all American name. It doesn’t give us his background. He’s the everyman. He works at THE PLANT down the street. He’s a good-natured fella with a lot of patience. He’s cracking but gently. If you bumped into him in the street you’d probably think, “hmm that Tom Wallace guy seems like he might be having some troubles.”

In the movie we have Tom Witzky. I’m guessing a Polish lineage here. Urban Chicago beer drinking working class guy who fixes your phone lines. Rock n’ Roll guitar player who used to play in bands but now that he’s a little older and has a wife and kid he pouts that his life sucks and he’s never done anything. He completely loses his shit after being hypnotized. If you bumped into movie Tom in the street you’d probably think, “Jesus, what the fuck is that guy’s problem?”

Though I think Kevin Bacon is great in the movie, the book Tom is just a more likeable character. Book Tom cares about his wife and how she feels. Movie Tom gives little effort to his wife’s feelings and is self-centered.

The neighbors

The book neighbors have lots of personality. They are major players in the story right off the bat and make several significant appearances in the story that lead you to believe they have something to do with the ghost mystery. Every time they appear, and Tom has an interaction with them it intensifies the suspense. Layers are peeled.

The movie neighbors are bit players. They appear every once in a while and do and say everyday things. The suspense in the movie leans more toward who the ghost is or what she wants. But it never ventures out into the real-world suspects until the reveal at the end.

The ghost.

The book ghost appears but a couple times. It’s more the idea of her that gives you the creeps. She is described in an appropriately eerie way but it’s subtle. It gives you a taste and lets your mind fill in the rest.

The movie ghost is there. You can see her and doesn’t leave much to be imagined. It will still creep you the hell out, but I think it stays right there in the moment.

Once again, I enjoyed the book better in this aspect. I’ve always been a fan of more subtle horror than blatant gore. Though I did like that the ghost was more at the forefront of the story in the movie. There is more depth to the plot in the novel. Many paths to explore. The movie says, here is a ghost story.

The mystery.

In the book after he gets hypnotized, the psychic powers are at the forefront of the plot. It’s not just a ghost he is seeing but now he can read thoughts, has premonitions, he can feel the horror of the traumatic experience through an object that was at the scene. So not only do we have the mystery of who the ghost was but he’s questioning his sanity. Is he really going mad or is this stuff happening?

In the movie the same things happen but it’s on the back burner. The psychic visions have everything to do with the ghost mystery. He almost doesn’t question what he’s experiencing because his son sees the ghost too. In fact, his son is talking to someone who isn’t there right at the beginning of the movie. In the book it’s only briefly mentioned toward the end that the son might have the same psychic abilities as the dad.

The mystery is played out in different ways in the book and the movie. Both are satisfying. You don’t see them coming, especially in the book. Unfortunately, this move on the part of the screenwriters for the psychic kid screwed them as in the same year the mega hit, The Sixth Sense came out.

Final thoughts.

Both are great. This isn’t a case of the book completely blowing the movie out of the water. There isn’t a clear winner here. It’s sort of like the original Blob movie versus the 80’s remake. Both are perfect for their era. That’s what this was. I do wish the book wasn’t set in Southern California though, that’s my biggest gripe about the novel. I also wouldn’t have minded just a little more ghost. The buildup in the book is a softer hill. It’s not screaming in your face to be noticed but it’s also not off track. You are right there with Tom as he slowly starts to lose it. You’re not watching from the outside.

The book was sexier. A look behind the plastic happy façade of 50s life. There is way more marital disfunction drama in the book than in the movie. Well, as far as the other couples in the book go that is. Tom and his wife are actually great together. In the movie the neighbor’s drama is only lightly suggested and movie Tom and wife are bickering and like previously stated, Tom is a self-absorbed moody downer who all but ignores his family.

That whole part in the movie where the wife and son run into the psychic cop and it basically remakes the Shining scene where Danny meets Dick Holoran is so dumb. That part was not only cheesy and a rip-off, but it goes absolutely nowhere. They really should have cut it. It’s not in the book at all.

Tom is so unlikeable in the movie. He really gets on my nerves. I feel like they could have turned down the intensity a notch. He’s running at ten almost right from the first paranormal occurrence. I do love how 90s it is though. And I prefer the wife’s sister character played by Illeana Douglas, instead of the chummy brother in the book. She’s always great in everything.

If I had to pick one over the other…I’ll give it to the book. It’s creepier to imagine the ghost than to see them. With the movie you are stuck with exactly what is given to you, even though I thought they did a great job. I did like the climax of the movie a little better though. I don’t know man! I just can’t do it. It’s a draw.

No comments:

Post a Comment