“Each of us are two independent beings.” Stephen King’s novel The Dark Half was published in 1989. This book is dedicated to the late Richard Bachman, thanks him for the idea for writing the work. Richard Bachman was one of several pseudonyms of the writer, from whose pen came such works as “Weight Losing”, “Running Man”, “Roadworks”. In some ways, The Dark Half is a closer work to King himself, who has parted ways with his Alter Egos and decided to write books on his own behalf. The film adaptation, as well as perhaps all the works of this wonderful writer, did not keep itself waiting - it took place in 1993, just 4 years after writing. Who would have thought that such a job would take not just a talented person, but a real classic of horror films, George A. Romero himself. That's how the meeting - the king of horror films, the master of zombies - the apocalypse makes a film based on the book of the famous "king of horrors" on a letter! Only these two names attract attention to viewing this project.
Ted Beaumont is a good writer and a very good teacher. Like everyone else, he has his secrets. Beaumont’s main one is George Stark. Yes, the same writer, famous for cool and more successful thrillers about Alexis Machine. Ted is the complete opposite of his "Alter-Ego": if the first is calm and clumsy, then the second is dexterous and with a much inflated character. When the books of the first remain on the shelves of the store, covered with dust, the books of the second are disassembled at the speed of light. One day, Fred Clawson claims that Beaumont is George Stark. In connection with such events, you have to reveal your secret and bury the pseudonym in the cemetery. Literally. Shortly after this incident, the brutal murder of Clawson occurs, but the deaths do not end there. Ted suspects George Stark has risen from the dead.
For the mater of horror films, George Romero decided to slightly leave the theme of his favorite walking dead and make a new movie for himself. From the advantages of his work, the correct, tense atmosphere stands out, which is filled with the book. The first half of the tape is made almost under a blueprint, everything goes as it should, right, interesting, according to the book. Speaking about the second half, I want to say that Romero greatly simplified and changed it well, apparently not wanting to exceed 2-hour timekeeping. The initiative to write the script was all from Romero, although it was right to let King write the script and follow its flow. In addition to a significant change in the second half of the film, George for some reason changed several more components:
1) The girl is a photographer and her assistant, who came up with the idea of “burying” Stark in the book, here changed to one old man;
2) Changed the death of one of the heroes, which is just as strange. It was the death of this hero that more showed Stark’s madness and the madness of his actions.
(3) Stripped from the script by Rowley Delesseps, changing his gender (and name accordingly).
(4) Changed the very appearance of George Stark – instead of a tanned blonde in the film there is some kind of Sicilian mafia.
Of course, these disadvantages are not so significant, but what was the point of changing all this remains a big mystery.
The script is not bad, a lot is taken from the book, thoughtfully, the characters feel and are spelled out as they should, but the second half is not particularly pleased: it looks very crumpled, tearing several dozen sheets from the book of the same name at once. The work of make-up artists raises the question: a little more make-up should be put on Stark at the final moment, because in the book he looks more rotting and falling apart. Tony Pierce-Roberts' camera work is good, highlighting the right moment, as if hinting at reading the book and comparing this moment to the description, the camera focuses well on what is happening. It was a shame to see very stupid, noticeable even if you do not look closely, blunders (extremely noticeable scene with a pencil, and underlined “s” on the board). The music of Christopher Ian, who wrote the compositions for “Nightmare on Elm Street” and “Rebel from Hell”, sounds very pleasant, adding to the film as a moment of calm, and giving rise to a dark, unpredictable atmosphere. The music sounds right, intriguing, mysterious, vivid.
Timothy Hutton may have a difficult temper (Romero has spoken a lot on the subject), but the fact that he managed to convincingly play Ted Beaumont remains a weighty fact. The actor did everything right, even convincingly shows the amazing awkwardness of his character, his courage and bravery to do anything for his own family. There’s not much to say about Hutton’s play against George Stark, as Stark is rarely shown. It can be seen most clearly only in the final, but there, we must admit, Timothy confidently showed the unkind character of Stark, his madness and the desire to survive at any cost (his position he calls nothing but “backed into a corner”). Another minor misunderstanding is too small a role for Sheriff Alan Pengborn, played by Michael Rucker. Alan has a lot of time in the book, which can be clearly said about another main character. With Pengbourne in the book is associated with a lot of events and discoveries about the past of Ted and the connection with Stark, so that cut (or did not do) not only a few moments, but also cut one of the characters. The performance of the other actors is good, without any serious mistakes.
In the award season, only Saturn was lenient to the project, which gave 4 nominations: Best Horror Film, Best Director, Best Supporting Actress and Best Makeup, but the film did not receive any awards. An interesting fact is that this year, in the nomination “Best horror film” was nominated for another adaptation of King, with which “The Dark Half” has something in common – “The right thing.”
Total:
“The Dark Half” is far from a perfect adaptation of Stephen King’s great book, but those who know will understand that good adaptations from the “king of horrors” do not come out so often. The main disadvantage of the film, if you take into account the opinion of the person reading the novel, will remain exactly that strong secrecy that goes to the tape only to the detriment. In all other respects, George Romero's film looks less good and interesting, and for people who haven't read the book, it might be a little more enjoyable. It is recommended for fans of the cast or fans of George Romero, and true fans of Stephen King are recommended to first get acquainted with the book, and only then watch the film to understand what and how Romero did wrong. Everyone else, at their own request.
Thank you for listening!