ironhorse_iv Review of Dreamcatcher

Dreamcatcher (2003)

Dreamcatcher was utter explosive diarrhea. A total mess.

[5/10 · 22 January 2021]

Don't get me wrong this motion picture had potential. It could had been a cinematic masterpiece like 1982 John Carpenter's 'The Thing' with its blend of extraterrestrial body horror and suspense. Sadly the 2001 novel originally called 'Cancer' in which the film is based off, was not really Stephen King's best work. Even the author didn't like it that much; seeing that he sold the film rights for $1. Written after the car accident that almost killed King. The novel is supposed to tell the story of four friends encountering an invasion of parasitic aliens on an annual hunting trip in Maine. Yet because King's written it under the heavy influence of Oxycontin while recovering. It suffers from way too many silly vulgar toilet humor repetitions that ceased to be funny after so long. Kinda wish the author took it more seriously. After all, prostate cancer is one of the most common leading cause of death among men. So, having a novel metaphoric telling the dangers of it could been frightful. To make it worst, King change the novel title to 'Dreamcatcher'; despite the plot has little to do with apotropaic magic nor the lore of Native American cultures that much. There were hardly any dreams sequences as well. As for premonitions. I have no clue what King was going for with one of the characters having a car accident like himself. I don't feel like that is how the mind works when dealing with a near death experience or an out of body moment. Wouldn't memories be open up rather than quickly shield. Nevertheless, seeing that majority of the book deals with memories. I really do dig the whole in mind reminiscence warehouse sequences of the film version with the Ripley monster trying to gain access to. However, the cartoony split personality between Gary 'Jonesy' Jones and the alien entity Mr. Gray also played by Damian Lewis was little too much over the top in the acting department. You would think that the creature possessing the body would try to seem normal or act similar to its host. Then again none of the adult characters in this story acted their age. The friends set of pop culture catchphrases don't really match the horror tone that well. Nor does it help to the underlining the theme of teamwork between our protagonists. Each one of them were doing their own thing, barely paying attention to what being said within the group. I hardly believe that the protagonists were all buddies. Plus, the childish dialogue felt forced & awkward put; especially when actor Jason Lee as Joe "Beaver" Clarendon spill it out. To top it off, King had to put telepathic powers yet again in his story which the movie overused in series of disorganized cliches flashbacks like standing up against stereotypical bullies in Derry. Unfortunately, Henry Bowers from the 1986 novel 'It' was not one of the antagonists. Nor was there much of a connection between the Ripley monster and the alien creature from that location beside the title Mr. Gray. While both use telepathic. Neither one act alike. The power here was highly misused both in the heroes and the villains. For example, seeing actor Thomas Jane as Henry Devlin used a pistol as a telephone while Tom Sizemore as Captain Owen Underhill looks on is just bizarre. The visual humor felt confusing out of place. It sets the wrong tone, hurting the horror vibe. The telepathic powers were certainly misrepresented. Much in the same way the down syndrome character of Douglas 'Duddits' Cavell played by Donnie Wahlberg was highly misguided even if the performer was decent. Without spoiling too much of it, the twist toward the end with Doug was a bit off putting. Alienating for sure for anybody dealing with a disability. The whole fake looking CGI battle between aliens in the climax was disappointing. Honestly most of the action involving computer effects were awfully done. They overused the same quick shock value movement of a violence attack toward the crotch way too much. Meanwhile the practical gore effects, make-up work & puppetry for the creature kinda does work for what the film has. As for the pacing. The movie could had work better without the overdrawn opening credit sequence with blurry close up of things, a montage of every group member at their work and most of all the military subplot. Morgan Freeman as Colonel Abraham Curtis didn't really add much of anything. All those padding wasn't really needed. Unfortunately, screenwriter William Goldman doesn't know how to cut these parts out when doing adaptations. Most of his script tend to go on way too long. As for director Lawrence Kasdan. I really don't get why he allowed the movie to go to 134 run time. It seemed like Kasdan didn't allow editor Carol Littleton do much. Whenever he does seem to want to cut. The movie used classic vertical film wipes from the 'Star Wars' film franchise way too often. To add onto the oddities. He also wanted to used the same sound effects from those movies. A jarring example is the blast door noise whenever the villain put up his hood. What on earth was he thinking? No wonder why the director found himself out of work for 9 years after this movie. Kasdan's choices were insane. Not even the studio's last-minute attempt to tacked on an animated Matrix short 'Flight of the Osiris' as a double feature could attract audiences to see this movie. This horror flick bombed at the box office. In 2003, it really does seem like most people would rather stay home and watch the news about Iraq Invasion rather than see this escapism horror flick. I don't blame them. Overall: While 'Dreamcatcher' is not as bad as some of the 1990s adapted television mini series of Stephen King's works. It still one film not worth catching.