![]() ![]() I can see how it replaced the information dumping and internal monologue from the book. So too would the inclusion of Ghost Elvis – in the novel he complimented the narrative well, but if transposed onto the big screen, would have been seen as camp.Ī new aspect to Odd’s character, psycometry, was introduced in the film production as a tool for presenting information to the viewer, and this by no means subtracted from the experience. If it had included a lot of the darker aspects in the book – like the backstory of Odd’s parents – I can see how it would have not only interrupted momentum, but killed the delicate tone of the film. The movie, in turn, remained true to the tone set in the novel, although more upbeat and focused more on the irony so that it would have broader appeal. ![]() But it is darkly comic and filled with witty banter to keep you grinning from start to end. While it was not anything new (with elements of previous stories evident in it’s composition,) left me feeling like I’d read it before. ![]() If I had to rate the book, I’d have given it three out of five kisses. That is the best word to describe this story – in either book or movie form.īeing a huge fan of Dean Koontz, I find his books comforting in a familiar way, he always has interesting characters, and most of the time it’s easy to visualise a movie created in your minds eye straight from his easy read narration. Some people have a hidden darkness inside, and others are just evil in a human suit! ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |