Watchers

I rented this movie because I thought (and still think) that the book was a masterpiece. The book is still on my top five novels ever list. So when I rented the film I expected it to fail in comparision. But not on this level. Travis is a Kid? I mean come ON. In the book the guy was ex-delta with plenty of tricks up his sleeve. In the movie he's a sixteen or so year old kid who seemed to be taught everything about traps and guns by the age of 10 when his dad died. I'm from the south and I don't know half the crap the kid was taught. Hell i was shooting guns at seven sure. 22s. BB guns. Not even a very entertaining movie. If you want to see a Dean Koontz book that made a good movie watch Phantoms.

*****/10

I would consider myself a fan of Dean Koontz; having read a number of his novels and liked them all, but unfortunately I never got around to reading Watchers so I'm left with no choice but to rate this film on it's own merits rather than comparing it to the book that I haven't read. I went into this expecting something awful, and while I didn't exactly get a brilliant horror film; I am lead to believe that it's fans of the book that are rating it down because as a film in it's own right, Watchers is an entertaining and somewhat original little horror movie. The plot obviously takes some influence from Predator and begins with an explosion at a research lab. It's not long before a rancher is killed by some strange beast and the boyfriend of the dead man's daughter has picked up an ultra-intelligent runaway dog. A secret Government agency is soon on the case, as the murders continue. The boy continues to be fascinated by the dog's intelligence, but it somehow ties in with the murders and the agency is soon on his tail too.

The script for this film was originally written by Paul Haggis, who later disowned it. I don't know why – the writing here is nowhere near as ridiculous as his 2004 hit Crash! Anyway, the main reason this film works is undoubtedly the dog, who aside from being rather cute, is also the best actor in the film. Corey Haim, hot off the success of The Lost Boys is the human lead and actually has a rather good chemistry with the dog, although it is a little bit ridiculous seeing him talk to it most of the way through the film. The plot is rather convoluted and as such the film is more than a little bit messy; but the ridiculousness of it all pulls it through during the more awkward moments. Michael Ironside also appears in the film and does well as the 'bad cop' side of the Government agents. The monster is, of course, one of the most interesting things about the film and the way it goes around killing people is always entertaining and gory; although unfortunately we don't get to see a lot of it and when we finally do it's rather disappointing - obviously the filmmakers had seen Bigfoot and the Hendersons! Still, this is the sort of film that can be easily enjoyed despite the numerous problems and I'd recommend to any undiscerning viewer of eighties horror.

I'm a great fan of Koontz, and thought this might be an adaptation worth watching. I admit that due to the complexity of most his books, with all its subtlety, it is difficult to make a perfect adaptation, but this movie just barely made as a mediocre production. In an effort to make the movie 'cute' instead of the full-fledged horror it should be, it concentrates so much on the dog and its antics, but leaves us to imagine the monster for the most part. Given that the monster is at least as smart and complex as the dog, to see it reduced to simply a killing machine was a waste. And I still prefer the book ending to the movie ending - at least it made more sense and left one feeling a bit sad at the monster's demise instead of gloating over it.

Adaption of Dean Koontz's book is about a teenager (Corey Haim) who takes in a stray dog. However, the dog was part of a top secret government experiment and a monster linked to the dog genetically is out to get the dog killing anyone in it's way. I have never read the book which most people consider brilliant. This movie is not brilliant, but it is entertaining and has some good shock scenes. It remains exciting from start to finish, but if your a fan of the book I would recommand staying away from this movie.

Rated R; Brief Sexual Situation, Graphic Violence, and Profanity.

If you went into watching this movie thinking it was going to be an exacting adaptation of the great novel, well, you apparently haven't learned your lesson. Because this is almost never the case, especially movies from this era.

I will judge it for what it is: a B-horror starring an early Corey Haim, still in his prime. There is plenty to like about the film, including some of the gore and terror sequences. Corey Haim's acting is still spot on and sharp (on of his last), and the movie does flow very well. It is an easy film to digest. There are frights aplenty, if you are prone to it. If you are a critical horror fan, you'll find the gore to be well-done, and the film amusing - so long as you don't judge it by the standards of the book.

Having said all that, there are some down sides to it: Some highly inane, and poorly written dialog at times. Also, the film itself, could stand to be spruced up. They could've also tightened up some of the editing.

As far as B-horror fare goes, I recommend it.