I'm watching, and enjoying, Riding The Bullet. The film was directed by Mick Garris. This is not a review.
1. After working out tonight, I went with a friend to pick someone up. I elected then to walk home. I'm trying to lsoe weight. The walk home, at around 11pm, had me passing several small town bars and throught he "heart" of our small town. A small town is both beautiful and spooky at night. That walk got me to thinking about the creepy journey in Riding The Bullet. The encounter with the dog in Riding the Bullet is what always scares me when walking in these parts. Even in town Coyotes make their presence known!
2. I really like hte scene where the grim reaper appears, and the images on the wall come to life. Very nice, and spooky.
3. The characters are nicely done. They feel real. The acting is natural -- which means it's good acting!
4. There is a morbid fixation on death here! It is handled with a mixture of horror and comedy. I hope humor was intended!
5. The movie is set in the 70's. So far, the only really awkward thing is that it doesn't really feel like the 70's. It feels like the 90's trying to be the 70's. Because it's hard to really reporduce just how. . . icky . . . the 70's were.
6. I've been to a LOT of funerals,and I don't thinkt he movie -- or any movie -- ever captures the real tone of a funeral. Though every funeral is unique, I have never seen one in a movie I felt was realistic.
Garris said, "Death deepens you when it’s close to you. I mean, it’s not really meant to be an arthouse film or anything; it’s meant to be an entertainment that hopefully has a bit more of an emotional connection than most “horror” movies, and emo horror movies, if you will."
I agree. So I don't understand why film makers find it so difficult to ever capture the sense of a funeral on film.
7. There are so many dreams and visions and flashbacks it gets frustrating to try and track with "prime reality." Vision of a guy grabbing Alan and asking if he needs a ride reminds me of Pet Sematary's ghost. Here's another vision -- papa just showed up as a haunting apparition. There are visions within the memory scenes. . . visions within visions. A dog attack. . . but it was only a vision. To be followed by a vision of mama. What this movie needs is another vision. Wait! We just got another. . . !
8. Garris told Bookgasm, "Watching the movie for the very first time, when the print had just come from the lab the day before, with an audience of 700 people, with my mother and sister in the audience, was nerve-wracking and emotional, much more so than anything I’d made before or since."
9. I like the feeling of journey as Alan tracks cross country to be with his mother.
10. Alan talking to himself . . . with himself represented as a second person. . . is effective.
11. I love roller coasters! Love to ride them, learn about them, experience the top of a hill thrill. Magic Mountain has some great coasters. The idea of a demon on a roller coaster is awesome! I've thought of it often, before I was aware of this work. A haunted rolelr coaster is cool because once you're on a coaster, you're strapped in and stuck -- perfect opportunity for unfriendly spirits to mess with you.
12. In the book, Lilja's Library, we are treated to some interesting insights to the larger King universe. Lilja writes,
"Garris has also put in some hints that this is based on a King story. First, you an see a car that looks incredibly like Christine, which turns out to be Goerge Staub's car. Chrstine was a 1958 Plymouth Fury and int he movie they use on from 1960, but who'll noitce? Also, Garris himself plays a doctor at the end of the movie and his wife Cynthia (who has been in many of his films including the dead woman in the bath tub in The Shining) plays the nurse called Annie, a tribute to King's Misery." p.396Here is an interview with Mick Garris whicn includes some discussion of Riding The Bullet.
My mother taught me that if you don't have anything nice to say, then just don't say anything.
ReplyDeleteHowever, I failed to learn that lesson, so I'll take this opportunity to say that I thought "Riding the Bullet" was absolute dreck. I wasn't a big fan of the short story, either, to be honest.
Gotta go with Bryant here: Riding the Bullet ranks in my book alongside the absolute WORST King film adaptations. It might even be worse that The Langoliers. I've seen it twice, and the second time confirmed what I knew from the get go.
ReplyDeleteI forget all the reasons why, but it started with a reference in the film to Cheech and Chong (during a 1960s flashback, YEARS before C&C ever met – that's sloppy writing, Mick), to the incessantly unpleasant suicide imagery, to the casting of David Arquette as the lead (David Arquette? Really?), to what seems an utter contempt for its audience. Even the sappy ending seems forced and pasted in. I HATED this film, and refuse to add it to my King film library because it sucks so hard.
"The acting is natural – which means it's good acting." I don't know which movie you're watching, but … I disagree with you pretty strongly here.
This was also the film where I started to have strong misgivings about Mick Garris as a director. I LOVED his miniseries versions of The Stand and The Shining (…though The Stand doesn't hold up very well after nearly two decades). Even Sleepwalkers (which I DO own) is not very good. The reason I own it, is … who doesn't want to spend a couple of hours with Alice Krige and Madchen Amick? Also, great use there of Santo & Johnny's classic instrumental 'Sleepwalk.'
I was pretty disappointed with Bag of Bones, too, where some REALLY BAD directorial choices ruined an otherwise good film. And Desperation … hurm. Same thing.
Anyway, I don't want to rain on anyone's parade. If you like Riding the Bullet, so be it. But your statement of approval on this insultingly bad film seems to fly in the face of your appreciation of GREAT King films.
Believe it or not, I actually thought it was an okay film.
ReplyDeleteFor me it all has to do with A Christmas Carol. Specifically, I don't pretend to know whether Garris thought of this or not, for me the movie is a kind of re-write of Dickens' story and since the main character is remembering events that happened in 1969, not the seventies, Garris bypasses the Ghosts of past and present and heads right for the Ghost of Christmas Future, here played brilliantly by David Arquette.
I think Arquette's performance manages to channel what the Future Ghost was all about, I think if that character had more of a personality he'd be like Arquette.
As to visions within visions. Garris deliberately leaves the question open whether the events of the night in the film are real, or whether the main character just had a bad dream. I think the main character ran into a real ghost in his dreams and that in turn actually made him in some way appreciate life.
ChrisC