Intense, gripping, stylish and poignant

One of the worst ways to make a cult movie is to set out to make a cult movie.

All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.

A great movie, one of the best of this year. There was a bit of confusion at one point in the plot, but nothing serious.

Christopher Walken - check. Stephen King - check. Spooky/creepy horror films - check. These are all pretty much lynchpins of my film collection, so you'd probably think that Stephen King's 'The Dead Zone' would fit in there perfectly. I wish it did. Before writing this review I took the time to read (the numerous!) five star reviews, all proclaiming it as a supernatural story that's up there with 'The Shining' and 'Salam's Lot.' Again, I enjoyed both of those, but I can't in all honesty recommend 'The Dead Zone' alongside those.Christopher Walken plays a school teacher who gets into a car accident, leaving in a coma for five years. However, when he wakes up, once he's got over the fact that his girlfriend has left him, he finds he's blessed with the ability to see people's futures just by touching them. Maybe it's because we're so used to seeing those with 'mutant' abilities jumping into a spandex costume and flying round New York fighting aliens that 'The Dead Zone' feels so muted. Yes, I know it's not meant to be an all out action epic and Walken's portrayal of a man coming to terms with the role he's been forced to take on post-coma is deliberately understated.It's not the plot or the lack of budget that didn't appeal to me. I think the main thing was the dialogue. Considering it was adapted from a Stephen King story and then - presumably - rewritten by one Hollywood screenwriter or another, you'd think it would have a better script. However, even with an actor as talented as Walken in the lead, the dialogue seems basic, clunky and very badly-written.Again, I don't know if it's just me, but if the film has a real 'low point,' it's Walken's on-screen love/former love-interest (Brooke Adams) who seems to never be able to make up her mind as to whether she should be with him (despite now being married and with child), or stick with her current relationship. These emotions seem to bounce back and forth from scene to scene and she comes across as one hell of a flake-ish character. Tom Skerritt is also on the bill, but I found him a bit underused, whereas the film's primary villain (Martin Sheen) gets more screen time, only to use it as a typicallly clichéd villainous and corrupt senator.I didn't hate-hate 'The Dead Zone' - it was okay enough. I just certainly don't see what so many have obviously seen in it. I found it slowly-paced, clunky-scripted and not worthy of the talent involved. However, I will agree with what many people have said about it - that it's a 'tragic tale.' It's not exactly a 'feel-good' movie and if you're looking for something to cheer you up, you certainly won't find it here! Maybe I should have been in a more cheerful mood before I sat down to watch it? Still, the ending was pretty good/different though.

After a terrible car accident a school teacher wake up five years later to discover he has physic ability.

"The Dead Zone" is an adaptation of yet another eerie Stephan King novel. The story, ably directed by David Cronenberg, is told in episodic form with five separate but linked stories involving the trials and tribulations of Johnny Smith (Christopher Walken).Johnny is an English teacher happy in his job and engaged to a fellow teacher, Sarah Brocknell (Brooke Adams). One day while driving home, Johnny is involved in a traffic accident that leaves him comatose for five years.When he awakes, Johnny discovers his lost five years, and under the care of Dr. Sam Weizak (Herbert Lom), begins the long road back. He is heart broken to learn that Sarah has gotten married and has a young son. One day he makes hand contact with his nurse (Chappelle Jaffe) and is overwhelmed by the feeling that her young daughter is in danger in a house fire. He manages to convince the nurse to call for help.Later, now aware of his psychic abilities and following his recovery. Johnny is approached by Sheriff Bannerman (Tom Skerritt) who asks for his assistance in finding the Castle Rock serial killer. He examines the body of the latest victim and has a vision of the crime and the identity of the killer.Now earning his living as a tutor, Johnny is approached by hard line millionaire Roger Stuart (Anthony Zerbe) to tutor his son who shuns contact with others. After winning the boy over, Johnny discovers that the boy is in danger by drowning during a hockey game. Johnny warns Stuart who reluctantly allows the boy to miss the game thereby saving his life.As luck would have it, Johnny's house is directly across the street from a political dais for senatorial and presidential hopeful Greg Stillson (Martin Sheen). Stillson has his own agenda and will go to any ends to achieve his goals. While shaking hands with the candidate, Johnny through his psychic powers learns what might happen if Stillson becomes president. He then decides to take necessary action and....An intriguing movie with a surprise twist at the film's climax. The performances are uniformly great. Walken has never been better than in the lead role as he tries to deal with his "gift". Brooke Adams is suitably sweet as the heroine who still loves the hero. Herbert Lom makes a convincing therapist who learns a long lost secret from one of Johnny's visions. Tom Skerritt, Anthony Zerbe and Martin Sheen play their roles with conviction. Collenn Dewhurst has nice little bit as the deranged mother of the serial killer. Others of note in the cast include Nicholas Campbell as Deputy Sheriff Dodd and Sean Sullivan and Jackie Burroughs as Johnny's parents.One has to wonder, in view of the Stillson character, how Johnny would have reacted to a certain presidential candidate in 2016.

The film lacks depth even without leaving out the metaphysics of destiny and fate. It only goes as far as treating the subject of predicting the future and whether or not to interfere to change the future. The film's problem is that it is not concerned with the "how", or the method, at all. The protagonist manages to save the life of his student from drowning in a frozen pond while missing the opportunity to save the lives of his teammates. Why? Because he was focused on preventing the one person from playing and not preventing the match from being played on thin ice. In the case of the candidate running for the Senate seat, he felt that the candidate's political career must end. The psychic had a vision that the candidate will one day start a nuclear war. Instead of trying to expose the candidate, and demanding public comments and commitments on nuclear weapons. Instead of trying to go to the people in order to prevent him from winning elections, he decides to go it alone. He carries his rifle and tries to assassinate the candidate during a campaign stop. The film makes it possible to understand why the protagonist resorts to this dangerous mode of thinking. Due to his psychic abilities, he was feared, and therefore isolated. He felt lonely and confined. This has resulted in a skewed and exaggerated view of himself, and an erratic problem solving process. The film has successfully created what is essentially a terrorist out of a caring and talented teacher. There are millions of people in the world who are isolated in the same way, and what society needs is not to turn them into murderers and terrorists. The film did not try to emphasize that bad solutions are not solutions at all.