User Reviews

In Castle Rock, Maine, the respectable writer and professor Thad Beaumont (Timothy Hutton) lives a comfortable life with his wife Liz Beaumont (Amy Madigan) and his two babies. Out of the blue, he is blackmailed by a punk from New York that has discovered a hidden secret about Thad: before writing serious novels, he had written cheap literature using the pseudonym of George Stark and has become a successful writer of the genre and made enough money to raise his family.

Thad and Liz discuss the situation and Thad calls his editors telling that he would tell the truth about George Stark to the press. The editors like the idea and prepare a promotional event, with That Beaumont burying George Stark in the cemetery. When the photographer is murdered, Sheriff Alan Pangborn (Michael Rooker) comes to Thad's home and tells that he is the prime suspect of the crime. Thad believes that the blackmailer is the responsible for the death but soon he finds that the man was murdered. Soon there are a crime spree incriminating Thad and he claims that George Stark is the responsible for the bloodshed. How can his violent alter ego be responsible for the homicides?

"The Dark Half" is a horror movie with a promising story by Stephen King but unfortunately with a disappointing conclusion with the sparrows destroying George Stark and leaving Thad Beaumont without any evidence to prove his innocence. The explanation of Reggie that George Stark is a conjuration, an entity created by dark half of Thad that brought his alter ego to life, is weak. I saw this movie for the first time in the 90's on VHS and I have just watched again on DVD. My vote is six.

Title (Brazil): "A Metade Negra" ("The Dark Half")

An above-average adaptation of the Stephen King novel, this is a gory, disturbing little movie which sticks closely to its source. The story is an intelligent, unpredictable one which remains one of King's most genuinely horrific tales, and director George Romero makes a good job of the film version. The gore and violence is used in a shocking, unpleasant way instead of being there just for the sake of it, and the spot-on acting elevates the film above being just another schlocky horror tale.

Timothy Hutton in particular is very good both as innocent writer Thad Beaumont, plagued by visions, sounds, headaches, and nightmares, and also as his demonic alter-ego George Stark, who is something like an evil version of Elvis Presley. Stark is a totally ruthless and villainous character, one of the most despicable I've seen (he reminds me somewhat of David Hess) and spends the film either slashing people up with a straight-razor or simply bullying them. Amy Madigan lends solid support as Hutton's endangered wife, while Michael Rooker also puts in a strong turn as sheriff Alan Pangbourne, who investigates the crimes.

The film gets off to a good start with an unforgettable horror special effect of a milky-white human eyeball blinking inside somebody's brain; a simple enough effect to create, but one which stayed with me afterwards. From then on, things get relentlessly darker; this film has a real hard edge to it which makes for uncomfortable viewing at times. Another horrific highlight includes a dream sequence in which a doll's face shatters to reveal a human skull underneath - very unsettling. The special effects are used well, from some realistic wound-makeups which look very painful, to the masses of sparrows which fill the sky on occasion and play a crucial part in the suspenseful finale. Incidentally, the ending (which will have you cheering) is also very horrific: good special effects make this a conclusion worth waiting for. CGI is occasionally used to animate the sparrows but doesn't intrude too much.

In conclusion, I would call THE DARK HALF a true "horror film" and miles away from the cheap gorefests and unscary slashers which populate the rest of the '90s, in that it actually manages to be frightening and disturbing at times. It also serves as proof that George Romero still has the power to make good movies on occasion, which makes it seem odd that he has so much trouble attempting to do so. Highly recommended for King fans as one of the better adaptations of his work, and alongside CHRISTINE and PET SEMATARY undoubtedly the darkest.

Not a bad thriller, but surely you expect more from a collaboration between Stephen King (the story is based on his novel) and George A. Romero (who wrote the screenplay and directed the film). "The Dark Half" at times is an intelligent and well-constructed thriller but eventually it raises more questions than the format can cope with. The concept isn't exactly new but it's creatively presented, with a good balance between visual shocks and atmospheric tension. Timothy Hutton plays one of the most prestigious roles in his career as the tormented author Thad Beaumont who's forced to kill off his successful alter-ego, when he's blackmailed with exposure. Right after the figurative burial of George Stark, people close to Thad die violent deaths, seemly caused by the fictional doppelganger that isn't supposed to exist… Especially the first hour of "The Dark Half" is excellent fright-material with an obscure sequence about Thad's childhood and a delightful supernatural element involving sparrows….millions and millions of sparrows!! The second half is a lot less appealing and I wish Romero cut a few tedious sequences. The story begins to show a few holes and Romero attempts to camouflage them by adding more action and gory footage. The climax in particular is quite gruesome and not really satisfying in case you were hoping for reason or logic. All this probably is the reason why this film isn't mentioned more often. It features big names and clever ideas, yet it's an overall shortcoming project. Too bad for George A. Romero who'll still always be one of the most important writers/directors of the horror genre.

Perhaps, it was me, but damn, The Dark Half, one of the very few Stephen King film adaptations I hadn't seen until now, was so hard to get into. The story about a boy who had another boy living in his head – literally, began to make less and less sense as the movie progressed. Worse, the movie was sooo long.

Now, I do own this book and, though I hadn't read that yet, it'll probably piece together some of the holes I couldn't follow. But, this movie did not encourage me to pick up Stephen King's novel any time soon.

The movie was delayed in my viewing because, well, I am not a Timothy Hutton fan. Knowing he's playing a duel role, didn't add to the excitement I should've had for this. But, since it's October, I figured I'd finally see what this was all about 20 years after its release.

From what I can recall, and forgive – it's been a couple of days, a boy's writing leads to headaches and mystical sounds of birds. Upon further examination, there was a twin lodged in his brain. We are to believe the second child, the "dark half" twin had been extracted and disposed of. Fast forward many years, and that boy, Thad (Hutton,) has grown up, married, had twins of his own and is a writer. Of course, in King fashion and true life, Thad has an alternative and secret name he writes under, darker stuff. Stuff that sells.

But, when the idea to "kill" off this other penned name to avoid a blackmail subplot, all hell breaks loose. This "George Stark/Dark Half" writer doesn't want to "die," so he kills people and (inadvertently or not) pins the murders on Thad.

Where I had a problem was: was this George a split personality? Or a ghost, or made up/made real being? Or, a grown up version of that twin in the brain that was supposed to be disposed of? That last one is the farthest stretch, and yeah, even more than a ghost. For, the twin in the brain was just an eyeball and cavity-infested teeth. Take that out, and in the 1960s, I doubt they could've reconstructed, somehow, the whole male.

As I began this review, I stated this is perhaps this is my fault. Perhaps, my mind was elsewhere and it was hard to concentrate. It was over two hours and not well paced, after all. But, if this movie was interesting enough, I'm sure it would've engaged me away from real life. Sadly, it was not.

* * * Final thoughts: Not recommended. Maybe read the book. I'm sure that's a ton better and there's no Hutton there.

I have always wondered why George A Romero's film based on Stephen King's novel never took off with horror fans. I think it has a knock out premise concerning an evil alter ego that takes vengeance out on those who "rubbed him out" by sadistically attacking those behind his "demise". The idea that this dark place, where an author finds the material forwarded to popular novels, manifests itself in human form, ticked off at the one he gave substantial good fortune, should be a story that appeals to the horror fans at large. I think it's a cerebral, twistedly inventive idea obviously pulled from King's own experience when he adopted his own alter ego, writing under a pseudonym.

The plot focuses on a professor, Thad Beaumont, who writes novels under the alias of George Stark and as himself. Stark is the dark side of Thad Beaumont's personality, which creates a popular series of horror novels detailed in disturbing fashion. When a crook finds out about the connection, he attempts to squeeze Thad through blackmail, which leads to Thad's decision to, once and for all, bury Stark and the baggage that comes with him. George, however, doesn't like this, and he "rises from the grave" to pick off all of those who were involved in his "execution and burial". Meanwhile, sparrows are starting to gather, prepared to take either Thad or George to "the other side", as they are a type of tool used to carry away the soul who doesn't belong. That's essentially what it is, a fight for survival. George wants to assume Thad's position, so that he can live, not die. Thad understands the kind of beast he is, because, in essence, he "gave birth" to him.

We later discover that a tumor, which his parents told him caused his severe headaches, was in actuality remains of a twin brother he didn't quite absorb during the fetal stage of development. The remains were removed and buried, so when Thad and a crew, hired for a specific magazine piece marking George's death, shoot a publicity shot of a fake tombstone with Stark's name on it, this will set forth the shocking events which leads to a series of razor slashings against everyone who had threatened to cast him away forever.

One of Romero's more sophisticated mainstream films, didn't hit a chord with his fans, and, actually, many didn't particularly like it. It could've been the premise, considering a killer who basically formed from nothingness, and wishes to take over his master's role..that and how the sparrows become involved in the grand scheme of things.

Good cast included Amy Madigan as his concerned, but headstrong wife, and Michael Rooker Castle Rock, Maine's sheriff. Julie Harris has an amusing supporting role as a professor of the occult who lends Thad a hand when he's searching for the truth regarding his murderous alter ego. I thought Timothy Hutton was quite effective in dual roles, even more so as the psychopath who enjoys cracking wise, dressed in black shirt, jeans, his hair slicked back, carrying a southern accent. The finale, with all the sparrows, I actually thought was effectively carried out, particularly how they tear apart a character. The story, which many might find really hard to swallow, works for me because it paints poor Thad in a corner due to how George relates to him in so many ways to the point that even when it's impossible for him to have committed murders, he's a suspect.

Shot at Washington & Jefferson College and in Edgewood, right across the bridge from Tateh Cuda's garden, The Dark Half found George Romero again working with a big studio and adapting a Stephen King book.

It has Thad Beaumont (Timothy Hutton) trying to escape the lowbrow horror books he writes under the name Goerge Stark for the highbrow world of literature, even burying Stark in a fake grave. The problem is, well, Stark is real, the soul left behind by a vestigal twin - the brain surgery scene in the beginning is astounding - making his way to Castle Rock to destroy all of the goodness in Thad's life.

King knows all about this, as his Richard Bachman pen name came from writer Donald E. Westlake, who wrote his more violent fiction as Richard Stark.

Sherriff Alan Pangborn, played by Michael Rooker in this movie, is the same character Ed Harris played in Needful Things. As you can imagine, he has a hard time trying to understand the fact that Thad has a dark version of himself because he's a man who believes in facts.

I wonder if the extended time Romero spent with Dario Argento led to him portraying Stark as a bandage covered, black hat and cloak wearing giallo killer, complete with a razor blade. He's always surrounded by swams of loud birds, which is a great tension builder.

Beyond Hutton and Rooker, Romero has a great cast here, including Amy Madigan as Thad's wife, Julie Harris as a friend who knows Thad's secret, Chelsea Field as Alan's wife, plus Royal Dano and Rutanya Alda.

While I like Romero's smaller productions, I really ended up liking this way more than i thought I would and plan on going back in to watch it again.

As a fan of Stephen King, and having read the novel many years ago, I was tempted to watch this film when I stumbled across it on pay per view films on cable.

At first I wondered why I had never heard of it, especially as it is directed by George A Romero, but it soon became clear.

This really is one of the dullest films I have ever watched. The main character is unsympathetic. His alter ego is two dimensional and totally hammy. You don't care about any of the victims. There is hardly any horror and next to no tension.

My husband fell asleep halfway through. I envy him.