Watchers

[Dave:Blackeye15]

I just watched the movie and I'd say I had good old time. 3/5 just because it was fun fun fun.

-the first rule of fat club-

[Matt]

Ok this movie is one of my favorite movies, they made the monster look really really sweet...hmmm well catch ya lata

[Sean Freel]

Oh, Canada makes that many bad movies? I didn't know and I live in the capital... well at least we have James Cameron.
This movie butchers the book, dont get meh started. Travis was Nora's husband in the first and he was in special forces and he kicked ass. Now he's a little s**theaded brat who makes love to the dog. Let's not talk about that "twist" if it had happened in the book I would have puked and burned my copy. Johnson was a nice guy who was held back by his job and even lets the dog go in the end.
He was African too, *cough*Ironside*cough*
Avoid unless you liked The Stand, ababuah

[Outsider]

I 've read the book, it's still one of my favorite ones. But this film has nothing to do with the book. Travis is an inbred child, and the OXCOM is gay.
The Outsider is supposed to be nothing, neither a dog, nor a monkey.

[Total Nut]

THAT was Jason Priestley? Or was it a different Jason Priestley? Even without the extra weight I wouldn't see any resemblance.

[NiJBro]

Wow...I've just read the book, and I absolutely LOVED it, but....this movie looks like s**t. I mean, you didn't even mention anything about the Outsider (*NOT* the OXCOM) tracking down the dog....and all of the main characters are kids!! >< I'm sure it's a good-ish movie and all, but...come on. It's movies like this that makes me make SURE I read the book first.  

[Nathan Hofstad]

 I can't freaking believe it. As I've grown older and wiser, I've come to understand and accept the fact that when a book is made into a film, not every detail or plot point is going to make it onto the screen. There's budget constraints, a resonable running time to keep track of, difficulty of visually achieving some scenes in the book, etc. Some characters, even if they're well-written and awesome, are ultimately not 100% vital to the plot and can be cut out.
  Still, the fact that someone desecrated Watchers in this way makes me both furious and sad at the same time. The book this movie was based on is a true work of art, a "desert island" novel if there ever was one. How badly did this flick mutilate the book? I'll just say extremely, unforgivably badly, and leave it at that.
 Andrew, I don't pretend to know if you're as much of a book person as you are a B-movie person, but I certainly hope this film doesn't dissuade you from picking up a copy of the novel. It's a true gem.

 P.S. This is one of the few books I read where I actually felt awful for the main villian. 

[Andrew]

Andrew, I don't pretend to know if you're as much of a book person as you are a B-movie person, but I certainly hope this film doesn't dissuade you from picking up a copy of the novel. It's a true gem.

I was fortunate to read the book long before I encountered the movie.  It has been years since I last read it, but I liked the book a lot.

[clubseal]

I know it's about three years too late, but if we're talking about desecration, look at what Hollywood (or its backwoods counterpart) did to F. Paul Wilson's The Keep. A crying shame.

[Felicity]

It was made in 1988 (not 1983). The sequel is pretty good. It has Marc Singer!