I don't have all the words right now but this film is a work of art.

best movie i've ever seen.

It's an amazing and heartbreaking story.

This movie feels like it was made purely to piss off people who want good shows

Well, this is actually my fav King story. Not that I don't like Shining, Mile, It etc. there's just something about this one, I really like. As with all books, you put your own faces on the characters, which makes it kind of hard to say whether or not, a cast is right or wrong. In this case, I will pick 3 people out. First and foremost, Steven Webber. Not that I have anything agains him, but he bares no resemblance of the Steve Ames in the story. I don't want to get into a lot about it here, it simply makes no point. Read the book, you'll see for yourself. Cynthia Smith. Again, she does not bare any visual resemblance to a girl, that is described as Orphan Annie From Hell. In the book, she comes across as a bit naive, but sharp witted and humorous. Not so much here though. And that's a shame, she's a great character in the book, one eaaily connects with. The last is Tom Billingsly the Vet. He's a lot more edgey in the book than in the movie. I don't know why that switch was made. But that goes for all the characters I've mentioned here.The rest of the cast fits pretty well, Ron Pearlman, should have played a bit more on the false sense of security and kindness Entragian originally uses.The speed of the movie, I don't get. You don't see how the Carvers got there, you don't get the background story of what has happened over the last few days. Only short bits anyway. There's also made changes that generally don't make sense, both in terms of storyline and characters.For what it is, it's an OK piece of made for TV film. But do yourself a favour, read the novel fist.It's one of those

Okay, I see many people have reviewed this movie already, and the critical ones seem to either be fans of the book who hate the adaptation, or people who haven't read the book and thought it was boring. To the first group my question is: You thought the book was any good? I'm sorry, but this book turned me off Stephen King, and I guess I won't quickly read any of his new books anymore. Yes the main theme of his books always was the struggle between good and evil, but in this book he made it so blatantly religious it's simply offensive. Being critical about the character of God doesn't change anything about that, especially because there are no justifications given for this so- called supreme being whatsoever. The characters ask the question: If there's a God, why is he so cruel, the lame answer comes from David (and is confirmed by the plot). There is a God, best not to ask any more questions about him. Well wow, give the man a Nobel prize, hallelujah. What kind of an answer is that? Making the hero of a book a teenage boy with a Jesus complex is such a cop-out. How does he know anything? Because God tells him. Why doesn't God tell him important stuff like, best not drive down that road, there's a monster there who's gonna kill your entire family? Unanswered. "God is Cruel". Wow. If I were a Christian, I would be offended by that. Being an atheist it just makes me angry that religion is being presented as the solution, while glossing over all the evil things this God dude is clearly up to. The movie makes no effort to mask the "praise-the-lord-do-not-ask- difficult-questions" mentality either, the producers must have thought there was a market for a bible-belt evangelist horror flick. Instead of using a God-driven plot to actually discuss the difficulties this imaginary friend brings to the party, it presents the questions and answers them in the lamest possible way. "God is cruel, love him and serve him, or else some sicko-cop from hell is going to suck your soul out through your nose." That message spoke to me both from the book, and from the film. It amazes me they got together a halfway decent cast for this one. The cop is played very convincingly. A bit dumb to kill him halfway through the movie. Then there's Tom Skerrit's character. Again : Great actor, wasted on a script full of unrealistic God-fearing bull. The boy is okay as well, but I really pity that little fellow. Anyone having seen him in this movie with half a braincell will forever associate him now with a smart-ass Jesus-freak who claims to be special, but has no real answers to anything. Pardon my french, but this was one of the dumbest movies I've ever seen in my life, and if you think it spoke to you on some deep spiritual level, please, grow up, let go of your mysterious imaginary friend on a cloud, and understand you were duped. For any atheist, stay away from this film, stay FAR away from it.

I read Desperation (and its twin, the Regulators) years ago when they were released and like most King novels, though "gee, this would be a good movie if done right." I never knew about the miniseries and found it here on IMDb. Upon that discovery, my internal argument went: "Five stars, meh. King wrote the teleplay though, so it can't be all bad." I took the plunge, watching this with my wife. I've read it, she has not. We are both King fans and enjoy his work. And in the end, we both like this production.The teleplay closely follows the novel, and there are plenty of details for those who have read it. The casting could have been better, I think - all of the actors involved seemed a little less than convincing but they also weren't phoning it in. Ron Perlman was great as the lead bad guy, and as a reader he was just what I expected. Tom Skerrit was the other big name that people will know, and I didn't think he was enough of an asshole (the character in the book most decidedly is). The movie itself plays out more like a horror flick of King's in the vein of Carrie or his earlier work, which is not a bad thing, but I felt it detracted from the deeper story underneath at times. I would have preferred more character development but again, King wrote the teleplay and if he felt it told the story, I can live with that. Kudos to King for providing the back story that is necessary to the plot in a concise way that the movie format needed instead of trying to weave it in more subtly.My wife, having not read the book, had more questions about what was going on at times but agreed that it kept her interest right up through the end. Thus, my recommendation is to watch this if you like King's work, but it would not be an introduction to his world. I also believe that reading the book first will deepen your enjoyment of the movie because it, too, holds your interest and keeps you wondering.

There are NO spoilers in this review, just questions I would like answered! My one question is: how? How on earth could such a talented writer, who brought such amazing horror novels such as: IT, Pet Semetary, Carrie, Christine and The Stand, write such nonsensical drivel. Everything, from the random comments the characters would make to the religious droning which was too contrived and forced to be of any depth, was terrible. The story, after starting off with a bang, descended literally into nothing. What the hell happened? Someone tell me please! Now, I have not read the novel, which is probably better than this movie, but an ounce of explanation would have helped. Who is Tak? Where did he come from? Why did he speak in a computerised voice? Was he God? What happened to the hundreds of dogs, did they just vanish? Those are a few questions I would love answered, as the story barely touches upon them. Besides the lackluster story, the characters are clichéd to the point of embarrassment. I mean, come on Mr. King: a skeptic, phony writer who becomes the hero, a kid who can speak with God, a drunken old man who tells the story, give me a break! Furthermore, it does not help that there are three good actors out of the bunch (Tom Skeritt, who looks like he is sleepwalking through the role, Steven Weber and the always reliable Ron Perlman). The little religious kid could NOT act to save his life, neither could the annoying hitchhiker or the kid's parents.What else is wrong here? Poor special effects, a made-for-TV feel and mediocre direction courtesy of regular Stephen King collaborator Mick Garris (who I find incredible overrated). Admittedly, he does conjure up a few genuine frights and a couple of eerie scenes, but these can not make up for the slow pace and lack of interesting story. There are only a few King adaptations which I have thought either fall into the overrated category or not-as-good-as-they-could-have-been category and this falls into the latter (assuming the book was at least good).1½/5