Head and Foot

Discussion in 'Misery' started by Neil W, Jan 29, 2014.

  1. Neil W

    Neil W Well-Known Member

    Two things about this excellent movie:

    One, given the extent to which the book takes place in Paul's head - nearly unfilmable - the adaptation did very well to capture the book's essence so strongly.

    Two, I can understand why they took the line they did with the foot, but I preferred what happened in the book! :D
    kingricefan, mcpon14, Riot87 and 8 others like this.

    GNTLGNT The idiot is IN

  3. Riot87

    Riot87 Love him forever

    I agree with the foot part that always got on my nerves that they changed it.
  4. blunthead

    blunthead Well-Known Member

    In William Goldman's book Which Lie Did I Tell?, Goldman, the screenwriter for Misery, fought tooth and nail to include in the movie the exact book-version of the hobbling sequence (exclaiming something to the effect that the writing was the greatest thing he'd ever read in his life). But later states that director Rob Reiner and the producers were correct in their decision not to put it on the screen that way; that they were were right in feeling it would've been too much for an average audience.
  5. mayday10

    mayday10 Member

    king family fan and kingricefan like this.
  6. Good job with it. That scene makes me cringe from pain every time.
    king family fan and kingricefan like this.
  7. mcpon14

    mcpon14 Well-Known Member

    I agree. It was so visceral. It reminded me of the scene in the first Saw movie where the guy had to saw off his own ankle and when the Jackass crew had to give themselves papercuts with the sharp-edged flaps of manila envelopes.
    king family fan and kingricefan like this.
  8. kingricefan

    kingricefan All-being, keeper of Space, Time & Dimension.

    The scene in the movie induces the terror it's supposed to. I think if they had done it the way it's done in the book it would have become the ultimate gross-out. I think the execs at Castle Rock were correct in their thinking- the audience (at that time) wouldn't have been able to handle it.
    king family fan and mcpon14 like this.
  9. mcpon14

    mcpon14 Well-Known Member

    I agree. I think it is to get a wider audience because the market for that kind of violence is too narrow.
    king family fan and kingricefan like this.
  10. Kingfisher

    Kingfisher Well-Known Member

    If you think about it, that form of hobbling would have been more effective to keep a person captive. The visceral effect of cutting off an appendage and cauterizing it has a psychological terror attached to it but the limb itself would heal and a stump can be somewhat functional I'd guess. Completely reshattering a leg is a whole different story. That limb is basically unusable, the captive would be going nowhere without being in excruciating pain.
    king family fan and kingricefan like this.

Share This Page

Finders Keepers