I Know What You Did Last Summer (1997)

 

So, here is the second half of my summer thrillers, even though it's not summer anymore, but, oh well. This time, we're going to explore the lore of I Know What You Did Last Summer, which is also set in my home state of North Carolina. Out of the many times that I've watched this movie, I had no idea this was based on a book. During my middle school and early high school years, I think I was familiar with Lois Duncan's work, but I never really got a chance to read her books. Instead, I've only watched a few TV movies based on her books, more specifically Killing Mr. Griffin and I've Been Waiting For You, adapted from the novel Gallows Hill. I've always wanted to read I Know What You Did Last Summer, but I never really had the chance. Finally, after all these years, I've read the novel, and here are my thoughts:

Of course, the novel is completely different from the film version. It's more like a mystery-drama that slowly turns into a suspense-thriller. The hit-and-run victim in the novel is a ten-year-old boy, which adds emotional weight to the story and makes the perpetrator's motivations more sympathetic. Most of it is character-focused rather than plot-focused. For example, unlike the film version, Julie James is your typical perky cheerleader with average grades. After the accident, she becomes a studious shut-in, prompting her to get good grades, so much so that she gets accepted to a prestigious college at the start of the novel. Helen Rivers, who came from a poor background, eventually becomes a beauty queen and lands a TV gig as a local weather girl, complete with a snazzy new apartment of her own. Ray Bronson was able to collect his bearings and took a trip to California. And then there's Barry Cox, who went on to become a Big Guy on Campus at his local university, complete with a football scholarship.  So, the core four are actually doing well for themselves; however, the past comes back to haunt them in more ways than one. The perpetrator's machinations are initially subtle. Not only does Julie get an ominous letter in the mail, but Helen discovers a newspaper clipping of the accident on her apartment door. So does Ray, and so does Barry. The group soon figures out that someone is out to punish them for what happened last summer, and that message becomes clear when Barry gets shot by an unknown assailant. When the walls are caving in and the feelings of guilt resurface, the culprit soon reveals himself to be Collingsworth "Collie" Wilson, a neighbor of Helen's and also the guy Julie was dating after she broke up with Ray. To Julie, he goes by the name of "Bud," which was also the nickname his kid brother David gave him, the same kid brother that Barry ran over. Collie is a soldier who served in Vietnam, and the death of his brother, along with his whole family falling apart, caused him to have a mental breakdown. Seeing Julie giving yellow roses at David's funeral led him to think that Julie was probably mocking him as some sick joke, but in reality, she was genuinely distraught. Unfortunately, Collie's fragile state of mind caused him to plan a revenge plot on Julie and her friends. When I first read this, I was totally caught off guard because all this time I thought he was two people. The book gives out a few hints, but then it becomes clear halfway through. It was actually well done, I really wasn't expecting that. When he goes after Helen in her apartment, she locks herself in the bathroom and eventually escapes through a small window. Soon, Collie has his eyes on Julie and lures her outside to reveal his motives. He starts to strangle Julie, but Ray comes to save the day, knocking Collie unconscious. After their horrible ordeal, Julie and Ray decide to confess to what they did last summer.

Unlike the last book I read, I thoroughly enjoyed this one. It was fast-paced, there was actual urgency, and the characters were well-rounded and interesting. It's a shame that the movie overshadowed the book because it's truly an underrated gem.

Film rights from the book were acquired by Columbia Pictures in 1974, with Producer Ray Stark casting cult favorite Olivia Hussey as Julie and Susan Dey, who was mostly known for The Partridge Family at the time, as Helen. But the production stalled due to a lack of funds. A couple of years later, the project was revived again in 1981 with Jodie Foster as Julie and Helen Hunt as, well, Helen. However, that project also fell through, as the musical Annie flopped at the box office.

Fifteen years later, a little film called Scream graced the movie theaters and became a box-office juggernaut overnight. Kevin Williamson, the screenwriter of Scream, actually penned a script for I Know What You Did Last Summer that was previously rejected; however, after the success of the aforementioned film, studio executives were finally piqued with interest. 

Although Scream was known for its self-aware satire of the slasher genre, I Know What You Did Last Summer was written to be a straightforward slasher without a wink to the audience. Instead of being set in a small town in New Mexico, Kevin Williamson changed the setting to Southport, North Carolina, a well-known fishing village. The concept of The Fisherman is based on Williamson's dad, who worked as a fisherman, and the urban legend The Hook, complete with a campfire scene that tells the story in detail.

Then came the casting. Melissa Joan Hart, who also auditioned for Scream, was approached but later declined because she thought it was a Scream rip-off, which, by the way, it is. I'm guessing she was going for the role of Julie. 

Reese Witherspoon auditioned but changed her mind. This eventually led to her boyfriend at the time, Ryan Phillippe to be cast as Barry. Maybe she was trying for the role of Helen, but I'm still banking on Julie. 

Jeremy Sisto was Jim Gillespie's original choice for Ray, but the studio execs insisted on casting Freddie Prinze Jr. for the role instead. I'm going to agree with Jim on this one; Jeremy would've been the better actor for the role. I'll talk about Freddie's "performance" later in the review. 

As the casting for Julie was on thin ice, the executives looked towards the hit teen show, Party of Five, which ironically starred Neve Campbell, the star of Scream. But there was another breakout star, Jennifer Love Hewitt, who was gaining popularity, and I guess the executives thought that this would be good stunt casting. She was initially cast as Helen; however, Jennifer went for the role of Julie, citing that she didn't want her mom to see her get killed on screen. 

Lastly, the role of Helen was the last to be cast. Luckily, there was another up-and-coming starlet who had just won an Emmy award from a daytime soap opera and was in the midst of starring in a soon-to-be hit TV show that would become a cultural phenomenon. That up-and-coming starlet was Sarah Michelle Gellar, and her star will eventually rise. 

The basic plot of I Know What You Did Last Summer kind of reminds me of A Nightmare on Elm Street. Not in a literal sense, but more like the tropes surrounding it: you have the beautiful, sympathetic blond and her hot but ill-tempered boyfriend, you have the beautiful, resourceful brunette and her hot but useless boyfriend, you have a killer that toys with them, then kills them, and the whole plot revolves around a deep dark secret that comes back to haunt them.  

Before I get to the core four, I would like to get the minor characters out of the way. 

Max, played by Johnny Galecki, known for Roseanne at the time, is a character invented for the movie only. He's portrayed as this pest who keeps pining after Julie even though she has a boyfriend, and he keeps being constantly bullied by Barry...just because. 

Max originally didn't die in the script, but because this is a slasher movie and the killer has to be some sort of ominous threat, the filmmakers decided to make him part of the body count; however, this doesn't make any sense in the narrative, considering that Max didn't have anything to do with accident, nor is he part of the core group. He's just a guy who's always there and nothing else. 

Then there is Helen's bitchy sister, Elsa, played by Bridgette Wilson, an actress best known for starring in '90s cult favorites such as Billy Madison and Mortal Kombat. In the novel, she was the plain, overweight older sister who was jealous of her sister's success. She was stuck having to work a dead-end retail job to take care of her younger siblings, while Helen had everything handed to her just because she was beautiful. In the movie, however, Elsa is just as beautiful as Helen, and she seems to have a steady job as the supervisor at her family's retail store, which looks quite lucrative, so we never really know what Elsa's deal is. It could be because she had dreams of being a beauty queen just like her younger sister, but because she had responsibilities of running the family store, she never really got to follow her dreams, though the movie never really gives us an indication of that. 

She's just portrayed as the usual asshole slasher victim we root for to die, and nothing else. 

Then there's Missy Egan, played by Anne Heche, who only had a few supporting roles before this. The movie builds up Missy as a red herring, and to be honest, that doesn't sit right with me. In the novel, she was just a girl who was trying to keep the family together after her brother's death. She actually came off pleasant, but in the movie, they decided to make her creepy for some reason, even though she's a person who's suffering from grief and loneliness. But at least Anne Heche did a good job with the few scenes she was given. 

Now we focus on our four main leads of the film: Julie, Ray, Helen, and Barry. As expected, they are far more different than how they are in the novel. 

Let's get Barry out of the way, shall we? He is, by far, one of the most irritating characters in the movie, but it helps that he's played by the handsome Ryan Phillippe, which almost helps me forget how much of an annoying twat he is. Barry in the novel is a lot more tolerable in comparison, and that's saying a lot. He still comes across like a selfish jerk who has no remorse about the accident, even though he was the one who was driving the car, and he contemplates breaking up with Helen, but doesn't exactly go through with it, leading her on and seeing other girls behind her back. But once he hears the news about Helen having a male friend, he freaks out and plans on breaking up with her on the spot. So yeah, he's quite a hypocritical jackass, but at least there's a shred of humanity in him towards the end.

Barry, in the film version, is borderline psychotic. He has this uncontrollable rage, and it's almost comical to watch at times. For starters, let me give you a list of the many crimes of Barry Cox. 

When the accident happened, Barry suggested they dispose of the body in the sea rather than have Ray make an anonymous 911 call in the book. Then he grabs Julie in a CHOKEHOLD when she refuses to make the pact, which makes me think he's not above committing violence towards women, or maybe even Helen if she gets on his bad side. 

When they suspect that Max might've been the one who wrote the letter to Julie, instead of questioning him reasonably, Barry ATTACKS him while at his job and outright THREATENS him. Then, when he thinks Ray was the one behind their attacks, he sucker PUNCHES him. 

And finally, oh my gosh, I'm getting exhausted from this, when he and Helen spot the fisherman, he TACKLES an old man who happens to wear the same slicker. He doesn't even apologize to him.

So yeah, it's pretty laughable that this guy gets away with so much crap, and I start to wonder why the group is even friends with him. He's completely unbearable. 

Okay, I have got to take a moment to talk about that shower scene. It's one of those scenes that made me realize that I'm gay, even at a young age. But like I said, Ryan Phillippe is an attractive man with an attractive body, and I just had to acknowledge that. 

As for his acting, he does a decent job, even though his character is repugnant. Luckily, he does have a bit of redemption when he swears to protect Helen in one of his final scenes, but I would've liked more of this, So I could at least have some sort of empathy towards him. But besides that, Ryan Phillippe did a good job with his role, and Barry's death was tragic enough to warrant some sympathy, but I felt more bad for Helen if anything. Overall, Barry was not an easy character to root for. 

Then we have Ray Bronson, played by Freddie Prinze Jr., who is the weakest link in this movie. Ray was a much more interesting character in the novel, just being a regular guy who wanted to live up to his father's expectations and was a genuine friend to Barry, matching his sensitive side to Barry's manly side. 

Ray was actually given more to do and had a lot more development than what they have given him in the movie. Ray is nothing more than the generic everyguy who is utterly useless at any given moment. First, when Barry holds his girlfriend Julie in a chokehold, Ray does absolutely NOTHING. He just stands there like some big dumb dog. Throughout the rest of the movie, he does nothing to help out the group's situation, especially when he was the guy who gave Missy his condolences to her brother, going by the name Billy Blue. Had he told the group that he was in fact the guy who visited Missy, everything would have been solved, and Julie wouldn't have run into The Fisherman's boat during the climax. Ray was never this dumb in the novel, but there would be no plot progression if he weren't. 

Nothing against Freddie Prinze Jr., he has grown to be a charismatic actor, and he did a decent job in the film House of Yes, but he is incredibly wooden here. There were times when he "tries" to sell a performance, but still comes off like a deer in the headlights. It may be because he had a beef with director Jim Gillespee, the reason why his performance is so flat, but it's more so the writing of his character. Ray is just a blank slate that fills up space and doesn't do much to be proactive in the story.

Aw, yes. Now we have Helen Shivers played by Sarah Michelle Gellar, who is the biggest highlight of the movie. In the novel, Helen Rivers came from a poor working-class family, and once she matured, she became a model and landed a gig at a news station. Unlike the novel, however, Helen didn't exactly find success after the events of the accident. Before I go on, I would like to take a moment to talk about Helen's last name. Why did filmmakers change it to Shivers? Is it supposed to mean that Helen shivers in fear? If so, that is really corny. Anywho, Helen really goes through the ringer in the film version. Different from her book counterpart, Helen is already well-off, but with a failed attempt at an acting career, Helen is forced to work for her sister, who clearly hates her. In just one day, Helen is really having the worst of luck. When she tries to reconcile with Julie, she's given the cold shoulder. When she tries to talk to her dad, he ignores her. Then, of course, she gets bullied by her bitchy older sister. And worst of all, The Fisherman cuts her precious long hair.

And from the looks of it, the haircut doesn't look that bad. It wasn't as if the filmmakers were going to put this awful short wig on Sarah Michelle Gellar; the hairstyle is quite flattering and is the right amount of shoulder-length.

It gets even worse for Helen when she witnesses Barry's murder during her beauty pageant recital. The most frustrating part of this scene is that the people kept holding Helen back, and no one would even go up to the balcony to check if Barry was there. Besides that, the scene was very effective and added some much-needed dramatic weight to balance out the horror elements. 

When Helen gets escorted by some idiot cop, The Fisherman lurks around a back alleyway pretending to have car trouble, which catches the cop's attention. Unlucky for him, the cop gets gutted like a fish.

Then, The Fisherman sets his sights on Helen...

This leads to one of the most thrilling and suspenseful chase sequences that I've seen in a while. Then comes ANOTHER frustrating situation when Helen races to the retail store and tries to get Elsa to open the door. Elsa takes her sweet little time, even though her sister is in distress, but she doesn't have a care in the world. This made me detest her character even more.

Thankfully, The Fisherman pays her a visit.

After being nearly tackled by The Fisherman and seeing her sister's dead body, Helen makes the great escape. She runs to the dumbwaiter, hoists herself up, jumps out of the window, into the alleyway, and just when she sees a parade down the street...

She stops and turns around. I can tell that the audience in the theater groaned in annoyance at this. Helen could've easily gotten away and hid amongst the crowd, but knowing that the beauty queen most likely won't be the final girl, they make her do something stupid to be unceremoniously killed by the slasher. I was so pissed off at this because she almost, almost made it! We were all rooting for Helen, we were all rooting for you! If the filmmakers had actually given it some thought, they could've made Helen a final girl. How about this? Why won't they make both her and Julie the final girl? Therefore, with all of the trauma they went through, defeating the killer would be a cathartic and full-circle moment for them to overcome the burden in their friendship. But, oh well, I can only dream. 

Sarah Michelle Gellar stole the show for me. She was mostly known for daytime soap operas at the time, and Buffy was just picking up steam, so this would be the role that made her a star, and what a performance! She acts her ass off in this movie, even upstaging Jennifer Love Hewitt in certain moments.

I've heard about the early developments of the screenplay, where Helen was described as "having warmth to her, but can still be a bit of bitch." But I didn't get that out of Gellar's performance. She was very earnest in her approach, which garnered Helen a lot of agency. She didn't play her off like a shallow, vapid mean girl; she portrayed her as a real person and I felt that Gellar had a hand in developing her character more. That's why Sarah Michelle Gellar was fan-freakin-tastic and was a shining beacon to an otherwise above-average slasher movie. 

Last, but not least, we have our resident Final Girl, Julie James, played by the ever-so-charming Jennifer Love Hewitt. She doesn't get a lot of fans amongst the horror community, mainly because they think of her as self-righteous and holier-than-thou, who's more concerned about the logical side of things instead of the emotional weight of the situation even though it does show that Julie does have some guilt about the accident, it's more so about how she feels and not anybody else. But I'll explore that later. Some might argue that she is a bit more interesting and likable in the book, considering her character development. Before the events of the novel, Julie was a cheerleader, which is far from the character she plays in the movie. However, after the accident, Julie uses this traumatic event in her life to improve her grades and eventually gets accepted to a prestigious college. During this time, she dates a guy named Bud, who's actually Collingsworth, the person terrorizing the core four. Of course, they would cut this subplot out of the final film, leaving Julie to be the investigative final girl who searches for the truth, other than dating a guy who just happens to be her perpetrator. 

In the film version, Julie is a straight-A student from the start and is a staunch feminist. Before the accident, Julie was sweet, endearing, and deeply cared about her friends. But after the accident, she's suffering from post-traumatic stress, is very antisocial, and is cold and distant throughout. When it comes to the novel, I liked the moments between Julie and her mom, particularly when her mom has bad premonitions of what's to come. I wished there were more scenes between her and her mom in the movie because it would've added more dramatic elements to the film, which would also explore their complicated yet loving relationship, because I thought the actress playing Julie's mom did a good job with what little she was given.

Speaking of complicated relationships, I would've liked more interactions between Julie and Helen. Considering what Helen is going through, I wanted so badly for Julie to bury the hatchet and give the comfort that Helen truly deserves. I mean, at least she went out of her way to join Julie to visit Missy. But the film never gives them enough time to make amends, and instead wants to focus on the mystery/horror aspect instead of the character study it's supposed to be. 

Julie does feel immense guilt, but the problem is that she's not confiding in anyone about it. For instance, there's a part where Julie feels bad about obviously ruining a family's life due to an accident, and Helen is actually right there with her, feeling the same shame and guilt. However, instead of understanding Helen and picking up where their friendship left off, Julie coldly shuns her. Sure, Julie feels crappy about what happened last summer, but she's not the only one who's going through it, and in some ways, it makes her kind of selfish, which made it difficult for me to be on her side. However, as the movie progresses, she's not as bad as initially perceived, and she does receive some redemption in the end.

Soon, The Fisherman starts terrorizing the core four to the point where Julie has a mental breakdown...

.

Now it's time to talk about that scene. The scene that produced countless of parodies and jokes throughout the 90s and 2000s. Yes, it's the "What are you waiting for!" scene. How this came to be was that a teenaged fan requested it, I guess because they thought it might add more dramatic tension but it came off more corny than anything. Hell, Jennifer Love Hewitt didn't even want to say the line. However, at least it's one of the more memorable parts of the movie. 

Despite the flaws in her character writing, I thought Jennifer Love Hewitt did a decent job. Whatever you think of the Julie as a character, at least Jennifer Love Hewitt made her tolerable and likable in some moments. I would even argue that Hewitt makes an effective final girl and Scream Queen, especially in the second movie. Overall, Jennifer Love Hewitt ask what was required of her and did her job well.

Finally, we get to our main villian of the piece, The Fisherman. Although he's a normal human man, The Fisherman apparanetly has the powers to hide dead bodies without a trace and teleport out of nowhere. So, throughout the whole movie, the core four have thought to have hit a guy named David Egan, who's aged up from a ten-year-old in the novel to a man in his early to mid twenties in the film. It's pretty clear when you see the body that that is not a twenty-something year old man, he's obviously a guy in his late forites or early fifties in the least. But oh well.  In the film version, David was dating a girl named Suzy whom he accidently killed in car crash. Julie thought that David intentionally went to the sea to drown out of guilt but in actuality he was already killed...

The guy that they actually hit was Ben Willis, Suzy's father. Up until that point, The Fisherman makes for effective slasher villian with cool look and a menacing edge, but once he's revealed, he's kind of generic and his motovations are murky. Sure, you could say his reasons for revenge is sympathetic, he did lose a daughter and after getting run over and left for dead in the ocean, but what did that have to do with Max? Or Elsa? Or even the idoit cop? Oh well, I guess he just loves killing for killing's sake. Muse Watson was...okay. Not great. Not memorable. But just okay. Like I said, he could be menacing but the screenplay doesn't do his performance any favors and he just comes off generic.

One of the weirder aspects of the movie is of course the nonsensical writing. None of it is really Kevin Williamson's fault, the producers probably saw dollar signs and decided to greenlight the first draft. 

Like I mentioned above, The Fisherman has teleporatation abilites despite being a normal, human man and then there's the scene when Julie discovers Max's dead body in the trunk of her car and just as she drives to Helen's house, the trunk is completely clean with no body in sight. Let me remind you that the trunk was filled with slimly crabs crawling around and not to mention the smell. Then, on top of that, this was all done during the daytime. How could The Fisherman plant a dead body, put crabs all around it, and by the time Julie and the crew go checking on it, completely cleans it out in a nick of time? Think about it, a man in a slicker, in daytime mind you, puts a dead body in a trunk of a car (how did he get the keys?), decorated with crabs, cleans the car out in a span of seconds, then drags the body out, which is obviously heavy, without a trace. There had to be witnesses, there's no way that's logical.

Then there's the part where the idoit cop makes a joke about Helen's haircut, asking her if The Fisherman was the one that cut her hair. Why would that even cross his mind? She probably just decided to get a haircut one day, who knows?

But the most frustrating part of the movie is definitely the climax. So, you have Julie and Ray going toe to toe with Ben Willis. Ray, being the dumbass that he is, gets knocked around and thrown off at the ocean and Julie is the typical damsel in distress: screaming, running around, and expected to be saved. Sidney Prescott, she is not. Speaking of Sidney, she took out two of the killers in the first Scream film. TWO. The only thing Ben Willis has is this measly fishing hook they could easily knock down with a pole or crowbar. It's just so ridiculous. Just by sheer luck, they were able to get away when Ben makes the fatal mistake of getting his fish hook caught on the boat's ropes, pulling him up, severing his hand, and being swung out into the depths of the ocean. It's so over-the-top that it's funny. Unlike the novel, where Julie and Ray decide to confess to the police about the accident, in this version, they decide to just keep it on the hush-hush in terms of why Ben Willis would be after them. And on top of that, the police never found his body. Do I smell sequel bait?

Then we have our cliched happy ending. Everything's fine and dandy and no lingering trauma. Julie and Ray are living in the midst of their young love bliss and Julie seems to be back to her old perky self until there's a message in the shower...Now, originally Julie was supposed to recieve an email titled, I STILL KNOW but the producers thought it was too anticlimatic, so instead she recieved the message in a steaming shower. Maybe as a homage to Pyscho? Heck, I don't know. It's pretty cheesy but, hey, what can you do? As expected, The Fisherman burst through the shower for one last jump scare and that's the end of the movie. 

So, what I think of I Know What You Did Last Summer? It's pretty mediorce to be honest with you. It has it's moments such as the Helen chase scene and some of the acting is pretty decent, however, the story could've been executed better. Yeah, it's a slasher movie but it could've had more substance than that. Lois Duncan was actually appalled that they would turn her novel into slasher movie, especially since her daugther was murder not too long ago, which kind of gives it a bad reputation because of it. It's also a movie that's very much of it's time. The poster alone shows that trend of late 90s/early 2000s teen horror that was all the rage back in the day. You have the cast who was part of some popular show either on the WB, ABC, UPN or what not, all scurnched up on the poster with some mysterious entity or killer lurking in the background. I've seen it all, but then again, I don't mind it. I wouldn't say that I Know What You Did Last Summer is my favorite movie. I watch Scream over this any day but at least it's somewhat watchable.

Eventually, this spawned a cult following. Not only did this get two sequels but it also has a TV series and a requel...a freakin requel! Okay, I'll probably have to save that for another time. But until then, this movie was just mildly okay.

My Last Word: Not good. Not bad. Just Okay.

 

Cape Fear (1962, 1991)

 

DISCLAIMER: This was meant to be published by mid-August, but somehow, I accidentally wiped out my whole review, and now I'm a little behind on my "Summer thrillers," but I'm still trucking on, and maybe sometime in September, I'll post my I Know What You Did Last Summer review. So without further ado, here is my review of the Cape Fear films. 

Here, I present to you my summer thrillers, based on books, two of which are set in my home state of North Carolina. In this round, we have Cape Fear.

Now I had no idea this was based on a book, so I decided to take a look at it. The book...was not an easy read. You see, it has this issue of "Show, Don't Tell." Although it's a term used for screenplays, this could also be used for novels. Remember the scene where Max confronts Sam at his car? Instead of "showing" this scene, it's explained to us by Sam while he has a picnic with his wife Carol and the kids. Oh, how very suspenseful. Oh, what about the scene where Carol sees Max stalking the family's house? This is also explained by Carol. You see a pattern here? It just takes out the excitement of what's supposed to be a spine-tingling thriller, especially when Sam and Carol are so casual about a man who's potentially stalking their family.

So the story goes like this: Sam Bowden and Max Cady used to be in the army together, and while on a mission in Australia, Sam witnesses Max brutally raping a fourteen-year-old local girl. Sam testifies against him, putting him away for fourteen years of hard labor. Eventually, Sam moved on, married his wife, Carol, and had three kids. Yes, there are three kids instead of one. Oldest Nancy, middle child Jamie, and youngest Bucky. Max, who was married once with a child, but after he was tried and convicted, his wife moved on and got remarried to a plumber, and his kid doesn't even remember him. So Max has come to collect his just due, and he's itching to wreak havoc on Sam's family. 

Yes, the premise may sound thrilling and on the edge of your seat, but the execution sucks. Sure, the family gets shaken up when Max poisons the dog, but it's back to your basic family activities. Max only appears in one scene and never appears again until the finale. I guess the author wanted him to be shrouded in mystery, but it never heightens the panic surrounding his character. Sam seems to treat his encounter with Cady as just another day at the park. 

Although she plays a pivotal part in both film versions, the teenage daughter, Nancy, doesn't have much of a role (as well as the other kids) in the novel. She is the typical teenage girl who frets and casually dates boys. Not one time does she share a scene with Max, even though she seems to be his main target.

So we go through the middle portion with nothing really going on until we arrive at a bar and have a chat with a woman to whom I refer as "Woman at the Bar." Before I go on, there is just one more pet peeve that I have with this novel, and it is the constant monologues. It's to the point where I ask myself, "Do people really talk like this in real life?" So in this scene in the book, there is yet another monologue where the Woman at the Bar explains her brutal encounter with Max Cady. So as the story goes, she meets up with Max for a good time.  She asks too many questions about who he is and what he does to the point where he gets irritated and beats her half to death. Yes, it's not shown, it's explained. In every detail. It just takes away the suspense of it all. Not to mention, The Woman at the Bar is more annoyed than traumatized by what Max did to her. He beat her to a pulp, and there's not an ounce of fear or even a distrust of men. She seems to just waltz into the bar like it's nothing at all. 

So, all of a sudden, the middle son, Jamie, gets shot in the arm. This incident actually happened at a summer camp. Yes, Sam and Carol had the brightest idea to drop off their kids at summer camp while there's a psychopath at large. Seriously, that's how careless Sam and Carol are in the novel. And although there is a grave sense of urgency, nothing ever comes of it. Even the son isn't traumatized by the fact that a grown man tried to murder him. He's too happy about the graze on his arm.

Things finally get going when Max rigs the family car, prompting Sam and Carol to take action. Once we get to the climax, Carol uses herself as bait to lure in Max while Sam and a rookie cop target him. So, the plan works...somewhat. Carol gets roughed up while the rookie cop dies from a stab wound. Sam, however, recklessly shoots all around the house until Max gets shot and bled to death in the backyard. That's it. That's the climax of the novel. Are you freakin' kidding me? So after that, the family goes back to normal, enjoying their summer vacation as Sam and Carol contemplate having another child. THE END.

Wow. What a waste of time. I don't see how this is called a 'suspense' novel when there's absolutely no suspense. I actually had to skip a few pages; it was that tedious to read. Other than that, no matter what you think about either film version, at least it's way better than the novel. 

Now we get to discuss the 1962 version and, as you know, there were a lot of changes made from the source material. I'm thinking that the screenwriter for the film read the book and was like, "Oh, I have got to punch this up more." And judging by the opening scene, that's exactly what he did. 

The film begins with Max walking his way to the courthouse as the booming film score plays, making him a larger-than-life character. The opening scene also subtly establishes Max's true colors. A woman walks by and drops her books, but Max doesn't even bother to help, which shows his total disregard for women. Then two young girls walk by, and Max leers at them, showing how much of a sleazy creep he is. 

Max stalks Sam at his workplace, trying to find the right opportunity to confront him, like a tiger waiting for its prey. 

Now, the scene where Max confronts Sam could be easily told through narration as Sam recounts the events. Films of that time had a sort of habit of doing that, but I'm glad the scene plays out as it is with an even pace. 

The story in the '62 film version is the typical revenge thriller. Sam was simply a lawyer who put Max away, and Max wants to get even. 

Alfred Hitchcock was actually in talks to direct, and considering the tawdry subject of the film, this would've been right up his alley. But scheduling conflicts got in the way, and that's when director J. Lee Thompson, who was a fan of Hitchcock's work, stepped in.

Speaking of Hitchcock, many film auteurs would look towards Psycho as being the precursor to the slasher genre, but I would also like to mention Cape Fear as being an inspiration as well, particularly with the chase scenes involving Max and Sam's daughter Nancy. She, running frantically towards the library while Max slowly saunters towards her, is very reminiscent of the Michael/Laurie chase scene in 1978's Halloween. 

The film was produced by Gregory Peck's production company, Melville Productions. So it may, Gregory Peck was cast as the lead. This would also mark his second acting role, playing a lawyer when he starred in To Kill A Mockingbird in the same year. Gregory Peck, of course, does a solid job as Sam Bowden, fitting in nicely into the good guy role.

For the role of Carol, now Peggy Bowden, actress Polly Bergen was one of the last actors to be cast. From what I observe, it's a very passable role that any actress could play; however, Polly Bergen does a good job of what she's given. Though there is one thing that I liked about the book, yes, I'm going to throw a bone here, is the witty banter between Sam and Carol, which seems to be missing in the film version. I also liked the fact that she wasn't the typical hysterical woman, and she had an intelligence about her, which made her and Sam a great team when it came to problem-solving. And another thing, I liked that she was very fearless and gung-ho about killing Max Cady, making her fiercely protective of her family, and quite frankly, an all-out badass to be honest. Sadly, she just wasn't given much to do here. 

For the role of Nancy, J. Lee Thompson wanted Hayley Mills, who worked with him in his previous film, Tiger Bay, but she was unavailable, so Lori Martin was cast in the role instead. Unfortunately, Thompson gave her a really hard time on the set, all because he couldn't cast Mills in the role, but this was at a time when she was mostly known for her Disney projects, which would probably be a bit jarring to some viewers to see her in a film where a rapist is stalking her. So, I think Lori Martin is really solid in the role, capturing the innocence and vulnerability of her character, especially in the scenes between her and Robert Mitchum, which are the most effective and bone-chilling moments of the film.

As they were developing the character of Max Cady, the studio execs didn't want to portray Max as a war veteran because it might reflect badly on the military. Even though it was well past the 1940s and well into the early 1960s, this was still a very patriarchal time. As for the casting, actor Telly Savalas screen-tested for the role but eventually went for the role of Private Eye Charlie Sievers instead. From how he's described in the novel, I think actor Yul Bryner would've been good as Max Cady, as he would portray a rather intimidating villain in the film, Westworld. However, Peck and Thompson had their eye on Robert Mitchum, who was known to be a film noir staple at the time. Mitchum wanted no part of it, but Gregory Peck and his production team lured him in with a bouquet of flowers and a bottle of bourbon. Robert Mitchum knocks it out of the park as the sleazily maniacal Cady. He's very slow and methodical, and from that cold stare, you know he's up to no good. Like I said previously, Max and Nancy shared no scenes together, but Screenwriter James R. Webb amps up the tension by adding in cat-and-mouse scenes to really show how much of a dangerous threat Max truly is. Furthermore, having Sam's daughter to be his one and only target adds more to the suspense, considering what he's capable of.

After his fair of stalking and harassing Sam, Max has his eye on at The Woman At The Bar, a drifter named Diane. Instantly enraptured by his southern charm, Diane tags along with him.

But as it follows the events of the book, we know something's bad going to happen. 

After her horrible ordeal, the police convince Diane to testify, but, worried about having to recount what Max did to her in each agonizing detail in the newspapers, Diane refuses and gets the hell out of Dodge. The police do a piss poor job of convincing her, by the way. Showing her various photos of Max's victims really didn't help much, and, of course, it would scare her off, so the police really messed up Sam's chances of protecting his family, which led Sam to take drastic measures, such as hiring some thugs to beat Max up at the behest of private eye Charlie Sievers. But they are no match for Cady, as he takes them out one by one. With fewer options available, Sam hides his family in their boathouse. This is where the climax of the film takes place. 

It's not long until Max scopes out their location. This is where he slowly transforms into an animalistic caveman as he takes off his shirt and swims towards the houseboat like a shark. He kills the cop on duty and bursts his way in to attack Peggy. 

While molesting her and shaking her around like a ragdoll, Max pushes Peggy aside and has his sights on his true target, Sam's daughter Nancy.

The way Max leers at Nancy with that smug look while she cowers in fear is known to be one of the scariest moments. 

Nancy tries to defend herself with a firepoker, but Max grabs hold of her. He forces her outside until he sees Sam, his ultimate true target, and pushes her aside to go after him. 

The two go at it in this epic battle. Just when Max gets the upper battle and seemingly drowns him, Sam emerges from the water and hits Max with a rock.

He grabs the gun, wounds him with a gunshot, and...doesn't kill him. Sam goes on this long speech about how Max is going to spend the rest of his life in prison, and, just like that, the Bowden family drives off to safety. That's it. That's the end. Wow, what a disappointing ending to an overall decent film. It's actually way more anti-climactic than the book. Now I wouldn't say that the film is perfect. It's very of its time, and it has this moral compass of "Thou Shalt Not Kill," which leaves no excitement in the ending. Not that Sam had to kill Max, but it just needed to be more engaging instead of some half-ass speech. 

Now, it's time to discuss the 1991 version, and, spoiler alert! This is my favorite adaptation.

First and foremost, I would like to talk about the amazing credit sequence. It starts off with this liquid, watery effect, superimposed with these unsettling images. The updated score is now accompanied by Elmer Bernstein, and it's freakin epic! This time it comes with a mighty force. Then we transition to Danielle, the Bowdens' teenage daughter, reciting her short story, which sets up the events of the film.

That's when we get to our next transition of Robert Deniro as Max Cady, pumping iron in his jail cell. This comes to show that this version of Cady means business, and he's not taking ANY prisoners. 

Of course, there are some changes to the main story, but director Martin Scorsese made sure to make Max's revenge a bit more personal this time. Sam was actually Max's defense attorney, but because of the heinous nature of the crime, Sam concealed the evidence that would've cleared Max. Unsurprisingly, he rots in prison for fourteen years. And what was this evidence that would've gotten Max off the hook? Before I answer that, I'm going to go on a tangent. So, there's your warning. This evidence involved the victim being promiscuous, to which I say, Why the fuck does that even matter? Why would anyone think that just because a woman has had a few sexual partners, she deserves to be savagely beaten and raped? Sure, Sam did screw Max over by not revealing this evidence, but why is that relevant to the case? Why would Max get away with this crime? Because the girl was promiscuous? I don't get it. And that's what makes this version a whole lot more interesting to me. The book and the 62' film seem to uphold the justice system to a higher standard, but in this version, it criticizes it and shows how corrupt the justice system really is. For instance, both Sam and Max use the law to one-up each other; that's how broken the system is. It's misconceived, mishandled, and everybody gets hurt in the end. Diane went through hell in the 62' version. When the police interviewed her, there was no empathy, no comfort. They just pressured her to testify against Cady, not knowing that she had to go through a lot of therapy and counseling just to get through the process.

Then there's Sam's law clerk, Lori, in this version played by Illeana Douglas, who's a very underrated actress, by the way. She's more than just some woman at the bar; she's an actual character. 

Lori is witty, bubbly, personable, and overall likable. Sure, she has a crush on Sam, who is a married man and is a bit flirtatious, but it's all fairly innocent, and in most cases, it happens to the best of us. Lori eventually becomes a character you care about. 

Knowing that Sam won't reciprocate her feelings, Lori goes to a bar all on her lonesome...until she meets Max. It starts off innocent. Max with his cool, suave, southern charm, Lori with her girlish bubbliness. Oh no, nothing goes wrong here...

But once they hit the bedroom, the worst is yet to come. This time, the scene is not described in heavy detail like the book, nor is it unseen like the original. The scene is shown in full view, and it's disturbing to watch. 

Max doesn't just beat her; he utterly destroys her, and I think the reason why he targeted Lori was not because he wanted to get his fix, but because he wanted to send a message to Sam. If anyone's close to him, whether that be a family member or a colleague, he'd hunt them down just to get the message clear. Not only is Lori's suffering disturbing, but it's also sad. The once bubbly, perky law clerk is now battered, bruised, and traumatized. So what would prevent Lori from testifying against Max? Well, the answer is Lori was openly flirting with her employer, to which I say, Why the fuck does that matter? Sure, it could also be that Lori would be uncomfortable being cross-examined by her colleagues, but still, this woman was basically savaged and beaten half to death, isn't that evidence enough? It all just comes to show that the law continues to fail women. 

The Bowdens aren't your happy-go-lucky 1950s family like the book and the original. There's actually a lot of angst and turmoil that's hidden beneath their perfect facade. 

Sam Bowden is far from a straight-laced good guy. As mentioned above, he is an unsavory lawyer who screwed over his client. Also, not too long ago, he had an affair on his wife. So it shows that Sam is a very flawed character, but it doesn't make him a bad person. Max, in a way, represents Sam's atonement, facing his shortcomings but also overcoming them to save his family. 

Originally, Martin Scorsese wanted Harrison Ford in the role, and I can definitely see that. He matches the same energy as Gregory Peck's strong, suave everyman type. However, Ford was more interested in playing Max Cady, I guess, so he wanted to break away from being typecast as the hero all the time. That's when Nick Nolte stepped in, and he actually fought to get the role. Since Nolte is known for playing the tough guy, it's a good change of pace that he plays a less action-oriented and yet still commanding role. I feel like the flaws in Sam's character bring out the best in Nick Nolte's performance. You can tell that he's a man who seeks atonement for the wrong that he's done by fighting off Max Cady's manipulations and winning his family over, which makes Sam a much more interesting character than in the book and original. 

Leigh, formerly known as Carol, has a lot more agency than her '62 counterpart. From what we know about Leigh is that she's prone to emotional fits. Still, you really can't blame her, considering that her husband had an affair on her and that the psychopathic Max Cady has poisoned her dog and is stalking her family, again on Sam's accord. 

Furthermore, this makes Leigh a very sympathetic character, especially when it's mentioned that she went through a long depression due to her marriage crisis. 

In the climax, she tries to reassure Max that she knows what it's like to be in isolation, even though Max is too much of a sociopath to let her get through to him. But at least she tried using her empathy to save her family, which makes her the emotional core of the film. 

Diane Keaton was in talks to play Leigh Bowden, but didn't get the part. Eventually, the legendary Jessica Lange, who wanted to work with Martin Scorsese, won the part, and boy, does she act her ass off. By giving Leigh more dimension and more to work with, it gives the opportunity to let Lange's acting prowess shine. 

Danielle, formerly known as Nancy, is now an angsty teen with hidden desires. She is not quite the dutiful daughter like in the original, and throughout the film, she's pretty much at odds with her dad. Just like any other typical '90s teen, she likes to smoke pot, listen to rock n' roll, and has a passion for creative writing. The thing about Danielle is that she's an observer. She's not just some kid who hangs around the background; she knows things. She's...curious. And it's that curiosity that leads her to Max Cady. Danielle is not terrified of him; she's more fascinated. I actually find that to be even more disturbing. Yes, I will talk about "that scene," but I'll save that for the Max Cady section.

Danielle eventually takes the wool from her eyes and sees what a monster Cady truly is, which prompts her to take drastic measures for survival. I have to hand it to Danielle; she is quite the ultimate badass during the climax.

Christina Applegate, Shannon Doherthy, Reese Witherspoon, Winona Ryder, and Drew Barrymore were sought out for the role of Danielle Bowden.

Drew Barrymore would've been an interesting choice, considering that she was a troubled teen herself. Had she gotten the role, the part would've been meta in context. However, in Barrymore's words, she totally blew the audition, and it was because she was around a Hollywood Heavyweight like Robert De Niro and got totally nervous. 

Enter Juliette Lewis, who did a few supporting roles and was just fresh off a TV movie with her then-boyfriend Brad Pitt. Lewis absolutely knocks it out of the park, and it helps that Juliette herself was 17 years old, which makes her performance more authentic. She's innocent yet intense, and you can tell that intensity is breaking out from the compounds of her childhood to adulthood. This performance shows how versatile an actress she is. Lewis got nominated for an Oscar and deservedly so. When it comes to Juliette Lewis' career, the rest is history. She became a cult '90s favorite, and hopefully, she'll be able to get that golden statue. Fingers crossed. 

Now we have crossed into the final boss of the section. Without further ado, here is Robert De Niro as Max Cady. Holy crap! His whole performance is like a hellish rollercoaster ride. I would literally go on and on about how insanely good his performance is, but first, let's explore the many machinations of Max Cady.

 

In this updated version, Cady is a loud, abrasive fundamentalist who labels himself as the punisher of law and justice. He even has tattoos to prove it. Plus, there is nothing scarier than a psychopathic fundamentalist with a god complex. Max, this time, isn't quiet in his approach; he makes his presence known. 

First, he becomes a nuisance, cackling loudly in the movie theater, smoking his cigar, just to fuck with Sam. Then there's the creeping and stalking that soon leads to him poisoning Leigh's poor dog. Soon, Max Machinations becomes more violent and confrontational. First, there's the attack on Lori, and then, Max does the most despicable thing of all...he attempts to seduce Sam's teenage daughter. 

Ok, now it's time to talk about "that scene.

Initially, it was going to be a typical chase scene similar to the original, but Scorsese decided to make it a seduction instead, which I find to be twice as disturbing. At first, it does seem like it's building up to be a chase scene as Danielle saunters quietly into the auditorium. When she sees Max, Danielle is scared, but slowly, she is swept up by his impeccable southern charm. Again, I would like to point out how amazing Juliette Lewis' acting is. She's scared, she's shy, she's awkward, she's intrigued. She has all these emotions, and she still comes off as authentic. This was her moment to shine. 

But this is when the scene gets really uncomfortable. Now that Max has shown his intellectual and chivalrous side, he has got Danielle hook, line, and sinker. She is now trapped in his web, and that's when he entices her...then kisses her. It got me to wonder that this is probably what happened to the girl he assaulted those many years ago. Just from that encounter, Max leaves a lasting impression on Danielle.

This time, Sam decides to take action and hires a couple of thugs to take Max down a peg. 

Not only does Max take them down one by one, but he senses Sam hiding behind an alleyway and makes a long speech about how he will conquer all, beating down any mere man who challenges him. It's a really chilling monologue, and De Niro absolutely sells it. Although he knows he's hiding, he doesn't attack Sam physically. Oh no. He uses the LAW on his side. 

Special mention to Robert Mitchum and Gregory Peck, who made cameo appearances. This time, Robert Mitchum is on the side of good, portraying Lieutenant Elgart, who's working with Sam, and Gregory Peck is a sleazy, holier-than-thou lawyer who represents Max in his restraining order case. 

Yes, you heard that right. Max puts a restraining order against Sam. So not only is Sam's job on the line, but Max has the power to stalk, harass, and possibly kill Sam whenever he pleases. Let's just say that Sam is royally fucked, and he has to try every method to keep Max at bay. 

Before we get to the climax, let's talk about the pure awesomeness of Robert De Niro. He is beyond dynamite!

You won't believe this, but Bill Murray of all people was approached to play Max Cady. Murray was known for playing in comedies at the time, so it would've been jarring to see him in this type of role. Not that he would've been bad, he can play well in serious dramatic roles, but playing a heinous psychotic criminal like Cady, I still question that.

Other actors such as Nicholas Cage (very interesting choice), Brad Dourif (another interesting choice), and Jack Nicholson were also considered.

But then there's Willem Dafoe, a definite runner-up, as he would match Max's chaotic, unhinged depravity. 

However, Robert De Niro, who was a lifelong collaborator of Martin Scorsese, landed the role, and he gives it his all. He went so far as to go to a dentist to file his teeth in, choosing his own wardrobe, and perfecting his southern accent for at least 2-3 months. Of course, it all paid off in the end.

De Niro's performance is so memorable that it might even overshadow Mitchum's portrayal. Yes, I know that's a controversial take, but I think Robert De Niro's version of Max Cady is much scarier, in my opinion. Think about this, Mitchum is sneaky like a snake. He slicks, he slithers, until he eats his prey. De Niro, on the other hand, is like a wild, feral animal that jumps and claws at your face. He's unpredictable, and that's the reason why he's so intimidating.

This was Robert De Niro's movie, fair and square, and he comes in like a hurricane. He plays a character that you're repulsed by, but at the same time, you can't keep your eyes off him. That's how great his performance is. 

Now we finally get to the Rising Conflict as Sam is on the lookout with the help of private investigator Claude Kersek.

But as you all know, as it happened in the book and the original, Max kills Kersek, and even kills Danielle's beloved maid, Graciela. So, this prompts the Bowden family to flee on their houseboat, but just in the nick of time, Max finds them. How, you may ask? He hides under their car. There's a moment where he gets out from under the car, and a woman has a look that reads, "What the fuck?" I just couldn't help but laugh.

Now we finally get to the climax, where the Bowden family fights off Max. It may suffer from ending fatigue, but it's a whole lot better than the original movie's ending. The action takes place in this epic rainstorm, and you're constantly on the edge of your seat. 

After Danielle sets him on fire, sending him down into the ocean, Max springs out like a bat out of hell. Now, riddled with these Freddy Kruger-like burn sores, Max has unveiled himself as the monster he truly is, no longer hiding under a suave southern facade. 

When the houseboat is completely demolished, Sam and Max duke it out one last time. Just as Sam grabs a rock to give Max the final blow, the raging sea washes him away. I see this as a sort of nature vs. man type of thing. Maybe Mother Nature has its own beef with Max Cady. 

Deep into the bowels of the ocean, Max slowly sinks to the surface, his eyes still burning into Sam. But, eventually, that fire has now been extinguished. 

Although the Bowden family survived the wrath of Max Cady, the trauma is still there. Well, at least Danielle has something to write in her short story. That final shot of Danielle staring out into the sea is so haunting, and it's an image that will seep into your brain. That is how you do an ending. Not some anticlimactic death or self-righteous speech, but a narration on the exploration of trauma and how to deal with it. 

Okay, I'm just gonna say it right off the bat, the consensus says that this is the better adaptation. I've said it once, and I'll say it again. Hell, not even a year later or so, after the film, The Simpsons, yes, The Simpsons did a parody of this movie. If The Simpsons make a parody of your film, you've got a classic on your hands.

Iconic lines, Iconic scenes, great writing, great acting, this is, hands down, one of the best remakes so far. 

I heard there was a TV series in development, starring Javier Bardem as Max Cady, Amy Adams as Leigh/Amanda Bowden, and Patrick Wilson as Sam/Tom Bowden. Yeah, those are good actors, and I'll know they'll do an awesome job, but I don't think it will be half as good as the 1991 version. It's at the top of the charts for me, and it's one of Martin Scorsese's best films.

My Last Word: The '91 version all the way. Highly recommend it.