Das Spiel

Wäre ich Flanagan, ich würde ein paar Details ändern. Die langen Rückblenden würde ich beschränken, das Filmmaterial um zwanzig Minuten kürzen. Carla hätte ich komplett ausgezogen und mit ihr eine Hardcore-Pornoszene gedreht, damit richtig was zu sehen ist. Das mysteriöse Gespenst, den hungrigen Cuja und besonders die luxuriöse Gore-Szene möchte ich hervorheben, bei der mein Gesichtsausdruck vor Ekel ganz schief war stand. (60%) (07.10.2017)

Das Spiel war inhaltlich ein sehr ehrgeiziger psychologischer Thriller, den ein durchschnittlicher Autor kaum bewältigen konnte. Unter Flanagans Leitung fängt er vielversprechend an. Der Großteil mit den "imaginativen Beratern“ ist aber unglücklich, er hat einen billigen TV-Anstrich und funktioniert überhaupt nicht. Die zweite, tiefere Linie mit dem Mörder und dem Kindertrauma wird bizarr hinausgezogen und im Finale hapert ihre Verbindung mit der vorherigen Handlung ein wenig. Der Stoff an sich – eine Frau in so einer prekären Situation – ist ausgezeichnet. Wenn man ihn schlau verarbeiten würde, wenn auch nur minimalistisch, könnte der Film zu einem Volltreffer werden (z. B. die erste Aufnahme, in der sie auf dem Bett gefesselt ist; warum sie sich dort befindet, erfährt man aus Flashbacks, parallel zu Rückblicken in ihre Kindheit). (30.10.2018)

It is paradoxical that once King is adapted faithfully once in a blue moon, it is made according to the original that would need one or even better, two rounds of uncompromising editorial commentary that would make it a lot better. In other words, what worked well in the original (basically all the passages in the bed, character study, loss of coherent thinking, reality versus hallucinations, a broken psyche controlling children's fears, coping with inner demons, the will to survive at all costs or vigilant "Cujo" on guard) it works well here either. But the same is true about the things that did not work (basically all the passages outside the bed, a completely appalling ending, continuous flashbacks, maybe just cut-ins/flashes à la The Wild would do it good, and on top of that the initial part has not enough space, i.e. “I´m not only fucked but I´m going crazy too"), so they don´t work were here either. And no matter how shorter it should have been (not only by the mentioned epilogue), thanks to the duo Carl / Bruce it is not such a big deal. In short, it´s a solid average movie with a few memorable moments and an excellent cast. PS: There are also some references to kingversum for king fanatics. (30.09.2017)

The first half Gerald’s Game plays out promisingly with just two well-matched actors and a dog (a similar setup as in The Mountain Between Us, which is currently in cinemas) in one room, an unpleasant situation and a few objects that could potentially resolve it. There are plenty of cuts and changes of perspective to hold our attention, the uncertainty of what is real and what is only imagined (in which the film is a more sophisticated variation on torture porn – it’s not just about physical pain, but also about holding on to one’s sanity). The presentation of the female protagonist’s train of thought is handled more elegantly than in, for example, 127 Hours with its affected flashbacks. I consider the flashbacks, which first appear after roughly fifty minutes, to be the film’s main stumbling block. The heretofore concentrated narrative, with its strictly limited number of ways to continue the game, loses traction and gets bogged down in pseudo-psychological explanations for Jessie’s difficulties with men. This is King’s favourite abusive cliché, with which he works in It, for example, and which is based on the rather questionable belief that in order for a woman to discover her inner strength, she must first suffer terribly. Cutting out the flashbacks and the very awkwardly appended emancipatory afterword could turn this into a brisk low-budget surprise that has no need to complicate a simple initial idea with lengthy explanations. At the same time, however, I understand that it is also a service to King’s fans, who will most likely appreciate this self-destructive fidelity to the source material. 65% (08.10.2017)

I was expecting much more from the Netflix/King/Flanagan combo than a made-for-TV, conversational bore that runs an unnecessarily long 103 minutes, as the premise would be more suited to a short film. On the horror side of things, there is nothing interesting, apart from one scene, otherwise absolutely no suspense or atmosphere and not even the seductive MILF in the lead role can save it. If the book is as boring as the film, I would burn it after 10 pages. Other viewers are satisfied according to the ratings on FilmBooster and IMDB, I had to make myself a double espresso to be able to make it to the end. One star for the lead actress, the other for the hand scene. Quite an ordeal. 40% (29.09.2017)