A woman is stalked by a psychopathic killer. She eventually kills him, only for the man to show up again, this time sane and without any knowledge of the attacks. The police don't believe her, but one detective agrees to look into it.
Similar titles
Reviews
Very best movie i ever watch
Simply A Masterpiece
This film is so real. It treats its characters with so much care and sensitivity.
All of these films share one commonality, that being a kind of emotional center that humanizes a cast of monsters.
Out of all of Koontz's work, why Whispers? Why was this a movie? For years, I was hoping they would turn The Bad Place into a movie, but no, this makes it to film. Why? Based on the 1980 book, Whispers follows a man who cunningly stalks a female victim ( played by Victoria Tennant). She kills him in self defense, but he seems to have returned. How? And what's worse, the police can't help her, because they don't believe her story. Has he returned from the dead, or is it an evil twin? Find out on a brand new episode of....Mystery Train Derailed! Some of the elements are okay, and when I say okay, I just mean okay, I mean they don't exactly work together, but it's okay to watch anyway. What am I talking about? Watch it, you'll see what I'm talking about. For the most part, Whispers is a just a "WTF" movie, some scenes are barely passable ( For example, tell me what you think of the man having his way with the woman in the morgue, or the man who is making out with his reflection in the mirror.) I want to say it's a mystery suspense movie, but there's very little mystery, and what I saw wasn't exactly suspense. In my opinion, all of Koontzs work that was brought to the screen got screwed, especially Watchers, which doesn't even come close to stacking up as tall as the book did. Maybe they should just....let sleeping dogs lie, so to speak. 4 out of 10. Hey? Seen Mr. Murder? That was a screwed up movie!
Unfortunately, Koontz seems doomed to die without seeing a decent adaptation of his work. Whispers follows the original book very closely, seemingly until the production company ran out of money. All of the sets in the first half of the movie were meticulously recreated from the book - something which has been lacking in many other Koontz films. Despite its other (numerous) downfalls, I continued to watch in anticipation of some really great scenery. Wrong. By the time the detectives show up at the crack head's apartment (in the book), the movie is out of funds, and one of the most suspenseful scenes from the book, is ruined. Where the book offered grisly discovery, a search and a chase through the guys apartment, the movie offers the backseat of the guys car.Let's face it - Koontz writes without a budget in mind, because imagination is free. If a Koontz novel ever gets made into a decent movie, no one will go and see it, because they have been let down so many, many, many times before. This is why Dean Koontz's Frankenstein is now just Frankenstien - if you had seen your work butchered that many times, you'd get out early if it looked like happening again!
I actually saw the movie before I read the book. When I saw the movie I was upset because I wondered why Dean Koontz had made such a bad book/movie. The movie was confusing and didn't have a flow at all, it was choppy and made me want to throw a rock at the TV. I couldn't connect with the characters at all, so i didn't care about what happened to them(normally I love the characters because I can relate to their personality or problems). Then I read the book and loved it. I often re-read the book, and the movie is collecting dust. I wish someone would make a Koontz movie that follows the plot of his books, then the movies wouldn't suck so much. DO NOT WATCH THIS MOVIE UNLESS YOU NEED TO WASTE MONEY!
The movie version of Whispers just does not do Dean Koontz' excellent novel justice, but it is still enjoyable and stuck fairly close to the original plotline created by Dean Koontz. The story is twisted and gruesome and has to do with a woman being stalked by a serial killer. Sounds simple, right? However the nasty, perverse elements of the story make this unique. This, again, was okay but if Koontz had scripted it would have been a lot better. The actress who played Hilary was about ten years too old for the part, had the wrong hair color (Hilary had long, black hair in the book) and I detected a faint British accent. Chris Sarandon was okay as Tony, nothing special, and the actor who played Bruno was very good, even though it wasn't how I imagined Bruno. I suggest that anyone who may be interested in seeing this, read the book first if you really want to. It's much better than the movie.