Cell (2016)

directed by Tod Williams
USA
98 minutes
2.5 stars out of 5
----

I was fully aware of the poor reception this movie got, but I was curious about it anyway and I recently re-read the book for the express purpose of comparing it to the movie. One of the big things about the book is that I could clearly tell Stephen King had meant it to be a dig at young people and their attachment to cell phones, and that's a viewpoint I can't stand, but it was subtle enough in the book that I could pretend it wasn't there, and thankfully that was the case in the movie too- but that doesn't mean it's salvageable. Interestingly, the issue of texting comes up in the movie- the book was published before the advent of texting was widespread- but, like most topics in the film, it's touched upon and then dropped completely within moments.

Right off the bat we've got one of the ugliest opening credit designs I've ever seen, followed by some truly atrocious (like "how did this get made" bad) acting in the initial outbreak scene. The acting among the people making up the crowds of infected is not uniform, but as a whole it's ultimately a point in the movie's favor since they differ so much from the typical portrayal of zombies. That I appreciated. If the book didn't exist, that aspect would probably get the movie some points in my opinion.

But the beginning also sets the tone for what turns out to be an extremely disappointing cast of characters. Clay in the original book was pretty flat, I'll admit, but his traveling companions Tom and Alice each had a distinct personality with several traits in particular that expanded their character beyond the very basics, and this movie neglects all that. It had such a good chance to bring these characters to life and really make the viewer feel something for them, but instead it casts aside everything the book set up and creates bland, unoriginal fake people. At one point Tom quotes a lengthy bible verse in complete earnesty and I found that to be particularly annoying since in the book he is gay and the only reason he knows a few bible verses (he's also an atheist) is because he had a somewhat traumatic upbringing in a religious household.

Like with the texting, it introduces concepts- sometimes ones that were very important in the book- and then either drops them or doesn't develop them enough, and they become meaningless symbols thrown in for continuity's sake. Pacing is of course very difficult to get right when adapting a book to a film because of the level of detail possible in writing versus what's possible in film, but the movie basically rushes right to what I thought was the pivotal moment in the fight against the phone-freaks and then just dawdles around for an hour, mostly improvising things that weren't too important in the book. It could have been like the source material, a lengthy and treacherous journey that the characters have to fight for every minute of, but instead things get revealed too quickly and easily and characters get handed plot devices on a plate.

Honestly I could probably make amends with everything else in this movie but I can't get over what they did to Tom. Ignoring his upbringing and the very valid reason for his distrust of religion to make him an automaton that conveniently spouts wisdom was almost a personal offense.