The Dead Zone

Product Information

Esta no es una historia donde el protagonista tratará en todo el libro de asesinar al futuro presidente de Estados Unidos. Cronenberg criticized the film's theatrical distribution and stated that it could have been number one at the box office had its distribution been better. [24] The head of marketing at Paramount, David Rose, was arrested for embezzling money and Cronenberg theorized that Rose might have taken money meant for the marketing of the film. [25] Who else but Christopher Walken could play Johnny Smith in the highly praised David Cronenberg film?

In the novel, the phrase "dead zone" refers to the part of Johnny's brain that is irreparably damaged, resulting in his dormant psychic potential awakening. When some information in Johnny's visions is beyond his perception, he considers that information as existing "in the dead zone." In the film adaptation, the phrase "dead zone" is that part of his psychic vision that is missing—a blank area that he cannot see. This "dead zone" refers to an outcome that is not yet determined, meaning Johnny can change the future. I’ve always thought this was one of King’s better books but hadn’t read it for years. A new audio version with James Franco narrating and doing a pretty good job of it got me motivated, and I’m pleased to find that it mostly lives up to my memory of it.

Develop

When Johnny comes out of his coma, he has the ability/curse of being able to touch someone or something owned by that person (psychometry) and see pieces of their future. Some key elements always seem to be missing, and those murky parts Johnny calls The Dead Zone. Johnny Smith wakes from a coma with the psychic ability to read a person when he touches them. Will he use this ability for good or for selfish reasons? And what's the deal with this Greg Stillson character that's swiftly becoming a heavy hitter in the political realm?

The book is a wonderful character study about a happy and unassuming man, and then watching him go through dreadful changes when his life is shattered and he's given God like abilities. Christopher Lehmann-Haupt of The New York Times compared reading the novel to the experience of watching "a particularly compelling movie", which he said is evidence of the novel's entertainment value, even if it does not speak of its literary value. [3] The Washington Post 's reviewer wrote, "It is not a book that will please everyone, but those who like it will probably like it a lot." [4] In a retrospective review, James Smythe of The Guardian wrote that The Dead Zone had become one of his favorite King novels after rereading it. Smythe said that although the novel seems to have no clear antagonist throughout the first two-thirds, it reveals itself as "a more literary novel about rehabilitation and loss". [5]John Smith (his name immediately marks him out as the "common man") is blessed and cursed with second sight. It began as a minor ability due to a skating accident in his childhood; but when he wins big time at the roulette wheel in a village carnival, this "gift" proves to be his undoing. Because while coming home late from the carnival, the taxi John is travelling in meets with a horrific accident, and he is precipitated into a four-year coma.

A fun fact: King said that it was highly irritating that many people were more upset by the antagonist killing a dog than by many other scenes in his books including violence against women and children and ironically said that this is pretty telling about human nature. „Stop hitting that dog, spank your kid instead! Thanks!“ The same happened with the completely consensual sex scene in his novel It, go read it immediately, that was considered worse than all blood, gore, rape, and torture combined. Humans are strange, man. The supporting cast, however, is a bit of a mixed-bag in terms of quality and memorability. Roger Chatsworth, for instance, a wealthy man who hires Johnny as a tutor, is complex and multifaceted. There were times when I expected him to act in rote, stereotypical ways, and he didn’t, which is always a nice surprise. The relationship between Johnny and Dr. Sam Weizak is also effective, conjuring a real sense of mutual affection. Years ago, I watched the movie staring Christopher Walken that was made in 1983. I was a bit surprised by some of the differences in the book vs movie.No se dejen llevar solo por la sinopsis (como me pasó a mí). La historia es mucho más que eso; lo vemos todo con los ojos del protagonista, a personajes con miedos e inseguridades pero con decisiones que van dejando marca, sea para bien o para mal. La historia de Johnny Smith es triste, cautivadora, reflexiva, emotiva y en cierta parte tranquilizante. Es una historia donde gran mayoría de los personajes no se olvidan y eso es gracias al protagonista.

One of most mind penetrating ideas is the horrible, real possibility of falling in a coma for years and finding out that the love of one's life is now married to another person because the doctors said that there is no certainty one may ever awake again. This is horrible, no matter when it happens in life. If one is young, the described could happen, but when kids at any age are involved, this could mean having the memory of a toddler and a kindergartener and being confronted with 2 unknown people who are both adults now and maybe even have own kids. The ultimate irony of very bad faith would be to wake up so old that one wouldn´t even survive long without the severy physical consequences of the coma, just to realize that one has missed some of the greatest periods of a human´s life. a b KNOEDELSEDER, WILLIAM K Jr (August 30, 1987). "De Laurentiis PRODUCER'S PICTURE DARKENS". Los Angeles Times.Ahora, la sinopsis me llamó muchísimo la atención desde siempre, pero a medida que leía me decepcionaba mucho porque pensaba que era una trampa para el lector; donde este creía que esa sería la trama principal pero se estrellaría con otra cosa distinta, pero no del todo mala. Sin embargo, Greg Stillson sí fue un villano en la obra, con sus dotes de grandeza y sus actos descarados y aberrantes... pero al fin y al cabo no fue un villano con mucha relevancia. Él simplemente aportó algo indudable en el clímax de la trama: fue la desicion más díficil e importante de Johnny. Al principio, me decepcionó mucho que no fuera tanta su importancia como había pensado, pero una vez que terminé el acto final comprendí el por qué.