Apt Pupil

With a few notable non-scary exceptions ("Stand By Me" and "The Shawshank Redemption"), Stephen King hasn't had much luck having his written work translated to the silver (or small) screen. And as one of today's most prolific and popular novelists, much of his work has been adapted. Not that I've seen all of it, far from it. But most of what I've seen has disappointed. Add to the list of disappoints, "Apt Pupil". The horror in this film is not supernatural, but psychological. It chronicles the improbable story of a young teen who discovers that an elderly neighbor is an ex-Nazi death camp commander. Instead of dropping a dime on the old butcher, he blackmails him! And not for money, but for his insight, insight into the nature of evil. And this from a 14-year old? The story didn't wash. The movie is created well, with decent acting, but the direction seemed to wander. At times I felt that the movie was taking a creepy, dark turn to plumb the depths of human depravity, then it would skip off into something more akin to a murder mystery. Sort of schizophrenic, as if the director wasn't quite sure of the type of movie he was making. I wouldn't recommend this movie.

Apart from the fact that he chews the scenery au-go-go, Ian McKellen is very miscast as the Nazi sadist who befriends a high school nerd(Renfro). The story itself is clumsily set up in a series of montages, and any inherent interest (for me) in the relationship between the ideals of the old man and the boy is ignored in favour of an obvious thriller, inhabited by cardboard characters and more montages to denote passages of time (and reduce tension) than I've ever seen. Bryan Singer has done much better than this in The Usual Suspects; here he seems to have been seriously compromised. I haven't read Stephen King's original story, but maybe I shall now, because Mr King knows how to tell a story, and whoever agreed to the final cut of this, doesn't.

APT PUPIL is the big budget film adaptation of the Stephen King novella of the same name, about an ordinary high school pupil who strikes up an unlikely friendship with a former Nazi. I remember the King story as being particularly chilling and disturbing given the subject matter, and it's no surprise the nastiness has been toned down for this big screen outing. APT PUPIL isn't a bad movie and indeed it starts off rather well. Ian McKellen, just before he hit the mainstream with X-MEN and LORD OF THE RINS, is outstanding as the former Nazi forced to relive his murky past, and the scene in which he dresses up in the full regalia is inevitably the film's chilling highlight. Unfortunately, at around the halfway point the movie starts to fall apart a little bit and the script lets it down. Brad Renfro just isn't a strong enough actor for the complexities of the lead role and McKellen isn't given enough to do in the latter stages. The excellent Elias Koteas bags a tiny yet highly sympathetic role and cult film fans may recognise James Karen in a one-scene cameo. But the story has been unforgivably altered and the lukewarm ending is a particular disappointment considering the potency of King's original climax.

Apparently this movie was based upon a novel from Stephen King which I haven't read yet, so don't expect any comparing between the book and the movie from my side. What I can do for you is to explain how I feel about this movie and I must say that it left me with a double feeling. The acting and the story were OK, most of the time at least, but the entire concept of the movie didn't convince me once. It even disturbed me, but not in the way that you probably expect. The movie gives us the story of a 16 year old boy, Todd Bowden, who learns more about the Holocaust at school. He gets fascinated by it and starts reading and learning more and more about it. And then he makes a big discovery. He sees a man on the bus who appears to be Kurt Dussander, a Nazi war criminal, who now lives in his neighborhood under the assumed name Arthur Denker. Instead of turning the man over to the authorities he makes a deal with Denker. If the former Nazi tells him what life in the concentration camps was like, he won't tell anybody what Denker's real identity is. What follows is a strange cat and mouse game between Denker and Bowden that will end with a vicious murder... The subject, talking about an old man who appears to be a former Nazi who now lives in America and pretends to be a sweet old man, isn't bad. Even the idea that he has lived an undisturbed life since he arrived, but now his true identity is discovered by a young student is OK. But it is everything after that that bothers me. For instance, why do people in Hollywood always think in stereotypes when talking about former Nazi's? I mean, sure what they did was horrible and it is almost impossible for us to understand why so many Germans knew about it all and didn't do anything, but many of those former Nazi's and soldiers now live a normal life, even though some of them still meet each other and seem to be proud of what they did during the war. (This isn't a thing that I make up, in Belgium for instance the 'Sint-Maartens-fonds' (you could translate it as the Saint-Martins-fund), still organizes the Belgian SS-soldiers who fought in the USSR against the Bolsjewism and I once saw a meeting of former SS and Wehrmacht troops in Austria, only a couple of years ago). But, opposite to what Hollywood tries to make us believe, these people aren't pure evil. I mean, they aren't torturing people during these meetings or creating plans to take over power and to chase the Jews... This movie does exactly that. It shows how Dussander changes into a Nazi again as soon as he puts on the uniform and is ordered to march. And that's only the start. Immediately after, he tries to gas and fry a cat in his oven (I guess the cat has to stand for the hundreds of Jews which Dussander killed personally), and eventually even kills a man... Another problem that I have with the movie is that it shows how Todd starts to study Nazism and the Holocaust and eventually changes into a bad guy himself. If that's true than be very afraid when you meet me, because I read a lot of books about WWII as well and yes I even read books about the Nazi's. Never have I felt the need to kill someone or something, but if you have to believe this movie, than I might turn into a disturbed and hating person myself... If you think that this movie is realistic, than I guess you should try to find out more about WWII yourself and especially about the Nazi's, because I guess it's fear of the unknown, that makes believe that this is a very realistic movie. Oh well, as a character study this movie isn't bad. Just don't take it too serious like I did, than you won't be very disappointed by it. I give it a 5.5/10.

I first read the Stephen King story about a year before the movie was made. It chilled me to the bone. The story is about a precocious young boy named Todd who, through a little detective work, discovers that an elderly German gentleman in his neighborhood is actually an escaped Nazi, Kurt Dussander, who performed unspeakable acts during the Holocaust. The naive Todd, full of curiosity, threatens to turn Dussander in unless he tells him in detail all about the horrors of his crimes. Todd is too young to comprehend the evil he is unleashing upon himself, and in the next five years, becomes obsessed and consumed by it. His adolescent fantasies and dreams become ones of violence rather than sex, until his desire to kill completely replaces all other desires. He plays society's game, pretending to be interested in school and girls, but in the end, the evil can no longer be hidden and he falls prey to it. The movie's most fatal flaw is that it doesn't cover nearly the span of time it should. Todd's *development* isn't a part of the movie at all. What made the book so disturbing is how young and naive Todd was at the beginning, and how he grew up with Dussander's evil. I realize this is difficult to do in a movie, but it is possible. In the movie, Todd is pretty much the same age throughout. The movie also doesn't get into Todd's head. Todd's lack of interest in sex is mentioned as a footnote in the scene in the car with Becky Trask ("Betty Trask" in the book), but it is never developed or explained. The audience is left saying "...huh??" Stephen King emphasized this aspect of the story in his book for a reason- sex is number one in most adolescents' minds, but Todd cares only about evil. Even sex isn't important to him. The ending was quite different in the movie as well, but I'm not going to call that a flaw because I thought that Stephen King's ending was rather abrupt. I can't really decide which ending I prefer. Neither really completed the story in my opinion. Psychological thrillers are difficult to portray on screen, I know. But, unfortunately, this disturbing story was turned into just your average horror flick. One highlight, though, was the casting of David Schwimmer as the dorky, sneaker-wearing guidance counselor Ed French. He's exactly how I pictured French when I read the book. Well, from what I gather from others who have commented, if you haven't read the book, you might like this movie. If you have read the book, you'll be disappointed. Either way, I highly recommend the book.

This critically acclaimed multi award winning Stephen King adaptation is a weird creature, a dark thriller tale which makes you question the definition of evil. It tells the story of a boy who discovers that a neighbour is an infamous war criminal, a high ranking nazi responsible for the deaths of countless people. He decides to blackmail him, he is fascinated and wants to know more about the nazi history. But the more he learns the more he takes a turn for the worse and the mind games between the man and boy escalate. Not only is Apt Pupil dark and highly thought provoking but its also oddly homoerotic, heavy undertones from several different sources and I cannot figure out for the life of me why these were included. The cast is stellar and really helps the film, full of veterans like Ian McKellen, Bruce Davison, James Karen & Elias Koteas. Also along for the ride we have Joshua Jackson and Friends alumni David Schwimmer. Despite this cast and despite it being a King adaptation I don't see the grand appeal. It's not a terrible movie it's just poorly executed and difficult viewing in places. As a psychological thriller it delivers and is very thought provoking. As nearly 2hrs of entertainment it kind of fails (For me anyway) The Good: Outstanding cast Great concept The Bad: Deeply uncomfortable viewing Unnecessarily homoerotic Some of the movie defies logic somewhat Many cast members are badly wasted as barely on screen Things I Learnt From This Movie: David Schwimmer with a moustache looks like someone who shouldn't be trusted alone with children, or animals, or even remotely sexy looking fruit 73yrs since they surrendered and 20yrs since this film and Nazi's are not only still a thing but going strong, this is a terrifying fact.

"Apt Pupil" is well directed, with some interesting themes of power lust and evil feeding on itself, and great acting by Brad Renfro and Sir Ian McKellan, but I was put off by the very loose holds on reality. The plot alone is full of insane coincidences (a kid obsessed with the Holocaust just happens to bump into a Nazi war criminal, and that war criminal just happens to share a hospital room with one of his victims), but even the characterizations are a stretch. Renfro's character is very odd, and there is no given reason for why he is so naturally evil. And while it is hard enough to accept that McKellan would be bursting with evil 40 years later, with no hint of remorse (or even insight) about his past, it is completely ridiculous to assume he would be spending his evenings gassing cats and killing homeless people. The direction and acting make it worth watching, but in the end, I just couldn't take this overly serious movie seriously.

If anyone has ever read the novella by Steven King, you would know that this movie came right from the toilet. It lacked not only good acting but also the psychological state of the characters. The characters lacked depth, which in turn created trite and meaningless interactions. I could have found more emotions in a comic book character. Mr. Renfro needs to stick to hickville roles (i.e. The Client), no offense Brad!!

After getting an A on his term paper about the Holocaust, a teenage boy (talented Brad Renfro) becomes Holocaust-obsessed, quickly finding an escaped Nazi war-criminal living in his own hometown! Never mind how irresponsible all this is, the film doesn't know where its sympathies lie, and showing our young hero drawing swastikas over and over on his notebook paper isn't exactly an affirmation of his character. Renfro is at such a loss with this script, he can't even come up with the semblance of a believable characterization. After squirming through an hour and ten minutes, I bailed out. Absolute rock bottom trash! All involved, including Ian McKellen as the aged Dussander and director Bryan Singer, should've known better. NO STARS from ****

I was surprised at how good this movie was. The plot line seemed intriguing, but I was worried that it would eventually fall into one of the standard "bad Nazi war criminal found" plots where you always know the ending. This story was much more inventive. At its core, the movie is about a high school student who discovers that an old man living in his community is a former Nazi war commander. Instead of turning him in, he approaches the man with a very unusual deal. He'll leave the man alone if he can hear first-hand about all the horrible things that were done. This was the plan at least. The movie needed intense performances - and it got them from McKellen and Renfro. Both are incredibly captivating and scary in their own ways. Coupled with a suspenseful, unpredictable Stephen King story, the movie succeeds well. If you're a Stephen King fan or simply enjoy thrillers, this movie is worth checking out.