It's never a good sign when the very first scene of a movie is so tiresomely heavy-handed that one's immediate thought is that there will be no need to be actively engaged with the remaining ninety minutes. This will sadly prove to be the enduring impression throughout, for in every capacity there is a brusque, blunt, hollow edge that accentuates the inauthenticity. The dialogue and character writing is full of tropes and stereotypes; the scene writing is flat and lifeless; the narrative is dull and bland, copied and pasted from any number of other titles. There's no subtlety, tact, or nuance to be found in the direction, and in turn there is none to be found in the acting despite the best efforts of the cast (then again, sometimes there's no apparent effort at all). Whether a song is presented on the soundtrack within a scene, or especially when it's possibly being performed within a scene, it sounds astoundingly empty, as if it were a parody. Each passing moment and every little inclusion feels like a series of hard, blocky edges butting up against one another - false, contrived, ill-fitting, with every small facet amplifying the lowliest qualities of those around it. 'Shiver' is not good.
There are some good ideas here. I'm unsure if a lot of those ideas are best suited for an earnest horror-thriller or, like the worst ideas, for a parody. The resulting screenplay reflects poorly on screenwriter Robert D. Weinbach, but to be frank, it also reflects poorly on novelist Brian Harper, because the conglomeration is so deeply unsatisfactory and unconvincing that I find it hard to imagine that a screenwriter could mangle a good book this badly. I guess the stunts are decent enough, and the practical effects. The hair and makeup artists did good work. The filming locations are swell, and the art direction. Richard Band's music is decent, if sparing and minimal. I see the skills of the cast that would surely shine through if given an opportunity; would that Julian Richards' direction didn't reduce every every component part to a tawdry, flimsy fraction of what it's supposed to be. There are no thrills to be had, nor any basic excitement; moments that should be creepy, charged, or disturbing are instead almost laughable. In theory 'Shiver' should bear a grim, dark tone; in practice, it's light and almost farcical, if indeed there's any tone at all.
I see what this could have and should have been. It should have been grotesque, exploitative, truly vexing, brutal, and nasty. What it is, instead, is exhausting, boring, boorish, grey, and mostly very trite; it stops just a little short of being a TV movie, in the worst of ways. Nearly all the best possibilities of what this might have been are squashed and squandered, and the relative strength of the last third can't compensate for broad, overwhelming deficiency. Had more care been taken from the outset, in the script and in the direction - even just as much care as had been applied to the back end - then the whole would have come off significantly better. As it is, 'Shiver' is lucky to have risen above rock bottom. I'm glad for those who get more out of this than I did, but unless one is a major fan of someone involved; I just don't see much reason why one should spend time here in light of the countless other titles one could be watching instead.
There are some good ideas here. I'm unsure if a lot of those ideas are best suited for an earnest horror-thriller or, like the worst ideas, for a parody. The resulting screenplay reflects poorly on screenwriter Robert D. Weinbach, but to be frank, it also reflects poorly on novelist Brian Harper, because the conglomeration is so deeply unsatisfactory and unconvincing that I find it hard to imagine that a screenwriter could mangle a good book this badly. I guess the stunts are decent enough, and the practical effects. The hair and makeup artists did good work. The filming locations are swell, and the art direction. Richard Band's music is decent, if sparing and minimal. I see the skills of the cast that would surely shine through if given an opportunity; would that Julian Richards' direction didn't reduce every every component part to a tawdry, flimsy fraction of what it's supposed to be. There are no thrills to be had, nor any basic excitement; moments that should be creepy, charged, or disturbing are instead almost laughable. In theory 'Shiver' should bear a grim, dark tone; in practice, it's light and almost farcical, if indeed there's any tone at all.
I see what this could have and should have been. It should have been grotesque, exploitative, truly vexing, brutal, and nasty. What it is, instead, is exhausting, boring, boorish, grey, and mostly very trite; it stops just a little short of being a TV movie, in the worst of ways. Nearly all the best possibilities of what this might have been are squashed and squandered, and the relative strength of the last third can't compensate for broad, overwhelming deficiency. Had more care been taken from the outset, in the script and in the direction - even just as much care as had been applied to the back end - then the whole would have come off significantly better. As it is, 'Shiver' is lucky to have risen above rock bottom. I'm glad for those who get more out of this than I did, but unless one is a major fan of someone involved; I just don't see much reason why one should spend time here in light of the countless other titles one could be watching instead.