Conference bookie::movies

26.0. "The Vanishing (original and '93 remake)" by DSSDEV::RUST () Mon Feb 08 1993 16:01

    "The Vanishing" is a psychological thriller, first made as a
    Dutch/French production in '87 or so, and recently remade (by the
    same director) for American audiences. As one who'd seen and loved the
    original, I rather dreaded seeing the remake, but was curious to find
    out just how the director was going to handle the "American audience"
    problem, so I went. And... 

    ...for the first hour or so, I was pleasantly surprised. The story
    remained almost unchanged, despite the relocation from Europe to the
    Pacific northwest; the performances were decent (though Jeff Bridges,
    as the antagonist, affected an odd accent and some slightly bizarre
    mannerisms that seemed to over-sell what should have been purely
    _internal_ weirdness); and the pacing, the mix of dawning horror with
    humor, and the growing suspense pretty much matched the original. 

    But, as we all know (or at least as critics and Hollywood marketing
    people keep telling us), American audiences simply won't put up with
    certain things in their movies, so this version has a few _minor_
    changes, which I will discuss behind spoilers. (BTW, if you like to see
    your suspense movies _completely_ unspoiled, I suggest you skip this
    topic entirely until you've seen the film - either version - as it's
    hard to discuss it at all without giving away something.)

    As for recommendations - well, I'd say the remake of "The Vanishing" is
    still a good deal better than the majority of wide-distribution
    pictures, and many people may find it more to their taste than the
    original version. But if you like your suspense unsweetened, go rent
    the original, now available on video. (And watch it with a friend.)

    Now to do a little digging...
    
    <SPOILER ALERT> 

 

    Warning: the following discusses (though somewhat vaguely) the endings
    of both films. If you don't want hints, read no further. 

    OK? 

    OK. First - a couple of minor supporting roles from the original (the
    protagonist's new girlfriend and the antagonist's daughter) are
    enhanced in the remake. (This was clearly done to set the stage for the
    second major change - and, possibly, to try to appeal to those who want to see
    roles for "strong women," even if the characters of said women have to
    be viciously pruned in order to get them into the situations from which
    their strength will extricate them.)
    
    And second - a new ending. Brand, shiny new, and tacked on to the end
    of the original picture like a Post-It on "The Raft of the Medusa".

    Now, I had several problems with this, the first being that I really
    liked the original ending and didn't see the need to mess with it.
    However, I'll agree that whoever makes the movie makes the decisions,
    and concede that many people may well like the new ending better. 

    But - why did things have to get so _stupid_? From the point at which
    the original movie ended, the remake seems to take place in a new and
    different universe. People who, up 'til now, had behaved in a
    consistently careful and logical manner suddenly become careless and
    random; people who had been intelligent become stupid; and not just as
    a response to overwhelming trauma, either. Furthermore, the physical
    properties of the world seem to change as well, so as to arrange
    themselves for the convenience of the plot and the special-effects
    people. My only surmise was that, somehow, at the point where the first
    movie ended, the new film was teleported to the shores of Camp Crystal
    Lake, and became "Friday the 13th Part 27". [There's even a totally
    gratuitous - but, judging by audience reaction, highly cathartic -
    bashing-with-a-shovel scene that would have been right at home in any
    slasher movie.]

    And, as is so much in demand by American audiences, the remake ends on
    a note of "whimsical humor" that - to me - felt utterly out of place,
    but which presumably lets the audience leave feeling _good_ about
    themselves. (Something that, I'll admit, the original version does not
    attempt to do.)

    Ah, well. Tastes differ, and many people may prefer the remake. For
    that matter, fans of the original may still enjoy the remake,
    especially if they leave at what would have been the original ending -
    or if they opt to view the new ending as if it were a humorous short
    subject being billed as a double feature!

    -b

    re.-1
    Do you remember the name of the director and/or names of actors
    of the first (European) version ?
    
    Andrea

    Notably oddly, the director (though not writer) of the American
    version, (something) Sluizar, happens to be the director and writer of
    the original Dutch version. 
    
    This isn't unparalleled (Howard Hawks's terrible musical remake of his
    own "Ball of Fire" comes to mind, John Ford did at least two versions
    of "Three Godfathers", and Hitchcock's Men who Knew Too Much even
    present the American-remake-of-European-original) but (aside from
    simultaneous making of versions in different languages ("Blue Angel",
    etc.) or different levels of naughtiness) this may be the fastest it's
    ever happened -- I don't think Sluizar has made a film between the
    Dutch version and the American. 
    
    Ray

    In the original film, Bernard-Pierre Donnadieu and Gene Bervoets played
    the two main characters (but I don't recall which was which), with
    Johanna Ter Steege as the missing woman. (In the original, the part
    that Nancy Travis plays in the remake was a much smaller role; that
    actress isn't credited in my film guide.)
    
    -b

  Would someone be willing to put a summery of this story behind the appropriate
spoiler warnings? I generally don't like to sit through these types of movies
but I am curious as to what happens. Also I'm curious as to how the two
versions differ.

  George

    So far the only positive review I've read was by someone who hadn't
    seen the original but stated that she wouldn't have been able to deal
    with it if it had been more intense.  So if you're looking for Thriller
    Lite...
    
    Another S. F. reviewer said he didn't want to give away the new ending,
    "but if you remember Bruce Willis in 'The Player'..."
    
    Ray

    Now  finally managed to see this one - and can imagine how good
    the original was !
    Very good explanations in .0 !
    
    Unfortunately the original was never in our cinemas and is also not
    available on video over here. (But there was story in a movie magazine
    revealing the two different endings, therefore I'm informed.)
    
    Andrea
    

    I had the opportunity to catch the original on video (unfortunately not
    in a theater.)
    
    It was very suspenseful, *very* creepy, and well worth seeing.  The
    calculation and "normality" of the villain was what really made this
    work.
    
    What else has George Sluizer directed besides the two versions of this
    movie?  BTW, I have absolutely no interest in seeing the Americanized
    version.
    
    - Dave

The only other thing in the databases is "Utz" (1992), but I seem to
remember seeing something else *very* recently (like maybe in last
week's Variety).

    Geroge Sluizer has just begun work on "Dark Blood" which stars 
    Jonathan Pryce and Judy Davis as a couple stranded in the desert who
    meet up with strange loner River Phoenix.
    
    - Dave

And produced by Stephen Woolley, responsible for The Crying Game as
well as Interview with the Vampire (to tie all the "coming soon"
threads together :-).  Also produced by Nik Powell.

Yes, it *was* in last week's Variety.  Thanks, Dave.

    The original is on TV this week, Thursday or Friday, I think. On the
    Sat-channel "VOX" (Europe).
    
    Now I finally have the chance to see it !
    A.

    I've only seen the remake, and I have a question about where the
    original version ended versus the remake:
    
    (Inserting spoiler here)
    
    
    Did the original movie end when the young man discovered where he was
    when he woke up? That would have been much more frightening than the
    "rescue" ending of the remake.
    
    Linda

    Re .12: Yep, you've got it.
    
    -b