Just perfect...

It is not deep, but it is fun to watch. It does have a bit more of an edge to it than other similar films.

To all those who have watched it: I hope you enjoyed it as much as I do.

Blistering performances.

As Stephen King adaptations go, this is a fair attempt at what I found to be one of King's most disturbing novels. The idea of your own body gradually changing for the worse, and you not being able to do a damn thing about it, is a particularly horrifying one and one which translates well to the big screen. Okay, so the acting isn't that great, but it's the clever storyline which carries this film through from the start to the finish and it works.What I like most about King's novels - and filmed works - is the theme of gradual transformation, or decay. In SALEM'S LOT and NEEDFUL THINGS it's the community which is slowly taken over, while in CHRISTINE - and indeed, THINNER - it's the individual who becomes taken over by evil. This film works due to some very good special effects work which sees Burke transform from a 297 pound monstrosity to a human skeleton, with skin stretched taught over his thin frame. Due to the excellent nature of the effects, this transformation is always 100% believable, which is lucky really as it carries the whole film along.There's a slow tension which burns in the background here, a feeling of unstoppable damnation which follows Burke whenever he's on screen. Obviously the revelations at the end don't live up to the audience expectations, but the build-up is very suspenseful. The acting is not brilliant, but good enough for this kind of mainstream film, with Joe Mantegna stealing the show as a cruel, heartless gangster type. His role would be a godsend for any actor, giving them a chance to be extremely vicious in a fun way. Lucinda Jenney is also effective as Burke's leech-like, two-timing wife. Burke himself is hardly convincing, but he manages to convey that harassed/frightened/disturbed look pretty well.Although not gory, there are some gruesome moments involving various dismembered or desiccated corpses which pop up every now and then for that shock moment. The one I liked best was a man who had been deformed with a chicken or something - pretty disgusting. There's another good moment where Burke is shot through the palm with a ball bearing, giving the producers a chance to use a perforated hand special effect, much the same as the one in FROM DUSK TILL DAWN. Some out of place action turns up to keep the wheels turning, along with a voluptuous and glamorous gypsy girl (there just aren't enough of these in films these days). The twist ending is a fun one, and there are plenty of things to enjoy here if you don't mind a bit of light entertainment. This is a film which is difficult to take seriously, but a lot of fun.

In the mid 1980s, fans of the horror genre were introduced to an up and coming director that showed promise in his career. That man was Tom Holland. Moviegoers will remember him best for directing two films that now have a cult status; that being Fright Night (1985) and Child's Play (1988). Other than this and directing a few episodes to TV shows, Holland hasn't done much else. He did go on to make one more horror film before he was diagnosed with Bells-Palsy (putting him out of Hollywood's spotlight for a decade), and that film was this, based off of horror novelist Stephen King's best selling novel (one of them at least) of the same. Unfortunately, several viewers do not find this to be that entertaining. It's weird because this film does have its flaws but it's not a harrowing experience to sit through. This may also be one of Tom Holland's lesser appreciated projects but that's not saying a lot considering there are ton of other films that have bottom of the barrel quality.Adapting Stephen King's novel was also director Tom Holland and Michael McDowell (the writer of Beetlejuice (1988) & The Nightmare Before Christmas (1993)). The story is about Billy Halleck (Robert John Burke), a gluttonous 300lb obese lawyer whose all about himself and food. One day after winning a big case, he accidentally kills the daughter of gypsy witch doctor Tadzu Lempke (Michael Constantine) in a drive by. Angry that Halleck was not properly prosecuted, Lempke places a curse on Halleck that rapidly sheds his weight at an alarming rate; to a point where it continues no matter how much he eats. Not realizing until it's too late, Halleck looks to find Lempke and have him remove the curse. Meanwhile, Halleck suspects his wife Heidi (Lucinda Jenney) is cheating on him with his friend Mike (Sam Freed). The issues that arise among these plot threads are convenient twists that get placed throughout the running time. How is it that Lempke knows certain pieces of information when he was never around? How does he have the power to curse people?Moments like these feel strangely placed more than proper timing. There are also a few continuity errors that don't make a whole lot of sense either. One minute someone is irreversibly damaged; a scene later that exact thing that was damaged turned out being completely fine. Lastly for those who are really looking for some nasty imagery, this isn't that kind of film. As a whole, the movie just isn't that scary. This is one of the tamest "body horror" genre films and it's still rated R. That doesn't mean it doesn't entertain though. It's just that because the plot device is thrown into the light so quickly, there isn't much to be scared over, especially with all the plot contrivances that occur. However if one can get past that, the actual experience is quite the captivating thriller. Seeing Halleck go from a whopping 300lbs to less than 150 is shocking. The makeup effects were done by Greg Cannom, the same man who worked on A Nightmare on Elm Street 3: Dream Warriors (1987), Dick Tracy (1990), The Shadow (1994) and The Mask (1994).The acting is acceptable by all cast members too. Robert John Burke as Billy Halleck was fun to watch. Taking into account he could have dropped out of acting after the critical and financial flop that was RoboCop 3 (1993), he demonstrates he's still a credible actor. Burke also had a number of good scenes that show just how deranged his character becomes. Michael Constantine as Lempke isn't that deep in motivations but is good at being a crusty old man, with a wicked sense of humor. There's also appearances from Howard Erskine (a court judge) and Daniel von Bargen (a police officer) playing friends of Halleck. Bethany Joy Lenz as Halleck's daughter and Lucinda Jenney as Heidi act like an ordinary family as well. There's also a gangster named Richie Ginelli (Joe Mantegna) who knows Halleck and uses his connections to help him out. If there's one thing to say about anybody else other than Burke, it's just that his or her characters aren't that engaging. They can act but their character arcs aren't as magnetic as Halleck's.Plus like many of his other adapted books, author Stephen King himself has a small part in the movie as a store clerk. Behind the camera to this picture is cinematographer Kees Van Oostrum. Van Oostrum has a lengthy filmography but the two projects he might be best known for are Ronald F. Maxwell's war epics Gettysburg (1993) and Gods and Generals (2003). Even though this film does not have any epic scope, many scenes are competently lit and confidently show the troubles of the bloated lawyer. The music was another added bonus. Composed by Daniel Licht, the same composer to the impressive score to Hellraiser IV: Bloodlines (1996), the film score to this feature is a great listening experience. Licht composes a memorable main title motif for the movie using majority strings and tambourines to emphasize the gypsy context of the plot. There's also a few tracks involving the piano with unsettling tunes that are cued when Burke's character begins having emotional bursts of anger. It's a film score that should not be overlooked. Not all of it's characters are inviting enough to be fully captivated (even though the cast can act), there are a couple of storytelling issues in the script and the overall feeling isn't that scary. However, it still has some thrills thanks to the makeup effects, notable film score, camera-work and a compelling performance from Robert John Burke.

"Thinner" (1996) was a fun enough outing; I'd give it an 8 out of 10. You can easily tell that this story originated with Stephen King. Only he can take an antiquated plot device like a gypsy curse and actually make it frightening.I do get the sense that screenwriters Michael McDowell and Tom Holland stuck closely to the original novel (which I have not read). It seems like a character-focused story; I'll bet the original prose really explored the incongruous friendship between Robert John Burke's mild-mannered attorney and Joe Mantegna's apparently psychotic mobster. I'll bet that King's unique style would have perfectly rendered certain plot points in the movie, such as one key conversation being overheard early on.I feel like an idiot ... For the life of me, I thought that actress Kari Wuhrer was Marissa Tomei. Her resemblance in this movie is striking. I can't be the only one who made that mistake, can I? Anyway, I really panned Wuhrer's performance in 2005's disappointing "Hellraiser: Deader." But she is damn terrific here in her role as the beautiful banshee adversary -- she damn near steals the movie. Also outstanding is Michael Constantine as her haggard, curse- casting gypsy father.

I have never read the Stephen King story upon which this movie is based, so how true the movie is to the book I can only speculate about. I have, however, seen this movie three times by now, not because it is my favorite movie or anything, just because I have had the chance.The story is about a guy who kills a gypsy woman in a car accident, an accident he walks free from because of his legal connections. As he walks out from the courtroom and old gypsy comes up and puts a curse on him. Being seriously overweight and on a diet, the weight starts to quickly come off, but at an alarming rate, and soon becomes a physical danger to his very life.I will say that the story is interesting enough, although it isn't particularly scary, so not really a typical movie version of a Stephen King story from the mid 1990's.The effects were actually quite good and still hold up by today's standards. The whole weight-loss process was quite good, as were the prosthetics of the corpses. Just bear in mind that the movie is not heavy-laden with special effects though.As for the cast and the acting, then people were doing good jobs with their given roles and characters.All in all, then "Thinner" is an adequate movie, although not the best of concepts to have sprung from the creative mind of Stephen King.