MovieChat Forums > Deadly Friend (1986) Discussion > The truth behind Deadly Friend: What wen...

The truth behind Deadly Friend: What went wrong?


Deadly Friend came about as a direct consequence of Wes’s agent saying to him, “you should do a studio film, because otherwise you’ll be stuck doing small films for the rest of your life”,’ remembers Craven.

When Craven started on the project it was called Artificial intelligence then A.I ., before settling on Deadly Friend

There were seven or eight producers and they all had their own idea of what the film should be,’ recalls Craven Sadly. ‘Then the marketing department came in at the very end and did a study and found out that Wes Craven had this enormous horror following , so they immediately rewrote the script and had Wes do more horror in it.

It was censored heavily by the MPAA. The film was submitted 13 times to MPAA . So for instance, the Anne Ramsey scene, with her getting killed by the basketball, was completely decimated.

Deadly friend features much of Craven’s trademark iconography, particularly the dream sequence: “they were mine (Wes’s) but they came very late. It was after the film was shot and the producers said “let’s put dream sequences in” Frankly Wes didn’t want to do those. The things that were added later were a nightmare sequence between Sam and her father and the basketball scene.

Originally it was a straight sort of macabre love story between this boy and girl.
Wes craven originally wanted it much quieter, but he was overruled. Writer Bruce Joel Rubin worked closely with Craven. He really tried hard to write a deep and heartfelt movie out of it. Then Wes and Joel showed the picture to a bunch of Wes’s fans, who hated it. All they wanted was guts, so the studio demanded six more scenes, each bloodier than the last. That killed the love story.

That robot coming out of the girls head belongs solely to the studio.

Kristy Swanson was sixteen at the time making this her feature film debut. It was a challenge playing a vibrant teenager turned into a zombie. Kristy Swanson was proud of her work in Deadly friend. She told Fangoria she found herself caught up in the studio’s attempts to strong-arm Craven into making the film more visceral than he’d intended. Script changes were being made, a title change was being discussed and there was a lot of discussions about just how violent and bloody the movie would ultimately be. The effect of the basketball hitting the face was added after the fact. Kristy Swanson remembers she must have thrown that ball at least a hundred times. “Wes kept at me to throw it as hard as I could to indicate great speed.’

Wes wasn’t convinced Kristy could handle the role of Samantha admitted Swanson. ‘Eventually he changed his mind. He always encouraging me, prodding me in subtle ways to get me to give a scene everything I could. There were days when we were behind schedule, or a particular scene was not working, were he would get a little upset, but I found Wes Craven to be a very patient man.’

For the scenes chronicling the transplant of the robot brain in Paul’s girlfriend body, Craven called on the advice of retired neurosurgeon William H. Faethe. “He was very helpful on all the anatomical details,’ explains Craven. Wes Craven studied anatomy a great deal.

The suburban setting of deadly friend echoed A Nightmare on Elm st. and was a deliberate choice by Craven.

Wes Craven wasn’t attracted to the story of Deadly friend because Samantha goes on a killing spree when she’s revived as an undead monster. Wes was much more interested in exploring the adults around her, all of whom seem to be monsters in human skin : ‘the scares don’t come from her, but from the ordinary people, who are actually much more frightening – A father who beats a child is a terrifying figure. That’s the one person you’re afraid of in the movie…the idea is along the lines that adults can be horrible, without being outside what society says is acceptable.

Deadly Friend ended up being a flop at the box office.

~Screams and nightmares the films of Wes Craven by Brian J. Robb

reply

[deleted]

One of the reasons I liked this film was because of the cast. Matthew Laborteaux and Kristy Swanson were so cute together. I saw this film as a kid in the theaters. so it brings back childhood memories.

I was also intereted in reading the book Friend. Very good book!













reply

I actually found this film quite amusing and I agree that the studios should never interfere with a director's creative vision, but Deadly Friend ain't exactly The Magnificent Ambersons. The only way this film could have been salvaged would have been for Craven to have played it for laughs in the vein of something like Re-Animator. The whole "macabre love story" angle is just too ridiculous to be taken seriously, but Craven plays the whole thing straight. The basketball scene and the bit at the end are frankly the best bits in the whole film.

reply

Thanks for the info Shubert I have read this article before and it just reinforces my belief that studios should butt the hell out and let the movie makers do the movie making.

Cravens vision for Deadly Friend is exactly how I would have approached Henstells brilliant shory story. It's a story about two deeply troubled, vulnerable young teenagers, a story that demands sypmathy and compassion, a story that could be told once more without the inteference of a bunch of capitalist studio bosses.

reply

I agree that studio bosses need to butt out of what the writer and director had invisioned for the film.

reply

[deleted]

I agree that letting the person doing their own thing can suck at times. but too many cooks in the kitchen can hurt the project as well. so it's hard to tell.

I thought the ending in Deadly Friend was a cool effect but didn't fit the previous scene where Sam yelled Paul.

reply

I still remember watching this on cable with a bunch of people who all said the same thing: if you dropped the death scenes, it wouldn't affect the film's continuity one bit. They were unneccessary and box-office driven.

Though, the Elvira death being "decimated"....can't agree with that. I think (considering the MPAA) we actually got to see quite a bit.

reply

"Henstells brilliant shory story."

A 307 page book is hardly a short story.

My head hurts, my teeth itch, my feet stink, and I don't love Jesus.

reply

What is it then?

reply

A full length novel dip *beep*

reply

If Wes got paid for this he is a capitalist too.

reply

I heard all of these info before, but every time i hear about it again, it just makes me feel sad how asholes from Warner Bros butchered the movie.

I read many bad reviews about this movie, some of it here on IMDb, but i don't care about them. I love this movie to death, it's one my fave 80's horrors and Wes Craven's movies.

Yes, it has its flaws and gore scenes were definitely not needed, plus that motherfkn ending with robo-girl rising up from dead is one of the most dumbest fkn endings i ever seen. I hate that ending so much that always turn it off when it comes to that scene. What the fk was with Mark Tappin (boss of the WB studio) to come up with such a blsht ending? Sometime, i will make a fanedit that cuts that last part.

From what i understand, except for gore scenes, fast pace that movie has was also forced by studio dkheads. Editor Michael Eliot who worked on this movie has done post production cutting on plot and character development scenes of some other Warner Bros movies to make them shorter and possibly more profitable with box office. With the way certain scenes in Deadly Friend are cut, and after finding several pictures of deleted scenes and reading about original director's cut, i'm pretty sure that DF was cut down to certain running time in post production.

Besides, you can't tell me that screenwriter of Jacob's Ladder and Ghost would wrote this to be just another "nightmare and slasher" horror.

Once again, good and fun movie that is not perfect, but IT'S NOT ONE OF THE WORST MOVIES EVER, so for all of you haters out there, ease off with harsh words and do some research before starting to accuse Craven for being bad director and movie for being a mess.

reply

I don't think anything went wrong in this movie except for the ending. The ending seems like it was put there as an excuse just to have a twist. I think the credits should've started rolling after Samantha died. But other than that, I think it is a great film and one of Wes Craven's best. It has an interesting, creative story, likable characters, and great acting (especially from Kristy Swanson, Matthew Laborteaux, and Anne Ramsey). I think the love story still shines through despite all the gore scenes and Wes should be proud of making a great film. Other than the ending, I feel it is almost perfect. I don't see why so many people seem to dislike it.

I've been waiting for you, Ben.

reply