MovieChat Forums > Deadly Friend (1986) Discussion > Craven's version

Craven's version

posted 16 years ago by JackForrester
11 replies | jump to latest

I keep reading everywhere how Wes Craven wanted to make a more dark romantic love story in this film, following the steps on Diana Henstell's novel, but when the movie failed at test audiences, Warner decided to change to a horror gory flick with that terrible ending.
I was really interested on seeing Wes version of the film. Was that ever filmed? It'd be really interesting to see that as one of the DVD extras for the movie.
I really like Wes movies, and the screenwriter is also very good, it's weird how this movie turned out so bad. Many people say the book "Friend" is very good too, I hope I can put my hands on it someday.

Everytime I watch this film I get so depressed. I always get the feeling it had a great potential to be a good film, and suddenly the movie turns into a terrible joke. Really sad.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] RobsBottin 15 years ago

Craven did indeed film another version of DF. It was screened to a small audience of Wes Craven fans and studio execs. Because of the success of ANOES Craven had a large fan base which Warners marketing execs discovered. The intial version of the film didn't go down well with the fans so the studio (having realised Cravens popularity as a horror director) demanded Rubin write in six additional gore scenes. Most of the romantic story was taken out and replaced with the aforementioned scenes - including the ridiculous ending.

Deadly Friend isn't a complete disaster, there are a few fine moments but it had potential more than anything else.

[–] JackForrester 15 years ago

That's what I think too.
I hope fans can see the original version someday. It seems much more interesting in my opinion.

[–] RobsBottin 15 years ago

Warners will release it at some point I'm sure.

[–] NekrosBebop 15 years ago

The ironic part is that the novel is, pound for pound, gorier than the gored-up studio version.

[–] Ribelin2000 15 years ago

Wow, really? Where did you read this?

[–] JackForrester 15 years ago

Well, I can't tell about the book, I've never read it (but I'd love to), but reading the comments of people that actually read it, the gore seems to have a little more purpose. In the movie, it was just to drag Freddy Krueger's fans to the theater.
I think the movie would've worked much better as a dark love story titled Friend, as Craven originally wanted.

[–] NekrosBebop 15 years ago

In the book, Sam's reanimated body starts to decay as the story goes on which could have been cool make-up for the film. There was also this backstory in the novel where Paul had set a kid on fire back in Boston. His spirit came back to Paul at various times through the story as a charred corpse. Like Jack said, the gore in the book was more purposeful

[–] JackForrester 15 years ago

Wow, that seems really creepy. The spirit of the burned kid could've been brought to the movie, it would be like Victor Pascow's ghost visiting Louis Creed in Pet Sematary. There's a lot of creepy/better ways Craven could have gone with this. The excessive gore and the dreams just made this movie laughable, not scary. Too bad the studio wouldn't let him.
I just ordered the book Friend, I'll read it as soon as it get here and I'll let you guys know what I think. But it really seems incredibly much better than the movie.

[–] livid_86 15 years ago

Yay just bought the book on ebay for a buck. Can't wait to read it.

Sometimes I doubt your commitment to Sparkle Motion.

[–] Blackace 13 years ago

The movie is definitely not Wes Craven's best, but it does have a creepiness about it. The robot was creepy enough. Attaching a robot brain to a human brain of course would not bring a person back to life. There is some decent gore in the film and it's a fun watch for 90mins of your time. Still, don't expect to be "Wowed" by it. The ending left a lot to be desired. I can't believe they couldn't come up with a better ending. I was like, "Now what!?!?" as the credit rolled.