The Monkey Saves the Stephen King Adaptation by Skewering It

by

When a movie opens with an explicit disembowelment scene, it’s surprising to compare it to the gentle charm of ‘Stand by Me’. However, as ‘The Monkey’ progresses beyond its initial shock, it does share some similarities with the 1986 Rob Reiner film, ‘Stand by Me’, which was based on Stephen King‘s novella ‘The Body’. Although ‘The Monkey’ is undeniably more gory, both films are coming-of-age stories about young boys, Hal and Bill (both played by Christian Convery), who are compelled to grapple with the harsh reality of death for the first time. Similar to ‘Stand by Me’, there’s a voice-over in ‘The Monkey’, where an older Hal reflects on his troubled childhood. Instead of focusing on the corpse of a missing child, as in ‘Stand by Me’, the narrator in ‘The Monkey’ is obsessed with a cursed monkey toy that claims a life whenever its key is turned and it begins to play its tiny drum.

In a different tone, “The Monkey” isn’t your typical coming-of-age story like “Stand by Me”, but rather it uses this premise as a ruse, according to Perkins. The tragic event where a key turn causes their mother (Tatiana Maslany) a fatal brain hemorrhage forces Hal and Bill to throw the monkey down a well. The movie fast-forwards from 1999 to the present, with an adult Hal (Theo James), who has grown estranged from his brother and son, Petey (Colin O’Brien). Seeking peace, Hal finds himself once again in turmoil when the monkey resurfaces, causing a string of unfortunate incidents that claim the life of Aunt Ida (Sarah Levy) through various accidents that seem excessive. (Fishhooks, fire, impalement: She endures them all.) Upon Hal’s return to the Maine town he grew up in, he becomes determined to uncover and eradicate the evil from his past, making “The Monkey” increasingly similar to “It: Chapter Two”. Perkins, the writer and director of the film, is keenly aware of the connections that audiences familiar with King adaptations will draw, but he’s not merely paying tribute. The more you scrutinize “The Monkey”, the more its intentional twists on the tropes synonymous with Stephen King movies become evident.

The movie occasionally leans towards playful mockery, with its quirky and fantastical elements indicating that it’s best not to take things too literally, even when the death toll is high. This playfulness also extends to some nods to classic King adaptations, which seem more like good-natured jabs than serious homages. The bullying experienced by the character Hal in the beginning, such as coming home covered in bananas, is an exaggerated take on the excessive bullying seen in movies like Carrie. In the current timeline, there’s a punk named Thrasher, portrayed by Rohan Campbell from Halloween Ends, who appears to be decades behind the times with his Ramones-inspired ’70s punk style, reminiscent of the anachronistic high schoolers in Christine but more intentionally comedic. At the funeral for Hal and Bill’s babysitter (Danica Dreyer), a monkey who dies tragically in a hibachi accident, we learn her name is Annie Wilkes, a nod to the antagonist in Misery. This reference feels like an Easter egg common in modern King films but is utterly incongruous in this context. These satirical elements don’t show disregard for the movies that preceded The Monkey so much as a recognition that King adaptations need a fresh take.

Regarding Stephen King’s works, it seems we’ve explored most of the territory already, leaving one wondering if there are any more tales left to bring to life. In recent times, the quality of King movie adaptations has reached a low point, and I can’t help but express my disappointment without specifically naming any particular films. The least successful of these adaptations have been remakes of previously made movies, such as the forgettable 2022 film “Firestarter”, 2020’s “Children of the Corn”, and the yet-to-be-released “Salem’s Lot” in 2024. Many recent first-time adaptations have also failed to make an impression, making it challenging to find fans of films like “Mr. Harrigan’s Phone”, released on Netflix in 2022, or “The Boogeyman” from 2023, the only wide theatrical release among them. Despite the brief promise of a new golden age of King adaptations following the release of “It” in 2017, it appears that this era was short-lived.

In terms of box office performance and generally positive to moderately favorable reviews, “The Boogeyman” stands out among the latest adaptations from Stephen King – “The Life of Chuck,” which received good feedback at TIFF but won’t be released until this summer, is another contender. However, “The Boogeyman” exemplifies a broader issue that has affected many of these films. Many have been weighed down by a somber tone and overly sincere feel, perhaps drawing the wrong lessons from successes like “It” and “Doctor Sleep.” Those movies were rich in emotion and themes, but they also offered a fun experience. In contrast, “The Boogeyman” transforms a minor King tale into another exploration of (Jamie Lee Curtis’ voice) trauma, where the title monster symbolizes grief. “Mr. Harrigan’s Phone” is an even more laborious affair that replaces the chills of the original novella with tears. Essentially, “The Monkey” is challenging this feelings-first approach to King. Instead of dulling the source material, Perkins amplifies the grotesqueness, absurdity, and humor. The outcome is a timely reminder that Stephen King movies can be entertaining – and equally importantly, thought-provoking.

The movie “The Monkey” shares a similar narrative structure with its source material, as both focus on an adult Hal attempting to destroy the titular item responsible for his mother’s death, primarily to safeguard his son. However, Perkins takes creative liberties in certain details and adds a unique twist by making the monkey the cause of numerous accidents leading to deaths. In the original story, characters meet untimely ends from falling out of a treehouse or getting hit by cars. In contrast, the film’s monkey appears to have a flair for the dramatic, often causing gruesome and violent scenes involving blood and gore. Darkly comedic elements are also woven into the movie, such as a character losing his head shortly after a heartwarming reunion. This return to darkness mirrors King’s earlier work but also enhances the source material, with shocking plot twists reminiscent of the controversial ending in the 2007 adaptation of “The Mist.

In a similar vein to how Frank Darabont, the director of Mist, recognized it, Perkins grasps an essential concept: harshness and sincerity need not be at odds with one another. Unlike recent, overly sentimental King adaptations, The Monkey maintains its emotional depth through parody and exaggerated violence. The absurd deaths serve to underscore the unsettling reality that death is unpredictable: “It is what it is,” as Tatiana Maslany’s Lois puts it to her children. This message resonates more effectively in a satirical comedy than it would have if Perkins had followed the film’s original script, which he deemed too trite because it was overly focused on trauma, as he shared with Vulture in a 2024 interview. Instead, Perkins crafted a version that challenges King conventions and leans into splatter comedy, resulting in an adaptation more impactful than any since Doctor Sleep. It’s refreshing to see that there’s still room for fresh interpretations from our most frequently adapted living author—sometimes all it takes is a generous helping of death to uncover the essence.

Read More

2025-02-21 21:54