Home
search
more | tips
IMDb > The Lottery (1996) (TV) > IMDb user comments

IMDb user comments for
The Lottery (1996) (TV) More at IMDb Pro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]
Index 40 comments in total 

9 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
The original short story was better, 23 June 2001
Author: Gravity06 from Florida, USA

By all means, read Shirley Jackson's original short story; it gets down to business without the padding this film adds to it.

To all who think that the ending is sick and pointless, that was Ms. Jackson's intention exactly -- the original story is an allegory about the cruelty man inflicts upon his neighbor in the name of upholding "tradition". Ms. Jackson's story is much more affecting than this film.

Was the above comment useful to you?

8 out of 10 people found the following comment useful :-
Shirley Jackson must feel like she's being stoned to death!, 1 March 2005
2/10
Author: tlgerma from Canada

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

This classic tale of misguided faith and tradition is done a horrible injustice in this made for TV adaptation. It utilizes little of the original suspense found in the story surrounding the question of "what is the lottery" and does little to further the themes of tradition and faith. Rather, the TV adaptation plods around a pre-story and end with the worst "gotcha" contrivance of an ending possible. I'm sure if Jackson was around today to see this sham of a film, she'd feel as if she'd won the lottery and was being stoned by the script and its direction. What particularly upsets me about this very poor adaptation is that it alters so much of the story as to make it less about the town and much more about a budding romance and a boy from the big city. Perhpas the only redeeming feature of the film is some OK character acting by some rather well-known Hollywood character actors. Other than some good performances (which are buried at times by the lame script), this film lacks the substance of the Jackson piece.

Was the above comment useful to you?

6 out of 7 people found the following comment useful :-
creepy!, 7 December 1999
Author: Goon-2 from WA

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

This film reminds me a lot of "Invasion of the Body Snatchers." Sometimes it even, er, rips off parts from "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," but both make for an effectivly creepy movie, particularly this one, about a small town that holds a lottery every now and then with all of its citizens. The person drawing the marked ballot wins the "honor" of being the town's sacrifice for prosperity. And how do they prosper? By stoning the person to death.

That's... quite a premise. It is every bit as scary as it sounds, as is the citizens blind oblivion to the wrong in what they are doing, which very much reminded me of the "Body Snatchers" wanting to become seed pods and live in a totaliterian society. Imagine all of the seed pod people becoming crazed killers and you get the characters in this film. Suprisingly good performances(considering that M. Emmett Walsh is the only one of the cast that I really like)bring these villians to life in quite the engrossing story. A few Hollywoodized "action" scenes from star Dan Cortese don't even spoil it much. Wow.

Was the above comment useful to you?

7 out of 9 people found the following comment useful :-
Shirley Jackson deserves better, 13 September 2003
Author: rmssw from Akron, OH

Shirley Jackson was one of the most talented writers of the 20th century and her story "The Lottery" continues to be one of the most discussed short stories in modern literature. You would think that a film (or in this case, a television) adaptation would pay a little more attention to detail and try to remain at least a little loyal to the original story. Instead, we get this. The only similarity between this and the story is the fact that someone is stoned to death. Beyond that, it seems as though the screenwriters never even glanced at the short story while writing this. Even when looked at on its own, paying no attention to the story, this movie is bad. It is over-the-top and insulting to the viewer. The context and setting are all wrong, making the plot completely unbelievable. As for the acting, I don't think it's fair to call what is portrayed in the movie "acting".

Do yourself a favor and read the story. With this and the recent second film adaptation of her novel "The Haunting Of Hill House", the memory of Shirley Jackson does not deserve to be degraded any further.

Was the above comment useful to you?

9 out of 13 people found the following comment useful :-
Keri Russell is the only good reason to watch this movie., 15 August 2001
Author: TxMike from Houston, Tx, USA, Earth

Keri Russell was 20 when she made this movie, 2 years before her success in the TV series "Felicity." Here she plays a teacher and part-time librarian in this strange, secluded town, where everyone dies on June 27th!! Even though she generally looks younger than her years, in this film she had to play several years older and did it credibly.

The community is one where a person is stoned to death each June 27th, chosen by lottery. "Don't look at it as murder, Josh, just a different kind of tradition," after her own mother was the most current victim. Turns out his own mother had met that fate years earlier, his investigation showed Josh, after his dad requested on his deathbed that ashes be placed at mother's grave. Josh escapes, but upon returning all towns people stick together, convince the authorities he was crazy, just like his dad, who had made the same accusations.

As other reviewers say, a strange movie, where the ending leads us to assume that another person will be stoned to death next year.

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Doesn't do the short story by Shirley Jackson justice., 2 February 2004
5/10
Author: Tom Smith from New Hampshire

This current day (90ish) version of "The Lottery" doesn't do the original (1948) short story by Shirley Jackson justice. However it is an interesting modernized version of the short story, with a modern day twist. For anyone who hasn't read "The Lottery" it's a great short story. It starts off as a pleasant story which could have taken place in any century. Once she has you hooked, the story takes an unexpected turn. If you like Edgar Allan Poe, you'll really enjoy Shirley Jackson's original story "The Lottery". Originally published in the June 28, 1948 issue of the New Yorker.

Was the above comment useful to you?

5 out of 6 people found the following comment useful :-
Would make a better short., 21 April 2002
Author: Tresix from Chicago, Illinois

I first read Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery" in my high school freshman English class and was really shocked that they would let us read THIS kind of story in a learning institute. Needless to say, that tale has always stuck with me. When I heard that NBC was going to be showing a made-for-TV movie based off of the story, my hopes were not high. When I saw the finished product, my fears were confirmed. Let's face it, folks, there are some short stories that just aren't meant to be feature-length films and this is one of them. I think it would have made a much better short subject or been done as an episode of a horror anthology series in the mold of "The Twilight Zone" or "Alfred Hitchcock Presents".

The story's theme of blindly following archaic traditions still rings within the film, just having it being padded out into a conventional thriller didn't work for me though. To see how to handle a short story REALLY well, try to find the adaptation of William Faulkner's short story "A Rose for Emily" that starred a young Angelica Huston. In a similar vein as "The Lottery", "Rose" runs approximately fifteen minutes and is very effective and evocative.

Was the above comment useful to you?

6 out of 8 people found the following comment useful :-
A study in why not to make movies out of short stories, 1 April 2004
Author: Mean_Joe_Weeks

There are some things in this world that are tied very exclusively to one time period, and though their essence is eternal, there is a need, sometimes, to bring subtle changes to the details in order to allow other generations to share in their merit. Unfortuneatly for the film version, `The Lottery' is not one of these. The original short story by Shirley Jackson is the perfect encapsulation of every interesting facet the story had to offer. it beautifully and subtly creates tension and then shocking horror, and makes us question ourselves and the things we hold to be normal. It does all this in a few scant pages.

The movie drags on and on for about an hour and a half, and the payoff is exactly the same. Along the way you have to sit through mercilessly lame acting and flat, dull characters. The idea that the town has a mysterious secret is introduced almost immidiatly, but the revelation at the end is where everything is revealed. Simple enough, but it unfortunately means that through the vast bulk of the movie, the same theme is repeated over and over. Jason comes to a situation that seems mysterious. But the townies won't tell him what's going on! Even if it were well acted, even if the subplots were remotely engaing, there just isnt any way to get around the tedious repedativeness. And folks, the acting is not good. And the subplots are just corny as all hell. Keri Russel in particular seems unfathomably cast. She stands out as totally inappropriate for the role of a small-town girl with her modern vernacular and of course her suspiciouly flawless tan. Most of the other character actors just play the predicatble role of "belligerent smalltown sheriff" and the like. Nothing to see here. The film particularly produces groans with it's implausable romance -replete with an exploding car, natch - and absurdly vague expository dialouge.

As for the end, its executed with appropriate style. But the wait it takes to get there just isn't justified. All and all, the film can't get past the troublesome point that there just isn't enough there to fill an hour and a half. Read the short story instead, its impact is at least, and probably more, potent.

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
predictable, 20 May 2003
Author: lar1

*** This comment may contain spoilers ***

The problem with this movie is that there really aren't any surprises. It takes Shirley Jackson's very short story about a New England town's annual ritual and uses it as a basis for a detective story as Dan Cortese comes to New Hope, with the hope of uncovering his past and his father's deathbed request. Even someone who has never heard of Shirley Jackson can figure out the town's secret long before Cortese does (it gives it away right in the opening credits!). The direction is okay and the acting passable, but the script fails to bring out anything new in the familiar story. ****spoiler warning**** Don't you think the FBI would be on to the town after fifty years and be grateful when a witness came forward?

Was the above comment useful to you?

3 out of 3 people found the following comment useful :-
A good adaptation, 19 August 2001
Author: ecardenas111 from United States

Being an English teacher, my students read the Shirley Jackson short story. I thought this was a good updated, adaptation of the story. Since it was a made for tv movie, I knew that it would not be too gruesome. I don't know that I would classify this as true horror, maybe more like mystery.

Was the above comment useful to you?
Page 1 of 4:[1] [2] [3] [4] [Next]

Add another comment

Related Links

Plot summary Ratings Awards
Parents Guide Plot keywords Main details
Your user comments Your vote history