The Lottery (1996)

Too much of everything

Pretty Good

It's funny, it's tense, it features two great performances from two actors and the director expertly creates a web of odd tension where you actually don't know what is happening for the majority of the run time.

The movie's neither hopeful in contrived ways, nor hopeless in different contrived ways. Somehow it manages to be wonderful

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.

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.

This film is truly an illustration that some traditions shouldn't be kept. If a tradition that has long been upheld causes extreme cruelty or death of those who follow it, then it should be abandoned. There are still traditions out there that are just as gruesome in real life and yet, just as the one in the film, are allowed to continue. Just as in the film, people become so blinded by their traditions that they sometimes forget the difference between right and wrong. Unspeakable acts are committed, yet those blinded by tradition just stand by and allow them to take place.

This modern day adaptation of the short story by Shirley Daniels is a gripping horror tale that successfully grabs the attention of our modern day teenagers while also making the point Ms. Daniels intended. This story warns us that sometimes traditions can be negative, and we must always stand up for what is truly right. I would love to get a copy of this movie for my own collection.