Smartphones can be a useful addition to our lives, but they can also be a menace. They can distract us from the beauty of the world around us, cause us to waste time when we should be doing something more productive, and they can give us a false sense of self-worth when we rely on social media for approval. ..
Smartphones are addictive and we need to face up to that. Author Stephen King has already warned us about the dangers of smartphone dependency in his 2006 novel Cell (and the subsequent movie) and in his short story, Mr. Harrigan’s Phone, which was published in the anthology If It Bleeds. He further warned us about the dangers of our miniature screens. ..
Netflix’s adaptation of the story tries to demonstrate King’s themes by showing how segregated schools are in America. In one opening scene, we are introduced to a high school cafeteria where the students are segregated not by their social standing or personal interests but by their phones. In one corner of the room sit the Samsung kids, while in another area of the hall sit the iPhone owners, and there are several other phone-related groups, with each student sitting glued to their screens instead of having actual face time with the people situated around them.
Craig begins to worry that the old man may have been sending him messages because he is lonely and wants company. He spends hours upon hours messaging the old man back and forth, trying to find out what the man’s story is. Eventually, Craig learns that the old man is in fact a widower with two children and he has been sending Craig messages to ask for help with getting back together with his wife.
Donald Sutherland’s ghost is communicating with Craig from beyond the grave, and is punishing people who have upset him. ..
The movie does not explore the ghost aspect of the plot. This might be disappointing if you’re expecting a fully-fleshed-out ghost story as director Hancock has given us a movie that is quite abstract in nature, with a bigger focus on Craig’s bond with Harrigan and subsequent grief. ..
This is a movie about the relationships between people, and the ways that technology can destroy them. It’s not a horror movie; it’s not a thriller. It’s just a story about people, and the ways that technology can destroy them.
It’s not that the film isn’t scary, it’s just that it doesn’t particularly matter that the film isn’t. This is more a character piece about a troubled young teen and his friendship with the elderly billionaire of the title. However, for a film that hinges on the premise that Harrigan can cause bad things to happen while lying six feet under, the film could have been a little more horrific. Horror fans are going to be disappointed with this one unless they lower their expectations in preparation for a movie that is far less gruesome than most King adaptations.
The cast does a good job of making the characters feel real, even if they are not always fully fleshed out. The only downside is that the story feels a bit too slow to really take off. However, Martell and Sutherland make up for it with their strong performances.
Despite the lack of any real horror, the movie still manages to engage throughout most of its runtime. This is partly because of Hancock’s atmospheric direction which draws us into the small-town world of Craig and his friends and partly because of the emotional screenplay that encourages sympathy for the bewildered teen. There are times when not a lot happens on screen but the performances help to maintain interest regardless, so the movie can rarely be considered boring.
Stephen King’s Phone isn’t the best adaptation of his work that you will ever see, but it does raise some interesting points about our reliance on technology. In particular, during a scene when Harrigan becomes alarmed at his own phone use, it “feels” like a Stephen King story even if it’s all rather bloodless. ..
If you’re looking for a movie that will keep you entertained and won’t leave you with nightmares, I recommend checking out “Hancock.” It’s based on the original short story by Stephen King, and it was surprisingly tender compared to the movie version. ..
In a recent interview, Mr. Harrigan said that his phone had ended up in the hands of someone who was not authorized to have it. He said that he had not been using the phone for months before it went missing and that he could not find any evidence to support his claim that anyone was involved in its disappearance.
