MPAA Rating: R/Genre: Horror/Stars: Miguel Ferrer, Julie Entwisle, Dan Monahan, Michael H. Moss, John Bennes, Beverly Skinner, Rob Wilds, Richard K. Olsen, Elizabeth McCormick/Runtime: 97 minutes
As a journalist of some skill and renown (or notoriety dependent on who you are talking to), I have found myself exposed to many different writing/reporting styles both in my professional day to day and in both my Communications undergrad classes as well as when I was a member of the yearbook staff in middle school. Yet, of all the styles I have gotten a chance to witness, there is one that above all others is responsible I feel not only for why journalists in general aren’t always looked at favorably by the general public (aka all of you), but also why in my desk at this very minute there is a bottle of Tylenol for the headaches that are all but inevitable at this point. That style being the one known as sensationalism (or journalistic lechery if you prefer) and which you can find both at your local supermarket checkout counter via such “gems of journalism” as Star, Sun, and Weekly World News as well as on TV courtesy of the “delightful and vast reservoir of journalist integrity” that is TMZ. Of course, can you really blame me and others for thinking so negatively about this type of journalism dear reader? I mean not only can this type of reporting conjure up a very unhealthy, to say nothing of extremely unnecessary, degree of fear in the hearts and minds of the public, but they can also seriously lead the public astray when it comes to what they report to say nothing of the fact that it can also result in the public really looking down on journalism as a whole due to a lack of trust that sensationalist journalism is very much a responsible party for causing. Therefore, and with such a healthy degree of disdain present, it should not come as a surprise by any stretch of the imagination to any of you reading this to learn that I might actually have been more than a tad bit excited to sit down and watch a film from 1997, and the slice of cinema I am reviewing for you today incidentally, known as The Night Flier. Not just because I am a huge Stephen King fan (22 years and counting), a fan of the late yet great Miguel Ferrer who is the lead actor in this, a lover of horror cinema, or even all of the above come to think. Rather, it’s because I found the core narrative idea of an unapologetically sleazy member of the sensationalist journalism community dealing with something potentially more monstrous than them to be a fairly intriguing idea. Imagine my happiness then to tell you that it might hit a fair bit of turbulence throughout its runtime, but with the aid of fairly solid work on both sides of the camera The Night Flier “97” is one lean and mean slice of horror cinema that manages to land fairly effectively even as it makes you think twice about flying or reading the magazines at the checkout line ever again.
The plot is as follows: An adaptation of the 1988 short story of the same name by iconic horror writer Stephen King, The Night Flier gets its spine-tingling story underway by taking us to an off the beaten path airfield in the middle of the night. A place that, under any other circumstances, might just be a place for the workers to deal with the occasional plane that arrives, but otherwise be content with just sitting around with a cup of coffee (if not something stronger) and just ride their shift out before heading home in the morning. Unfortunately for the worker on duty this night however, that’s not what he is treated to as we see him have an encounter with…somebody that doesn’t exactly end well. From there, the story takes us to the offices of a newspaper known as Inside View. A newspaper that, if I’m being honest, is less in the vein of the Washington Post and more akin to the National Enquirer right down to the kinds of truly out of left field stories they unapologetically, and more than a tad bit satisfyingly, cover. It is in these offices amidst the hustle and bustle that we are also quickly introduced to the “hero” of our story in the form of a man by the name of Richard Dees. A man who, when humanity was being distributed, must have either overslept or just decided to not get in line. Indeed, and in case that didn’t exactly spell it out, our highly skilled reporter is not exactly what many, if any, would call a nice guy. Rather, he is a cynic, a jerk and a half, an immoral sleaze, and perhaps the worst kind of person imaginable….almost. I say almost because, upon entering his editor’s office to confront him about a controversial picture he had taken not being approved to go with a story of his, we see that Dees is given a new assignment. It seems that someone under the name of Dwight Renfield has been flying around to a number of out of the way airstrips in an ominous black Cessna Skymaster 337, proceeding to butcher whoever is working when he lands there at night, and then proceeds to get out of dodge with no one being the wiser. Yet despite initially brushing off the story, due to thinking it a significant waste of his oh so precious and valuable time, and having it passed over to a new junior reporter on staff, we see that it isn’t long before Dees changes his mind and decides to take the story after all. In doing so however, we see that Dees is doing more than just taking on a simple story. Rather, he is also being taken by the hand into a bonafide nightmare. One that not only will introduce him to the properties of true terror, but also potentially bring him face to face with genuine evil as well. As for what transpires from there, that I shall let you uncover for yourself…..
Now right off the bat (pun maybe intended), it should be said that, whilst most assuredly not perfect, the various units operating behind the camera nevertheless do manage to do a fairly solid job here all the same. Without a doubt in my mind, this starts with the work done in the director’s chair by Mark Pavia and, despite being his only directorial credit (as of this writing), he still manages to by and large make this an entertaining little movie. Indeed there are several key components that Pavia manages to pull off extremely well here. The first is that Pavia does a wonderful job of making this film very much a slow burn type of horror story that, whilst organically constructing a genuinely palpable degree of suspense and tension, is also able to keep you equally hooked on what is happening on screen at any given moment whilst also on the edge of your seat as you wait to see what happens next. Along with that, it should also be said that Pavia is able to give this slice of horror cinema a twistedly delightful atmosphere made up of equal parts dread, creepy, and ominous that fits the unnerving essence of the source material perfectly. With that in mind though, it should also be said that despite the genuinely creepy tone and atmosphere that Pavia is able to drench this film right from the very first frame, there are moments where either specific moments are unnecessarily rushed or stretched out, but also where the tone can be a wee bit on the inconsistent side. As a result, it might not be the best work a director has done with King’s work, but trust me when I say that it is also not the worst either. Not by a long shot. Along with the fairly skilled work done by Pavia at the helm, this film also features a not-bad yet not great either screenplay by Pavia and Jack O’Donnell. Yes, the screenplay is wonderfully faithful to King’s original story and for that it does deserve praise. With that in mind though, it also does suffer a bit. Not just from the issues faced by the work done in terms of the film’s direction, but also because the vast majority of the cast in this aren’t given nearly as much in terms of substantive material to work with thereby making their characters a bit more one-dimensional than they ought to have been. Besides those 2 departments, the film also manages to incorporate some fairly solid work from David Connell in the cinematography department. Yes, there are points where the movie’s limited budget makes itself apparent, but overall Connell manages to do a really good job at not only utilizing lights and shadow to aid in the creation of this film’s genuinely unnerving mood, but also in giving us moments (including one near the end filmed in black and white) that are hauntingly gorgeous to look at. Last, but by no means least, I feel like this section would be lacking if I didn’t take some time to talk about the work done by iconic composer Brian Keane on this film’s score. Yes, it does feel at times like your run of the mill score for a horror film, but overall Keane’s work here is still able to contribute just as many effective tingles down the spine as some of the other ingredients at play behind the camera. Suffice it to say that when you also throw into the mix fairly well-done work from the editing department as headed by Elizabeth Schwartz alongside some effectively nightmarish work from the effects and make-up departments respectively it’s clear that this slice and dice of horror cinema might not be a turbulent-free flight by any means, but the work done behind the camera definitely does what it can to make sure things go as smoothly as they ultimately wind up going.
Alongside the fairly solid yet by no means flawless work done by the teams operating behind the camera, this slice and dice of horror cinema is also reinforced admirably well by a game cast of talent in front of the camera even if (as previously touched on) a fair majority of them aren’t given nearly as much in terms of narrative material to work with as some of the others. Without any doubt in my mind, this starts with the lead performance given here by the late yet highly underrated Miguel Ferrer and he is absolutely solid here. Yes, the character is one that is at best a cynical and abrasive jerk with a competitive streak a mile long and at worst an amoral monster who has no limits to the lengths he will go or the ethical barriers he will choose to annihilate in order to get a story. Even so however, there is no denying that in Ferrer’s more than capable hands Dees still, thanks in large part to his determination and select few moments of genuine vulnerability especially as he gets closer and closer to the target of his sensationalist journalist pursuit, manages to become a somewhat relatable character that is worth following on this terrifying journey…..even if it is at the most extreme version of arm’s length as you can possibly get (plus or minus a few feet for good measure). Besides the undeniably skilled work done by Ferrer in the lead role, this slice of cinema also manages to give us a fairly well-done performance from Julie Entwisle as Katherine “Jimmy” Blair. Indeed Entwisle does a wonderful job of bringing to life a character that might start out as a more moral (though no less ambitious) counterpart to her seasoned colleagues, but by the end….well you’ll just see have to see where she winds up by the end of the film. Along with Ferrer and Entwisle, this film also gives us a perversely delightful turn from Dan Monahan (Pee Wee from Porky’s) and I like to think this is just an older Pee Wee after his misadventures in high school. I say this because as Dees and Katherine’s editor, Monahan does a slimy good job at being someone who is both ruthless and manipulative. Not only in how he pits the two against each other, but also in doing whatever it takes to keep readership of the paper up. Finally, I feel like this section would definitely be lacking if I didn’t talk about the work done here by Michael Moss in the pivotal role of Dwight Renfield. Yes, there’s not a whole lot I can say due to spoilers, but what I can say is that the film does a terrific job of really keeping this character an enigmatic yet creepy presence throughout most of the runtime by focusing more on the aftermath of his butchery rather than on him himself. Once he does show up in the flesh so to speak, there is no denying that Moss is absolutely terrifying despite only being given 15-20 minutes of screentime tops. Suffice it to say that when you also take into account solid (albeit tragically underwritten from a narrative perspective) work from such performers as character actor John Bennes (I Know What You Did Last Summer, The Patriot, and Hollings in Children of the Corn II: The Final Sacrifice), Beverly Skinner (Miss Puttnam in the 1989 TV movie Night Walk), Rob Wilds, and Richard K. Olsen (Thomas Edison in a couple episodes of The Young Indiana Jones Chronicles, Radioland Murders from 1994, and Mr. Milo in 5 episodes of Dawson’s Creek) it’s clear that this slice and dice of horror cinema most assuredly does have its fair share of issues, but thankfully the work done by the cast does what it can to help patch things up.
All in all and at the end of the day is The Night Flier the best of the best when it comes to horror cinema, cinematic adaptations of Stephen King’s vast literary catalogue, or even both for that matter? Honestly I’m afraid that is most assuredly not the case. With that in mind however, does that make this the worst cinematic attempt of King’s work ever brought to the silver screen? Not by a long shot, but if you are the kind of person who believes so then I definitely think (among other examples) the 10 million Children of the Corn sequels (or so it feels like), the 2017 Dark Tower movie, Maximum Overdrive from 1986 (as much as I find that film to be a genuine cinematic guilty pleasure), the 2002 Carrie, Cell from 2016, and even The Shining mini-series from 1997 respectively would all love to have a “polite word” with you though I can’t promise it’ll be the kind of conversation that goes in your favor. All sarcastic jokes aside, I must admit that this is definitely a flawed film. Indeed the pacing can be a bit touch and go at times, the main character and his extremely high degree of abrasiveness can be a bit much, and there isn’t exactly an equal amount of narrative material being distributed here. Despite those flaws however, I must also admit that I do have a degree of fondness for this film. Indeed the work at the helm is fairly skilled, the score is appropriately spine-tingling, the script surprisingly faithful to the source material, the cinematography not that bad for the budget they were working with, and the performances (with particular regard to the ones given by Ferrer, Entwistle, Monahan, and Moss) do work despite the lack of equal narrative substance across the board. Suffice it to say that it’s not exactly the smoothest cinematic flight in the world, but if you’re looking for a delightfully spooky little film to watch at some point this Halloween season trust me when I say this should definitely give you what you’re looking for and then some. Now if you’ll excuse me: I’m at the airport and about to board, but before I do I really would like to make sure that it’s not a black Cessna Skymaster 337 that will taking me to my destination. Not that I’m superstitious or scary easily by any stretch of the imagination mind you. Rather, I would just like to make sure that I get where I am going in one piece instead of one piece of me being all that manages to get where I’m going. Make of that what thou will dear reader. On a scale of 1-5 I give The Night Flier “97” a solid 3.5 out of 5.
