Strawberry Spring (2001) User Reviews

Disappointed

[camachoborracho · 4/10 · 15 April 2004]

I read the short story a few years ago and still remember the King "twist" at the end. This story seems to have done what Hollywood has done and just exploited King's name for attention while ruining the source material...I won't ruin the ending but it is vastly different from the story and so the story no longer makes sense.

Overall, for a student film, this was beautifully shot and I was impressed with the visuals. However, the story - at only 8 minutes - really drags due to a narrator who seems to be sleeptalking and nothing happens in the story that makes it seem worth watching. Like I say, I was disappointed, and not only because I know the source material, but even if I had never read the story before the film alone was dull, just atmospheric but nothing else.

Final Verdict: Read the story instead.

King's Story Was Misrepresented

[Chadd-3 · 5/10 · 11 June 2002]

I saw this short and frankly, I was disappointed. The film was all right, but it kind of felt like it was the same throughout it. Like every scene and narration was the same. But I was not letting that get to me because; being a HUGE fan of the short story (in Stephen King's collection Night Shift), I was expecting the powerhouse twist ending.

It didn't come.

I won't spoil it, but I will just say that the story and movie did end the same, but the way they got to the ending was MUCH different. The story had a VERY strong and surprising ending; the short film did not. So my first reaction after seeing it was, "They screwed it up!" (I did use a harsher word than "screwed").

How not to adapt a short story

[Horst_In_Translation · 4/10 · 20 September 2013]

Admittedly, I have not read King's "Strawberry Spring", so i'm fairly judging this from the movie standpoint. I read some of the other reviews, however, saying, it didn't do the work justice. Can't say I'm surprised. Not at all. The short films goes on for 8 minutes and I was really tempted to discontinue watching despite the short running time. Basically, we have to take all the story about those murdered female students from what the narrator tells us as the storyline and direction gets so confusing already one minute in after we see the campus full of ambulance and police cars that it's really hard to follow.

Also, the ending seemed a total mystery to me. When you make a movie, you can't rely on the viewer having read the material it's based on and just be okay with the fact that he'll only, if at all, understand it if he's done so. Well yeah.. maybe take a look at the story first and then decide, if you want to see it. At least it's just under 10 minutes long and not 20 or so.

Good Rendition

[rocky_wood · 7/10 · 1 October 2002]

A tremendous rendition by (I presume) a young filmmaker. Good writing and quality, although the soundtrack music is a little loud at times.

Another successful King dollar baby. King fans should seek it out as interesting representation of this story, while those interested in short films will find a good, solid and well presented short story.

Too short

[giffenbob · 22 March 2003]

Considering that it's a dollar-baby, it's very professional done, technical and all, but they should have made it longer. It's too short. It's quite moody and a bit spooky at places, and you begin to warm up and really enjoying what you see, and boom, it's over. It's pretty close to Stephen King's story, but it leaves too much out. 8 minutes was an appropriate length for Paranoid, another and better dollar-baby, but not this time around.