The Pumpkin King: NEEDFUL THINGS (1993)

Note: This piece is in reference to the 1993 theatrical cut of NEEDFUL THINGS, not the three hours-plus extended version that appeared on cable as a miniseries beginning in 1996.

NEEDFUL THINGS is not a subtle movie. That lack of subtlety is forgivable to a point since the Stephen King novel is also far from understated. While the ham-fisted approach by director Fraser C. Heston (working from a surprisingly straightforward adaptation by the enigmatic W.D. Richter) hammers away at the same over-the-top note for too much of the film, it did make me nostalgic for the kinds of surface pleasures that mid-budget studio genre movies of the time contained. Considering that one of the lessons that the movie beats its audience over the head with is the futility of trying to recapture the past—the danger of nostalgia, if you will—my nostalgia for the type of filmmaking the movie represents made this viewing an oddly meta experience.

Heston sketches the film’s morality lessons in traditionally Biblical good vs. evil terms. However, what struck me upon this re-watch (my first since seeing it in its original theatrical run) is how nostalgia for a fleeting moment from the past is the easiest thing to twist into something grotesque. The people cajoled into the committing the worst crimes by possible Satan/definitely supernaturally evil antiques dealer Leland Gaunt (Max von Sydow) are swayed by mundane objects from their past.

In the case of miserable, drunken Hugh (Duncan Fraser), all it takes to coerce him into killing and skinning a dog is a replica of his old high school letter jacket. For Nettie (Amanda Plummer), a porcelain figurine that her dead, abusive husband smashed years before is all she needs to play a mean-spirited trick on the dangerously paranoid Danforth (J.T. Walsh). Both Hugh and Nettie are broken people before Gaunt even gets hold of them, but he prays on their nostalgia for a time before they were broken to manipulate them.

Forgive me if I go on a bit of a tangent here, but trust me that I will bring everything in the next couple of paragraphs around to what NEEDFUL THINGS gets disturbingly right about human nature and how it also makes me feel a bit like a hypocrite.

Over the last few years, I’ve been troubled by the constant retreat into the past that I’ve observed in pop culture. Reboots, legacy sequels, comic book adaptations, spinoffs, and overt homages to TV shows and movies that might as well be remakes have become the rule and not just the exception. Creative decisions by artists have given way to algorithms and the amount of new “content” is more important than if it’s entertaining or artistically justified. This has led to a dearth of mainstream TV shows and movies sporting original ideas. Stranger Things is a hit? Quick, we need more “content” that trades on Gen-X nostalgia for ‘80s Amblin productions. The IT movies made a lot of money? Let’s adapt the best-known Stephen King novels again.

I’m not immune to this approach. For example, I tear through every new season of Cobra Kai when they premiere. Still, even I get a little embarrassed for the show when it continues to pull the nostalgia strings by bringing back more and more tangential characters from the original films instead of giving its good young cast more to do. So, while I think nostalgia is largely a neutral force, the temptation to use it as an easy shortcut to emotional connection is too great for many “content” creators.

Have I mentioned I hate the word “content” to describe entertainment or art? I’ll get to that in another essay at another time.

Hey, Matt! What does your old man shaking his fist at a cloud tangent have to do with NEEDFUL THINGS? Focus!

Gaunt offers up tokens of nostalgia to Hugh and Nettie, not just because it makes them feel warm and fuzzy (which it does, for at least a moment), but because it makes them feel safe. People will do a lot of things to protect their sense of safety and Gaunt knows this. That is why he uses the lure of nostalgia to hook two of the most vulnerable people in town to accelerate his campaign of destruction into violent territory. He harnesses their fear of the present by promising them the past if they will just help him gain the souls of their fellow townsfolk and, in the process, destroys their future. NEEDFUL THINGS may lack subtlety, but it is dead on with the way it takes the weaponization of nostalgia to its logical extreme.

Nostalgia—the lack of it, anyway—is also the reason that Gaunt’s plan eventually unravels. When adolescent Brian (Shane Meier) accepts a Mickey Mantle baseball card, it’s more out of guilt than nostalgia since it was the one card that his now absent father never acquired. Since Brian eventually feels no real connection to the card, his conscience gets to him and he makes Sheriff Pangborn (Ed Harris) aware of Gaunt’s sinister plans. Pangborn, whose present life is better than a past he would like to forget, lacks a nostalgic nature, making him immune to Gaunt’s schemes and is able to stop most of the people of his town from destroying themselves and each other.

As I said earlier, I’m not above to the pull of nostalgia. It is only natural to want the things you like to stay the way they are. While watching NEEDFUL THINGS, I had a thought that I hear thrown around a lot on social media: “you couldn’t make this today.” I usually roll my eyes when I hear this sentiment, so to my credit, I immediately felt ashamed of myself for thinking it.

But I thought it not because of any dialogue or themes that would be taboo by today’s oddly puritanical standards. I thought it because there is a polish to the movie that comes with a major studio putting enough money behind it to make sure that the best craft went into making it. NEEDFUL THINGS is not a great movie. I’m not even sure that I would call it a good movie. It’s a serviceable adaptation of an overly ambitious novel. Yet I cannot deny that I miss this kind of mid-budget studio genre production that we no longer get.

The casting is excellent with von Sydow giving Gaunt an oily charm and dirty-old-man menace that sets a tone the rest of the movie would have done well to match. Even with the tonal fluctuations, it’s simply fun to watch great character actors like Harris, Plummer, and Walsh bounce off one of the greatest actors who ever lived. By the end of the movie, every bit of the scenery is chewed with gusto, and that’s exactly how it should be.

Heston has the bad habit of shoving the lessons of the film down the audience’s throat, but I cannot deny that he and his crew pump up the atmosphere. Cinematographer Tony Westman beautifully captures the swirls of fog and cigar smoke of Gaunt’s scenes in ways that accentuate von Sydow’s smiling menace. Composer Patrick Doyle rips off Jerry Goldsmith’s THE OMEN (1976) score in all its bombastic glory, but also brings a playful sense of humor that is often missing outside of von Sydow’s performance. The production and art design create a fully believable coastal town, the stunt work is terrific, and on and on down the line.

Even as I sat watching NEEDFUL THINGS and applauded its take on how nostalgia can be used for evil, the circumstances of watching the movie now made me nostalgic for a time 30 years ago—even though that was not personally the best time in my life. As much as I preach that we need to stop looking to the past and embrace change, I fell prey to the trap of nostalgia, comparing a movie from another time to the smaller, lower-stakes, much less expensive (and thus, less lavish) genre fare we get these days—an unfair comparison that shouldn’t be made.

As on-the-nose as it can be, King’s tale still has the ability to zero in on the weaknesses of human nature and how they can be exploited. Even if it’s just manipulating an aging horror nerd through the simple aesthetic pleasures of a silly movie from the early ‘90s.