Exploring the Differences Between ‘The Monkey’ Film and Short Story: More Kids, Less Backstory

Osgood Perkins has recently transformed Stephen King’s short story “The Monkey”into a compelling film. While both versions draw inspiration from the original tale, they diverge significantly in execution and thematic exploration. Perkins’ adaptation stands out as a fresh interpretation of the narrative found in King’s 1980 collection, Skeleton Crew.

The differences between King’s original story and Perkins’ film adaptation are profound. They illustrate two interpretations of a similar premise, with Perkins utilizing creative liberties that enhance the narrative’s depth and overall appeal. By transforming the source material, Perkins has crafted a version that might resonate more with contemporary audiences while still retaining the essence of King’s vision.

This divergence between the two works highlights the filmmakers’ freedom to explore themes in a manner that suits the cinematic medium. In this analysis, we will dissect the core plot elements of both King’s “The Monkey” and Perkins’ film to illustrate the contrasts.

Exploring the Short Story

In King’s original short story, we are introduced to Hal Shelburn, his wife Terry, and their sons, Dennis and Petey. The family visits Casco, Maine, to tidy up the home of Hal’s late Aunt Ida and Uncle Will. As the story unfolds, we learn that Hal’s brother, Bill, is also present, but the narrative pivots on Hal’s unsettling discovery of a childhood possession—an ominous toy monkey he believes possesses deadly powers whenever wound up.

Hal’s memories reveal a haunting past linked to the monkey, with implications of death surrounding those who crossed paths with it. As the monkey’s reintroduction into Hal’s life unfolds, it strains family relationships, culminating in tension between Hal and his family. It is Petey’s disdain for the monkey that propels Hal to take decisive action against it.

Hal and Petey attempt to return the monkey to its original home. Remembering a story shared by Uncle Will about the deepness of Crystal Lake, Hal embarks on a solo mission to rid himself of the cursed toy. After a tense struggle with the monkey, which seems determined to sabotage him, Hal manages to dispose of it, albeit at a cost to the fish in the lake.

Delving into the Film Adaptation

In stark contrast, Perkins’ adaptation introduces us to Pete Shelburn (played by Adam Scott), who is bloodied and clad in a pilot’s uniform while attempting to sell the monkey at a pawn shop. His immediate insistence that the object is not a mere toy marks a dramatic shift in narrative tone. The film’s grisly premise becomes apparent when the monkey’s sinister song heralds the death of the pawn shop owner.

While both versions depict children’s aversion to the monkey, Perkins alters the family dynamic by introducing twins Bill and Hal, with the younger pair portrayed by Christian Convery. The brothers’ relationship, heavily influenced by their mother Lois (played by Tatiana Maslany), is fraught with tension, especially as they discover the monkey in a pile of their father’s belongings.

Initially, Hal winds the monkey without consequence. However, chaos ensues when it ultimately causes the death of their babysitter. In a fit of rage, Hal misuses the monkey against Bill, resulting in tragic unintended consequences that spiral into further violence and death, establishing a persistent rivalry between the brothers.

The monkey’s chaotic legacy continues to unfold, leading to multiple fatalities and a chilling conclusion that leaves the audience uncertain about the monkey’s ultimate fate, amplifying its lethal presence and power.

The Value of Adaptation: Innovation Over Replication

Upon reflection, it’s clear that Perkins’ adaptation reimagines the narrative rather than simply retelling it. While the short story capitalizes on an unsettling, unseen horror, Perkins injects a satirical twist into the tale, presenting grotesque scenarios that reflect deeper themes of familial dysfunction and revenge.

The deaths in King’s tale are understated and easily dismissed, whereas Perkins amplifies these moments into uproarious spectacles. The characters grapple with the absurdity of their predicaments, confronting the horror before them.

Despite the numerous differences, Perkins’ bold interpretation highlights darker themes of fatherhood and trauma, exploring character development in ways King’s original story does not. This layered complexity gives Hal’s fears a more relatable grounding, enhancing the adaptation’s emotional weight.

I find myself wishing that other film adaptations of King’s work would emulate Perkins’ innovative approach. Many remain overly faithful to the source material, rehashing familiar stories. Perkins’ rendition of The Monkey stands as an original piece that complements the 1980 short story, illustrating the potential of cinematic adaptations to evolve narratives into something fresh and engaging.

Source&Images