King of Halloween: The Night Flier (1997)

Wondra: Okay, so here we go kicking off a month of binging and chatting about Stephen King adaptations… Since there are some real crackers on the list, let’s start with some of the “smaller” ones. Like The Night Flier (1997.)

The Night Flier is a great movie but is mostly overlooked, even by horror fans. Why isn’t it more popular?

Jay: It was probably a lack of marketing. Plus, even though it was Stephen King, people might have been like, ‘Eh, a vampire flying around at night? I don’t wanna watch that!’ And it was kind of corny in places. I mean… Dwight Renfield and Jimmy Olsen and all that. 

But there isn’t anything else like it, is there? It’s original and a very entertaining.

W: Right. I don’t think I watched it until a couple years ago and that was only because you recommended it. 

You kind of go into The Night Flier not really expecting much because there’s no hype surrounding it, which is good because you can be pleasantly surprised by how great it is.

I love it because of the chase and the imagery. What makes it a great movie for you?

J: The Night Flier is a great movie partially because, like you said, there’s no hype. But, like I said before, there’s just nothing like it. It’s unique. There are so many films that are just same old, same old, especially when it comes to vampires. Vampire goes after young girl, the fall in love, blah blah blah.

This isn’t that. There’s no romance. It’s gutter press. It’s sensationalism. The vampire at the end is quite ropey, really, but I thought there was a nice amount of suspense, which makes up for that. You never know where it’s going, and you never see the end coming.

W: That’s not fair! The vampire is grotesquely awesome. It’s horrible to look at – but also heartbreaking because you know the handsome man he used to be. The horrible face hides a tragic backstory and I love that. 

I can’t really go any further without talking about the role of women in Night Flier. I mean… Grah! Dees and Morrison (Dan Monahan) are both absolute pigs. The way they treat women makes my blood boil. 

Since I can speak from the inside, I’m going to. You have no idea how fucking frustrating it is to be a woman in publishing. Especially in horror. The number of slush stories I’ve read through that are basically just violence fetish and rape fantasy barely disguised as fiction… it’s disgusting.

Katherine Blair (Julie Entwisle) faces a different kind of sexism. She doesn’t have to work alongside men who would sooner see her raped, beaten, and slain than give her a space in their genre, but she does have to fight to make herself seen – and fight even harder to be taken seriously. It’s all “honey” and “dear” until she doesn’t play along. Then, she’s just a bitch. 

I thought more had changed since the '90s but… *shrug* I dunno. It still seems too relevant.

As a man watching all this, I’d love to know what your thoughts were.

J: The sexism is obvious but I think it’s meant to be.

Women have always been either the eye candy or the victim since the dawn of film. It all started to change in the '70s, late '80s when you started getting people like Sigourney Weaver, who were badass and owned whole franchises. Women never shook the stigma, though. Even now, getting Hollywood to give women a chance is painfully laborious. Take Wonder Woman, for example. They were dying for that to fail so they could say a woman can’t carry a superhero film.

But, in the end, Katherine has the last laugh, doesn’t she? She wins. Even though she sees the vampire, she doesn’t go after him. She doesn’t give in to the obsession that destroyed Dees. I guess she doesn’t need the vampire because she’s already got her man. She got her story and Dee got his. It was a victory, even though she had to put up with all that shit to get it.

W: There’ve been a few remakes lately of King films, like Firestarter. What about The Night Flier? Could it be remade now and, if so, how do you think it would it do?

J: Oh, they can always remake something. It all depends on somebody’s vision. Too many times, they remake something and it’s exact. Like Carrie. There’s absolutely no point if you’re gonna redo The Night Flier scene-for-scene. You would have to take it in a whole new direction. Modernize it. Make it viral. Because it didn’t do well financially the first time around, though… no, I don’t think they’d bother.

There are just too many horror films out there now. Horror films used to be an event. Now the market is just flooded with the same old crap and so much of it is just so low budget.

W: So they could, but they shouldn’t?

J: I don’t know… if you modernized it with cell phones and social media... it’s original enough that it could work. I just don’t think they’d spend the money on it. Not when there’s so much else out there to remake that’s more well known.

Everything has been done to death. That’s exactly why The Night Flier works so well. Even after twenty-five years, there’s still nothing like it. It’s so clever, with his plane as his coffin, and sticking to backwater places that wouldn’t bother reporting him. He’s right there under their noses and they don’t even see it. Clever.

W: I mentioned the vampire, Dwight Renfield (Michael H.Moss) – and we agree that the name is stupid and unworthy of King, right? I liked the vampire’s look, but you didn’t. What didn’t you like about it? It was creepy as fuck!

J: Don’t get me wrong, I liked it well enough… I just didn’t like the visual with the huge mouth. I liked the fangs, though. I liked that instead of two tiny pricks, he left huge fucking gouges in their throats. That’s a nice touch.

W: Right. Nothing sexy there.

J: No, definitely not.

Renfield’s look kind of reminded me of Fright Night, actually, although Dandrige (Chris Sarandon) didn’t have a cape. And Dandrige was sexy, hah.

I loved that the first time you see the vampire in The Night Flier properly, all you see is him peeing blood into the urinal.

W: Tell me the movie was directed by a man without telling me the movie was directed by a man…

Ugh. It’s just so gross and so crass. I mean… visually effective, but eww.

What are your thoughts on Miguel Ferrer as Richard Dees? I had a very angry, very physical reaction to his character. I wanted to hurt that fucker myself, he was so awful. He was the real monster of the piece, for me.

J: Well, yeah, because the vampire warned him off the whole time. He didn't want Dees following him. All Dees had to do was let it go – but he couldn’t. He was a sleuth hound. He had to see and, because he did, he lost it all. He’s the ghoul. He’s the monster.

Honestly, you have to be such a prick to be in that line of work. You know you’re hurting people, you know you’re lying... but it’s a paycheck, so you keep doing it.

I guess that’s the difference between real news and what the other guys are doing. It’s the difference between Ari Melber and Sean Hannity. There are reporters who care about the truth. Maybe they spin it a little, but they don’t just make it up for ratings. Not like Richard Dees.

W: Final thoughts on The Night Flier?

J: Only that it should be highly revered but is barely even recognised. I guess there were just too many big movies that year. That, and the fact that it didn’t get the publicity it deserved.

The Night Flier is a well-made movie, but let’s be honest, it’s still horror’s little cousin.  

Wondra's Rating: 💀💀💀

Jay's Rating: 💀💀💀