Greetings, all. Ambush Bug here with another AICN HORROR: ZOMBIES & SHARKS column. I had a chance to catch up with director Mark Hartley who directed the remake of the Australian coma-horror film PATRICK. Entitled PATRICK: EVIL AWAKENS, this new version of the film is pretty similar to the classic version, with a few differences we get into in the interview below. Towards the bottom, I go into how the film stacks up against the original. But first, here’s what director Hartley had to say about PATRICK: EVIL AWAKENS…

MARK HARTLEY (MH): I think so.
BUG: Were you part of the whole process of remaking PATRICK: EVIL AWAKENS or was that later on that you came upon the project?
MH: No, when I was on a documentary called NOT QUITE HOLLYWOOD and while we were still making that it seemed that every single film that has been rejected in America was getting a remake done on it One day just we were musing about what films would be right for a remake and PATRICK seemed pretty ideal. And we basically just pitched in our idea for it and the producers loved it and that was, that’s what started the ball rolling. It was all very accidental to tell you the truth.
BUG: Yeah, and Synapse is actually re-releasing a lot of the old Ozploitation films, PATRICK among them. Actually it’s coming out I believe the same week that the remake is going to be coming out. Was the coordinated in any way or was that just a happy coincidence?
MH: Not sure, but it’s a good thing the original is coming out and that people will get to be able to compare them and see what changes we’ve made.

MH: I think what we wanted to do was give it a very different sensibility; a very different atmosphere and obviously wanted it to be, a lot more old fashioned in a way. I mean we did update it but in the same way we kind of made a film that is a lot more old school and old fashioned than the original. We wanted it to be a gothic chiller, which is yet is a kind films that are not really made anymore. And we decided whether we didn’t want it to be sent in today’s date so we could have technology creep into the story as well. This was because we liked the idea that the effects and technology has made privacy more difficult today.
I always thought it was an important thing. When we were watching the original we knew that there were certain key things and key moments that we had to include because we did want to appease fans of the original. We were fans of the original as well. It was a very landmark film when I was a kid growing up to see PATRICK. It had been made in my hometown and it was, you now it was like an American film. It was like watching the films that I love that are American but have been made in Australia and that was kind of the great thing about it when I was a kid.

MH: We always wanted to get some kind of prestige cast for this film. And so when we wrote the screenplay we really did overwrite it, we wanted it to read like it was a smart dialog-driven story so we could attract a decent cast. And thankfully Charles, you know, responded to it, and Rachel had been a fan of the original when she was a kid so I think that was part of the appeal for her also in playing Julia Blake’s role. Sharni, I think Sharni was just an actress who like the script and sent in an audition and almost at the same time as we originally started casting this film, YOU’RE NEXT had played Toronto had played Midnight Madness and it made huge buzz of that film so casting Sharni seemed like a complete no-brainer to reach a link to the sales agent for this film.
BUG: Speaking of Dance, he’s such a distinguished gentleman sort, in a diabolical way. Was it tough to get Charles Dance to eat the frog?
MH: It wasn’t tough to get Charles to do it. He was great. He was up for anything. He was sitting on the floor in the kitchen covered in frog slime and I kept thinking of this horrible taste he must have had in his mouth. There were some moments when I did think surely this actor is above this. But no, Charles was really great and it was amazing coming to work each day and hearing him put his life into the character that we scripted.

MH: Well I think if, well have you’ve watched both films I think you can see that we did step into a slightly different direction in terms of casting Patrick. In the original film, I couldn’t understand how Kathy could fall in love with Patrick because he was a very weird looking guy. And we said we really want to have Patrick to be, almost like a wax effigy of a person. At casting brief we wanted someone who was like John Phillip Law in BARBARELLA and Jackson (Gallagher) came in and you know he was good looking but he also had something a little bit strange behind the eyes which I really liked as well. And, so he was, he was right into it too. All the shock therapy stuff you see in the film—none of that is being enhanced with any visual work or anything at all, he’s doing all that work himself on screen so he really threw himself into the role.
BUG: There is a little bit of CGI in here, there are some ghostly images and things like that.
MH: That’s that part that takes most of the flack in the film and it’s kind of strange because we wanted everything to look a little bit non-real. We wanted it to look surreal. It’s all actually intentional; it’s all a part of the style of the film. Some people haven’t embraced that element as much as others.

MH: We wanted the first half of the film, obviously people know what Patrick is, but for people who didn’t have a clue what Patrick was and have stumbled into this film, we actually wrote the first of the film to play like an old fashioned haunted house movie and then sort of reveal Patrick almost halfway through. So I think that’s part of the reason why there are those ghostly images was that I want it to be the very old fashioned horror films that I saw when I was a kid, and back in those days, no one was apologetic of the jump-scares. That is the reason you went and saw these films. You didn’t go to these films to see people get their eyes cut out with scalpels, you went because you wanted those old fashioned jump-scares. So we certainly threw in every single one we could think of.
BUG: What kind of direction you give to an actor playing a coma patient?
MH: Don’t blink. [laughs]

BUG: Well I really appreciate you taking the time to talk with me today. Is there anything you’re working on now or coming up that we can look forward to seeing from you?
MH: We just finished shooting my final documentary in my documentary films which are about Cannon films. It’s called the ELECTRIC BOOGALOO: THE WILD, UNTOLD STORY OF CANNON FILMS.
BUG: Nice, nice. Ok well thank you so much for talking with me today and have a great day.
MH: Thanks a lot.
BUG: PATRICK: EVIL AWAKENS is available now on DVD, On Demand, and digital download. Below the trailer are my review of both PATRICK (1978) and the remake PATRICK: EVIL AWAKENS!


PATRICK (1978)
Directed by Richard FranklinWritten by Everett De Roche
Starring Susan Penhaligon, Robert Helpmann, Rod Mullinar, Bruce Barry, Julia Blake, Helen Hemingway, María Mercedes, Carole-Ann Aylett, and Robert Thompson as Patrick!
Available now on DVD, On Demand, and digital download!!
PATRICK: EVIL AWAKENS (2013)
Directed by Mark HartleyWritten by Justin King
Starring Sharni Vinson, Charles Dance, Rachel Griffiths, Peta Sergeant, Damon Gameau, Martin Crewes, Eliza Taylor, Simone Buchanan, and Jackson Gallagher as Patrick!
Find out more about this film here and on Facebook here
Reviewed by Ambush Bug
There’s no denying it. Coma people are freaky as hell. There haven’t been a lot of coma horror films, but the ones that have been made have been pretty damn creepy. PATRICK is the king of coma horror in that it both exemplifies the mystery of the coma and also takes it into perverse avenues uncomfortable for most.







In the end, should this film have been remade?

But director Mark Hartley does a decent job of conveying an old school haunted house vibe throughout the entire film. The overly CG-ed latter half does distract quite a bit from the gothic charm established in the first portion of the film, but in terms of perverse themes, the remake does a better job than I would have thought it would at retaining the creep factor. In the end, though, I prefer the grimy original which left me with a feeling of utter unwash after viewing. This newer version is too clean and good looking for my tastes, but the cast is phenomenal and the mood is right. Still, if they went toe to toe, both have a lot of same scenes of ooky goodness (especially the frog eating scene which is in both), but the original wins out because of those creepy eyes that the remake just failed to capture.
And finally…here’s something I didn’t know. An unofficial sequel to PATRICK called PATRICK STILL LIVES was made in 1980 in Italy and by the looks of it, it was pretty awful. Still, while we’re on the topic of PATRICK, we might as well show the trailer for the sequel. Hopefully, one of these days I’ll get to check it out. Beware, there be boobies and 70’s bush in this here trailer!
See ya next week, folks!
Ambush Bug is Mark L. Miller, original @$$Hole/wordslinger/writer of wrongs/reviewer/interviewer/editor of AICN COMICS for over 13 years & AICN HORROR for 4. Mark’s written THE TINGLERS & WITCHFINDER GENERAL, DEATHSPORT GAMES, NANNY & HANK (soon to be an Uptown 6 Films feature film), Zenescope’s GRIMM FAIRY TALES Vol.13, UNLEASHED: WEREWOLVES, and the critically acclaimed THE JUNGLE BOOK and its follow up THE JUNGLE BOOK: LAST OF THE SPECIES. FAMOUS MONSTERS’ LUNA: ORDER OF THE WEREWOLF (co-written with Martin Fisher) will be available soon in trade. Mark wrote/provided art for a chapter in Black Mask Studios’ OCCUPY COMICS. Follow Ambush Bug on the Twitters @Mark_L_Miller.


Interested in illustrated films, fringe cinema, and other oddities?
Check out Halo-8 and challenge everything!