Robert J. Maxwell A man enters a rural town for a humdrum purpose and everywhere he turns he finds mystery. People answer elliptically. No one is friendly. Puzzling things happen. Objects aren't where they're supposed to be. Records are missing. Why, it's almost as if the villagers were -- covering up some secret! When these things are done right, they can be genuinely effective. "Bad Day at Black Rock" is simple but gripping. "The Wicker Man" is unforgettable -- the original, not the loathsome remake. Even a low-budget TV movie like "Evidence of Blood" can do the job. And no one can finish reading Shirley Jackson's story for the first time without a gasp. She offers no real explanation. As someone said of another short story writer, ""Hemingway walks the reader to the bridge that he or she must cross alone without the narrator's help."The problem is that Jackson's is a short story, and short stories about mysterious and unexplained events can be stellar as long as they remain short. Look at Hemingway's "The Killers" -- nasty, concise, horrifying.But when you turn a short story into a feature-length movie, you have to pad it out, tell the back stories, parse the synecdoches, fill in all the blanks that made the original so enthralling.That's the problem the film makers ran into here. Those back stories and ellipses. "The Lottery" is littered with them. And they're not too interesting either. As the hero, Cortese, is making his escape with Keri Russel towards the end -- long AFTER what SHOULD have been the end -- they have a kind of philosophical exchange in which Russell defends the practices of her small town by counting the vices of the big city that Cortese has come from. It's a stupid brief. It makes as much sense as an argument in favor of the euthanasia of the mentally ill or the unemployed. ("At least we're pruning the herd.") A couple of good character actors appear in this film -- William Daniels, M. Emmet Walsh, Veronica Cartwright. It's beneath their dignity. Salome Gens gives an outstanding performance in her brief appearances.As the puzzled visitor, Dan Cortese is okay. He brings a certain professionalism to the role. He's darkly handsome in a conventional way, and a bit over-muscled. But make up has made a mistake that they didn't make with Keri Russell. Cortese has been given, not an ordinary haircut, but the kind of carefully styled grooming that was popular among West Coast celebrities at the time, a sort of pattern in which the man's hair is swept back into a wavy loaf over his occiput, suggesting the sagittal crest of an extinct reptile. Keri Russell's russet tresses are alternately straight and curled -- and very long. She has the features of a kewpie doll and is quite attractive. How much of an actress she is, is hard to tell from this hollow attempt to make a long film out of a gem of a short story.

Lara Muñoz Well, the fact is that this film surprised me. I was 12 years old when i saw it, and I can tell that the story is good and different. Despite that is a TV movie, and the cast crew is medium-low actors, the film is good. I recommend it! Besides, it also was interesting for me because the date of the tombs its my birthday! The best scene is the moment in which people of the village start to throw the stones to the "chosen" by lottery, though is so predictable who it was to be chosen. (The girl , daugther of major of the town, or her mother). It was a critic for the attitude of the village town: how could it possible to allow this kind of events? Its inhuman act !!! Thanks heavens that is a film!!!

pchic I saw the original movie (circa 1973). At the time, it was a mandatory English class assignment to watch and write a report on it. That version, to me was even worse than the one with Dan Cortese. But again, I was only 12 years old. What a movie for a child!!!! As an adult now, I only have an occassional disturbing dream about it. When I saw the Dan Cortese version, my curiosity got the best of me and I only wanted to compare my emotions/feelings to the original and the remake. Even though I will never watch this movie again, the writing and acting was as good as only the script would allow. For people who like disturbing, twisted and at times very spooky movies....this one is for you!!! But don't say that you weren't warned!!!!!!!

matahari1968 This film is truly an illustration that some traditions shouldn't be kept. If a tradition that has long been upheld causes extreme cruelty or death of those who follow it, then it should be abandoned. There are still traditions out there that are just as gruesome in real life and yet, just as the one in the film, are allowed to continue. Just as in the film, people become so blinded by their traditions that they sometimes forget the difference between right and wrong. Unspeakable acts are committed, yet those blinded by tradition just stand by and allow them to take place.