What do you think?
Rate this book
A Watcher in the Woods
When their family moves into a house at the edge of a forest, two sisters sense an invisible presence as strange occurrences take place.
229 pages, Hardcover
First published January 1, 1976
10 people are currently reading
838 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 100 reviews
September 3, 2017
Decent writing, characters, plot -- but that "ending" wtf? That was objectively bad. You cannot establish a timeline leading up to an important conclusive event and then end the damn book before that event occurs. That is terrible authoring.
Want to read
January 19, 2009I bought this book in the 5th grade and loaned it to Ginger Wise before I had read it. She never gave it back to me and I've still never read it.
January 26, 2024
1/23
I bought the DVD of this movie which I loved on VHS.
One scene exactly from the book: when the little sister names her puppy NERAK. The missing girl is named Karen.
The DVD has deleted scenes. Three different endings. So now I can see that they did try, even to show the different planet/dimension. They had to give it a happy ending (which the book does not have). They decided on a cleaner ending with the little sister possessed by the Watcher, and telling us what we need to know.
So, okay, I maligned Disney. Whatever. They can take it.
The book also does not have the scene at the dirt bike race (very 1980 zeitgeist, though the book is also from 1980).
There are other big things not in the book.
10/2013
This was so much better than the movie, which Disney mangled. That said, I don't know why they wanted to make a movie of this. It is definite sci-fi, but it had things left open ended including the ending. But what a waste of Bette Davis.
I bought the DVD of this movie which I loved on VHS.
One scene exactly from the book: when the little sister names her puppy NERAK. The missing girl is named Karen.
The DVD has deleted scenes. Three different endings. So now I can see that they did try, even to show the different planet/dimension. They had to give it a happy ending (which the book does not have). They decided on a cleaner ending with the little sister possessed by the Watcher, and telling us what we need to know.
So, okay, I maligned Disney. Whatever. They can take it.
The book also does not have the scene at the dirt bike race (very 1980 zeitgeist, though the book is also from 1980).
There are other big things not in the book.
10/2013
This was so much better than the movie, which Disney mangled. That said, I don't know why they wanted to make a movie of this. It is definite sci-fi, but it had things left open ended including the ending. But what a waste of Bette Davis.
October 20, 2021
I recently watched the movie, “The Watcher In The Woods,” again. I’ve had a strong appreciation for the show since I first saw it in the theater years ago, even though I recognize it has some issues with plot construction. (Perhaps it is one of my Guilty Pleasures.) Even so, it is a highly unusual picture to be released by the Walt Disney Studios … not like their usual product of the time at all … and I was curious as to how much was their interpretation, and how much was in the original work.
The novel is also an unusual mixture and, although quite different, it does provide a firm foundation for what would eventually become the motion picture. The book’s style follows a Young Adult format that is sometimes surprisingly strong and, at other times, curiously quaint. Both versions fall into the realm of “science fantasy” and, even though the movie’s ending is much more visually exciting, the book’s ending was much simpler … but, it also genuinely surprised me.
The tale is narrated by Jan, a 15-year-old teen who readily admits that she is at an awkward age. She gives the same emphasis to unusual and eerie happenings that occur in and around the new house her family has purchased near the woods as she does to awkward “growing up” moments, and fluctuates between fear, longing and dissatisfaction in her encounters with others. At times, her feelings are described as being “possessed” … which could also be a reference to “growing into her young woman’s body.” As a curious example of what she notices, Jan frequently tells the Reader whenever she is barefoot!
Gradually, Jan’s sense of being watched by someone in the woods … a female presence … leads her to the discovery of a mystery involving the disappearance of a young teen from those same woods 50-years earlier. Both frightened and intrigued by what could have happened, Jan warily starts an investigation that will come to involve everyone she most cares about.
There were a couple of things that bothered me about the novel:
* The writer occasionally interrupts a current scene to reveal what happened in a previous scene. What she reveals is always interesting, but it sends the story’s forward momentum to a crashing halt.
* Considering the highly unusual events that occur, characters are surprisingly quick at accepting them. This is also a problem when it comes to character motivations. An example is Jan’s mother who is highly protective of her youngest daughter, yet makes concessions that don’t fit in with that protectiveness at all.
That said, I was strongly impressed by the writer's delivery of insights about age, especially 80-year-old Mrs. Aylwood. She beautifully describes the challenges of “physically not being the person that one needs to be” while, at the same time, provides an all-too-accurate diatribe about the perception of “old people” in society. Her description of a rule-bound senior living facility is just short of horrific … and more accurate than one would like to think if the news stories are correct.
I have a movie half-sheet poster on display that notes the film is based on the novel “A” WATCHER IN THE WOODS. However, this paperback edition that I read was obviously intended as a “movie tie-in” and has changed the title to “THE” WATCHER IN THE WOODS. Otherwise, it is the same story and unabridged.
This is one of those times when I wish that half-star ratings were allowed. I consider this a solid 3.5-star book … and I’ve rounded it upward. It is fine as a stand-alone book, although I think that those who have seen the movie will have a stronger appreciation.
The novel is also an unusual mixture and, although quite different, it does provide a firm foundation for what would eventually become the motion picture. The book’s style follows a Young Adult format that is sometimes surprisingly strong and, at other times, curiously quaint. Both versions fall into the realm of “science fantasy” and, even though the movie’s ending is much more visually exciting, the book’s ending was much simpler … but, it also genuinely surprised me.
The tale is narrated by Jan, a 15-year-old teen who readily admits that she is at an awkward age. She gives the same emphasis to unusual and eerie happenings that occur in and around the new house her family has purchased near the woods as she does to awkward “growing up” moments, and fluctuates between fear, longing and dissatisfaction in her encounters with others. At times, her feelings are described as being “possessed” … which could also be a reference to “growing into her young woman’s body.” As a curious example of what she notices, Jan frequently tells the Reader whenever she is barefoot!
Gradually, Jan’s sense of being watched by someone in the woods … a female presence … leads her to the discovery of a mystery involving the disappearance of a young teen from those same woods 50-years earlier. Both frightened and intrigued by what could have happened, Jan warily starts an investigation that will come to involve everyone she most cares about.
There were a couple of things that bothered me about the novel:
* The writer occasionally interrupts a current scene to reveal what happened in a previous scene. What she reveals is always interesting, but it sends the story’s forward momentum to a crashing halt.
* Considering the highly unusual events that occur, characters are surprisingly quick at accepting them. This is also a problem when it comes to character motivations. An example is Jan’s mother who is highly protective of her youngest daughter, yet makes concessions that don’t fit in with that protectiveness at all.
That said, I was strongly impressed by the writer's delivery of insights about age, especially 80-year-old Mrs. Aylwood. She beautifully describes the challenges of “physically not being the person that one needs to be” while, at the same time, provides an all-too-accurate diatribe about the perception of “old people” in society. Her description of a rule-bound senior living facility is just short of horrific … and more accurate than one would like to think if the news stories are correct.
I have a movie half-sheet poster on display that notes the film is based on the novel “A” WATCHER IN THE WOODS. However, this paperback edition that I read was obviously intended as a “movie tie-in” and has changed the title to “THE” WATCHER IN THE WOODS. Otherwise, it is the same story and unabridged.
This is one of those times when I wish that half-star ratings were allowed. I consider this a solid 3.5-star book … and I’ve rounded it upward. It is fine as a stand-alone book, although I think that those who have seen the movie will have a stronger appreciation.
April 3, 2011
Giving this 4 stars for nostalgia's sake.
After seeing the Disney movie version a bunch of times I tried to read this book but got so scared I had to stop (a common occurrence when I was 11 or 12.) Something recently reminded me of the movie and I was psyched to see that both the book and the movie were available at the library. The movie is still scary by Disney standards-we had fun exposing my 10 year old nephew to it. We'll see if I'm brave enough to make it through the book now!
Update-I made it to the end! The part that freaked me out as a kid was by far the most climatic part of the book, the rest was a let down really. It's funny, while I wasn't scared while reading this, it was like my body remembered being scared and my heart started pounding anyway. This happened to me once before while I was watching an old episode of Fantasy Island that totally freaked me out as a kid. Body memories are strange things.
Like I said before, the end was a bit of a letdown and more than a little confusing. Still, I'm glad to have finally made it all the way to the end but I liked the movie more.
After seeing the Disney movie version a bunch of times I tried to read this book but got so scared I had to stop (a common occurrence when I was 11 or 12.) Something recently reminded me of the movie and I was psyched to see that both the book and the movie were available at the library. The movie is still scary by Disney standards-we had fun exposing my 10 year old nephew to it. We'll see if I'm brave enough to make it through the book now!
Update-I made it to the end! The part that freaked me out as a kid was by far the most climatic part of the book, the rest was a let down really. It's funny, while I wasn't scared while reading this, it was like my body remembered being scared and my heart started pounding anyway. This happened to me once before while I was watching an old episode of Fantasy Island that totally freaked me out as a kid. Body memories are strange things.
Like I said before, the end was a bit of a letdown and more than a little confusing. Still, I'm glad to have finally made it all the way to the end but I liked the movie more.
November 27, 2010
Boiled down to its essence, this is an interesting story, and who doesn't love the cult-classic Disney movie? But the book is so badly written that it becomes difficult to make yourself finish it. The dialogue is bad, the logic is outlandish, the descriptions are over-wordy and repetitive. I mainly kept reading because I wanted to find out how it would end, and I suspected (rightly) that it would be very different from the movie. In a word, this book is frustrating, and I don't really recommend it except as an exercise in curiosity.
September 27, 2019
This is one where the movie and the book really must be two separate entities for me and I think, in this case, I prefer the movie. That may be due to having seen the movie first and loving it so much. The ending in the book did frustrate me but I enjoyed the book overall and appreciated the creepiness factor. I will forever see Bette Davis as Mrs. Aylwood, whether watching the movie or reading the book!
January 4, 2015
It is very rare that I like a movie better than a book, but that is the case here. Read the book, then watch the movie. See what you think. I felt no closure at the end of the book. It wasn't terrible, but definitely not my favorite.
September 22, 2012
I re-read this book because I had been thinking about the movie. Sadly, and I think this is the first time I've ever said this, the movie is better than the book.
January 15, 2019
I found this book when going through a box of my childhood books. I didn't remember anything about it but if I still had it so many years later, I must have liked it. As an adult, I thought it was okay. I was rather disappointed in the ending and thought it had a lot of potential. I don't think I need to keep it any longer.
October 28, 2017
Fifteen year old Janet (Jan) Carstairs, who narrates the story, is moving with her father Paul, mother Kate, and seven year old sister Eleanor (Ellie) from Ohio to Bywater, MA, where Mr. Carstairs, a professor, will head the English Department at the local college. The family buys a large old house with a meadow, pond, and woods in a somewhat isolated location on the outskirts of town from eighty-five year old Mrs. Anne Aylwood. Their nearest neighbors are the Flemings, and Jan is attracted to their nineteen year old son Mark. She learns that fifty years ago Mrs. Aylwood lost her daughter Karen, who was fifteen at the time. One hot July morning, the girl went out for a walk in the woods, didn’t return, and never was found.
Strange things begin to happen. Mirrors crack, seemingly on their own, always with the same X pattern. Jan has the feeling of being watched by someone or something in the woods. Sometimes the feeling is cold, other times joyful, unhappy, or alarming. Occasionally it even controls her movements. Ellie hears humming and voices with words which she writes backwards. One of them tells her to name her new puppy Nerak, which is Karen spelled backwards. Mark and Jan see a vision of Karen in the hollow of an old tree. And the television turns itself on and sends messages about Karen. What is going on? What happened to Karen? And who or what is the watcher in the woods? We recently saw the 1980 Walt Disney Productions film entitled The Watcher in the Woods (subsequent editions of the novel have borne the slight change of title) starring Bette Davis and liked it, so I decided to read the book. A little profanity occurs with the terms Lord and God used as interjections, and references to smoking a pipe are found, but there is little that one might consider unsuitable. While many similarities between book and movie exist, there are distinct differences too. Some people may not care for the horror-like plot, but those who enjoy science fiction with a slight Gothic flavor will probably like it. It was written well enough to hold my attention.
Strange things begin to happen. Mirrors crack, seemingly on their own, always with the same X pattern. Jan has the feeling of being watched by someone or something in the woods. Sometimes the feeling is cold, other times joyful, unhappy, or alarming. Occasionally it even controls her movements. Ellie hears humming and voices with words which she writes backwards. One of them tells her to name her new puppy Nerak, which is Karen spelled backwards. Mark and Jan see a vision of Karen in the hollow of an old tree. And the television turns itself on and sends messages about Karen. What is going on? What happened to Karen? And who or what is the watcher in the woods? We recently saw the 1980 Walt Disney Productions film entitled The Watcher in the Woods (subsequent editions of the novel have borne the slight change of title) starring Bette Davis and liked it, so I decided to read the book. A little profanity occurs with the terms Lord and God used as interjections, and references to smoking a pipe are found, but there is little that one might consider unsuitable. While many similarities between book and movie exist, there are distinct differences too. Some people may not care for the horror-like plot, but those who enjoy science fiction with a slight Gothic flavor will probably like it. It was written well enough to hold my attention.
February 27, 2022
Not my favorite by Florence Engel Randall - that would be The Almost Year - but still a solid, interesting story, and I definitely think Randall had an incredible ability to understand and portray different ages and people from different walks of life. I particularly like that the ending involved a child, a teenager who will soon be a young woman, and an old woman - all the aspects of child, maiden, mother, crone - coming together to solve the mystery.
September 13, 2025
Woof. This was. Not very good. Not that I probably noticed when I was a teenager. I do think that this book (I've never seen the movie) helped form me into a reader of "creepy" tales though; Missing persons, backwards writing, broken mirrors, children with strange abilities... classic stuff.
But the writing was not very good. It was fabricated and melodramatic. I found myself wondering how old Randall was when she wrote this metaphysical outlandishness. It was a lot to take on.
My old teenage copy is going on its way to another home.
But the writing was not very good. It was fabricated and melodramatic. I found myself wondering how old Randall was when she wrote this metaphysical outlandishness. It was a lot to take on.
My old teenage copy is going on its way to another home.
November 16, 2015
Interesting story, but so poorly written. The narrator would ramble endlessly, punctuating her narrative with bits of dialogue which made reading it out loud to my children difficult. My kids soldiered through it, but were put to sleep many nights before I could finish the chapter.
July 26, 2016
Loved this book. I read this when I was like in fifth grade or something. Recently something brought it to mind and I had to order a copy through our libraries interlibrary loan. Better than I remember.
February 9, 2022
I saw the movie when it first came out but had never gotten around to reading the book until now. It's hard to know how I would have rated it as a child, although I think I would have enjoyed it more then.
January 9, 2021
I've had this book since the mid-90's, but didn't get around to reading it until 2015, after Grad School. At the time, I read it as part of a reading challenge: A book from your childhood. In my reading journal, I had noted: When I finished this book, I felt... "shocked -- the end left me feeling like the book/story wasn't finished, like there were chapters missing." This seems to be a common theme in Goodreads reviews. And yet the book doesn't have a lousy rating, and I think this time around (Jan. 7-8, 2021 reading) I understand why. Both my readings, 6 years apart, were inspired by enjoying the creepy Disney movie. (I saw several articles calling it "Disney's scariest movie.")
Looking at my 2015 reading journal review and the other recent reviews on here, I began to wonder why I hadn't gotten rid of the book back then. After getting the movie for Christmas, I planned on re-reading (just to compare the media interpretations), then getting rid of it for good. But now, I think I'll keep it. As a writer currently editing my own book, I'm doing a lot of meta-cognitive analysis of my writing, as well as that of what I'm reading for fun. The writing style, as a number of people have said here, is engaging. I feel like Randall knows what it's like to be a hormonal teenager, without losing sight of the uniqueness of other characters' age-appropriate quirks. Sure, it's dated, but if you can't read a book about a character who doesn't have a smart-phone without losing interest, then it's your loss!
As for the abrupt ending... this time around, I feel like it works. It doesn't answer all the questions, but it doesn't feel as unfinished as I first thought. No story can ever be finished; readers can always ask, "what happened next?" This book leaves that up to the reader in a unique way. I feel like it ended on a note of hope, of possibility, without having to address the complications that would inevitably arise from the 'desired' ending.
Quasi-Spoilers / What-If thoughts below this point:
If Karen did come back, she'd be a 15-year-old child in a world unrecognizable from the one she left one day ago, in her perception. Her mother is 85 years old, incapable of taking care of a child -- she moved into a nursing home, and while she may have money from the sale of the house, she's not in any place to parent a traumatized teen. The Carstairs could adopt Karen, with Mrs. Aylwood as a live-in grandmother, as proposed, although they would need one more bedroom. [That's one thing the movie didn't address: "what happens next" to poor Karen? All her friends are elderly.] Randall's book ending leaves you with the assumption that Karen CAN come back through the door, the other child (the Watcher) can return home to her family, and that they will "all live happily ever after." But it leaves you formulating that (cheerful) ending in your head, in answer to "what happens next," rather than the (granted, more adult-like) "what happens next" concerns of the resultant psychological trauma, which are likely after her certain, written return.
Looking at my 2015 reading journal review and the other recent reviews on here, I began to wonder why I hadn't gotten rid of the book back then. After getting the movie for Christmas, I planned on re-reading (just to compare the media interpretations), then getting rid of it for good. But now, I think I'll keep it. As a writer currently editing my own book, I'm doing a lot of meta-cognitive analysis of my writing, as well as that of what I'm reading for fun. The writing style, as a number of people have said here, is engaging. I feel like Randall knows what it's like to be a hormonal teenager, without losing sight of the uniqueness of other characters' age-appropriate quirks. Sure, it's dated, but if you can't read a book about a character who doesn't have a smart-phone without losing interest, then it's your loss!
As for the abrupt ending... this time around, I feel like it works. It doesn't answer all the questions, but it doesn't feel as unfinished as I first thought. No story can ever be finished; readers can always ask, "what happened next?" This book leaves that up to the reader in a unique way. I feel like it ended on a note of hope, of possibility, without having to address the complications that would inevitably arise from the 'desired' ending.
Quasi-Spoilers / What-If thoughts below this point:
If Karen did come back, she'd be a 15-year-old child in a world unrecognizable from the one she left one day ago, in her perception. Her mother is 85 years old, incapable of taking care of a child -- she moved into a nursing home, and while she may have money from the sale of the house, she's not in any place to parent a traumatized teen. The Carstairs could adopt Karen, with Mrs. Aylwood as a live-in grandmother, as proposed, although they would need one more bedroom. [That's one thing the movie didn't address: "what happens next" to poor Karen? All her friends are elderly.] Randall's book ending leaves you with the assumption that Karen CAN come back through the door, the other child (the Watcher) can return home to her family, and that they will "all live happily ever after." But it leaves you formulating that (cheerful) ending in your head, in answer to "what happens next," rather than the (granted, more adult-like) "what happens next" concerns of the resultant psychological trauma, which are likely after her certain, written return.
January 27, 2010
sigh. I remember this was a cool creepy movie with an old withered Bette Davis in it, but I never read the book. Well, if you were a fan of the movie, just go watch that again. The first two-thirds of the book is so lame it's hard to read. I just kept thinking, "but I know it gets better!" I realize it is juvenile or young adult fiction but that's no excuse. The story is first person which is vaguely irritating but even worse it keeps jumping from present to past, and by past I mean a couple hours ago. This time- changing device seems forced and only makes the narrative weird and choppy. The mystery of the story is pretty compelling, but the book is not.
March 29, 2019
My lovely friend bought me this as a birthday present, as she knew the Disney version was my favourite childhood film. It is very, very rare for me to prefer a film version to a book, but in this case the film is more satisfying in terms of plot. I prefer the book's focus on the whole family though, and it could be that I only prefer the film because I have loved it for so long. I felt this about Moondial too: a TV series I adored with a book I thought was OK.
Brought back wonderful nostalgic memories.
Brought back wonderful nostalgic memories.
December 9, 2020
4.5 stars. I really enjoyed this! Being a fan of the movie, I wanted to check out the book and realized that Disney completely messed up the movie- the book is so much better! I feel like the writing was enjoyable and the ending was quick, and kind of a twist, but it worked for me. This seems to be a slightly unpopular opinion compared to other's reviews here on goodreads, so your mileage may vary. Though I do recommend giving it a read!🙂
December 9, 2022
I loved the weird 80's Disney movie "The Watcher in the Woods" and when I realized it was based on a novel I decided I had to read it. It's quite short, about 200 pages, so I read this cover to cover in a couple of hours on a lazy afternoon.
It's mostly very similar to the movie; I do however think it tries to get a bit philosophical and wanders somewhat, whereas the movie plot is tighter and makes more sense.
I've taken to lazily just taking notes while reading these days, instead of always composing a well-thought-out review later. Or, thinking I'll do one and it will lead to the other but honestly, right now I'm just not in the mood. Here are the notes I took while reading this book.
NOTE - the LAST LINE IS THE SPOILER - the rest of this is not.
The character Jan complains about restarting high school in a new place which is understandable but that's not the same as "not belonging anywhere" as she puts it.
I'm not far in and I've already read a few good metaphors, the author sometimes has a nice turn of phrase here or there.
The descriptions of the sister relationship seem good; very believably portrayed and layered.
The author has mentioned/used the word stucco 3 or more times in the first 20 pages, referring to not just the house they end up buying but multiple houses - how much can there be in the country?
The last line of the first chapter - HOW does she know "someone is watching"? Weird.
"She's a witch." Lol - based on this description? "Shapeless black dresses with white aprons tied around the middle" - sounds more like a housemaid than a witch but OK
"...her - not him - why did I have such a strong impression of something feminine?" and "a watcher in the woods" hm, odd. I mean I get where that's going or what it's hinting at (because I've seen this movie) but that's a weird way to hint at it or get there.
"It's very necessary to love yourself before you can love anyone else" - oh this old claptrap was already in this book written in... 1980 - ok later than I thought but still that seems like such an Oprah early 2000's mainstay of pseudo-psychology. Huh.
"...I felt he was going to give me something much more valuable" - creepy. 19-15 is statutory, yeah? even in 1980! The author probably intends for Jan to mean like, being seen by another human, having a real friend, having something that's just "hers" outside of her family - those desires would make sense for her age - but that wording does not come off right. Eek.
Ha! Some of my favorite words -
interminable
cloisonne (vase)
expectorate (as a verb? to spit? I've taken expectorants when sick but never used that as a verb!)
A very nice section:
"She was my mother. Never before this had I looked at her and thought of her as someone separate, as someone else. Now, so near to her that I could smell the subtle scent of her perfume and see the clear, fine texture of her skin, I realized for the first time that I was looking at another human being who was complete within herself. She was my mother, but she was more than just a loving and convenient extension of me and my needs"
"Human, I told myself, suddenly frightened, more afraid at this swift, overwhelming knowledge of mortality than I had been at the sight of the broken mirror. My grandmother had been human, and I had lost her. My mother is human. If I'm very lucky, someday she will live to be an old, old woman, like Mrs. Aylwood, my young mother, beautiful mother changing into someone with wrinkled skin, swollen knuckles, and dark shadows under her eyes."
"She was my mother, but somehow, at this moment, our roles were reversed. She was asking me for help. My practical, sensible mother who had said there was an explanation for everything was turning to me and asking me to explain how and why two mirrors had been broken, each jagged cut spelling out the letter X."
---
p. 71 (end of chapter 6) - a good creepy paragraph imagining what if Karen drowned in the pond in the woods - very 'Lovely Bones' -esque.
This story is more confusing than the movie. Weird that the whole family is involved in this entire ordeal but also just immediately takes it seriously? They don't think their daughter is like, crazy, or acting out? I feel that this is very... taken for granted? Like, I have a healthy suspension for disbelief, but it's hard for me to believe that EVERYONE in an entire family ALSO does for something this INSANE going on. You know?
"When you live without hope, how are you supposed to know that it's been there all along?" Youch. That one hits hard, and kind of out of nowhere for a YA book.
There's some slight commentary on aging, and how we treat the elderly. (Uh, aging is hard and we treat the elderly poorly, duh.) It's odd that Mrs. Aylwood left for some retirement home then came back later - the movie handled that better for sure, in that she lived in like, the servants' house/guest house of the mansion, right on the property, and the condition of buying the house was that she gets to stay there. That makes way more sense, given what she went through/where her mind is at.
Huh - small bumps/having to bend once in a while "...[keeps] him from taking happiness for granted". That's an interesting perspective.
Whoa, the ending was different, too! Mrs. Aylwood goes INTO the portal, not that her daughter comes back. She sort of BECOMES the watcher in the woods. WEIRD!
It's mostly very similar to the movie; I do however think it tries to get a bit philosophical and wanders somewhat, whereas the movie plot is tighter and makes more sense.
I've taken to lazily just taking notes while reading these days, instead of always composing a well-thought-out review later. Or, thinking I'll do one and it will lead to the other but honestly, right now I'm just not in the mood. Here are the notes I took while reading this book.
NOTE - the LAST LINE IS THE SPOILER - the rest of this is not.
The character Jan complains about restarting high school in a new place which is understandable but that's not the same as "not belonging anywhere" as she puts it.
I'm not far in and I've already read a few good metaphors, the author sometimes has a nice turn of phrase here or there.
The descriptions of the sister relationship seem good; very believably portrayed and layered.
The author has mentioned/used the word stucco 3 or more times in the first 20 pages, referring to not just the house they end up buying but multiple houses - how much can there be in the country?
The last line of the first chapter - HOW does she know "someone is watching"? Weird.
"She's a witch." Lol - based on this description? "Shapeless black dresses with white aprons tied around the middle" - sounds more like a housemaid than a witch but OK
"...her - not him - why did I have such a strong impression of something feminine?" and "a watcher in the woods" hm, odd. I mean I get where that's going or what it's hinting at (because I've seen this movie) but that's a weird way to hint at it or get there.
"It's very necessary to love yourself before you can love anyone else" - oh this old claptrap was already in this book written in... 1980 - ok later than I thought but still that seems like such an Oprah early 2000's mainstay of pseudo-psychology. Huh.
"...I felt he was going to give me something much more valuable" - creepy. 19-15 is statutory, yeah? even in 1980! The author probably intends for Jan to mean like, being seen by another human, having a real friend, having something that's just "hers" outside of her family - those desires would make sense for her age - but that wording does not come off right. Eek.
Ha! Some of my favorite words -
interminable
cloisonne (vase)
expectorate (as a verb? to spit? I've taken expectorants when sick but never used that as a verb!)
A very nice section:
"She was my mother. Never before this had I looked at her and thought of her as someone separate, as someone else. Now, so near to her that I could smell the subtle scent of her perfume and see the clear, fine texture of her skin, I realized for the first time that I was looking at another human being who was complete within herself. She was my mother, but she was more than just a loving and convenient extension of me and my needs"
"Human, I told myself, suddenly frightened, more afraid at this swift, overwhelming knowledge of mortality than I had been at the sight of the broken mirror. My grandmother had been human, and I had lost her. My mother is human. If I'm very lucky, someday she will live to be an old, old woman, like Mrs. Aylwood, my young mother, beautiful mother changing into someone with wrinkled skin, swollen knuckles, and dark shadows under her eyes."
"She was my mother, but somehow, at this moment, our roles were reversed. She was asking me for help. My practical, sensible mother who had said there was an explanation for everything was turning to me and asking me to explain how and why two mirrors had been broken, each jagged cut spelling out the letter X."
---
p. 71 (end of chapter 6) - a good creepy paragraph imagining what if Karen drowned in the pond in the woods - very 'Lovely Bones' -esque.
This story is more confusing than the movie. Weird that the whole family is involved in this entire ordeal but also just immediately takes it seriously? They don't think their daughter is like, crazy, or acting out? I feel that this is very... taken for granted? Like, I have a healthy suspension for disbelief, but it's hard for me to believe that EVERYONE in an entire family ALSO does for something this INSANE going on. You know?
"When you live without hope, how are you supposed to know that it's been there all along?" Youch. That one hits hard, and kind of out of nowhere for a YA book.
There's some slight commentary on aging, and how we treat the elderly. (Uh, aging is hard and we treat the elderly poorly, duh.) It's odd that Mrs. Aylwood left for some retirement home then came back later - the movie handled that better for sure, in that she lived in like, the servants' house/guest house of the mansion, right on the property, and the condition of buying the house was that she gets to stay there. That makes way more sense, given what she went through/where her mind is at.
Huh - small bumps/having to bend once in a while "...[keeps] him from taking happiness for granted". That's an interesting perspective.
Whoa, the ending was different, too! Mrs. Aylwood goes INTO the portal, not that her daughter comes back. She sort of BECOMES the watcher in the woods. WEIRD!
January 27, 2024
This was possibly the most bizarre book I've ever read. The writing structure was weird, there were times when Jan would react to a conversation or event and then explain it afterwards like she was looking back. There was an excessive use of metaphors and flowery, existential language, with the main character pondering the universe. The story went in absolutely wild directions and felt almost incoherent in places, and the ending was unsatisfying and inconclusive.
September 16, 2017
My four-star-rating is not based on the book by itself, but on how the elucidates the movie version, which I spent a ton of time thinking about in my childhood because of how creepy & confusing it was. The story of the book departs from the movie a lot, and really isn't the same story in the end, but somehow reading this made me understand it more anyway.
December 31, 2018
I vaguely remember watching this Disney movie when I was young.... Not sure if the book came first, or if it was written based on the movie. It's an interesting sci-fi story. I liked the characters, especially Mrs. Aylwood. I would have liked the story to go a bit further, instead of leaving it open-ended like it did. But overall, an enjoyable book.
January 3, 2020
I liked the story. Many have said that it's not the best writing or whatever, but I see it as a story that doesn't set out to broaden my intelligence or be a perfect example of amazing writing. It just tells a story the author wanted to tell, and I enjoyed it. I read this book to be entertained, and I was. Of course, I think it helps that I love mysterious and otherworldly tales.
November 26, 2018
I really enjoyed this little YA "thriller". The plot was predictable, but the writing style itself was expert and unique. I really liked the family dynamics. I think it made the book, in fact. I highly recommend this book if you are looking for a quick read.
February 18, 2012
I actually prefer the movie for the first time instead of a book. The story was good until the ending. The ending felt weak and unexplained.
October 26, 2025
DNF pages read 85/202
The Watcher in the Woods is a novelization of an old Disney movie. I have never seen the movie, but I can see how this plot would work as a movie. As a book, it falls flat.
The story follows Jan, a 15-year-old girl whose family is moving to a new house in the middle of nowhere. The day they go to view the house, Jan senses that something is off about the woods near the house. She's convinced that someone - or something - is watching her family. She has no evidence to back up this feeling, she just knows that something is wrong. These feelings don't go away once the family moves into the house. Jan knows that something is in the woods, she just has no way to prove it.
This lack of evidence is why I don't think this works as a book. I can picture the movie version having dramatic music and haunting shots of the woods that give the audience a feeling of foreboding every time the woods are mentioned or seen. In the book? There's no atmosphere. The woods are barely even described. The only creep factory we get is Jan endlessly saying that something is in the woods. The plot is similarly lacking. I'm sure it's going to have something to do with the woods, but I have no idea what and no real interest in finding out. The characters are far too bland for me to care about them and the pacing is glacial.
Before I gave up, I glanced at a few other reviews to see if the book was worth powering through and it sounds like a hard, "no." Everyone seems to agree that the movie is better so, if this plot interests you, just go find a copy of the movie. Don't waste your time with a boring book.
The Watcher in the Woods is a novelization of an old Disney movie. I have never seen the movie, but I can see how this plot would work as a movie. As a book, it falls flat.
The story follows Jan, a 15-year-old girl whose family is moving to a new house in the middle of nowhere. The day they go to view the house, Jan senses that something is off about the woods near the house. She's convinced that someone - or something - is watching her family. She has no evidence to back up this feeling, she just knows that something is wrong. These feelings don't go away once the family moves into the house. Jan knows that something is in the woods, she just has no way to prove it.
This lack of evidence is why I don't think this works as a book. I can picture the movie version having dramatic music and haunting shots of the woods that give the audience a feeling of foreboding every time the woods are mentioned or seen. In the book? There's no atmosphere. The woods are barely even described. The only creep factory we get is Jan endlessly saying that something is in the woods. The plot is similarly lacking. I'm sure it's going to have something to do with the woods, but I have no idea what and no real interest in finding out. The characters are far too bland for me to care about them and the pacing is glacial.
Before I gave up, I glanced at a few other reviews to see if the book was worth powering through and it sounds like a hard, "no." Everyone seems to agree that the movie is better so, if this plot interests you, just go find a copy of the movie. Don't waste your time with a boring book.
Read
July 27, 2021I was surprised, given some of the very negative reviews, how well written this is. I had expected stilted, dull prose that just serves the plot but Randall actually writes some beautiful and evocative descriptions. Yes, there are a couple of occasions when her musings get a little tangled up in words and the prose doesn't do them justice, and she certainly starts off with an alarming amount of adverbs, but overall I found her writing has a real thoughtful quality to it and a very natural flow that made it a pleasure to read.
It's difficult for me to be objective about the story itself and how believable Randall makes it when I know the film so well! It starts off very similar to the film and I enjoyed the suspense and atmosphere that was set up in the first two thirds of the book. On account of being a bit 'out there' the story does occasionally get away from her a bit. The ending I believed Randall was working towards would have been perfectly fine and could have been executed well, but the abrupt nature with which it ended dissolved all the tension that she'd spent time building up. It reminded me of being in school and the teacher saying, "You have one minute left" and everyone frantically trying to finish what they're writing.
Bafflingly unsatisfying ending aside, I enjoyed the story both for the nostalgia and the actual reading experience itself👍
It's difficult for me to be objective about the story itself and how believable Randall makes it when I know the film so well! It starts off very similar to the film and I enjoyed the suspense and atmosphere that was set up in the first two thirds of the book. On account of being a bit 'out there' the story does occasionally get away from her a bit. The ending I believed Randall was working towards would have been perfectly fine and could have been executed well, but the abrupt nature with which it ended dissolved all the tension that she'd spent time building up. It reminded me of being in school and the teacher saying, "You have one minute left" and everyone frantically trying to finish what they're writing.
Bafflingly unsatisfying ending aside, I enjoyed the story both for the nostalgia and the actual reading experience itself👍
Displaying 1 - 30 of 100 reviews