Printable View
Based on the commentary of those nuts, that might not always be the best idea :doh:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sai Sheb
I do wonder if the filmmakers neglected to compose a proper extended cut of the film (for whatever reason...apathy, maybe?) and instead just dumped the cut scenes as the "Deleted Scenes" feature on the home video release.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland of Gilead 33
From what I've understood from interviews with the director, there wasn't a whole lot cut out of the film. Sure, some new stuff was shot, but that was to replace scenes test audiences and producers deemed confusing. So there's likely no material and no reason to invest in an extended cut.
It, in comparison, was slowly reworked from a 3 hour cut to 135 minutes. They cut out some legitimate moments of character development and storytelling.
i really fucking hate test audiences i really do cause they don't always know jack fucking shit when it comes to movies. ya know i know a LOT of people hate the (1990) version of IT i love it and no i don't think it's a perfect adaptation at all.
but at least Tommy Lee Wallace has admitted he hadn't read the book before he made the film and i kind of get the impression he wishes he had read it 1st. with The dark tower they claim they read it but i wonder if that's even the truth?
the thing is if they wanted to make it a sequel to the series that's fine but to make it so fucking different from the novels that is not making it a sequel at all. it's a decent film and i can see why people hate it but it's one of those films that didn't piss me off like many other films based off books did.
they should have been more faithful to the fucking source and if i was forced to accept some changes like i forget who said it where they said the dark tower turned Roland Black cause of his dealings with it that would have been a really funny thing to put in. when they said it was going to be a sequel of sorts i had assumed it was going to be faithful to a certain point than they would have changed some shit.
cause from his last trip through the tower some things had changed even if it was little things. such as Roland coming to our world when he didn't come to it before. in his body i mean,
on IMDB and yes that can be wrong they had listed Eddie and Susannah for a long time and i forget who was going to play them i wonder if anything with them was even filmed? and i like the fact that the leads i'm to lazy to type his name are honest to us when they say they have no idea if there will be a sequel or not.
Couldn't make things any worse at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu DysonBased on the commentary of those nuts, that might not always be the best idea :doh:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sai Sheb
Disappointing film aside* it looks like they've put together a good Blu-Ray release. Very promising extras there.
*And I did like it.
Oh, they could, and you needn't even self-select the more extreme opinions among them. Simply suggesting that the books receive a fully faithful translation is one way to go too far in the other direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberGhostfaceCouldn't make things any worse at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu DysonBased on the commentary of those nuts, that might not always be the best idea :doh:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sai Sheb
The more I think about this the more convinced I am that they truly felt that they were going to pull an audience from the comic book crowd. They catered this movie (IMO) to this group.
The DT film as it is was effectively a flop that was shunned by most critics and fans alike.Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu DysonOh, they could, and you needn't even self-select the more extreme opinions among them. Simply suggesting that the books receive a fully faithful translation is one way to go too far in the other direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberGhostfaceCouldn't make things any worse at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu DysonBased on the commentary of those nuts, that might not always be the best idea :doh:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sai Sheb
A more faithful DT film could only be a step up. Provided they were modestly budgeted (and the new It film was only $35 million which is cheap) and had realistic expectations I see no reason why 90% faithful versions of the first three books wouldn't do well.
honestly if they were to do a more faithful version do they really need a budget that big? let's say they follow the book the only parts they really need to have a big budget that i can think of at the top of my head are the underground caverns.
and if it works for the film i could live with a couple changes as long as it's written well and makes fucking sense. i'm also going by if they want to go by the this is a sequel to the books thinking. but what they need is someone who's actually read
the fucking material and cares about it. not someone who's only read up to a point and hasn't even read the whole series by the time filming starts. i doubt i'm the 1st person who to say this but i doubt i'll be the last one either
I'd contest that bolded part, but i've constantly noticed by this point that there's a tendency to downplay the success of the film despite figures to the contrary. As a result, the futility of such an action has finally managed to inch past my passion on the subject.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberGhostfaceThe DT film as it is was effectively a flop that was shunned by most critics and fans alike.Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu DysonOh, they could, and you needn't even self-select the more extreme opinions among them. Simply suggesting that the books receive a fully faithful translation is one way to go too far in the other direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberGhostfaceCouldn't make things any worse at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu DysonBased on the commentary of those nuts, that might not always be the best idea :doh:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sai Sheb
A more faithful DT film could only be a step up. Provided they were modestly budgeted (and the new It film was only $35 million which is cheap) and had realistic expectations I see no reason why 90% faithful versions of the first three books wouldn't do well.
Anyhow, just what are we discussing here: a full-fledged television series, a mini-series, or a septology of films? We can throw out the lattermost proposal, because a seven-film stretch isn't going to happen. That right there is going to irk some fans. Even if we pare down the installments to a total of three or perhaps four (five seems a bit much for a work of fiction not nearly as culturally entrenched or simply popular as Harry Potter or The Lord of the Rings, but I don't think this is necessarily an impossibility), inserting the titantic flashback that is Wizard and Glass smack down the center is going to be a tricky proposition and one hell of a sell when said installments are going to be released yearly at the least (bi-annually is more likely). Certain aspects of the story either won't make the cut because of copyright issues or instead will be translated into a form markedly different from the source material...such as the triple-offender known as the Wolves. We can be fairly confident that Wolves of the Calla, Song of Susannah and The Dark Tower are going to receive the lion's share of alterations. Then, there's the little issue of having a main protagonist "hero" who - as has been previously noted - is significantly less heroic than will be expected (performing an unwanted abortion with a gun's barrel, sticking around to get laid despite knowing his presence will almost surely ensure bloodshed and then straight up massacring children as a one-man army).
There are plenty of other considerations. What I typed above are the ideas which are held fast to my grey matter.
Now, if we're receiving a television series, then there is much more freedom afforded to arrange the live-action adaptation of the story. Hell, we may even see some comic material if The Dark Tower hits the small screen.
Faithfully reproducing the region surrounding Lud and Lud itself will also be sizeable monetary investment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Roland of Gilead 33
Well yes I think the television show would be the best approach. I don't think making a mostly faithful film series would be impossible, though. I imagine halfway through there would need to be some serious condensing regardless of the format -- lots of the Sombra stuff, Stephen King writing himself into the series, Callahan and Ted's backstories, Roland and Suz traveling in the snow, etc.
I think the first three books could work as films fine enough. Book 4 can be the tie-in tv series. And you could probably fit 5-7 into two films.
Content-wise, well I agree that Roland performing the gun abortion should be cut out. Otherwise I don't think his character would have to be changed that much. Morally gray characters are pretty popular now.
Maybe someday. Were finally getting a good Punisher after 3 failed films. Maybe the same will happen for DT. I enjoyed Idris as Roland. But I would not mind somebody else play him in a rebooted DT. A Dark reboot that shares the tone of the books. Thats all I want.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberGhostfaceThe DT film as it is was effectively a flop that was shunned by most critics and fans alike.Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu DysonOh, they could, and you needn't even self-select the more extreme opinions among them. Simply suggesting that the books receive a fully faithful translation is one way to go too far in the other direction.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberGhostfaceCouldn't make things any worse at this point.Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu DysonBased on the commentary of those nuts, that might not always be the best idea :doh:.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sai Sheb
A more faithful DT film could only be a step up. Provided they were modestly budgeted (and the new It film was only $35 million which is cheap) and had realistic expectations I see no reason why 90% faithful versions of the first three books wouldn't do well.
http://www.digitalspy.com/movies/new...ailure-reason/
Quote:
With IT storming it at the box office, it's easy to forget there was another Stephen King adaptation this year that didn't do anywhere near as well.
The Dark Tower was savaged by critics and didn't exactly draw in the audiences either, so far grossing only $120 million (£89 million) worldwide. But King seems to know the reason why it didn't click.
"The major challenge was to do a film based on a series of books that's really long, about 3,000 pages. The other part of it was the decision to do a PG-13 feature adaptation of books that are extremely violent and deal with violent behaviour in a fairly graphic way," he told Vulture.
"That was something that had to be overcome, although I've gotta say, I thought [screenwriter] Akiva Goldsman did a terrific job in taking a central part of the book and turning it into what I thought was a pretty good movie."
Last month, director Nikolaj Arcel revealed that the planned TV series continuation of The Dark Tower was still in the works and would be "totally canon" with the movie, but King reckons it'll be more of a do-over.
"The TV series they're developing now… we'll see what happens with that. It would be like a complete reboot, so we'll just have to see," he explained.
We'll have to wait and see if The Dark Tower does get a TV series after the movie's failure, but there's no denying that a TV series is certainly more fitted to King's epic books than a 90-minute movie.
Hopefully they replace the creative team and ask Darabont to take over. Or Mike Flanagan who managed to make what appears to be a very good film out of one of King's lesser efforts and has said DT was his dream project.
Darabont taking over is my dream scenario
The reboot terms means all and everything.
I mean, since the series is PLANNED to be based on the 4th book, it will already be a reboot in the way that it wont be a syfy teenager movie anymore.
So, what is the meaning between that term : commercially a failure so changing the entire team, or just a different universe so that would be LIKE a reboot? which if i remember correctly, thats what the said.
Btw, the movie was a critic disaster, we all know that.
But was it REALLY a financially disaster?
I mean, sure, it wasnt a success like IT, but IMDB lists : $337,430,352 (Worldwide) (24 September 2017)
But weirdly enough, it's a MAJOR growth from a week before : $110,222,920 (Worldwide) (17 September 2017)
So up to the 17th it was quite a financial disaster, and all of sudden not so much?
Any idea of what happened in between? I dont see any new territorial releases. The success of IT brought new people to go watch TDT?
Perfect scenario, like I said before, would be a few of seasons of Wizard and Glass, Wind/Keyhole, and heck, Eluria, gradually leading into DT1 and so forth.
That sounds perfect!Quote:
Originally Posted by pablo
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well it didn't even break even. To break even, depending on who you ask, it needs to make two or three times the budget. DT would need another ten million double its budget. And I'm not even sure if that's accounting for advertising or foreign sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertwest
No matter what, The Dark Tower will at least break even once home video sales are factored in.
One consideration for any live-action adaptation will be the steady march of Jake's age. He's definitely going to be an older teenager or even full-fledged adult near the end. Well...perhaps not if a series of films are shot back-to-back a la The Lord of the Rings.
And if the movie was more faithful to the books it would of made even less money. Just look at Mother! it floped. Original films just do go well with General audiences anymore. DT is just too weird an IP for adaptation. Sadly. But still hoping for a niche TV show reboot. And yes with someone like Darabount or JJ Abrams.Quote:
Originally Posted by CyberGhostfaceWell it didn't even break even. To break even, depending on who you ask, it needs to make two or three times the budget. DT would need another ten million double its budget. And I'm not even sure if that's accounting for advertising or foreign sales.Quote:
Originally Posted by herbertwest
EVEN if it does... which I still doubt as most will just download it and steal cause no one wants to pay for a shitty movie now a days... it will not be enough to warrant more. I hope... but I feel the ship has sailed for the time being. Just archive this thread already. :rose:Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu Dyson
The thread will self-archive when people stop commenting in it. We may consider unstickying the thread.
IMDb can be updated by anyone, maybe it was a jokester :) Gotta check a site like boxofficemojoQuote:
Originally Posted by herbertwest
Highly doubtful. If we take a look at how much money the movie made:Quote:
Originally Posted by Isamu Dyson
Domestic: $50.4 million x 0.5 (what actually goes back to the studio): $25.2 million
Foreign: $60.4 million x 0.4: $24.16 million
Total amount Sony made: $49.36 million
The movie's production budget was $60 million, plus they added another $6 million worth of reshoots. That means they already made a loss of $66-$49.36 = $16.64 million.
But we have yet to add in the marketing budget. Usually that's about the same amount as the production budget. If true for this movie, Sony is looking at a loss of about $77 million total. That's a lot of money to make in home video sales in a market where DVD and Blu Ray are dying, for a movie that few people care to seek out or rewatch.
Maybe the merchandise is selling, though. Everyone here bought their Dark Tower Vinimates?
http://www.dreadcentral.com/wp-conte...rVinimates.jpg