The Dark Tower series filmed adaptation

[mtdman]

With the turnaround being less than a year until it's in the theater, it's obvious the first movie isn't going to have a whole lot of cgi or involved sets. It's obviously going to be set in modern times and take place mostly in this world. They're going to be very conservative with it and not go out on a limb.

With all the info that came out this week, I am much less concerned with Idris Alba being Roland and more concerned with all the plot and story changes. And people saying "Well, King's involved with it so surely it will be good" are kidding themselves. That means absolutely nothing going on his track record. IMO King has demonstrated his willingness to allow horrible changes to his books when translated to the screen and then support it anyway. UTD is a great example (not that I liked that book). I heard a lot of crap about how great it was going to be and how King was on board with the changes. And then the finished product sucked. I don't trust him when it comes to proclaiming script changes are good.

True, but then again on the flip side how about the "Kubrick The Shining" film and adaption? He sure didn't endorse that one more than he was contractually required. Goes to show you just don't know, right?

I love The Shining movie just as much as I love The Shining book. IMO the movie is great, and I dare say it's probably great because King wasn't much involved in it. Which only goes to prove my point more. King may be a great writer, at times, but I don't trust his opinion of movie translations of his work.

[mtdman]

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/74563

So,

Spoiler:

Eddie and Susannah don't even appear in this movie? Keeps getting worse and worse and worse.

[fernandito]

We don't know that yet ^

[mtdman]

To get back on topic, as far as TDT film, to the film makers; amaze me and you'll have a fan for the duration of the film series. But you're going to have to come out guns blazing so to speak and get me early; before that narrow strip of space (known as my mind) locks up tight.

But the fact of that matter is, we know already they are NOT trying to amaze the ardent fan. If they were they, would stay true to the beloved source material and make the adaptation as close as possible!

The ardent fan base represents a very small percentage of the movie-going public, so it would not be fiscally prudent for them to focus on satisfying just that audience. They have to create a movie that will appeal to people who've never even read a King novel, let alone a Dark Tower book.

This just says to me that Hollywood doesn't trust King's books to appeal to a general audience, and that The Dark Tower series as it exists in print form isn't entertaining enough, isn't good enough to stand on its own without butchering it. Every time I see that excuse, that they have to appeal to a wider audience, that means it's going to get dumbed down, watered down, and sliced to pieces. Why bother even making it then? If you aren't appealing to the core fan base, why make a movie?

Dumb.

[mtdman]

We don't know that yet ^

From the AICN link:

Spoiler:

Whatever ends up happening with Abbey Lee's character, I can all but guarantee she's not the new Susannah, which I've seen floated by fans. In this draft Eddie and Susannah do not pop, but art hinted at via a tarot deck.

[fernandito]

Why bother even making it then? If you aren't appealing to the core fan base, why make a movie?

This doesn't just apply to the Dark Tower franchise though. Science fiction films, Marvel movies, X-Men films, Batman, Superman, Spider Man films etc. have all strayed - to varying degrees - from what the core fan base wants in lieu of appealing to a larger audience. That's just the way it works. They want to maximize profits by trying to make it accessible to as many demographics as possible.

[Brian861]

As I said before, if it gets a few folks who see the movie/s to crack open the said books and actually read the story for themselves; that's a win. I'm sure there are probably many diehard King fans who dislike the series too. We all love King but we don't love all of his books. I don't know. I'm really just trying to open my mind up more and more to the idea as the discussion continues. Many great points being made btw. At least it got us talking and that's never a bad thing.

[Rahfa]

I'm glad I got my defense of the Elba casting out of my system before it was officially annouced, because with the way the story's being set up, I really could care less.

Just to wade in and piss people off...

The Mist movie ending = fucking terrible. If you liked that ending, you never graduated second grade because it is the most simplistic, basic, boring, obvious, fake-ass pointless twist ending that some 10th grader wrote in their fiction class in high school and thought they were being "edgy." I'd rather watch Maximum Overdrive again. Seriously - "oh no! If he'd just waited ONE minute everyone would have lived! Oh noes, the tragedy!" Spare me. SK KNOWS it's terrible - but he feels bad for Darabont and defended him...OR King's simply lost it. I prefer to believe he's defending Darabont.

Stephen King Shining miniseries - excellent. Hit all the book's high points, and kept the spirit alive - while tweaking the ending just enough to let Jack redeem himself in an honest and poignant way (the one flaw of the book).

Kubrick Shining - grim, atmospheric, building tension of imminent doom...harmed by poor Shelley Duvall getting thrown to the wolves and obviously Jack being crazy right from the start. But it did a good job at building tension throughout.

[fernandito]

I'm ambivalent about The Mist's ending.

Does that mean I'm in 6th grade?

[mtdman]

I liked the Mist's ending, and I hated that abomination that was the miniseries Shining. What a load of crap that was.

[Rahfa]

I'm ambivalent about The Mist's ending.

Does that mean I'm in 6th grade?

Haha - I don't know, I'm just being a jerk. But I didn't like the ending, that's for sure!

[Merlin1958]

Boy, I better stay out of here. LOL Apparently my tastes and the tastes of quite a few of you are on opposite sides of the spectrum!! LOL

I enjoyed the "Mist" film ending. As far as "The Shining" well, at the time I had just finished reading it and thought it to be, King' masterpiece. I immediately thought of, Nicholson as "Jack" and was really hyped to see the film. I guess when all is said and done it just didn't meet my expectations and I just came to hate it. Not saying I'm right or wrong it's just how it went for me is all.

[Johnny Alien]

Based on that article I am seeing the vision. They are going to bring Jake in via the method in the Wastelands because they don't intend to..

Spoiler:

drop him in the mountains and have him die. Roland has the horn so this is the next path and King has pointed out that the most crucial choice Roland makes is letting Jake die. So he is going to save Jake in the mountain thus making this a fundamentally different loop with a potentially very different ending. So if he doesn't die there than bringing in him in the way he does in the Wastelands makes some sense because it's more interesting. I am not sure I am agreeing with everything but I am starting to see that there might be a really good vision here AND we might be lucky enough to see the next loop in the story.

[Merlin1958]

Based on that article I am seeing the vision. They are going to bring Jake in via the method in the Wastelands because they don't intend to..

Spoiler:

drop him in the mountains and have him die. Roland has the horn so this is the next path and King has pointed out that the most crucial choice Roland makes is letting Jake die. So he is going to save Jake in the mountain thus making this a fundamentally different loop with a potentially very different ending. So if he doesn't die there than bringing in him in the way he does in the Wastelands makes some sense because it's more interesting. I am not sure I am agreeing with everything but I am starting to see that there might be a really good vision here AND we might be lucky enough to see the next loop in the story.

Yeah, good point. Giving him the horn kind of takes the gloves off for the movie makers. Doesn't necessarily mean it won't be a good film though. Perhaps even better because it will eliminate our expectations to a degree. At least we won't be able to draw direct comparisons to the books.

[Roland of Gilead 33]

1stly i love the Shining Miniseries but what hurts the film i think was the bad casting. i love Steven Weber as an actor but he was fucking terrible at Jack. his acting was horrible as was the rest of the Torrence Family. anyways,

i don't like having a Black Roland, the character is a white character and i have nothing against the actor who is going to play him and depending on how it's done i may end up loving him as Roland. it is a better Casting than Javier Bardem who i just could NOT see as Roland at all. thank god he wasn't Roland. i was hoping Viggo Mort. i dunno how to spell his last name. but Matthew M. as well i dunno how to spell his last name either. i wish he was playing Roland than the Man in black but i am okay with him as the man in black cause he'll be fucking awesome. there is no question and if he's having fun in the film you can normally tell cause it helps his performance i think. that's when he's at his best.

looking up Idris Elba i've only seen him in one film and that's the 1st Thor film. i don't remember anything about his acting at all cause i've only seen that film once to be fair. but if people wanted him as Alex Cross he has got to be good.

that sounded like a good idea too. course having a pile of dog shit as Alex Cross than Tyler Perry is more appealing but that's a given. sorry for going off topic folks. my point is i'm open to give him a chance i just don't like them changing the race that's all. like Johnny Storm being black in the fantastic four was a shitty idea and i have nothing against the actor who played him in fact i still haven't even seen the film yet to be fair. i only hate that cause the character has been white over 50 years but that's just how i feel that's all. i hope the 1st film is a great one i'm open to it. and i can't wait until it comes out.

if they change it a little depending on what the changes are like the interview with EW said that there will be more of the man in black than he was in the book. that may help the film if it's done right, and having him in his younger days in flashbacks is a must of course. my guess the 1st film will be part of the 1st novel and part of the drawing of the three. if the film opens in our world than it may open with Jake in our world before he dies in our world for the 1st time and wakes up in Roland's world. so it may follow the book mostly, but they change it so it will give the characters more developement i''m just guessing of course. i don't like the fact that it won't follow the book exact but i'm open to how it's done cause let's face it the 1st book leaving out the flashbacks, really doesn't have that many characters in it. yea there's Tull if memory serves me right, ya can correct me if i'm wrong cause i may be. but i'm just guessing like you all are. either way i can't wait to see it!

[Girlystevedave]

AND..

Spoiler:

we might be lucky enough to see the next loop in the story.

Yes! This is very true. I'm excited to see where this movie goes and, knowing it won't be just like the books, I'm just going into this like I'm getting another version of The Dark Tower.

[Jon]

Based on that article I am seeing the vision. They are going to bring Jake in via the method in the Wastelands because they don't intend to..

Spoiler:

drop him in the mountains and have him die. Roland has the horn so this is the next path and King has pointed out that the most crucial choice Roland makes is letting Jake die. So he is going to save Jake in the mountain thus making this a fundamentally different loop with a potentially very different ending. So if he doesn't die there than bringing in him in the way he does in the Wastelands makes some sense because it's more interesting. I am not sure I am agreeing with everything but I am starting to see that there might be a really good vision here AND we might be lucky enough to see the next loop in the story

.

I am more concerned about THIS than a black Roland. LOL

[Brian861]

Boy, I better stay out of here. LOL Apparently my tastes and the tastes of quite a few of you are on opposite sides of the spectrum!! LOL

I enjoyed the "Mist" film ending. As far as "The Shining" well, at the time I had just finished reading it and thought it to be, King' masterpiece. I immediately thought of, Nicholson as "Jack" and was really hyped to see the film. I guess when all is said and done it just didn't meet my expectations and I just came to hate it. Not saying I'm right or wrong it's just how it went for me is all.

FWIW, Bill. I agree with ya wholeheartedly about The Shining. Agreed that we're probably in the minority though for reasons I can't fathom . I never saw the miniseries but I'm sure it sucked just as badly if not worse .

[T-Dogz_AK47]

The Shining as a novel is a masterpiece - I would never calll Kubrick's film version a masterpiece, and certainly not better than the novel in any shape or form! It's true that King has endorsed some not-so-good adaptations lately: A Good Marriage and Under the Dome. So maybe he has somehow lost it in that department, or maybe don't care so much anymore. Except his endorsement and praise of the show, 11.22.63, is spot on. That one is really good. I have come to terms with Idris as Roland, but I still have big problems with the rest - seems almost like they just want to ruin it and piss off the fanbase! And King, eager to please, for whatever reasons, just goes along and says "That sounds fantastic, go for it!" I will watch it, and may even end up liking/loving it, it remains to be seen, but oh boy, most of the recent news about The Dark Tower movie franchise has been scarier than any novel by King, and a head-shaking experience. The only thing, so far, that they have managed to do perfectly is casting Matthew as Flagg!

This is way off topic, I really don't like it when King fans and King himself crap on Kubrick's movie. It is a masterpiece. It's one of the scariest movies ever made, and it's also just plain one of the best movies ever made. Period.

Boy, I better stay out of here. LOL Apparently my tastes and the tastes of quite a few of you are on opposite sides of the spectrum!! LOL

I enjoyed the "Mist" film ending. As far as "The Shining" well, at the time I had just finished reading it and thought it to be, King' masterpiece. I immediately thought of, Nicholson as "Jack" and was really hyped to see the film. I guess when all is said and done it just didn't meet my expectations and I just came to hate it. Not saying I'm right or wrong it's just how it went for me is all.

FWIW, Bill. I agree with ya wholeheartedly about The Shining. Agreed that we're probably in the minority though for reasons I can't fathom . I never saw the miniseries but I'm sure it sucked just as badly if not worse .

That's probably because you both read the book before watching the film and the the expectation of what was in your mind's eye, marred the experience for you.

Try watching the movie again, but remove all thoughts of Stephen King whilst doing so. Look at the film as being a completely different entity, running on completely different themes.

[Brian861]

That's probably because you both read the book before watching the film and the the expectation of what was in your mind's eye, marred the experience for you.

I do believe you are correct, Sir! I'm really hoping I can get on board with TDT films. It can be its own living, breathing thing if done well I reckon.

[Merlin1958]

The Shining as a novel is a masterpiece - I would never calll Kubrick's film version a masterpiece, and certainly not better than the novel in any shape or form! It's true that King has endorsed some not-so-good adaptations lately: A Good Marriage and Under the Dome. So maybe he has somehow lost it in that department, or maybe don't care so much anymore. Except his endorsement and praise of the show, 11.22.63, is spot on. That one is really good. I have come to terms with Idris as Roland, but I still have big problems with the rest - seems almost like they just want to ruin it and piss off the fanbase! And King, eager to please, for whatever reasons, just goes along and says "That sounds fantastic, go for it!" I will watch it, and may even end up liking/loving it, it remains to be seen, but oh boy, most of the recent news about The Dark Tower movie franchise has been scarier than any novel by King, and a head-shaking experience. The only thing, so far, that they have managed to do perfectly is casting Matthew as Flagg!

This is way off topic, I really don't like it when King fans and King himself crap on Kubrick's movie. It is a masterpiece. It's one of the scariest movies ever made, and it's also just plain one of the best movies ever made. Period.

Boy, I better stay out of here. LOL Apparently my tastes and the tastes of quite a few of you are on opposite sides of the spectrum!! LOL

I enjoyed the "Mist" film ending. As far as "The Shining" well, at the time I had just finished reading it and thought it to be, King' masterpiece. I immediately thought of, Nicholson as "Jack" and was really hyped to see the film. I guess when all is said and done it just didn't meet my expectations and I just came to hate it. Not saying I'm right or wrong it's just how it went for me is all.

FWIW, Bill. I agree with ya wholeheartedly about The Shining. Agreed that we're probably in the minority though for reasons I can't fathom . I never saw the miniseries but I'm sure it sucked just as badly if not worse .

That's probably because you both read the book before watching the film and the the expectation of what was in your mind's eye, marred the experience for you.

Try watching the movie again, but remove all thoughts of Stephen King whilst doing so. Look at the film as being a completely different entity, running on completely different themes.

Easily said, hard to put into practice. However, I take your meaning.

[Isamu Dyson]

For those of you unsure about Elba, check him out in the BBC series "Luther". He's got the tortured anti-hero role down pat.

[Rahfa]

my point is i'm open to give him a chance i just don't like them changing the race that's all. like Johnny Storm being black in the fantastic four was a shitty idea and i have nothing against the actor who played him in fact i still haven't even seen the film yet to be fair. i only hate that cause the character has been white over 50 years but that's just how i feel that's all. i hope the 1st film is a great one i'm open to it. and i can't wait until it comes out.

This is nostaligia - there's no reason why the next 50 years have to be the same as the last 50 years. When people say "It's a change for change's sake!" that's no different than saying "Don't change for don't changings sake."

If you stopped cheering for the Red Sox because Ted Williams retired in 1961, that's like worrying about the color of a character. There was one era, and that era's over. Now we're in a new era, with new memories and new things to be nostalgic about 50 years from now. There is no "black character" or "white character." There's yesterday, and there's tomorrow.

[divemaster]

I still disagree that all we have to do to accept a black Roland is tell ourselves it's a fictional character in a fictional world and that gives us (or the story adapters) the obligation to accept it without pause. Robin Hood was a fictional character. Could you imagine a movie where he was Chinese? What about a black Paul Bunyan? If a movie had a Chinese Robin Hood walking up to a peasant cottage in Nottingham Forest with a bag of coins, don't you think there would be a reaction of WTF? These people would never have seen a Chinese fellow and it would have rocked their world.

I don't get from my reading of the DT books that folks in the Baronies, or Mejis, or Mid-World, would nonchalantly accept a black gunslinger, given the mythology King created around the character of Roland and the guild of the gunslingers. Sure, it would work fine in the scenes in the modern world, where no one would bat an eye, but not in the World of the Dark Tower.

That's why I see this as completely different from changing the character of "Red" in Shawshank from Irish to black. That's easy. In the world created for the story, the internal logic still holds. A black prisoner. Ho-hum. No big deal. I do not see this holding in the DT world King created.

Now, having said all that, I can see the writers changing the DT world to accommodate a black Roland. How? I don't know. But given the wholesale changes hinted at above regarding all the other characters and storylines (which I am NOT a fan of at this point), I guess they could create a world where there are black folks living amongst the various Mid-World/Barony communities and that they would be just as likely to come from a heraldic line than anyone else. A world where a black gunslinger could show up and no one would bat an eye. Sure, such a world could be created. But King did not create that world.

But once you change the DT world to such an extent, change the characters (again, to a major extent), substantially change the plot, well, you pretty much lose my interest. The movie might indeed be great, but at some point it ceases to be a "Dark Tower" movie and becomes a random fantasy action/adventure movie.

[WeDealInLead]

I've always been under the impression that Mejis was the Mid-world version on Mexico. I could be mistaken. I'm rereading the books and I'm not at that point yet. I do remember that the folks there had a different accent. I don't see why they'd have a second thought about a black gunslinger. Folks throughout that entire world seem accepting of a lot of weird shit actually (mutants, Andy, talking trains, magic etc.) So we're going to have to strongly disagree on this one.

I don't remember King describing different ethnicities or races of most characters the ka-tet encounters. Why assume they're Caucasian? Is that a default race people have in their mind's eye? That reminds me when white folks freaked out when a black girl played Hermoine in a play. Rowling herself said she never wrote her as a white girl, people assumed she was. Skin colour was never specified. Ditto for Mid-World's inhabitants. They're not in medivial England.