Luckily I never intended to watch ANY DT movie. Quite simply they can't come close to the movie in my mind. Because of this I'm basically fine with whatever changes they make.
Yes
No
Luckily I never intended to watch ANY DT movie. Quite simply they can't come close to the movie in my mind. Because of this I'm basically fine with whatever changes they make.
Yup. And I'm perfectly fine with that.Originally Posted by CyberGhostface
I know this might be a strong ask, but let's assume that in a series where the fabric of reality is literally torn apart and rearranged, maybe things didn't rearrange exactly as originally envisioned by its creator.And the logic of "everything is different because this is a new loop" clashes with what King has already said, that the 'loops' would in effect only have small increments of change. Roland, Walter, Pimli, Sayre, etc, wouldn't go through massive character shifts to the extent that this film is suggesting that they will because everything that happened prior to "the man in black fled across the desert" would still largely be the same.
Hell, even the creator of the series couldn't foresee himself getting sucked into the story itself.
I'm not taking issue with it being an adaptation.Yup. And I'm perfectly fine with that.
This line is used a lot (for example to handwave how Furth's comics were thrown out of continuity with 'Wind through the Keyhole') but the DT novels still follow their own (mostly) consistent logic. I.E. Jake doesn't die because Roland prevents Mort from pushing him into traffic and the conflicting set of memories drive both of them nearly insane. It's not a case of "everything is different just because".
A hound will die for you, but never lie to you. And he'll look you straight in the face.
My Collection
Is it ever stated explicitly that Roland always draws the same 3 from the Beach?
I am not sure how Roland having dark skin is a "massive character shift", given that his character isn't contingent upon him being white or black. Jake is a few years older, but I would not call that "massive" either.
Consider this: we have not seen/heard ANY of these individuals in action, so we cannot accurately criticize the acting/actual characterization of their respective actors yet.
Did I suggest otherwise?
A hound will die for you, but never lie to you. And he'll look you straight in the face.
My Collection
There isn't a whole lot else to go on with this adaptation. Do you consider characters being moved up in the "timeline" to be massively altered in terms of characterization?Did I suggest otherwise?
Did you miss the info beforehand that this Roland's main motivation is revenge against Walter/Marten and Jake has to be the one to sway him back to getting to the Tower?
A hound will die for you, but never lie to you. And he'll look you straight in the face.
My Collection
At this point we have zero idea what is happening with any of these characters in the movie. The characters are not being moved up in the timeline. The breakers were there breaking in the very first book we just didn't see them. We saw the whole thing unfold from Roland's viewpoint but if you backed up and look at the whole story there was a whole bucket of bad stuff happening during the time when Roland was still finding his way up the beach.
SPOILER
"I aim to misbehave."
-- Malcolm Reynolds
"I am a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar."
-- Hoban Washburne
"What does that make us?"
"Big damn heroes, sir."
"Ain't we just."
-- Malcolm Reynolds and Zoe Washburne
SPOILERSpoiler:
I always felt he has the same Ka-tet and their reward for their sacrifices is happiness together, because Roland really does make them a family. On the flipside, Ive always felt that The Man In Black wants the tower to fall and the cycle to end because he knows he's trapped in it, but he's powerless not to die at Mordred's hands.
Then again, I also think the entire series takes place inside Maerlyn's Grapefruit....
Like Counter Culture Shock on Facebook
SPOILERSpoiler:Spoiler:
If they don't do Oy I'll be super bummed. .......but he'd better not be cartoonish.....
I'm pretty sure Oy won't be in the first movie.
Author of The Road to the Dark Tower, Stephen King: A Complete Exploration of His Work, Life, and Influences and The Dark Tower Companion. Co-editor with Stephen King of the anthology Flight or Fright.
I'm pretty sure Oy won't be in the first movie.
Bummed.Actually I've been pretty bummed about this movie all along.........
Is anyone familiar with the ice cream sundae that Spongebob Squarepants made for himself? Worst case scenario: we end up with the Spongebob Squarepants ice cream sundae version of DT.
You can't be aloof until you advertise.
At best, he might be in a sketch somewhere on a wall, but even that background or the scene it is in might not make the final film.I'm pretty sure Oy won't be in the first movie.
Maybe they could make Oy a bit Jar Jar Binks-like.
You can't be aloof until you advertise.
Yeah if any of the Tet is in danger of not getting the big screen treatment it's definitely Oy.
I just don't think they're going to get that far into the story.
Author of The Road to the Dark Tower, Stephen King: A Complete Exploration of His Work, Life, and Influences and The Dark Tower Companion. Co-editor with Stephen King of the anthology Flight or Fright.
In that case, it isn't so much a radical shift as an emphasis on a previously held grudge. Roland would need to desire to open up his own ice cream shop before I would call foul.
By the way, the amount of knowledge people retain between iterations of the story is a little unclear to me. Walter seems to be in the know, if only in a subtle way, but is it possible that people strongly linked to the fate of the Tower retain residual subconscious memories or feelings when the cosmic reset button is pressed?
Allow me to rephrase my statement: characters being introduced earlier in the timelineAt this point we have zero idea what is happening with any of these characters in the movie. The characters are not being moved up in the timeline. The breakers were there breaking in the very first book we just didn't see them. We saw the whole thing unfold from Roland's viewpoint but if you backed up and look at the whole story there was a whole bucket of bad stuff happening during the time when Roland was still finding his way up the beach..
Oy likely will not be in the first film - if nothing else - because of budgetary constraints.
(How many dead presidents does it take to fully animate a CGI companion anyhow?)
Despite not being anywhere near big enough, the Direwolves in GOT were pretty well done.
"A real limited edition, far from being an expensive autograph stapled to a novel, is a treasure. And like all treasures do, it transforms the responsible owner into a caretaker, and being a caretaker of something as fragile and easily destroyed as ideas and images is not a bad thing but a good one...and so is the re-evaluation of what books are and what they do that necessarily follows." - Stephen King
An emphasis is one thing, but for Roland needing to be so deadset on revenge that he needs to be convinced that he needs to reach the Tower is another. Given that Roland's main obsession is the Tower and was before entering the Mohaine desert.
And then we have Matthew saying that Walter thinks he's "keeping the peace" when that's always been the last thing Walter cares about. When there's peace, that's when he causes chaos. That's his entire schtick.
A hound will die for you, but never lie to you. And he'll look you straight in the face.
My Collection
It's been awhile since I read the first book but I'm trying to remember if his obsession then was more about catching the MIB or was it about reaching the tower?An emphasis is one thing, but for Roland needing to be so deadset on revenge that he needs to be convinced that he needs to reach the Tower is another. Given that Roland's main obsession is the Tower and was before entering the Mohaine desert.
It seems to me if it was the latter, he wouldn't have let Jake fall. I remember there being an emphasis on him worrying about not catching the MIB if he stopped to help Jake and that his obsession to reach the tower didn't really start until after their palaver.
Again, it's been a long time so I may be mis-remembering the details.
Hearts are tough, she said, most times hearts don't break, and I'm sure that's right . . . but what about then? What about who we were then? What about hearts in Atlantis?
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
