Slashdot Mirror


King's Dark Tower Series To Be Adapted For Film, TV

Kozz writes "Universal Pictures and NBC Universal Television Entertainment have closed a deal to turn Stephen King's mammoth novel series The Dark Tower into a feature film trilogy and a network TV series, both of which will be creatively steered by the Oscar-winning team behind A Beautiful Mind and The Da Vinci Code. 'The plan is to start with the feature film, and then create a bridge to the second feature with a season of TV episodes. That means the feature cast — and the big star who’ll play Deschain — also has to appear in the TV series before returning to the second film. After that sequel is done, the TV series picks up again, this time focusing on Deschain as a young gunslinger.'"

238 comments

  1. the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The last two books are going to be kind of tough to put on the big or small screen...

    1. Re:the last two books by lgw · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      The last two books are going to be kind of tough to put on the big or small screen...

      Not compared to making a movie of Running Man that was close to the story! That's one movie that won't be made in my lifetime, given [rot13 spoiler="ending"]Gur ureb syvrf na nvecynar vagb n fxlfpencre[/rot13].

      I've thought that every movie ever made from a King book has been crap, far worse than the normal adaptation decay, but maybe that's just me.

      --
      Socialism: a lie told by totalitarians and believed by fools.
    2. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Yeah... The Shining, It, Stand By Me, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile... pure crap! What the fuck ever, douchebag.

    3. Re:the last two books by c0d3g33k · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Touche. People remember the bad adaptations, but there have been a number of excellent ones. Too bad hollywood's interest is high enough that much of their King adaptation work has been shovelware, the source material is certainly not at fault.

    4. Re:the last two books by JeffSpudrinski · · Score: 1

      There are many bad adaptations, even with King himself directing...remember the horrendous "Maximum Overdrive"?

      However...the two television adaptations of his works that were excellent were "The Shining" (the one starring Steven Weber as John Torrance, not Jack Nicholson) and "The Stand".

      "The Stand" was brilliantly done, and while there were a few creative licenses taken, stuck extremely close to the brilliant novel he had written.

      It took me three tries to read "The Stand" when I was a teenager. Every time I started to read it, I caught a cold and had to stop. (not much of a spoiler there...)

      Just my $0.02.

      -JJS

    5. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The last two books are going to be kind of tough to put on the big or small screen...

      Not compared to making a movie of Running Man that was close to the story! That's one movie that won't be made in my lifetime, given [rot13 spoiler="ending"]Gur ureb syvrf na nvecynar vagb n fxlfpencre[/rot13].

      I've thought that every movie ever made from a King book has been crap, far worse than the normal adaptation decay, but maybe that's just me.

      Crap? One of the best movies of all time is from a Stephen King short story you might of heard of - The Shawshank Redemption. Not to mention The Shining, Stand by Me, The Green Mile. Yes, there has been some crap (ie Maximum Overdrive) but all in all he has written many stories that have been made into great films. And while I've always wanted to see The Dark Tower series as movies, there's no way it will be done well - just too much story there.

    6. Re:the last two books by Nephilium · · Score: 1

      Just a note here... It was a TV mini-series adaptation (which the TV adaptations of King's work usually hold up well). While Stand By Me and The Shawshank Redemption were both based on novellas instead of novels.

      I'd say The Shining (movie version), and Green Mile are both the exception, rather then the rule.

      Nephilium

    7. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The man in black fled across the desert and the Gunslinger followed.

      Hell-motherfucking-yeah, bitches. Bring that shit on.

    8. Re:the last two books by localman57 · · Score: 1

      If you like that, you should read the stuff that follows. It's nearly as good.

    9. Re:the last two books by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      I actually liked Maximum Overdrive for what it was: A zombie-style horror movie with mechanical devices taking the place of the zombies.

      Perhaps if I'd read the book I would have found it appalling?

    10. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you like that, you should read the stuff that follows. It's nearly as good.

      Touché!

    11. Re:the last two books by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      The Langoliers was one horrible mini-series adaptation, but I think that was mostly because of the extremely bad special effects with regard to the langoliers themselves.

      They used low-budget CG (TV quality) in a time when even big-budget CG was terrible for anything remotely large on-screen.

      The rest of the show was OK - not fantastic, but not horrendous either.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    12. Re:the last two books by oldmac31310 · · Score: 1

      I seems to remember the Langoliers as being hilariously crap. So bad it was good and compelling despite all of its flaws.

      --
      http://www.acetonestudio.com
    13. Re:the last two books by JeffSpudrinski · · Score: 1

      It was based on a short story which was much creepier and less in the "jump in surprise" type of thing.

      If he hadn't said it was based on that particular story and just said it was an original movie, it would have been better received.

      -JJS

    14. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, and they should have made the blind girl sexier.

    15. Re:the last two books by Bassman59 · · Score: 4, Funny

      The man in black fled across the desert and the Gunslinger followed.

      Next time add "Spoiler Alert!"

    16. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod parent +1 Funny. The Dark Tower came out in 1982. Oh, and mod me -1 Whoosh while you're at it.

    17. Re:the last two books by domatic · · Score: 1

      Well I did love the "You're not running! You're scampering!" bit.

    18. Re:the last two books by Skim123 · · Score: 1

      "The Stand" was brilliantly done, and while there were a few creative licenses taken, stuck extremely close to the brilliant novel he had written.

      Really? I agree that the adaptation wasn't bad, but I thought the acting and soundtrack left a lot to be desired. And the casting decisions were questionable, especially having Kareem Abdul-Jabar and King himself making cameos. Also, they never were able to really connect the viewer - emotionally or visually - to the wasteland of the world after the plague. I agree it would be hard to do on the small or big screen, as those aren't as impressive as one's imagination, but given that several of King's books have translated excellently to the big screen, I was disappointed by this mini-series. But perhaps that's what one is to expect from a TV production, at least one back in the 90s.

      I thought IT was a better small screen adaptation - much better acting.

      The main problem with King's novels, in my opinion, is that he spends all this time in character development and setting up the plot, then rushes headfirst into the conclusion. The Stand, for instance, should have been 2,000 pages. Having the whole thing wrap up in the last 100 pages or so was a travesty. (Likewise for IT.)

      --

      I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

    19. Re:the last two books by mweather · · Score: 1

      The only reason the Shining didn't suck is because Kubrick made it. The Mick Garris series sucked. Only about 6 of the 60 or so King movies/TV shows didn't suck, and most of those are due to exceptional directing or acting, not the underlying story.

    20. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I read the stand when swine flu was all over the news. Let's just say I could have chosen a better time...

    21. Re:the last two books by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Oh, and mod me -1 Whoosh while you're at it.

      Mod feature request up! Can we have a -1 Whoosh negative, non-karma-affecting, mod as the counterbalance to +1 Funny?

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    22. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those all sucked compared to the books or stories they were based on. Guess you would have had to read them.

    23. Re:the last two books by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The man in black fled across the desert and the Gunslinger followed.

      Next time add "Spoiler Alert!"

      the most ironic missed spoiler alert ever (don't think about it too hard if you are or will be reading the books)

    24. Re:the last two books by wondafucka · · Score: 1
      I'm doing you a huge favor when I say that the ending just loops around to the beginning.

      There are lots of little interesting moments interspersed with overly long passages of junk. I think that Hollywood might actually be doing us all a favor with this one.

  2. Bout. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fucking. Time!

  3. It seems to me by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

    That even with the TV seasons thrown in it's just not enough time. It seems likely we'll end up with something that has the depth of the animated Lord of the Rings movie. Stephen King may not have the depth of Tolkein, but The Dark Tower deserves better.

  4. Excited by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

    I'm excited. This sounds like it will be the first thing on TV I'll have cared about in a long time. Hopefully. I'm trying not to get my hopes up yet, but I guess we'll see.

    --
    Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
  5. I was just thinking about this by drewsup · · Score: 2, Interesting

    the other day.. Jack Palance in his prime would have the best gunslinger. I cant think of anyone else today who could fill this role Either way, this will be a waaaayyyy bigger undertaking than The Stand.

    1. Re:I was just thinking about this by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 1

      Stephen King has said Clint Eastwood's 'Man with No Name' was his model for Roland Deschain. Obviously unless they do some insane CGI that's not going to happen. My guess would be a little known actor would be the best pick for the role.

      --
      I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    2. Re:I was just thinking about this by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I agree that a little known actor would be good; I also think that such an actor is more likely to take the role, since it is a multi-year, multi-outlet commitment to the part. I also pray that they do not try to soften the character or pick someone who is at all soft and fuzzy.

      On the other hand, as long as Shia LaBeouf stays the fuck away from the movie, I'll be happy.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    3. Re:I was just thinking about this by corbettw · · Score: 1

      Clancy Brown could do it. He's about the right age, too, around 50 or so. Roland of Gilead was a bit younger than that in the books, I think, but given how hard his life was you'd expect him to look bit worse for the wear.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    4. Re:I was just thinking about this by c0d3g33k · · Score: 1

      Clint could still pull it off.

    5. Re:I was just thinking about this by Tobenisstinky · · Score: 1

      "Happy halloween ladies! aaarahahaha"

      --
      wha'? where am i?
    6. Re:I was just thinking about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Roland of Gilead was a bit younger than that in the books"

      Really? I thought he was supposed to be at least hundreds of years old (except the flashback book, of course).

    7. Re:I was just thinking about this by Fred+IV · · Score: 1

      Viggo Mortensen could probably pull off Roland. I always thought of Palance as more of the man in black type. Clint should get a part somewhere to pay respect to how much of an influence his early work had on the series, but I can't see him wanting to sign up to do all three movies plus a miniseries as a major character.

    8. Re:I was just thinking about this by jchernia · · Score: 1

      Yul Brenner maybe? "The Wolves of the Calla" and "The Magnificent Seven" are roughly the same story.

    9. Re:I was just thinking about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What about Clint being Rolland's teacher? He looks like the perfect fit.

    10. Re:I was just thinking about this by T.E.D. · · Score: 1

      So the role requires someone who can stand around and not emote one single bit no matter what happens around him? Obviously it would be perfect for Keanu Reeves then.

    11. Re:I was just thinking about this by DirePickle · · Score: 1

      You just jinxed it. Shia will play Eddie. I hope you're happy.

    12. Re:I was just thinking about this by Reality+Master+101 · · Score: 1

      Stephen King has said Clint Eastwood's 'Man with No Name' was his model for Roland Deschain. Obviously unless they do some insane CGI that's not going to happen. My guess would be a little known actor would be the best pick for the role.

      You know, I'd be okay if they did a CGI Clint to make him younger, and used motion capture with the real Clint. I don't know if they could really pull it off, but it would be a worthwhile experiment.

      This man IS Roland. Who else has that granite weather-chiseled face?

      --
      Sometimes it's best to just let stupid people be stupid.
    13. Re:I was just thinking about this by StalinsNotDead · · Score: 2, Funny

      Maybe he'll play Sheemee?(sp?)

      --
      Thanks to the internet, we can now all die alone together! -SomeWoman
    14. Re:I was just thinking about this by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 1

      Clint as Cort would be awesome, but I think a better tip of the hat would be to have him as the farmer Roland meets first in the very first book.

      --
      I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    15. Re:I was just thinking about this by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Viggo... Definitely Viggo Mortenson.

      That seems to be his type-cast role of late, some sort of bleak guy wandering around bleak things, and being generally bleak.
       

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
    16. Re:I was just thinking about this by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As much as I like Clint he's just too old to be a good Roland now.
      Now a young Clint, sure, he'd be a great Roland, perfect even.
      Alas, the world has moved on.

    17. Re:I was just thinking about this by nanospook · · Score: 1

      How about Richard Simmons? Just picture it! Go ahead I dare you!

      --
      Have you fscked your local propeller head today?
    18. Re:I was just thinking about this by Painted · · Score: 1

      In reading this I was wondering who could pull this off, and Clancy Brown hadn't even popped up on my radar, but I agree, he could do it quite well. Good call.

      --
      http://marsandmore.com - Posters of space, spacecraft, and astronomy.
  6. Very Tricky Translation to Make by ImprovOmega · · Score: 1

    There's so much material there though, how could you possibly adapt it even into 7-films without leaving newcomers behind?

    I mean, the TV series piece will be helpful, but that's asking for a large time investment for someone that wasn't already a big fan of the books. I am cautiously hopeful though, and even if this is just something that ends up being for the fans it could be great fun for a season.

    They did do a pretty good job a few years back translating Nightmares and Dreamscapes to the small screen *fingers crossed*

    1. Re:Very Tricky Translation to Make by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think that releasing the first Movie before the show is a move to get a general audience into the TV show. Look at popular TV shows like Lost or Prison Break. Millions of people bent over backwards to catch each episode. The movie should bring a larger pilot audience and curb the "Did you see that?" "No but I will" water cooler type catchup audience.

    2. Re:Very Tricky Translation to Make by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      There's so much material there though, how could you possibly adapt it even into 7-films without leaving newcomers behind?

      Skip "Wolves of the Calla"? :)

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    3. Re:Very Tricky Translation to Make by Selivanow · · Score: 1

      I was kind of hoping for a movie series of the Dark Tower, but I really wanted it to be a movie per book, a la Harry Potter; only actually worth watching.

      --
      -- ...trying to make digital files uncopyable is like trying to make water not wet. -Bruce Schneier
    4. Re:Very Tricky Translation to Make by HereIAmJH · · Score: 1

      Skip "Wolves of the Calla"?

      There are parts of 'Wolves' that are important for later parts of the story. But there are probably parts of each of the books that could be eliminated. I personally didn't care how King brought himself into the story line in the later books.

      --
      Another day, another update to a Google android app.
  7. Never read by Pojut · · Score: 1

    I'm a big King fan, but I've never read this series...often wondered if it's worth getting into. Any opinions/advice/suggestions?

    1. Re:Never read by sscroggins · · Score: 1

      Personally I think that it starts off great, has a pretty so so middle and a decent (though not amazing) end. Definitely read the first two, though. Very good.

    2. Re:Never read by tulmad · · Score: 1

      The fifth book was my favorite of the whole series.

      --
      "In case of emergency, break glass. Scream. Bleed to death."
    3. Re:Never read by Meostro · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think it's some of King's best work. It's worth reading at least one to see if you're into the series. The first one is harder to get into than the rest.

      I read The Wastelands first. It reminded me a little of The Stand, but with more detail around Roland (main dude) and less background on what's going on in the world. It was interesting enough that I decided to go back and see what I'd missed.

      Tried to read The Gunslinger and got bored after a little while - there are a few other characters, but it's mostly two dudes in the desert. The Drawing of the Three was more in the vein of Wastelands, and from there I blazed through each book as soon as it came out.

      You may not realize it, but you've seen glimpses of the DT universe through most of King's books.

    4. Re:Never read by wytten · · Score: 1

      If you like Stephen King, and don't mind reading long serials while getting the feeling that nothing will ever be resolved to your satisfaction, I'd say go for it.
      In my case I gave up after a book or two because I personally don't like the feeling that nothing will ever be resolved to your satisfaction.

    5. Re:Never read by ADRA · · Score: 1

      The first 3-4 books are absolutely amazing. If you like the Gunslinger (which shouldn't take that long to read) the other 3 will be fine. Books 5-7 are ok, but there were times for me that it definitely stepped out of the realm of wow and into something else entirely. That's not to say they were bad, just um different.

      --
      Bye!
    6. Re:Never read by ooshna · · Score: 1

      YES that is the only answer.

    7. Re:Never read by tulmad · · Score: 1

      Definitely pick up at least the first book. I was hooked after that one and had to finish the whole thing.

      --
      "In case of emergency, break glass. Scream. Bleed to death."
    8. Re:Never read by Pojut · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the responses, everyone. I know what I'm loading up on my nook tonight!

    9. Re:Never read by corbettw · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "The man in black fled across the desert and the gunslinger followed."

      If that first sentence doesn't grab you, don't bother with the rest of the book. If it does, then go for it; you'll never regret it.

      --
      God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
    10. Re:Never read by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      You're not a King fan until you've read The Dark Tower series. It's his masterpiece.

    11. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I find it to be his best work. It is epic and all encompassing with characters he puts in a lot of his different novels.

    12. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      mayhaps you should read it, because if you don't mordrid will kill you... and she's A HONGRY!

    13. Re:Never read by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

      The first book is great though it has a different feel from a standard King book. The rest are good, but uneven in their own way. After a while, they get downright weird. The best parts are when Roland (and the other travellers) are in his world. When he spends too much time in other places, it just doesn't work for me. The ending (or endings?) are good, and it wraps up the story IMHO, YMMV.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    14. Re:Never read by Inner_Child · · Score: 1

      That sentence still gives me chills every time I read it, even now, 20 years after the first time I picked up The Gunslinger... If anyone's on the fence: If you've read his other work, you'll probably get a glimpse into it from Mid-World -- or a glimpse into Mid-World from it. It's not Tolkien, but it's very good. Unlike most people, I *loved* the ending, but YMMV.

      --
      Today is red jello day - all workers must eat all of their red jello. Failure to comply will result in five demerits.
    15. Re:Never read by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 1
      It is, but you have to understand King's Dark Tower series is his Magnum Opus, and half of his books are integrated into the Dark Tower mythos in some way. Buick Eight, Eye of the Dragon, The Stand, Hearts in Atlantis, Salem's Lot and a bunch more are intertwined. It's pretty incredible.

      Like I said in a post further down, it's good until book six, then does a left turn at Albuquerque. Still good, and you'll want to finish it, but does not live up to the hype. I think King pushed making the key and it didn't come out right.

      --
      I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    16. Re:Never read by Mad+Hamster · · Score: 1

      Go for the original version of "The Gunslinger", not the revised one King published after otherwise finishing the series. Though the latter has more consistency with the other six volumes, the original version is told better and is a greater read. Oh, and if you're anything like me, prepare to be captivated, you'll want to read it all in one sitting.

      --
      Yandelvayasna grldenwi stravenka
    17. Re:Never read by localman57 · · Score: 1

      Agreed. Read the original. More generally, read the edited verison of any of his books, not the unedited. The unedited sometimes have other interesting side characters, but he also tends to go all George Lucas where he needs someone else to tell him when Enough is Enough.

    18. Re:Never read by Dorkmaster+Flek · · Score: 1

      I agree with others who say take a chance on the first couple books. However I offer one additional bit of advice. Track down the revised version of the first book. It flows smoother, and a few plot elements are changed so they mesh with the later books properly. The first book was literally one of the first novels he wrote, and it shows in the original version. The revised version is far superior.

      --
      I like to think of online DRM as something akin to a college -- you pay for lessons until you learn something.
    19. Re:Never read by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      The Dark Tower series was good, but I liked Insomnia & Black House just as much.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    20. Re:Never read by Dorkmaster+Flek · · Score: 1

      Funny you should mention that. The fifth book has possibly my single favourite scene in the entire series when Roland does the rice dance.

      --
      I like to think of online DRM as something akin to a college -- you pay for lessons until you learn something.
    21. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hah. You probably chose wisely if you are looking for closure...

    22. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I really feel that the final ending sucked for such a great series.

    23. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Didn't "The Man in Black" shoot the gunslinger in Reno? Just to watch him die.

    24. Re:Never read by Bassman59 · · Score: 1

      You may not realize it, but you've seen glimpses of the DT universe through most of King's books.

      All of King's books occupy the same universe. Especially in his earlier work, he references himself a lot. Which is good.

    25. Re:Never read by Skim123 · · Score: 1

      You may not realize it, but you've seen glimpses of the DT universe through most of King's books.

      You could say that.

      --

      I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

    26. Re:Never read by SolarStorm · · Score: 1

      There are lots of positives, here is one that says "dont waste your time" /* Spoilers */

      It is some of Kings best and worst work. Where as most great works start of shaky and gain strength. Kings hits hard and strong in the first half, then crashes and burns. There are plot disconnects. Deux et Machina are a plenty even as the books themselves discount it as a cheap writers trick.

      I personally am disappointed with myself for paying money for the last couple of books, but I kept thinking, it has to get better, the start was so strong, this is just a build up to a fantastic finish. And then the cork fell out of the gun...

      We never see a stand off between Flag the ultimate bad guy, and Roland. In fact Flag is killed "out of hand" a long with a myriad of other characters. As a reader I want to be rewarded for investing my emotion into hating the bad guy. He deserves to die at the hands of hero in an epic confrontation.

      I probably just dont understand the ending, and maybe he even did it first, but the whole, "it was a dream" didnt work for me. The fact that there was nothing in the dark tower, except memories could have been quite powerful, but to cause a reset because he didnt pickup the bugle? just lame. In the end the 7 books to get to the dark tower didnt mean anything. I think because King didnt know what it was either.

      I predict that this will turn into another Lost ending (if it survives)

    27. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i think you have forgotten the face of your father

    28. Re:Never read by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      If a good ending is what you like, I'd say steer clear of Stephen King altogether. As far as I can tell, his standard M.O. is to write as many characters as he can dream up and send them dawdling along little side-quests until he realizes he's written too many words, then kill them off in unsatisfying ways and call the book done.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    29. Re:Never read by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      You're not a King fan until you've read The Dark Tower series. It's his masterpiece.

      Years ago, around the time The Waste Lands came out, I kept hearing what a masterpiece this series was. I'd only read one short story by King (Survivor Type), found it amazing (ghastly, but amazing), so I picked up The Gunslinger.

      I thought it read like something written by a high school student, and it turned me off to King's work.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    30. Re:Never read by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      Ironically enough, The Gunslinger was written when King WAS a high school student! :)

      That being said, I think King would even agree with your assessment, which is why he re-wrote a huge chunk of that book and re-releasing it a few years ago.

    31. Re:Never read by arb+phd+slp · · Score: 1

      read the first sentence in a bookstore as a kid. It was the large paperback with the color plates. Couldn't leave without it. Spent my allowance on it instead of whatever I'd actually gone in to get.

      --
      There's a perfect xkcd for my sig but I'm too lazy to look it up. sudo someone go find it.
    32. Re:Never read by Mr.+Slippery · · Score: 1

      Ironically enough, The Gunslinger was written when King WAS a high school student! :)

      Aha! Score one for my assessment skills. :-)

      That being said, I think King would even agree with your assessment, which is why he re-wrote a huge chunk of that book and re-releasing it a few years ago.

      Interesting. I may give it a second chance, then. Thanks for the information.

      --
      Tom Swiss | the infamous tms | my blog
      You cannot wash away blood with blood
    33. Re:Never read by Nyder · · Score: 1

      You're not a King fan until you've read The Dark Tower series. It's his masterpiece.

      That god. I stopped being a King fan a few decades ago.

      Think it was around the book "It". It was just, so crappy, i could never go back.

      Like a lot of writers, he lost the drive & hunger he had back when he wasn't as famous.

      --
      Be seeing you...
    34. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "Go then. There are other worlds than these."

    35. Re:Never read by runningman24 · · Score: 1

      >

      Like a lot of writers, he lost the drive & hunger he had back when he wasn't as famous.

      Yeah, that's pretty much nonsense. Like a lot of critics who don't know what they're talking about, you haven't read/watched the very material you're criticizing.

      My favorite is people who tell me a movie sucked because they fell asleep in the first 15 minutes.

    36. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And everyone who likes the DT series should give "The Eyes of the Dragon" a read as well.

    37. Re:Never read by CronoCloud · · Score: 1

      And bad, because it means Salem's Lot is full of Vampires (because "one for the road" takes place after) and that "It" isn't dead because two Tommyknocker altered people saw Pennywise in Derry after the "Losers" supposedly destroyed "It".

    38. Re:Never read by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The man in black fled across the desert and the gunslinger followed."

      If that first sentence doesn't grab you, don't bother with the rest of the book. If it does, then go for it; you'll never regret it.

      http://www.money4home.ws/ income for life with gdi

  8. This has suck written all over it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    TV miniseries has to be the lowest form of entertainment. I'd rather watch the local junior high community theater production.

    1. Re:This has suck written all over it. by Pojut · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Band of Brothers called...they told me to tell you "piss off".

    2. Re:This has suck written all over it. by eln · · Score: 1

      On the contrary, I don't think networks do the miniseries thing nearly enough. When you have a finite work that wouldn't fit into a 2 hour movie, a miniseries is the perfect treatment for it. These days, the solution tends to be to either cut all the good stuff out and make an incomprehensible 2 hour movie or try to make the material into a multi-season series where you have to add tons of filler if it gets popular because the original source material was too thin or the planned story arc too short for that many episodes (see: Lost, also arguably the third season of Battlestar Galactica).

      Just like with any format, there have been really great miniseries and some really tragically terrible ones. You can't say the entire format is bad because it can be used to make bad works though.

    3. Re:This has suck written all over it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Band of Brothers called...they told me to tell you "piss off".

      Haw, pwned!

    4. Re:This has suck written all over it. by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

      TV miniseries has to be the lowest form of entertainment. I'd rather watch the local junior high community theater production.

      Yeah, it's right up there with "seasons" for story-based shows. Preposterous, nobody would want to watch that crap.

    5. Re:This has suck written all over it. by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      The Pacific was pretty damn good, too. The Pelileu airfield charge, Snafu tossing pebbles into the open head of a dead Japanese soldier and many other scenes really make it a miniseries worth watching and remembering, up there with much of Band of Brothers.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
    6. Re:This has suck written all over it. by Painted · · Score: 1

      Really? I hated* The Pacific- apparently the Pacific campaign was primarily a few brief firefights, lots of R&R, psych stays, and sitting about in a camp.

      I knew it was in trouble when the series started with all the home life stuff; Band of Brothers was about a group who were thrown together in jump school, and formed a camaraderie due to the trials they went through- and how astonishing those trials were.

      The Pacific's message seemed to be "war is upsetting and some people had issues with it". /shrug. Maybe I just missed the point, but everyone I know who has seen both considered BoB astonishing, and Pacific was tedium to sit through.

      --
      http://marsandmore.com - Posters of space, spacecraft, and astronomy.
    7. Re:This has suck written all over it. by Nidi62 · · Score: 1

      A few brief firefights? You do realize those troops spent 3-4 months at a time in those islands? 3-4 months of combat, in tropical heat and weather. And you do realize the basis behind the miniseries, right? Band of Brothers was a book written off of interviews and official government documents. The Pacific is taken solely from war-time diaries of Sledge and one or 2 other men. And about the whole "why are we fighting"/psychological portrayal of the Marines in The Pacific, that is because the war in the Pacific was drastically different than the war in Europe. The Germans didn't use human wave attacks, or coerce their civilians to commit suicide rather than go over to the Americans. The shows are so different because the experiences of the men were different, the nature of the combat was different, and the effects on those that fought were so different between the two theaters.

      --
      The only thing necessary for evil to triumph is for it to be pitted against a slightly greater evil
  9. Encouraged by al0ha · · Score: 1

    I'm encouraged by the fact it is Ron Howard slated to direct; however that said, I think this initiative has no better than a 50/50 chance of being any good. It is quite impossible to duplicate the in depth pictures that King paints in your mind on the big screen. With the exception of The Shining, which was a pretty good screen adaptation, though of course pales on comparison to the book, all King screen adaptations have pretty much sucked. Need I mention The Stand? And that is only one book, good luck with Dark Tower Ron.

    Do you ken filmslinger?

    --
    Did you ever wake up in the morning, with a Zombie Woof behind your eyes? -- FZ
    1. Re:Encouraged by blair1q · · Score: 2, Insightful

      So you're saying a picture may be worth 1,000 words, but not 100,000?

    2. Re:Encouraged by Pojut · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I dunno...The Langoliers was pretty good, despite (or possibly because) it's campy script and hammy acting.

      Also...are you forgetting Carrie?

    3. Re:Encouraged by Pojut · · Score: 1

      (or possibly because of)

      its

      Fixed.

    4. Re:Encouraged by ADRA · · Score: 1

      Shawshank Redemption, Stand By Me, and Green Mile are all on my somewhat short list of great movies. I personally liked Dream Catcher, but I can understand why some wouldn't love it. The stand was made as a 4 part mini-series and the book was 1200 pages, so yeah they cut corners. The dark tower series is around 3000? pages and being made as three movies and a series. That sounds like a lot more breathing room. More importantly though, this story was King's baby ever since he started writing. He won't let someone step in and make a crappy adaptation. He's been dealing with TV/Movies long enough to know what works and what doesn't.

      --
      Bye!
    5. Re:Encouraged by MozeeToby · · Score: 1

      Funny that you should choose The Shining as a good screen adaptation. King himself has said that he hated it, that Kubrick made too many large changes to the story, and that it wasn't a good adaptation. I think what you meant was that it's a good movie that was based on Kings book, but that doesn't necessarily make it a good adaptation. Personally, I'd be more interesting in a good rendering of The Long Walk, a book which I found to be an almost pathological mix of interesting and repulsive. Like watching a semi jackknife on a busy highway.

    6. Re:Encouraged by MRe_nl · · Score: 1

      The Long Walk, can you imagine, that would be one exhausting movie.
      I prefer the Bachman books to all his other work, and the Long Walk is one one my favourite stories ever. I had very much the same reaction to it you did.
      Maybe it's just me, but the whole series of Bachman-book stories have some of the harshest social/psychological observations i have read in fiction. Me like.
      And i would love a "real" Running man by say Ridley Scott or Paul Vehoeven, hold the Arnold.

      --
      "Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
    7. Re:Encouraged by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      With the exception of The Shining, which was a pretty good screen adaptation

      Actually, Kubrick's The Shining was an absolutely terrible film adaptation, if faithfulness to the source material is what you're looking for. Stephen King was so blinded with rage by what Kubrick did to his novel that he couldn't see the movie for what it was: fucking awesome. So he had to go and let them do a TV version and... well.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    8. Re:Encouraged by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "It"

      Although it left a lot of the book out, Tim Curry played an excellent Pennywise.

  10. Sigh... by pedantic+bore · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I give it until Blaine the Mono, and then the audience will be distracted and wander off and the project will be cut.

    Well, maybe they'll jiggle the timeline a little and do Wizard and Glass first. That would actually make a decent movie.

    --
    Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    1. Re:Sigh... by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Blain the Mono was one of my favorite parts.

      If you've read the series, then you know the time-line comes pre-jiggled. I'm not sure how you could get away with jiggling it much further without fucking things up.

      It's also good to have read a lot of King's works when going through The Gunslinger series - it's King's "connect everything together" work, like Asimov did with the Foundation novels.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    2. Re:Sigh... by RMingin · · Score: 1

      Blaine is a pain, and that is the truth.

      Marvel is doing a very nice and very, very authentic translation. They started with W&G, I believe. It's working out very very nicely so far. They've also got a King-approved-and-guided added section, connecting the end of W&G to the Incident with Roland's mother and the Grapefruit. It's a nice little thing.

      The first movie should be Young Roland, his training and Trial, and Susan, the Barony of Mejis, and the journey home. The first movie should end with Roland's mother. The first miniseries/series should cover the walk through the desert, finally catching up to Walter, and falling asleep. The second movie should cover the beach, the Doors, and entering Lud. The second series should cover the riddling and journey..... Ah crap, I ran out of movie/show to schedule. There's too much left.

      This is a monstrous task. I hope the crew and producers are up to the challenge.

      --
      The preceding comment is my own, and in no way construes an opinon of the Emperor of Mankind.
    3. Re:Sigh... by pedantic+bore · · Score: 1

      Blain the Mono was one of my favorite parts.

      Tastes differ.

      I saw the jokes coming a hundred pages away, and I think that without a strong element suspense, King's works don't have as wide of an appeal.

      --
      Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
    4. Re:Sigh... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope they at least do that part. That way I can skip the book and keep reading the rest of the series. I realize i'm in the minority but I really couldn't care less about what Roland was like as a child, or what he did.

  11. follow the author's wishes by rev_sanchez · · Score: 1

    Skip the last episode.

    --
    If you didn't come to party don't bother knocking on my door. Prince '1999'
    1. Re:follow the author's wishes by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what the author's wishes really are. I can't say that I trust what they write at the end of a book, telling you not to read the rest of it, when they went ahead and wrote the extra bit. If they didn't want us to read it, then he should not have written it. So, either it's a ploy or he's undecided about it himself.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    2. Re:follow the author's wishes by Bassman59 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure what the author's wishes really are. I can't say that I trust what they write at the end of a book, telling you not to read the rest of it, when they went ahead and wrote the extra bit. If they didn't want us to read it, then he should not have written it. So, either it's a ploy or he's undecided about it himself.

      King knew that his intended ending was going to piss off the millions of readers who waited almost 30 years for it. So he gave you the option to enjoy the tale up to that point, or proceed. I thought it was brilliant.

  12. Epic (or not)? by grayn0de · · Score: 1

    While I must say that I am pretty stoked about this news, I must also say that, while I understand the point of using a TV series as a bridge between feature films, I am a little dissappointed with the decision to go this route. Call me old fashion, but wouldn't it be more epic to have like 6-9 full length films? There is more than enough material in the books for that and IMHO the film adaptations should not stray from the books like most others. This project should be as epic as the book series.

    1. Re:Epic (or not)? by ADRA · · Score: 1

      /spoilers:

      You

      have

      been

      warned

      King's got to be around to play himself, nay? With him being around 63, its hard to guarantee that he'll be around another 7 or so years to play his part in the films. By the rate that films are made and aired it could be another 12 years from now before we could see the final film.

      --
      Bye!
    2. Re:Epic (or not)? by Beezlebub33 · · Score: 1

      I disagree. There are lots of side stories, back stories, etc. Eddie's back story does not need to be fully told in the movies, but would be fine in a series. A series of stories set in Roland's world, adventures of the gunslingers, the battles between Flagg's army and the gunslingers, training of the gunslingers, etc. would be interesting in their own right. The connection to the movies would not be direct storyline, but filling in the rich world that King has envisioned.

      --
      The more people I meet, the better I like my dog.
    3. Re:Epic (or not)? by grayn0de · · Score: 1

      King's got to be around to play himself, nay? With him being around 63, its hard to guarantee that he'll be around another 7 or so years to play his part in the films.

      I don't think him getting to be 75 is terribly far fetched. Hard to guarantee, yes, but not impossible. Now, will he be coherent enough for cameos at 75? Tough to say.

      By the rate that films are made and aired it could be another 12 years from now before we could see the final film.

      Now THAT would keep it true to the books! Or perhaps more like 22 years? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Tower_(series)

    4. Re:Epic (or not)? by SolarStorm · · Score: 1

      I read about King enough in the books to ruin what started off as very promising. I don't need his self egotistical therapy on screen as well.

    5. Re:Epic (or not)? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      wouldn't it be more epic to have like 6-9 full length films?

      Yeah, it would. But if they tried to do that, we wouldn't get 6-9 full length films. We'd get maybe two films and then someone up top pulls the plug because it's not making assloads of money, or one of the main actors gets bored or dies.

  13. Excited and Terrified by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 1

    Excited to finally get to see it on the big screen to see my imagination come to life. Terrified they will destroy it so badly that I will sulk away in horror.

    Personally I thought it started coming off the rails in book six and book seven basically threw away the build of the first four books plus how much backfill from The Stand, Salem's Lot and Eye of the Dragon.

    --
    I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    1. Re:Excited and Terrified by ADRA · · Score: 1

      To be fair, he did write those novels and others with kernels of the gunslinger, not the other way around. You are right though. The series did start to languish near the end though.

      --
      Bye!
  14. Excited and scared by rvaniwaa · · Score: 1

    The Dark Tower series is my all time favorite series of books and I have read them all multiple times. I worry about how it will adapt to both the big and little screen although the adaption of The Stand did fairly well. It is a huge story and I love it all (except for the last half of the last book).

    --
    main(i){(10-putchar(((25208>>3*(i+=3))&7)+(i ?i-4?100:65:10)))?main(i-4):i;}
  15. Won't take long to form an opinion by perpenso · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm a big King fan, but I've never read this series...often wondered if it's worth getting into. Any opinions/advice/suggestions?

    Take a risk on the first paperback or go to the library. My recollection is that unlike other books(*) you will get a sense of the story and style pretty quickly. If you like what you are reading keep going.

    (*) As for book that don't really reveal themselves for a while I'd have to refer to Dune. Friends told me how great it was so I started reading. I pushed myself for the first third or so wondering what the hell the attraction was. Now while reading the second half I could not put the book down. Years later when I reread the book I loved the first half too. It was only after I had the big picture did I fully appreciate the rich and detailed social and environmental background information. This was all before the movie and miniseries so perhaps today fewer readers will stumble as I did.

    1. Re:Won't take long to form an opinion by localman57 · · Score: 1

      I'd say take a risk on the first two. The first one is a quick read, but is very much his early writing style where the characters are kind of stark, black and white with detail purposefully omitted in the shadows. The second is more representive of the tone the rest of the books take, with a more indepth, colorful character development.

  16. Re:Just what we needed by MozeeToby · · Score: 5, Interesting

    If it proves popular I can't wait to see people's reaction to the ending (those that aren't familiar with it). It'll make everyone's disappointment in the Lost and Battlestar Galactica finales look like indifference. I know people who are still pissed off about everything that happens after the "don't read past this point" warning. Personally, I laughed out loud at the ending since it basically came down to with thing: "Ka is a wheel bitches! Deal with it."

  17. the creative team is middle of the road by circletimessquare · · Score: 3, Interesting

    we need wacky and out there for this material

    ron howard: apollo 13, a beautiful mind, the davinci code

    akiva goldsman: lost in space, batman & robin, i robot

    eh

    they are excellent filmmakers and producers and writers with a spectacular run of success with solid well-done pop fare and are well-regarded and appreciated

    but they have strolled into psychedelic territory here

    a story like the dark tower needs a stanley kubrick, a david lynch, a martin scorsese, maybe even a tim burton: a master of the theatre of the macabre and absurd

    not these middlebrow crowd pleasing hollywood mainstream guys

    for something like the dark tower, we want week old road kill roasted over an oil drum fire by a paranoid schizophrenic hobo. we don't want olive garden

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
    1. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by dyingtolive · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd rather Dark Tower not get "Burtoned". The biggest problem with a Tim Burton film is that if you've ever seen 5 minutes of one, you can immediately identify any other movie he does in an equal amount of time. I'm not saying they're bad (except Nine), I'm just saying that his penchant for the surreal is 1-dimensional. Kubrick, Scorsese or Lynch would be interesting though.

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    2. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by Inner_Child · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, Kubrick would definitely be interesting, considering he's been dead for over a decade. I can see the headlines now: First Film Directed By Zombie Nominated for Oscar!

      --
      Today is red jello day - all workers must eat all of their red jello. Failure to comply will result in five demerits.
    3. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      I meant moreso willing to tackle the movie in the same way as him. This forces my next question: Would a award given for a film directed by a zombie have to be given posthumously, or would the zombie have to die first?

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    4. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by bigdan69 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'd rather Dark Tower not get "Burtoned". The biggest problem with a Tim Burton film is that if you've ever seen 5 minutes of one, you can immediately identify any other movie he does in an equal amount of time. I'm not saying they're bad (except Nine), I'm just saying that his penchant for the surreal is 1-dimensional. Kubrick, Scorsese or Lynch would be interesting though.

      This, plus I don't think Johnny Depp would make a good gunslinger.

    5. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by Jaknet · · Score: 2, Interesting

      for something like the dark tower, we want week old road kill roasted over an oil drum fire by a paranoid schizophrenic hobo. we don't want olive garden

      Amazing description and, to my mind, fits perfectly

    6. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nor Helena Bonham Carter a good Susannah.

    7. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Jeunet...?

    8. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by MonsterTrimble · · Score: 1

      Maybe not a good gunslinger but Johnny playing it straight in the role of Randall Flagg would be pretty awesome.

      --
      I call it 'The Aristocrats'
    9. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by dyingtolive · · Score: 1

      C'mon, I'm picturing it now: Abruptly alternating between doing funny slackwristed crap with his hands and staring off miles away while monologuing nonsensically. TOTALLY sounds like Roland of Gilead to me. Plus that one song Danny Elfman wrote would make a GREAT soundtrack!

      :(

      --
      Support the EFF and Creative Commons. The war is coming, and they're supporting you...
    10. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by Inner_Child · · Score: 1

      Now, I like Depp, but from that description, he would make a *great* Sheemie!

      --
      Today is red jello day - all workers must eat all of their red jello. Failure to comply will result in five demerits.
    11. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by Bassman59 · · Score: 1

      Jeunet...?

      YES!

    12. Re:the creative team is middle of the road by louisfreeman · · Score: 1

      I am going to fully agree with this. Three movies full of that "week old road kill roasted over an oil drum fire by a paranoid schizophrenic hobo" please. Now the next Q: How will they put 7 books with so many sub stories, climaxes, details etc .... into three movies. Peter Jackson did it with LOTR but I have a hard time seeing anyone doing this with the dark tower. The audience would have a very hard time understanding unless the stories were simplefied, condensed into something understandable (please don't!).

  18. I feel another Rumming Man coming by ooshna · · Score: 1

    I feel that if the TV series are actually going to be part of the real story of the book it is going to be a raped and destroyed vision of the books. There is no way they can capture the the full story if they have to limit themselves to a pg-13 rating. There are way too many parts that when described in the book had you stuck unable to put it down. Unfortunately a lot of those parts will become watered down to the point of unwatchability if they are made for regular TV. Just imagine the fight between Roland and his teacher Cort. Or how crummy the CGI will be when he looses his fingers. Hell I'll be surprised if they do Blane the Mono any justice at all. Believe me I am all for a series of movies (done like Harry Potter one/two movies per book) or a TV series (if it was on Showtime or HBO) but I think it being on NBC will just cut the legs right out from under it.

    1. Re:I feel another Rumming Man coming by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      Or the Oracle. How will PG-13 deal with Roland being raped by a demon, who takes his seed, and then rapes Suzannah to impregnate her?

  19. GDI NOOOO! by Beelzebud · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If it's not done as a series of R-Rated movies, in the spirit of how Lord of the Rings was done, then I don't see how anything good can come of this....

    The Dark Tower is my all-time favorite series of books, and I'm appalled to read this....

    It would need 3-4 3-hour R-rated moves, and Clint Eastwood at 30 years old, to play Roland.

    1. Re:GDI NOOOO! by EggyToast · · Score: 1

      Funny, considering the LotR movies were rated PG-13.

    2. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      I wasn't suggesting they were R-Rated movies. What I was trying to say was that at least LotR dealt with what was in the books. It didn't need to be R-Rated. However, doing Dark Tower on TV, I just don't see how it could be done in the spirit of the books.

    3. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I pretty much agree -- I don't see how you could really do Dark Tower (or as much of it as I read... I fell off when he stopped writing them for a while and haven't gotten around to going back yet) justice on normal TV.

      Probably a HBO series setup like A Game of Thrones is getting would be the best fit.

    4. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      Why wouldn't it be done as a series of R-Rated movies? There are also plenty of TV-MA series/mini-series on television.

      I'm not sure why you're concerned at this stage.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    5. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Scroatzilla · · Score: 1

      I think Josh Holloway (Sawyer, of Lost fame) would be pretty good.

    6. Re:GDI NOOOO! by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      It's funny, if HBO picked up every show that "really should be on HBO," they'd never be able to fit it into a 24 hour schedule. Personally, I think that if more basic cable stations were less skittish about "what would the advertisers think?", then the advertisers would thank them.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    7. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I agree, although probably not more than a few of them have enough of an audience to make the kind of highish-budget-to-do-halfway-right shows we're talking about.

      I mean, I know some people looooove the old-school-BBC style of "let's take a story that should be made with a real budget and make the thing for 100 euros and half a can of Spaghetti-Os instead" shows, but to most American audiences, including myself, they're barely watchable at best.

    8. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Sir+Foxx · · Score: 1

      Josh Holloway will do just fine in Eastwood's place. Don't misunderstand me, Eastwood at 30 for this, there is no better casting choice for this role. Since that isn't going to be possible, Holloway will do.

      --
      "I don't which is worse, that everyone has a price, or that the price is always so low"--Hobbes
    9. Re:GDI NOOOO! by guyminuslife · · Score: 1

      I was thinking, specifically, of the Sandman adaptation that is supposed to be happening at some point in the near future. That's an arty kind of show that needs a large budget and a lot of creative freedom, if it's going to be made at all. The point being, that there are a lot of potential adaptations of existing material, and I'm sure plenty of brilliant new material, that demand this kind of treatment. I think one of the basic cable stations (AMC, USA, FX) could get quite a bit of mileage by fielding late-evening R-rated dramas.

      --
      I don't believe in time. It's a grand conspiracy designed to sell watches.
    10. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Crudely_Indecent · · Score: 1

      Hugh Jackman!

      --


      "Lame" - Galaxar
    11. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Amen!!!

    12. Re:GDI NOOOO! by Mongoose+Disciple · · Score: 1

      I was thinking, specifically, of the Sandman adaptation that is supposed to be happening at some point in the near future. That's an arty kind of show that needs a large budget and a lot of creative freedom, if it's going to be made at all.

      No doubt -- especially with Neverwhere as Exhibit A of trying to do Gaiman on the aforementioned "100 euros and a can of Spaghetti-Os budget" old-school BBC style. Ugh.

  20. The have forgotten the face of their fathers by RiddleofSteel · · Score: 1

    Ugh, when JJ Abrams and the Lost writters were attached to this I had hope that they could actually do this thing justice. While Ron Howard is alright, really not overly impressed with him, akiva goldsman IS HORRIBLE. The guy completely sucks and guarantees this is going to be an abomination. Such a shame too because the book are amazing. As for the Movie to TV split, very interesting way to come at it, but only if the tv show is on HBO, wattered down regular tv is not going to cut it.

    1. Re:The have forgotten the face of their fathers by Beelzebud · · Score: 1

      After seeing how Lost ended up, I'm GLAD those asshats don't have anything to do with Dark Tower.

    2. Re:The have forgotten the face of their fathers by RiddleofSteel · · Score: 1

      Well they wouldn't have a lot of leeway to rewrite the ending I would think, so nothing to worry about there. Also alot of people compared the endings to those two epic series. While I was really disappointed in the ending of Lost, I have to adminit they kept me riveted every week for 6 years and that says something.

    3. Re:The have forgotten the face of their fathers by dbIII · · Score: 1

      Lost writer: As the group walk along the ridge they come accross a [rolls dice, looks up table] polar bear!

  21. The last few books stink. by Gotung · · Score: 1

    The first three books were very good. Wizard and Glass was amazing. After that the series fell off a very sharp cliff.

    This is one instance where I seriously wouldn't mind if hollywood completely re-wrote the story when doing the later half of the series.

    1. Re:The last few books stink. by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

      I completely disagree more. King likes to do weird shit, and that's what makes him popular.

      Frankly, Song of Suzanna has been my favorite so far, almost a toss-up with Wizard and Glass. I have yet to read the 7th book though.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    2. Re:The last few books stink. by Gotung · · Score: 1

      My thoughts before I read the last one was somewhat inline with yours. #7 is garbage, and it infected my opinion of #5 and #6 retroactively as I realized how the self indulgent incoherent garbage wasn't something new, but had been seeping into the series after #4.

  22. Re:Just what we needed by c0d3g33k · · Score: 1

    Indeed. My new rule is that good writers are separated from the bad (aka hacks) by their ability to devise a good ending to the story they started. Hint: There are few good ones, particularly in television. It's probably no accident that many writers in television today also contribute to the comics medium. I love comics, but they aren't exactly known for wrapping things up and declaring it done.

  23. Howard directing the TV series.... by NiteShaed · · Score: 1

    TFA: It seems hard to fathom he'd direct a full season's worth of episodes, but that is the early plan, and who says they have to do 22 to create that bridge to the next film?
    Well duh. They should obviously only do 19.

    --
    Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
    1. Re:Howard directing the TV series.... by DaedylusSL · · Score: 1

      If I recall correctly, when King and company made Kingdom Hospital a few years ago, the same guy directed all 11 episodes (13 TV-hours). It's a TON of work for one guy to do, but if Ron Howard thinks he can get it right, I say go for it.

    2. Re:Howard directing the TV series.... by DaedylusSL · · Score: 1

      Sorry. 13 episodes, 15 hours.

    3. Re:Howard directing the TV series.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...woosh

      Don't feel bad, you would have needed to read pretty far into the series to get the joke.

  24. Re:I feel another Running Man coming by ooshna · · Score: 1

    Exactly even if they don't show the actual act itself it would go well beyond pg-13 to even just show the shadows and sounds.

  25. Re:Just what we needed by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

    Indeed - I can't say that I enjoyed the ending, but I can certainly see that it was the only ending possible. And *man* will people be pissed off if they end the movie trilogy the same way.

  26. Re:Just what we needed by Abcd1234 · · Score: 1

    Funny, I thought the ending was perfect. How the hell else would you have the series ended? Happily Ever After? Maybe Roland settles down with a nice lady and has a couple kids and an SUV?

  27. and then there is Chuck by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

    The writers seem to wrap-up things very nicely at Episode 13 and then at the season finale. Basically because they are never sure if the show will be back. It makes them move things along. And no freakin' awful season long arc crap.

    BTW, Season 4 premieres 9/20 in the States. Again, only 13 episodes were ordered.

    1. Re:and then there is Chuck by Omestes · · Score: 1

      Chuck sucked the last season. I probably won't be watching the next.

      It turned into some stupid cliche drama-romance crap, and had all the geekish humor sucked from it. I'm sick of romantic tension, it is nothing but a cover for bad writing, and more often then not is the only thing that drives most modern television shows. Often it seems you reach for the overbearing romantic tension card when you have long run out of plot ideas. Its the jumping the shark for the 21st century.

      Sure, a little romantic tension can be a nice thing, but when your whole "hook" is "will he get the hot girl who obviously has feelings for him" you pretty much failed. I stopped caring at some point. "Will Chuck finally get the girl?" stopped mattering, the only reason I watched past that point was for the potential of hot Scott Bacula action, and Casey. Sadly the "will he get the girl" thing is the ONLY thing they've done last season.

      Though for some reason I don't mind it as much in Castle, though after 4 seasons this might be different.

      --
      A patriot must always be ready to defend his country against his government. -edward abbey
  28. Canceled in Season 2 by abe+ferlman · · Score: 1

    With so many outstanding series were canceled after only two seasons, like Firefly, Deadwood, and countless others, is there any hope that the same might happen here? The first Dark Tower book was outstanding, and the next three were all right. The last few were bizzare self-indulgent crap where King appears to have simply transcribed his therapy sessions in the wake of his being hit by a van. The man has never written good endings, let's hope the studios do it for him this time.

    --
    microsoftword.mp3 - it doesn't care that they're not words...
    1. Re:Canceled in Season 2 by jchernia · · Score: 1

      > The last few were bizzare self-indulgent crap where King appears to have simply transcribed his therapy sessions in the wake of his being hit by a van.

      Agreed, writing himself into his own novel was *weak*. I also thought he borrowed far too heavily from Harry Potter in the last one.
      The first 3 were great, I really liked the 5th as well (4th was good, could have been its own novel). Way downhill on the 6th and 7th.

    2. Re:Canceled in Season 2 by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

      With so many outstanding series were canceled after only two seasons, like Firefly, Deadwood, and countless others, is there any hope that the same might happen here?

      Easy.

      King has enough clout now to demand that if the studio fails to follow through and cancels the TV portion they would be liable for a set penalty that would be equal to the ad revenue for a successful show. Therefore they would have no incentive to try and play the margins by cancelling this show for one which might earn a % more.

      That, and this:

      This will be shown later at night. It would fit in somewhere after the key prime time shows due to content. OR would go to a place like Showtime or HBO.

      --
      Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
    3. Re:Canceled in Season 2 by SolarStorm · · Score: 1

      I have never read anything that had so much potential at the start and went down hill so far and so fast. My hope is that this new format will retain the "theme" of books. Loose the SK reference entirely and rewrite a decent ending. I also hope they treat the antagonists with a little more respect than SK did. to have an ultra antagonist for 6 books only to have him die in a random encounter with another antagonist, with confrontation with the protagonist is flawed just a little bit. Unless the other antagonist turns out to be the real mega. but alas the spider turns out to be trivial as well.

      Sorry for the rant

      I am excited by the format, howard, and initial concept. But this is one that I hope they deviate DRASTICALLY from the latter half of the books.

    4. Re:Canceled in Season 2 by Bassman59 · · Score: 1

      I have never read anything that had so much potential at the start and went down hill so far and so fast. My hope is that this new format will retain the "theme" of books. Loose the SK reference entirely and rewrite a decent ending. I also hope they treat the antagonists with a little more respect than SK did. to have an ultra antagonist for 6 books only to have him die in a random encounter with another antagonist

      I thought Walter's ending was excellent. Why does the Baddest Bad guy of all have to die in spectacular fashion? That's standard trope.

    5. Re:Canceled in Season 2 by SolarStorm · · Score: 1

      This was the guy that Roland chased across the world, in the end, he didn't even know that he met his end. References were dragged in about him being flagg from the stand. The build up of the character was huge. In the end, he provided no insight or satisfaction to the hero. It made no difference really. I just showed how the whole story was a running creation with no overall story arc thought out. Walter simply became a loose end (like many others) that were simply dropped. I also couldn't figure out the dialog shift. I read these a while ago so can't remember which book it was, but, they went from speaking normal to that strange farm dialect for the rest of the series. He explains that Roland picks up dialects, I can understand that. But then he should also loose that dialect in the next book.

  29. This reads like by Hadlock · · Score: 1

    This reads like, "we have a plan that cannot fail! let me outline how we will plan to suck all the life and joy out of King's story while generating the greatest profit possible in a series of alternating movies and made for TV movies^H^H^H^H 1 hour TV drama seasons".
     
      Stephen King has sort of thrown in the towel and is happy to let the visual media butcher his stories in the past, while people buy his the books to understand what the hell directors were trying to convey. I don't see this being any different this time around. There's an opportunity to tell this story in a series of 7 or 8 movies, or as a 7 season TV series, but alternating between the two is a recipe for disaster, as Serenity has taught us.

    --
    moox. for a new generation.
    1. Re:This reads like by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Serenity was a failed (for various reasons) TV show that after great begging and a surprisingly good DVD series release (this being the driving reason) lead to a movie to wrap things up. There was no back and forth with movie then show then movie. I love the Firefly show and it wasn't a half bad movie either but face the facts, it flopped in everything but it's DVD release (again, for various reasons).

      If anything Star Trek has shown this can work with it's show then several movie lineup then show(s) then again with the several movie lineup. I'm only worried about retention of the actors. Star Trek managed this by using a cast of B level actors (or less) and building them as actors and characters in the shows meaning the executives of the show had the most power in contract negotiations (in the beginning). Then as the show grew the actors would get paid more by virtue of more income coming to the show. When the movies are ready for casting it's not hard to know if it will be a blockbuster or bust so contract negotiations are easy. Again as the movies gain more audiences everything grows naturally. What the article describes could put the studio at the disadvantage when negotiating contracts. If the movie is a smash hit, the main actor (Roland in this case) could demand tons of money for the lower budget TV show forcing the studio to A) take it or B) recast Roland. "B" being what I fear thanks to the 90s Batman fiasco.

    2. Re:This reads like by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Agreed, it sounds like that Star Trek crap all over again with movies, series and spin-offs. It was a total disaster; nobody liked any of it, ever.

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    3. Re:This reads like by LanMan04 · · Score: 1

      Stephen King has sort of thrown in the towel and is happy to let the visual media butcher his stories in the past

      Actually that's not true. He was that way UNTIL "The Shining" movie came out, which he absolutely HATED. I believe he said it's the only adaptation of his works that he's truly hated.

      that it's a bad movie, but that it completely destroys King's narrative and characterizations.

      "Stephen King has been quoted as saying that although Kubrick made a film with memorable imagery, it was not a good adaptation of his novel[17] and is the only adaptation of his novels that he could "remember hating".[18] It has been noted that prior to this King often said he didn't care about the film adaptations of his novel.[19]"

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Shining_(film)#Response_by_Stephen_King

      --
      With the first link, the chain is forged.
    4. Re:This reads like by Hadlock · · Score: 1

      Actually, I was referring to the abysmal "The Stand" TV miniseries - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stand_(TV_miniseries)">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Stand_(TV_miniseries) It's kind of hard to find since the DVD is out of production (with good reason) but if you need an example of how bad Stephen King TV miniseries can be, this is a good starting point to write your dissertation on the subject.

      --
      moox. for a new generation.
    5. Re:This reads like by Skim123 · · Score: 1

      It's kind of hard to find since the DVD is out of production (with good reason)...

      If you don't mind wasting two spots in your queue, you can the two-disc mini-series from Netflix.

      --

      I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

    6. Re:This reads like by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      it flopped in everything but it's DVD release

      Actually, it did very well in TiVo ratings as well, but at the time the studios were ignoring these entirely in favour of Nielsen ratings.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  30. Re:Just what we needed by Kintalis · · Score: 1

    Heh, good point. My initial reaction was "Thank you Roland! But our princess is in another castle!"

    I admit I was disappointed by the ending at first, but on thinking about it, it was probably the most sensible way for it to have ended. To the extent that sense applied to those books in the first place, at least. I otherwise enjoyed the books quite a bit.

  31. Yes by NiteShaed · · Score: 1

    Especially if you're a big King fan. I don't want to give things away, but King references his other books quite a bit (more in the later parts of Tower), which I thought was a lot of fun. I would also recommend reading Hearts in Atlantis, The Talisman and Black House first if you haven't read those. Not necessary, but Dark Tower is more fun if you have.

    One of the things that used to keep people away was that it seemed like it'd never be finished. Now that it has an ending, I'd definitely say take a look.

    I disagree with the sibling posts though. Personally I liked the later books more than the early ones, but of course that's just a personal preference.

    --
    Some bring out the best in others, some the worst. Some bring out far more.
  32. Re:Just what we needed by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

    I also loved the ending very much, both the first and the second (post-warning). Both could are logical endings to the series.

    *** Spoiler Alert ****

    A small point: IIRC (I don't have the book near me), in the "reincarnation" he has with him his friend's horn - so it isn't exactly a wheel, some small detail changed and it gives hope that things will end differently. Should we say "ka is a spiral"?

    --
    Whenever in an argument, remember this.
  33. Re:Just what we needed by MozeeToby · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Don't get me wrong, the ending was perfect. The whole 7 book uber-novel is about two things, the journey to the tower and Roland's character development from heartless asshole bent on revenge to someone his companions could put trust in. From a literary standpoint, it's pretty clear that those two elements are meant to be connected, Roland only ever gets closer to the Tower when he puts his faith in others, helps others, sacrifices for others, etc. (spoiler) Since his character development wasn't complete (his obsession over the tower still overpowered his love for his companions) it doesn't make sense that he should reach the tower either. The idea that Roland has been living the events of the novels over and over again, each time gaining a tiny piece of humanity back (or maybe sometimes not even succeeding that much) is a very powerful idea from a literary standpoint. Of course, try telling that to people that feel they got cheated out of an ending that they read a few thousand pages to reach and they just don't seem to appreciate it.

  34. Re:Just what we needed by localman57 · · Score: 1

    My new rule is that good writers are separated from the bad (aka hacks) by their ability to devise a good ending to the story they started.

    Michael Criton is king of the hacks this way. He comes up with interesting starts and middles, then the end is always that the problem gets solved by some dues ex machina. It's like he read War of the Worlds, and based an entire career on that ending type.

  35. Re:Just what we needed by MozeeToby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    See, I took at as implied that not only will Roland relive the events again, but that he has already lived them many, many times, each time earning (or failing to earn) a small piece of his former life (symbolizing his humanity) to take with him. Maybe the first time he didn't have his original guns, or his hat, or his coin, etc. Roland is doomed to repeat the cycle endlessly until he has enough of his humanity to value his friends over his search for the Tower, the items from his past are meant to remind him off all the people that he's lost due to his search for the tower and other mistakes. I suppose it's possible that he'll eventually do so, but in my imagination it will take dozens of repetitions to do so (even assuming he earns something each time); maybe "Ka is a wheel, but you have a choice to get off from it" would be more accurate.

  36. Re:Just what we needed by timster · · Score: 1

    That's funny, I just found a new rule that good Slashdot commenters are separated from the bad by their ability to see the world as shades of grey and fine distinctions, rather than dumping everything into buckets of "good" and "bad".

    Also, the ending was perfect.

    --
    I have seen the future, and it is inconvenient.
  37. Re:Just what we needed by puto · · Score: 1

    Ahh,in case you did not know, he died two years ago. As far as hacks go he was a Harvard MD and a his background was based in hard science. Most people enjoy a happy ending with a problem solved. Not everything has to play out like a French movie.

    --
    The Revolution Will Not Be Televised
  38. It could happen by GodricL · · Score: 1

    It should star the cast of Arrested Development. "Go then, there are other worlds than these... and in these worlds you can get the Cornballer for only $29.99! Come on!"

  39. Say what??? by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

    ... a happy ending with a problem solved. Not everything has to play out like a French movie.

    What world are you living in? A french movie with a happy ending and a problem solved? I thought the French invented the muddy, unhappy, wtf ending.

    BTW, I have met way too many Harvard grad idiots.

    1. Re:Say what??? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      Yes, that is why he said that not all movies end like French films, some have a happy ending with a problem solved. Did you go to Harvard by any chance?

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    2. Re:Say what??? by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

      No, he said, "Not everything has to play out like a French movie." To me, that implies that all French movies end that way.

       

      Did you go to Harvard by any chance?

      I gotta remember that, the next time someone says something stupid. ::grin::

    3. Re:Say what??? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      If I said "Some people like hamburgers. Not every meal has to be hot dogs." - that isn't implying that hot dogs are hamburgers. He said that some people like happy endings, and the "Not everything has to play out like a French movie" meaning that films with happy endings are the opposite of French movies, or, these films do "not play out" like a French movie. It seemed pretty clear to me that he was implying that French movies do *not* have happy endings. But YMMV.

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
    4. Re:Say what??? by mwvdlee · · Score: 1

      Two possible ways to interpret a sentence and you choose the one that made the other guy sound stupid. What does this say about you?

      By the way, I read it as "it's okay to have a happy ending, not every movie has to have a sad ending like french movies do"

      --
      Slashdot social media options: AIM, ICQ, Yahoo, Jabber and Mobile Text. Why no MySpace?
    5. Re:Say what??? by macbeth66 · · Score: 1

      ARG! I must have gone to Harvard!!! My apologies, you are quite right.

      I should just be barred from slashdotting after an all-nighter+.

      Never mind...

    6. Re:Say what??? by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

      If we deleted all the posts that happened after all-nighters, over half of Slashdot would disappear instantly!

      No worries...

      --
      "But this one goes to 11!"
  40. Akiva Goldsman? by wienerschnizzel · · Score: 1

    will be creatively steered by the Oscar-winning team behind A Beautiful Mind and The Da Vinci Code

    Which means Ron Howard and Akiva Goldsman. While I have nothing against Howard, Goldsman is a terrible choice. His greatest achievements are not screwing up Sylvia Nasar's book (A Beautiful Mind) and not making Dan Brown's novels any more ridiculous than they are (Da Vinci Code, Angels and Demons). On the other side we have such pearls of storytelling as Batman and Robin, Batman Forever and, more recently, a bunch of really cheesy episodes of Fringe.

    I think I'll pass on this one

  41. Re:Just what we needed by wilder_card · · Score: 1

    I agree. Sorry I have no thoughtful philosophical analysis to go with that statement.

  42. Re:Just what we needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Not sure that it was the only ending possible. I'd agree that it was the only ending one could expect King to write, given how enamored he was of the opening line of the first book. (I think he called it the greatest opening line in any book ever written, or something like that. *Of course* he used it as the closing line.)

    The reason the ending bothered me (aside from being singularly unsatisfying) was that it pretty much destroyed the premise of the entire seven-book series. The driving force for the whole plot was that the Dark Tower was in terrible danger, and the universe along with it, right? So, after Roland, et al., destroy the baddies and save the Tower and the world, the Tower essentially shrugs and says, "Eh, do it again." WTF? Was the world in danger or not? If so, then why repeat it? If not, then why bother caring about anything Roland does? Seems to me that an author ought not betray his own plotline that way.

    (Personally, I go with the "he just wanted to re-use that opening line" theory. Too bad he didn't do a better job of it.)

  43. NOOOO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    They beat me to it! I've been meaning to write a screen-play to the Gunslinger for about 5 years now, but what with school, work, etc... Well, hopefully they do a better job then I would have done.

    "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed."

  44. Re:Just what we needed by localman57 · · Score: 1

    I enjoy happy endings wtih problems solved. But one where there's some reason the problem got solved. In most of his books, the major problem gets solved independent of the actions of the main characters. I do agree, though, that he does a good job presenting new things to the public. As I say, he writes a great 67% of a book.

  45. Re:Just what we needed by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 1

    How can you know the ending when the series isn't finished yet?

    --
    Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
  46. Re:Just what we needed by Mister+Whirly · · Score: 1

    I also thought the ending was decent. Now the ending to It on the other hand....

    --
    "But this one goes to 11!"
  47. furthermore by circletimessquare · · Score: 1

    when zombie charlton heston says we can have his oscar when we pry it from his cold dead hands... is that redundant?

    --
    intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
  48. English Lesson by Seraphim_72 · · Score: 1

    Stephen King's mammoth novel

    There is a redundant statement here can you see it?

    --
    Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
    1. Re:English Lesson by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, the first Dark Tower was much shorter than any of the others. A tight, compelling story that doesn't really resemble any of the others, or much of King's later books. Not to say the later ones are bad, just a whole lot thicker.

  49. Re:Just what we needed by IndustrialComplex · · Score: 1

    That IS an interesting way to look at it. It makes it all the more interesting when you think about what he sacrificed just before he literally lost a piece of himself on the beach.

    --
    Out of modpoints but really liked a post? 1BDkF6TtmmeZ3yqXbz9yhdYVqRYnwFoXDj
  50. Re:Just what we needed by Rudeboy777 · · Score: 1

    It wasn't quite as you say - remember, young Roland was in possession of the horn in the reset that occurs at the end of the final book. It gives the reader hope that the outcome may be different on the subsequent attempt.

    I appreciated that detail, but I realize I'm one of a tiny minority of fans that liked the ending.

    --

    From hell's heart I fstab at /dev/hdc

  51. Re:Just what we needed by Spills · · Score: 1

    The reason the ending bothered me (aside from being singularly unsatisfying) was that it pretty much destroyed the premise of the entire seven-book series. The driving force for the whole plot was that the Dark Tower was in terrible danger, and the universe along with it, right?

    Roland did save the Tower (and the universe). The point was that saving the Tower was never really Roland's goal, he was obsessed with completing his quest to what he thought the ending should be (reaching the top of the tower) and thus (possibly) doomed the universe again. I thought King tried to link Roland's obsession with getting to the top of the Tower to the obsession some readers have for a satisfying ending. Or something like that :)

  52. please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...dont fuck this up. thanks

  53. I wonder if they will do the scene... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where the hero masturbates. Probably not.

  54. Re:Just what we needed by Bassman59 · · Score: 1

    My new rule is that good writers are separated from the bad (aka hacks) by their ability to devise a good ending to the story they started.

    Michael Criton is king of the hacks this way. He comes up with interesting starts and middles, then the end is always that the problem gets solved by some dues ex machina. It's like he read War of the Worlds, and based an entire career on that ending type.

    Remember the movie, "Adaptation" (which was brilliant)? The Brian Cox character teaches a screenwriting class, and he says, "Do NOT use a goddamn Deus Ex Machina!" (And if you've seen the movie, you know how that advice is taken.)

  55. Re:Just what we needed by Bassman59 · · Score: 1

    It wasn't quite as you say - remember, young Roland was in possession of the horn in the reset that occurs at the end of the final book. It gives the reader hope that the outcome may be different on the subsequent attempt.

    I appreciated that detail, but I realize I'm one of a tiny minority of fans that liked the ending.

    Another fan of the ending here. I thought it was absolutely brilliant, and that detail is very important. And I also thought, "there are a LOT of King fans who are saying, 'I waited 25 years for THIS?'" Which I'm sure he was very aware of ...

  56. Re:Just what we needed by Skim123 · · Score: 1

    remember, young Roland was in possession of the horn in the reset that occurs at the end of the final book. It gives the reader hope that the outcome may be different on the subsequent attempt.

    Maybe, but probably not. It seems like after a second or two he had already forgotten about the events that had just transpired and was back to the narrative of The Gunslinger.

    Have you seen the movie Triangle? If you liked the ending you may like that movie.

    --

    I could not justify my existence if I were a turkey farmer. Would I terminate myself? Undoubtably, yes.

  57. Re:Just what we needed by thePowerOfGrayskull · · Score: 1

    Indeed - the picture I came away with was that it changes for the better just a little bit every time through.

  58. TV shows in countries other than the US ? by louisfreeman · · Score: 1

    How will the TV shows be handled in countries other than the US. I live in the Netherlands. We will probably get the movies in the movie theaters. I doubt the TV series will broadcast here at the same time as in the US. Usually it takes months if not years for TV shows to appear on TV here. So most likely We will see movie #1, then a long wait of nothing, see movie #2, the first TV series may (or not) start airing here. Then we get movie #3 and then after a long wait .... TV series #2. Point: it will be all out of sync. Just curious how that will be handled.

    1. Re:TV shows in countries other than the US ? by machxor · · Score: 1

      How will the TV shows be handled in countries other than the US. I live in the Netherlands. We will probably get the movies in the movie theaters. I doubt the TV series will broadcast here at the same time as in the US. Usually it takes months if not years for TV shows to appear on TV here. So most likely We will see movie #1, then a long wait of nothing, see movie #2, the first TV series may (or not) start airing here. Then we get movie #3 and then after a long wait .... TV series #2. Point: it will be all out of sync. Just curious how that will be handled.

      Just curious; if you go to nbc.com -> Watch Video do you see localized content (does NBC even exist in your market?) or do you see the same things I do or maybe nothing at all?

    2. Re:TV shows in countries other than the US ? by louisfreeman · · Score: 1

      I probably see the same thing as you. My point is. Many people will see the movies outside the US. They may very well never know that a large part of the story is told on a different medium. How many will find their way to a website, an illegal download etc... whatever it takes to see those two in-between parts? I would say, make three, heck, four movies if that is what it takes.

  59. Re:Just what we needed by cusco · · Score: 1

    Damn, I'm glad I actually read this far in the thread or else I might have wasted time reading the books. Or at least starting them, I've never managed to plow very far through the page after page of dreary tedium in the King books that I've had pushed at me. Dreadful stuff, worse than Hemmingway even.

    No sarcasm implied.

    --
    "Think about how stupid the average person is. Now, realise that half of them are dumber than that." - George Carlin
  60. Compared to George Martin by lymond01 · · Score: 1

    So I started reading the Gunslinger series when I was a kid -- I think the first book is from the 70s or something. It's a good read, very Stephen King, each book is kinda out there in its own way with no shortage of imagination. Very Epic.

    I'll say that the unfinished Song of Ice and Fire series by George R.R. Martin is coming to HBO soon. More character-driven than Lord of the Rings, it's a great fantasy series. I know Robert Jordan's series the Wheel of Time is popular, and I did read the first book. But it didn't pull me in like Martin's, and I didn't continue reading it. Perhaps I missed out. Martin's writing is fantastic and his delivery perfect. I can only hope the TV show is 1/10th as good.

  61. Re:Just what we needed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Spoiler alert: The Dark Tower is the seventh, and final book of novelist Stephen King's Dark Tower series, published by Grant on September 21, 2004 (King's birthday), and illustrated by Michael Whelan.

  62. Re:Just what we needed by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

    Kevin J Anderson is better at it. Masses of buildup, then more buildup, then (two pages from the end), the good guys have a massively anticlimactic victory, along the lines of a battle that lasts half a page, or the bad guys just giving up and saying 'sorry' and the book ends.

    --
    I am TheRaven on Soylent News
  63. Re:Just what we needed by Random+BedHead+Ed · · Score: 1

    Thanks for that. It's a great interpretation. I had wondered about the fact that he had the horn in the new loop.

  64. Re:Just what we needed by QuantumBeep · · Score: 1

    Spoiler alert.

    To add a critical detail, the plot was resolved in the middle of the last book. The tower was saved when the Beams were saved. The rest is icing.

  65. Re:Just what we needed by QuantumBeep · · Score: 1

    If you think books are much about their endings, you are missing out on a lot.

  66. But... by zoom-ping · · Score: 1

    Will it be as good as Garth Marenghi's Darkplace?

  67. Re:Just what we needed by Kilrah_il · · Score: 1

    If you don't like SK, then fine, what is your point? I don't like many authors, but I don't think it interests anyone (except maybe the women I date) what authors I like and dislike.

    --
    Whenever in an argument, remember this.
  68. Re:Just what we needed by Jaknet · · Score: 1

    It wasn't quite as you say - remember, young Roland was in possession of the horn in the reset that occurs at the end of the final book. It gives the reader hope that the outcome may be different on the subsequent attempt.

    I appreciated that detail, but I realize I'm one of a tiny minority of fans that liked the ending.

    After reading the ending I would have loved to be able to re-read the story there and then and see what changes due to Roland having the horn this time round

  69. Younger Deschain in the second series? by severn2j · · Score: 1

    So, if Im reading this right, there's a move, followed by a TV series, followed by a second movie and then a second TV series, which is about the younger Deschain, then a final movie.. So, that means the second TV series is Wizard & Glass (the middle book) . So, the three books before that are covered by a movie, a TV series and another movie, but the final three books (and IIRC probably the biggest of the series) are all covered by only one movie.. Seems like they've got some balancing issues here. Surely it would be better to make W&G the middle movie and have a movie and TV series either side to cover the other books?

  70. chjchj by chjchj · · Score: 1

    What a great post! Your article is very http://www.uggbootsale-uk.org/ugg-classic-mini-boots.html nice! It is my pleasure to read your article! I knew little in this part before, Thank you for sharing!

  71. lead actor... by seekertom · · Score: 1

    Gotta find Richard Boone, Paladin, and rejuvenate him. Only guy to play the part of the gunslinger. Just hope they listen to King in keeping things like the books.