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.'"
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.
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...
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.
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*
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?
Living With a Nerd
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
Band of Brothers called...they told me to tell you "piss off".
Living With a Nerd
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?
Skip the last episode.
If you didn't come to party don't bother knocking on my door. Prince '1999'
Yeah... The Shining, It, Stand By Me, Shawshank Redemption, Green Mile... pure crap! What the fuck ever, douchebag.
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.
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'
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;}
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.
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."
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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
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?
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.
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
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...
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
If you like that, you should read the stuff that follows. It's nearly as good.
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
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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
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!"
... 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.
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
I agree. Sorry I have no thoughtful philosophical analysis to go with that statement.
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
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.
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
I also thought the ending was decent. Now the ending to It on the other hand....
"But this one goes to 11!"
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
There is a redundant statement here can you see it?
Slashdot, where armchair scientists get shouted down and armchair theologians get modded up.
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
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
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
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 :)
The man in black fled across the desert and the Gunslinger followed.
Next time add "Spoiler Alert!"
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.)
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 ...
Well I did love the "You're not running! You're scampering!" bit.
"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.
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.
Indeed - the picture I came away with was that it changes for the better just a little bit every time through.
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.
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.
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
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.
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
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
Thanks for that. It's a great interpretation. I had wondered about the fact that he had the horn in the new loop.
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.
If you think books are much about their endings, you are missing out on a lot.
Will it be as good as Garth Marenghi's Darkplace?
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.
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
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?
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.
/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.
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".
http://marsandmore.com - Posters of space, spacecraft, and astronomy.
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
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!
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.
postmodernsideshow.com
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.