The Dark Tower

[3D-Brainx]

Hello all,

I just herd on a local radio show that Sony is planning to take Stephen King's "The Dark Tower" to the big screen in a series of movies (not sure if they are going to be as many as the books). Anyone herd anything about it?

[EXO]

http://deadline.com/2015/04/dark-tower-movie-tv-series-stephen-king-sony-mrc-1201407880/

[Gerli]

The first books where ok... the rest... nah, i didn't like how the story ends..

[anime52k8]

I've only read the first two~three books. should really get around to reading the series someday.

[Valkyrie Hunter D]

I agree with the comments: that it should be done as a series. But Russell Crowe as Roland? I don't see it.

And yes, the ending should be changed. Maybe this will give King his chance to redeem his self-admitted weak end to an epic story.

[Phobos]

The first books where ok... the rest... nah, i didn't like how the story ends..

This. I was so disappointed with the inclusion of himself, plus the characters spontaneously changing the way they spoke. Not to mention all the loose ends King left.

[Dobber]

Most overrated series, IMO. A guy at work told me to read them....and how they changed his life, they were so incredible. Man it was tough reading them all. Got to the end and was like, meh. I did kind of like book 4....the flashback book. It was pretty heartbreaking.

As for Roland...I always pictured Bill Nighy. Roland was supposed to be older wasn't he, and I thought how Bill Nighy looked in Underworld fit the older, gaunt, with piercing blue eyes that Roland was described as. Though he is too old now.

Overall I can see myself liking the potential films more than I liked the books....much like the Lord of the Rings. Books are meh to me but I really liked the movies.

Chris

Edited April 11, 2015 by Dobber

[seti88]

 

[Mazinger]

I had a hard time getting though lots of parts of these King books so I was doubtful at first when I heard this project was actually moving forward.  This looks interesting.  I like McConaughey as the man in black.  Kinda wish Idriss was using his natural English accent though.

[Thom]

Never read the books or even heard much about them. Looks interesting. Like Elba. Real cool character.

[TangledThorns]

I never read the book as well. There has been so much hype to the book I guess I expected something bigger.

[kajnrig]

The books were better-written than this. Certainly less hammy. I feel no qualms skipping this.

[Mommar]

I wonder how the movie will turn out.  By book 5 I just couldn't continue.  It was a great concept but it took Stephen King too long to write and it was obvious he didn't have it planned as was making it up as was going along (and losing his mind as he did it.)

[bob joe mac]

Looks like it has very little to do with the books, Character names and places etc, I did like the books for the most part until the 6th and 7th where a absolutely moronic twist happens that IMO ruined the story which had been a solid read up until that point. 

I usually bring up the Dark Tower series as a example of sometimes NO ending is better then a BAD ending. (Although the VERY end was fine just the preceding 600 pages were garbage)

Movie looks meh cool fantasy world abandoned for another NYC fight. I'll wait for the reviews.

[Golden Arms]

I read all of the books and definitely looking forward to this.  Elba and  Matt McC will bring it.  The only part of the books that didn't work for me was the fourth wall stuff.  But other than that an entertaining read.

[Big s]

I'm interested, but will wait for reviews.

[Roy Focker]

Don't know a thing about the books.  The trailer looked like it was trailer for the coolest remake of the "Last Action Hero" that I've ever seen.  

[Ghadrack]

The Very End of the book,  is what I understand explains why it seems there are some discrepancies in the story / characters and allows them a little artistic freedom to modify things a bit, if this is a prior or later incarnation of the endless quest of Roland.  That may just be fan speculation, but it would make sense to me so they don't end up trapped in a GRRM like " you didn't copy page 48 exactly like it was in the book" sniveling festival of the hyper fans.

[Phobos]

It looks good-ish. I dislike the stylized/super show-ey reloading sequence, but unfortunately that what Hollywood thinks the people want. I may see this, depending on what other book readers say. If I had no idea what The Dark Tower was, or had read any of the connected books, i'd probably give this a pass. 

[kajnrig]

1 hour ago, Ghadrack said:

The Very End of the book,  is what I understand explains why it seems there are some discrepancies in the story / characters and allows them a little artistic freedom to modify things a bit, if this is a prior or later incarnation of the endless quest of Roland.  That may just be fan speculation, but it would make sense to me so they don't end up trapped in a GRRM like " you didn't copy page 48 exactly like it was in the book" sniveling festival of the hyper fans.

GRRM = ???

From what I gathered of the novels' ending,

It implies that Roland's quest isn't so much endless as just slightly incrementally better each time. At the end of the books, he re-begins his quest, the same old quest as it ever was, but he has the Horn of Eld(?) this time around, implying he'll do a bit better this time around, leading up to what will ultimately be a positive ending and a true safekeeping of the Dark Tower.

This movie's story, if it is part of that spiral, must be a few thousand cycles ahead of or behind the one in the books to account for how different it is.

53 minutes ago, Phobos said:

It looks good-ish. I dislike the stylized/super show-ey reloading sequence, but unfortunately that what Hollywood thinks the people want.

Yeah, those parts were a bit head-slappingly silly. The Dark Tower was a lot of things, but "stylish action" was never one of those things. And Americans in general don't seem to know how to do stylish action very well. For every Marvel movie or LotR there's an Ultraviolet and a dozen Underworlds and all the Resident Evils and The Hobbit.

I saw the Magnificent Seven remake when it came out, and I'd have loved to see gunplay like that in this movie.

EDIT:

Hopefully this fixes the spoiler tags. Really hate that there's no manual editing option...

Edited May 9, 2017 by kajnrig

[sh9000]

 

[kajnrig]

Pfaahahahahahhahahahahahahahahah

oh this movie is going to be terrible

[kajnrig]

It was terrible.

[Mommar]

32 minutes ago, kajnrig said:

It was terrible.

Is that the whole review?

[kajnrig]

I mean... it probably could be, but I just thought it was a funny response to my other post directly above it.

It's hard to pick a starting point for criticism, because everything about this movie is bad in one way or another. I don't really want to give this movie much more thought. That said...

 

This movie is trying to be too many things at once. It's a fish out of water story where both the central protagonists take turns being fish out of water, it's a classical good versus evil story, it's a science fiction story, it's a coming of age story, it's a father and son story... And none of the things that it sets out to be it sees through to completion, save for the very broadest one: The good guy saves the thing from destruction.

There are bits and pieces that standalone could make a good movie, but it's all mashed together into a generic, sanitized PG-13 mold. The gunfights especially feel so limp and lifeless. In the books, they talk about how Roland the gunslinger's guns kick like a mule. The characters equip themselves with 9mm's and other small arms while on Earth, and the story notes how they're noticeably weaker (but less physically taxing as well) than Roland's guns.

This movie treats his revolvers like Hollywood always treats handguns, as little things that you just point and click with. The gunshot sound effects are weak and tinny, and they hit with as little impact as you'd expect of a sanitized PG-13 movie.

The story is dumb, and the "humor" is trying so hard to not try hard. The man in black, who in the novels is a smart, ruthless, and incredibly evil sorcerer, here is reimagined as a plain Jane super-villain, complete with a super-weapon (of the giant sky laser variety), an evil lair, and henchmen. There's a moment on Earth where Roland is popping pills on a bus and two teenage girls ask to join in, and he mutters, "You two have forgotten the face of your fathers," and it falls so flat and is so unfunny that I tried to sink further into my seat. It also makes him come across as a major douchebag.

The movie's climax is a dumb fight between Roland and the man in black, with McConaughey doing a funny as hell miming act while debris and stuff flies at Roland, who shoots bullets at the projectiles. Compare that to the novel, where the two never actually fight, and the man in black gets eaten alive after being forced to tear out his own eyes and tongue.

And then it comes to a point where Roland is nearly defeated, and you think back to his ostensible character conflict the entire movie: he wants revenge against the man in black for killing his father, but his duty is to protect the Dark Tower. Setting aside the fact that these two aren't necessarily mutually exclusive, you think that "Oh, well, now is the moment he makes a decision, either get his revenge or uphold his duty." Except nope, he just gets up, shoots a trick shot that gets the man in black in the gut, and from there empties his revolver, finishing with a headshot. Then he walks to the super-weapon and frees his adopted son figure from it, and the two of them escape and the super-weapon blows up the evil lair.

It's... ugh. And they don't ever get to the Tower. Like, that's one of the core tenets of Roland's character, is that he's obsessively dedicated to not just protecting the Dark Tower, but to reaching it and climbing it. In the first novel, he's nowhere near reaching it, but his obsession with it causes him to let his adopted son figure fall to his death in a mineshaft. And then in the last novel, after losing all his friends and family, horribly maimed, he finally gets to it, and he walks inside.

None of that is in the movie. The Tower doesn't even really matter all that much to him, to any of them, except for being the thing that holds the universe together. It's not anyone's end-goal, it's their means.

The novels are loosely based on a poem by Robert Browning titled "Childe Roland to the Dark Tower Came." (A childe is something like a knight in training.) Both tell a tale that is very mythical in nature. The gunslingers are akin to knights, and the novels weave Arthurian legend into itself. The movie kind of tries this, but half-heartedly. It dabbles in shout-outs, cameos, and references, but it has no vision of the culture and community around those shout-outs, cameos, and references. The gunslinger's revolvers are forged from the Excalibur, apparently. That's about it. It's so, so bad.

Ahem. Look at me saying I don't want to say anything, then spew a wall of text. This movie's just bad. Anyway, moving on.

EDIT:

Also, the kids' (yes, kids', as in multiple) acting was terrible.

EDIT 2:

Also, this, since I know some folks here are a fan of his:

 

Edited August 4, 2017 by kajnrig

[505thAirborne]

Personally I enjoy Bob's reviews. thanks for posting!