so... the dark tower movie is retarded in EVERY fucking way. dont pay for it , dont watch it , boycott that shit. The guys name WAS Roland... and there was a tower... but other then that this stupid shit got NOTHING to do with the dark tower story
>>624 Thanks chum. I love SK books, and I've fallen for adaptations way too many times, I wasn't sure about this one but no one of my friend saw it. You just saved me time, money and the disappointment.
the reviews are universally bad , truncated non sense , no one likes it, least of all fans of the books. man in black character is goofy ,and retarded
>>626 IMO, the main problem with SK adaptations is they try to condense in two hours a 6 or 7 books saga. That's a recepy for disaster in any circumstance.
>>627 I've read TDT series in its entirety and can't really envision it in a movie format anyways. Someone online suggested that it would have been better off in serialization like GoT on HBO which I think would have been way more awesome. It'd be nice if there was a series that explained all of the backstory including how some of the characters came about. I know that the preacher comes from Salem's Lot (along with a short-time villain (vampire)) and then a mute painter mentioned from the JFK time-travelling book ("11/22/63") then there are references to the Crimson King and Walter Padick (the actual name of "The Man in Black" according to the books) from other books like It, The Stand, etc. As far as the movie goes, it's supposed to be sort of like a sequel but with our PC culture and Roland being black, I was disappointed. Call me a racist, I don't give a shit. I don't think Roland ever got into close contact with Walter anyways. The Crimson King, at the very end perhaps, but not Walter. He was doing shit elsewhere if I remember correctly.
>>628 I never read The Stand, but I read Apocalypse which is The Stand but... longer, I thought the baddie's name was Randall Flag, in fact there's several references to TDT in that book. I'm agree with you, making the gunslinger a black guy didn't changed anything story wise, just made it more confusing.
>>627 its actually 8 books; including a 4.5 that came out in 2015 man in black, Walter Paddic , and Randall flag are all basically the same guy. -- uummm...diff alt-realities . Roland needed to be white ...because Susanna was black and hated white folks... but they took her and Eddie out COMPLETELY , IT was retarded from the get-go and yes the dark tower story is related to all most every other story ever wrote. ---hard to explain
>>633 > Roland needed to be white ...because Susanna was black and hated white folks... but they took her and Eddie out COMPLETELY , That was brought up on a Reddit thread (I wanted to hear a review from an actual person--not a professional movie reviewer--I mean asskisser) and everyone pretty much went all PC, calling him a racist and the whole retarded 9 yards... I believe most, if not all, of SK's stories are tied to each other in some way. Not the same universe perhaps, but there are references to other characters, settings, events, etc. all over the place in his stories. Some of them are very obscure though. The Man in Black goes by many names including Randall Flagg but I referred to his original because unless you've read all TDT books you won't know it. I hope I didn't miss a name, but he goes by these names starting from his birth: Walter Padick, Walter o'Dim, Marten (Broadcloak) and then Randall Flagg for the majority of TDT series. But according to the Wikipedia article he also went by Nyarlathotep, Bill Hinch, Russell Faraday, Richard Fannin, Richard Freemantle, Rudin Filaro, The Covenant Man, Richard Fry, Robert Franq and Ramsey Forrest. Pretty much always went by the initials R.F. with a few exceptions. He was referred to as The Covenant Man in "The Wind Through the Keyhole" (basically an unrelated folktale originating from Inner World that Roland tells in the middle of his journey with his ka-tet while they are taking a breather).
>>633 They could switch susanna to a white chick, but it's basically destroying a character for the sakes of pandering to an idiotic crowd, instead of change books they should create new characters of the colour or sexuality they prefer, make them good and they'll realize no one gives one shit as long as the story is good. I read DT 1, 2, and 3 but then I moved and I kinda stopped buying books all together, I decided to buy the whole saga and read it without cliffhangers.
>>633 "Book 8" came out in 2012, not 2015. >>641 >I read DT 1, 2, and 3 but then I moved and I kinda stopped buying books all together, I decided to buy the whole saga and read it without cliffhangers. I would never recommend to anyone to buy a book one at a time if its part of a series, especially from SK. He did a really good job with the cliffhangers in TDT and I'm glad I found out about this series well after all the books had been released. SK mentions in one of his books (in the prologue I believe?) of all the fan letters he received after putting the series in hiatus after book 3 (1991) ranging from prisoners on death row to the elderly BEGGING for him to tell them what happens at the end of the story and he denied them the privilege of knowing anyways. There was also a gap after book 4 (1997) and then he finally released the last three in 2003-04. I ended up reading all 7 around 2009 so I didn't have to deal with that kind of anticipation while reading them back to back. I was disappointed with the Keyhole story though as it wasn't directly tied to Roland's journey through Mid-World or explained what happened between the death of his friends in the very beginning and right before the desert where he is introduced in the first book.
>>644 >I would never recommend to anyone to buy a book one at a time if its part of a series Actually the green mile was intentionally segmented into 5 volumes if I don't remember wrong. I decided to play along, because that was the intention of SK, to experience it with cliffhangers and wait for the next small book to come out. It was in a way enjoyable, the story was really good (the movie adaptation, while took things out it was surprisingly good too), and the overall experience gave me the taste of King's original intention for the novel. I wouldn't like to read everything like that but as one time experiment it was something good. As a rule of thumb I would recommend to read serials as serials if the series have a defined end after a defined amount of books, but I would recommend the netflix system to those serial books where the author doesn't even know when or how to finish the story. I don't know if I make any sense, it's too early in the morning.
>>645 From the audience reviews I read on RT about 95% of the people who had read the books thought the movie was trash. But that same amount that went in blind enjoyed the movie. Go figure.
>>647 Let me remind you there's people who thinks episode I was good.
the guy from "no country for old men' ; Viggo something would have been a good Roland
>>651 Mortensen I dunno. Maybe.
>>651 To me it should be an actor that could look like a very thin, hard walking corpse if needed, a younger clint eastwood could have been awesome
truncated nonsense , thats what it comes down to
>>624 Why cant Idris Elba get in any good roles anymore
>>680 bcuz he aint gunna be bond no more
REVIEWS FOR 'IT' clowns can be both scary and funny, but mostly scary. Personally, I’ve never found one remotely funny. The makeup with funny paint and red nose may look hilarious, but if you look closely… frightening. It, the novel, is considered by a lot of Stephen King fans as his scariest story, and that is saying something. To understand the premise of It, imagine Stranger Things with slightly older kids and an infinitely more powerful monster. Calling themselves the Loser’s Club, the group led by Bill Denbrough have to face bullies in school, and we all know bullies can be nasty. But no bully can be compared to It, a being which appears in the form of a clown called Pennywise, but is not really a clown. It is actually an entity that existed before our universe and came from a different reality. It has been adapted before as a television miniseries in the 1990s and was received well. But take it from somebody who has read it – translating the horror factor of the novel faithfully to the screen is nigh impossible. But one can try. It also called It: Part 1 – The Losers’ Club, is the first part of the planned duology, and if the first trailer is something to go by, it is going to be downright scary. So yeah trailer is good, but it is a capital mistake to judge a film by its trailer. But what about those who have actually seen it? Well, a bunch of critics got the chance to watch this film before its release, and the good news is all that of them agree that It is a very good horror film and also an excellent adaptation of the novel
i never liked any of the Beverly marsh's , not the right kindda geeky this latest red head is ...OK...meh