Mike Flanagan's Adaptation of Stephen King's 'The Dark Tower'

[Deck Rickard]

A frickin awesome time to be a fantasy nerd especially! I'm actually living at a time when Amazon are producing TV shows of both Stephen King's Dark Tower series and J.R.R. Tolkien's Middle-earth, two of my absolute favourite things.

I'm wondering how far into the DT lore they'll dare to go in this first season. We'll obviously get mentions of Maerlyn and his Wizard's Rainbow (not to mention see the pink ball), and Arthur Eld and Roland's bloodline I'd imagine. Will they start to drop hints about the Dark Tower and what it actually is? Will we get to see it? What about the universe hopping? The dimensional doors? Going todash? Could we even have a cameo from the Crimson King himself? If the show is a success and they end up jumping forward to the main timeline of the books in later seasons, it would make sense to start the world building early.

I'm trying not to get too excited about this show (after the massive slap in the face that was the movie I vowed I wouldn't), but it's hard not to, thinking about all the possibilities.

I think we could get glimpses of all that stuff. In the graphic novel adaptation they had glimpses of the Crimson King and John Farson, even though they didn’t appear in the novel, and it fit in quite nicely. If you haven’t read it, I highly recommend it. The artwork is amazing and is a really good interpretation of Roland’s world.

 

[TheFuture]

I feel utterly ludicrous saying this but Strike was a notch above his costars on EastEnders. Then again that wouldn't be difficult.

Since then I've seen him in Night flyers and I thought his acting was woeful. This feels like an unnecessary risk to take.

 

[FunkMiller]

Hmmmm.

Starting with young Roland, and pre-horn/loop, eh? Interesting choice.

I would have preferred the proper start in the Mohaine, but imagine they’re distancing from that abortion two years ago, and taking things right back to Roland’s youth is a brave choice. I wonder if they’re just adapting what happens in the books? I would have thought they’ll also take from the graphic novels, and do Jericho.

 

[Persona]

I feel utterly ludicrous saying this but Strike was a notch above his costars on EastEnders. Then again that wouldn't be difficult.

Since then I've seen him in Night flyers and I thought his acting was woeful. This feels like an unnecessary risk to take.

I haven't seen Nightflyers but from what I understand, no one involved comes off particularly well.

I watched Strike in episode 4 of Mindhunters this morning, he played one of the killers, Monte Rissell. I thought he was quite good, definitely saw the potential for him as Roland.

 

[Deck Rickard]

Been meaning to watch Mindhunter on Netflix. Now I'm definitely going to check it out since our future Roland is in it, playing a killer. Let's see if he kills with his heart.

 

[Roose Bolton]

I’m reasonably pleased by both these castings, and equally so that they’re avoiding the previous adaptation.

 

[Deck Rickard]

I really hope this gets a full series order (if it’s good). I imagine the pilot will involve Roland’s Gunslinger test.

 

[Finarfiniel]

I’m reasonably pleased by both these castings, and equally so that they’re avoiding the previous adaptation.

Yeah, the fact that they're completely ignoring that abomination of a movie is a huge plus and gives me hope for the show. Akiva Goldsman still being involved is a concern, but all we can do is wait and see how this plays out.

I really hope this gets a full series order (if it’s good). I imagine the pilot will involve Roland’s Gunslinger test.

Same here, if the pilot is at least decent I see no reason why it wouldn't get a full series order from Amazon. Both the fantasy genre and adaptations of popular book series are big business at the moment. Also, DT has a big plus in that it's so unique compared to other long running fantasy book series with its mixture of high fantasy and sci-fi, speculative fiction, western and post-apocalyptic genres. It has a unique selling point which hopefully will go in its favour.

I think the pilot should introduce In-World/Mid-World/End-World (Gilead especially) and its feudal society and politics, the importance of Roland's family and the line of Eld, the affair between Gabrielle and Marten (and Roland discovering it) and end with him winning his Gunslinger test against Cort. It should also introduce the characters of Steven Deschain, Cuthbert, Alain, Jamie and also Aileen, if they're also following the comics as well as the books. That would be a fantastic first episode.

 

[Deck Rickard]

That all sounds like it could happen in the pilot. I really hope the first season takes Roland to Meijis and we get to meet Susan Delgado. They could probably cover all of Wizard and Glass in one season, though I could see them stretching it out as well.

 

[Finarfiniel]

That all sounds like it could happen in the pilot. I really hope the first season takes Roland to Meijis and we get to meet Susan Delgado. They could probably cover all of Wizard and Glass in one season, though I could see them stretching it out as well.

I imagine it will, Roland and his first ka-tet travelling to Mejis, meeting Susan and discovering John Farson's plans with the oil and the war machines will be the main focus of the first season I would think, or at least hope. It's a story that's ideally suited to a television format. Just think of all the great characters we may get to see in live action, not only Susan but also Rhea of the Coos, Sheemie, Eldred Jonas and the Big Coffin Hunters, e.t.c.

If they want to do more with Young Roland in a potential second season and beyond, there's lots more they can cover. The fallout of Gabrielle's death at Roland's hand, Roland and Jamie travelling to Debaria (the flashback events in The Wind Through the Keyhole), the fall of Gilead and then all the way up to the Battle of Jericho Hill. Then there are the events of The Little Sisters of Eluria, though Roland is slightly older then.

 

[TheVileOne]

‘The Dark Tower’ Casts Sam Strike As Gunslinger Roland Deschain, Plus Jasper Pääkkönen As Amazon Nears Pilot Order

LOL, wow that flop totally killed all their plans for this show didn't it? They had to start over from scratch.

 

[Finarfiniel]

LOL, wow that flop totally killed all their plans for this show didn't it? They had to start over from scratch.

And all fans of the book series everywhere say thank goodness. That movie was a total insult to the books.

 

[TheVileOne]

And all fans of the book series everywhere say thank goodness. That movie was a total insult to the books.

It's still amusing to me how almost 10 years ago, this almost started from a place of, we are going to make a multi-movie franchise with TV spinoffs that would feature the same actors. And it ultimately got pared down to one 95 minute movie for $66 million.

I mean hearing about the movie at first, you would've thought this would've been a Lord of the Rings level franchise. Instead it went kaput right out the gate, and now they are starting over again with the show.

I also hilariously remember the reports of MRC after the movie saying the TV show was still a go with Idris Elba returning as Roland. Nope.

It's like Simon Kinberg saying there would still be a Fantastic Four sequel.

I think the problem is that studios get ahead of themselves far too much. They want their own MCU or Lord of the Rings so badly. Everyone wants to come in second and repeat the success but they can't figure it out.

 

[Deck Rickard]

I imagine it will, Roland and his first ka-tet travelling to Mejis, meeting Susan and discovering John Farson's plans with the oil and the war machines will be the main focus of the first season I would think, or at least hope. It's a story that's ideally suited to a television format. Just think of all the great characters we may get to see in live action, not only Susan but also Rhea of the Coos, Sheemie, Eldred Jonas and the Big Coffin Hunters, e.t.c.

If they want to do more with Young Roland in a potential second season and beyond, there's lots more they can cover. The fallout of Gabrielle's death at Roland's hand, Roland and Jamie travelling to Debaria (the flashback events in The Wind Through the Keyhole), the fall of Gilead and then all the way up to the Battle of Jericho Hill. Then there are the events of The Little Sisters of Eluria, though Roland is slightly older then.

Yeah there is plenty of ground to cover with young Roland. And they can also flesh out some characters that are only briefly touched on in the books. Characters like Farson and the Crimson King are mostly unseen threats, but here they could make them real characters. This has so much potential; let’s hope that this time the creative team knows what they’re doing.

 

[Deck Rickard]

It's still amusing to me how almost 10 years ago, this almost started from a place of, we are going to make a multi-movie franchise with TV spinoffs that would feature the same actors. And it ultimately got pared down to one 95 minute movie for $66 million.

I mean hearing about the movie at first, you would've thought this would've been a Lord of the Rings level franchise. Instead it went kaput right out the gate, and now they are starting over again with the show.

I also hilariously remember the reports of MRC after the movie saying the TV show was still a go with Idris Elba returning as Roland. Nope.

It's like Simon Kinberg saying there would still be a Fantastic Four sequel.

I think the problem is that studios get ahead of themselves far too much. They want their own MCU or Lord of the Rings so badly. Everyone wants to come in second and repeat the success but they can't figure it out.

Yeah, their plans were ambitious. But something like The Dark Tower is tricky because while it has a loyal fanbase, it's not as well-known as something like The Lord of the Rings. So trying to launch a big budget movie franchise was going to be a huge risk. On one hand, some people might find it more accessible than something like LOTR or Game of Thrones because a portion of the story takes place in the "real world", but that might turn off fans of deep fantasy. And hardcore fans of the books are going to be turned off by anything half-assed like the movie we ultimately got.

TV was always the best way to go with this. Shows like GoT and Westworld proved that you can do lesser known fantasy and sci-fi concepts that can resonate well with people, because it's a lot easier (I think) to convince someone to watch something on a channel or streaming service that they are already paying for than to motivate them to fork over their cash to see a movie. And while movies are still one of the cheaper forms of entertainment out there these days (even as ticket prices have gone up over the past few decades) there are still other financial factors that might deter people from going to see a movie they're not 100% sold on (How much gas do you need to drive to the theater? Will you go out to dinner beforehand? If you have kids, do you need to hire a babysitter?). Pretty soon, a night out to see a movie can cost over $100. And that's not worth it if the movie ultimately sucks (and it did).

I do wonder how this might have gone had JJ Abrams stayed on the project. He's not my favorite director by any means but he does have a talent for making (sometimes abstract) sci-fi and fantasy concepts accessible to general audiences. But he ultimately decided he couldn't go it justice, and I respect that. Still, I think he was selling himself short.

And after how bad the movie turned out, I also wonder if Ron Howard might have fared better. I remember thinking he was a terrible choice when he was involved, but I'm sure he would have done a better job than (looks up director of The Dark Tower movie) Nikolaj Arcel did.

 

[Persona]

I still can't believe that someone ostensibly read the thousands and thousands of pages of The Dark Tower series and thought, "Yeah, this can be a 90-minute movie."

Oh wait, yeah I can believe it, because it was Akiva Goldsman.

The books even read much more like television than a movie or movies. Doing it this way just makes so much more sense. Akiva still has an executive producer credit but I imagine his involvement is going to be more minimal. Glen Mazzara is the show-runner and is writing the pilot, and he's done some good stuff before (The Shield and what turned out, in retrospect, to be the better seasons of The Walking Dead, S1-3). If nothing else, Glen has shown that he knows how to write and produce in a way to get people engaged and hooked on his shows. But this show will also need some ace television directors that will be able to make the most of their budgets. It really needs to feel otherworldly and strange and big and mythic. King gets so mired in his plot shenanigans and character interactions in the series that he sometimes loses that feeling, but when it's there in the books it's entrancing and unnerving and great.

I look forward to more cast/crew announcements. Wonder if this is still planning to shoot in April as the original leaked report was stating? If so, I think we will have some more news shortly.

 

[TheVileOne]

Yeah, their plans were ambitious. But something like The Dark Tower is tricky because while it has a loyal fanbase, it's not as well-known as something like The Lord of the Rings. So trying to launch a big budget movie franchise was going to be a huge risk. On one hand, some people might find it more accessible than something like LOTR or Game of Thrones because a portion of the story takes place in the "real world", but that might turn off fans of deep fantasy. And hardcore fans of the books are going to be turned off by anything half-assed like the movie we ultimately got.

TV was always the best way to go with this. Shows like GoT and Westworld proved that you can do lesser known fantasy and sci-fi concepts that can resonate well with people, because it's a lot easier (I think) to convince someone to watch something on a channel or streaming service that they are already paying for than to motivate them to fork over their cash to see a movie. And while movies are still one of the cheaper forms of entertainment out there these days (even as ticket prices have gone up over the past few decades) there are still other financial factors that might deter people from going to see a movie they're not 100% sold on (How much gas do you need to drive to the theater? Will you go out to dinner beforehand? If you have kids, do you need to hire a babysitter?). Pretty soon, a night out to see a movie can cost over $100. And that's not worth it if the movie ultimately sucks (and it did).

I do wonder how this might have gone had JJ Abrams stayed on the project. He's not my favorite director by any means but he does have a talent for making (sometimes abstract) sci-fi and fantasy concepts accessible to general audiences. But he ultimately decided he couldn't go it justice, and I respect that. Still, I think he was selling himself short.

And after how bad the movie turned out, I also wonder if Ron Howard might have fared better. I remember thinking he was a terrible choice when he was involved, but I'm sure he would have done a better job than (looks up director of The Dark Tower movie) Nikolaj Arcel did.

I think there are a lot of things that just don't translate to the Hollywood movie format.

Honestly, I truly believe Dune is another one of those stories. I do not think the movie is going to do well, even if it's a modern sci-fi classic.

 

[Deck Rickard]

I think there are a lot of things that just don't translate to the Hollywood movie format.

Honestly, I truly believe Dune is another one of those stories. I do not think the movie is going to do well, even if it's a modern sci-fi classic.

I really hope you're wrong about that one, but I have to say... I'm about halfway through the book right now and I think you could be right. Some of the stuff in there... I'm not sure how well it's going to translate to film. I never saw the original because the little clips I've seen of it look god-awful and while I do enjoy a bad movie, since Dune is such an important piece of sci-fi/fantasy, I want to see the good version before I see the MST3K one.

 

[Finarfiniel]

Yeah, their plans were ambitious. But something like The Dark Tower is tricky because while it has a loyal fanbase, it's not as well-known as something like The Lord of the Rings. So trying to launch a big budget movie franchise was going to be a huge risk. On one hand, some people might find it more accessible than something like LOTR or Game of Thrones because a portion of the story takes place in the "real world", but that might turn off fans of deep fantasy. And hardcore fans of the books are going to be turned off by anything half-assed like the movie we ultimately got.

TV was always the best way to go with this. Shows like GoT and Westworld proved that you can do lesser known fantasy and sci-fi concepts that can resonate well with people, because it's a lot easier (I think) to convince someone to watch something on a channel or streaming service that they are already paying for than to motivate them to fork over their cash to see a movie. And while movies are still one of the cheaper forms of entertainment out there these days (even as ticket prices have gone up over the past few decades) there are still other financial factors that might deter people from going to see a movie they're not 100% sold on (How much gas do you need to drive to the theater? Will you go out to dinner beforehand? If you have kids, do you need to hire a babysitter?). Pretty soon, a night out to see a movie can cost over $100. And that's not worth it if the movie ultimately sucks (and it did).

I do wonder how this might have gone had JJ Abrams stayed on the project. He's not my favorite director by any means but he does have a talent for making (sometimes abstract) sci-fi and fantasy concepts accessible to general audiences. But he ultimately decided he couldn't go it justice, and I respect that. Still, I think he was selling himself short.

And after how bad the movie turned out, I also wonder if Ron Howard might have fared better. I remember thinking he was a terrible choice when he was involved, but I'm sure he would have done a better job than (looks up director of The Dark Tower movie) Nikolaj Arcel did.

I completely agree that a television format is definitely better suited to The Dark Tower than a movie format, mostly because of the fact that the series spans 7 very content-heavy books (8 if you count 'The Wind Through The Keyhole'), there's no way that even a high quality movie trilogy could really do the scope of the books justice. LotR is different because, despite the fact it was published in three parts (which wasn't Tolkien's choice, it was down to post-war budget constraints), it tells one (admittedly very long) self-contained story which Tolkien wrote to be one long novel. In that way, LotR was very well suited to the movie trilogy format. TDT is long and complex and the story takes place across many different worlds and eras in time (or 'wheres and whens' as Roland would put it), not to mention mixes many different genres. If we're honest, we're never going to see a completely note-perfect adaptation of TDT because it's just not possible due to the sprawling, universe and time hopping nature of the books, but if this show can at least capture the spirit and feel of the books and tell the parts of the story that it can really well and with respect to its source material, I'll be happy and very excited. Getting the main characters right is step one, and that's a biggie and something that the movie completely failed on every level. I usually like Matthew McConaughey, but my god, his Walter was vomit inducing. It makes me mad just thinking about it.

The sole thing that the movie did well was Tom Holkenborg's (a.k.a. Junkie XL) score which I genuinely like:

 

[Deck Rickard]

Totally agree. TDT is a much larger and in many ways more complex story than LOTR (I’m not factoring in The Silmarillion here), that requires a long time to tell if you’re trying to do it right. And I think it’s a hard sell for mainstream audiences who aren’t familiar with it. Everyone knows Stephen King but people who aren’t ‘constant readers’ mostly know him as a horror author. And while TDT has aspects of that, it’s primarily a fantasy/sci-fi western. But given the success of some shows, particularly Westworld, I think that people who are new to the series would be much more willing to give it a chance as a series.

And yes, character is SO important. Because the one thing King does better than anything is write good characters. If you **** that up, then it doesn’t matter how good the rest of the adaptation is.

 

[TheVileOne]

But I mean, they wanted to do multiple films beyond a trilogy and TV miniseries to go along with them. And that sounds neat on paper, but I knew that was a hard sell because it's not like a superhero franchise that has a built-in audience plus four quadrants and all that. And it eventually just got whittled down to one low budget movie that was 95 minutes long.

 

[Marvolo]

I think there are a lot of things that just don't translate to the Hollywood movie format.

Honestly, I truly believe Dune is another one of those stories. I do not think the movie is going to do well, even if it's a modern sci-fi classic.

I think Dune will be another Blade Runner 2049. A great piece of modern cinema, but a disappointment at the box office. I think the built in fanbase of the book might help Dune do better than BR2049, but I dont think it will help a lot more. Dune is 53 years old, the previous film is not extremely popular, the story and the world is strange at times even by scifi standards, it has a weird mutation of Catholicism and theology that could turn some viewers off, the hero is a white messiah saving nomadic natives, and on top of everything else it's even got a vague magic of a sorts.

The there is Denis' directing style which tends to be slow burn and more concerned with characters than flash and bang set pieces. The studio will no doubt market it as a fast paced thrilling scifi film. Audiences will go to it expecting something like Star Wars or modern star trek. Theyll feel bitter about the misleading marketing and gripe and spread bad word of mouth. Which will cause a big drop after opening weekend.

 

[TheVileOne]

I think Dune will be another Blade Runner 2049. A great piece of modern cinema, but a disappointment at the box office. I think the built in fanbase of the book might help Dune do better than BR2049, but I dont think it will help a lot more. Dune is 53 years old, the previous film is not extremely popular, the story and the world is strange at times even by scifi standards, it has a weird mutation of Catholicism and theology that could turn some viewers off, the hero is a white messiah saving nomadic natives, and on top of everything else it's even got a vague magic of a sorts.

The there is Denis' directing style which tends to be slow burn and more concerned with characters than flash and bang set pieces. The studio will no doubt market it as a fast paced thrilling scifi film. Audiences will go to it expecting something like Star Wars or modern star trek. Theyll feel bitter about the misleading marketing and gripe and spread bad word of mouth. Which will cause a big drop after opening weekend.

I mean here's the other issue. The book's so called hero isn't exactly heroic. Later on, Paul does some pretty terrible and messed up things. Frank Herbert plays around a lot with charismatic leaders and why we ultimately shouldn't follow them and listen to them or trust them.

 

[Lily Adler]

Goodbye Idris Elba in tight leather.

 

[Finarfiniel]

And yes, character is SO important. Because the one thing King does better than anything is write good characters. If you **** that up, then it doesn’t matter how good the rest of the adaptation is.

I agree so hard that creating complex, compelling and likable characters is what King absolutely excels at as a writer, and it's where so many adaptations of his books stumble at the very first hurdle, if his characters aren't adapted as faithfully as possible then the adaptation as a whole is never going to work, period. That's where I think IT (the 2017 film, not the mini-series) really succeeded and why audiences took to it in a big way, it may not have been a completely faithful adaptation of the child half of the book but it captured the essence of King's original characters and their kinship really well (okay, except poor Mike admittedly, which is my biggest complaint with the film). All I want is to see these characters from TDT that I love so much (especially Roland and Walter/The Man in Black who are two of my favourite literary characters of all time) adapted faithfully and with respect to what complex, enigmatic, fascinating creatures they really are.

I mean here's the other issue. The book's so called hero isn't exactly heroic. Later on, Paul does some pretty terrible and messed up things. Frank Herbert plays around a lot with charismatic leaders and why we ultimately shouldn't follow them and listen to them or trust them.

It's interesting because a similar thing could be said about Roland in TDT, but in reverse. Roland isn't your typical fantasy hero figure by any stretch, especially early on in the book series where he's very much an anti-hero. In the first book he does some particularly despicable things to keep following the Man in Black (including letting Jake, his child companion, fall to his death rather than try to save him and in therefore lose track of Walter in the process), but through some particularly wonderful and moving character development by the end of the series he transforms into much more of a traditional, selfless hero figure. That's why, in a way, starting from Roland's boyhood in this series makes a great deal of sense. Starting from the events of The Gunslinger (the first book in the series) runs the risk of the general audience not taking to the very anti-heroic Roland at all, but starting the series from Roland's childhood means that the audience can witness first hand the sheer amount of drama, loss and grief that Roland has had to suffer through in his life because of his bloodline and his status as the last gunslinger, and therefore they will feel much more sympathetic and understanding towards him if the series ever does jump forward to older Roland and adapts the main timeline of the books.

Goodbye Idris Elba in tight leather.

And we all say thankya big-big (for fans of the book series )... Don't get me wrong, I love Elba, he's one of my favourite actors and he's extremely underrated (and he indeed looks good in tight leather), but he just isn't Roland Deschain. At all. The character in the film didn't resemble the character in the books in any way, and I'm not even talking about race or physical appearance, he just wasn't Roland. The film Roland railed against being a gunslinger and wasn't even trying to find and enter the Dark Tower. I mean... what? It's like the writers thought, 'Oh hey, let's take away two of the most vital character traits of this guy, strip him of all his depth and purpose and re-write him completely into someone that in no way resembles the book character, that'd be cool, right?'