'Dark Tower' Movie Update: Seven Films?
An unlikely approach, but they are still considering it
AMC comes through for the second week in a row after their revealing Mathieu Kassovitz interview last week this week they have a new interview with Damon Lindeloff which is meant to talk more about "Lost" and Star Trek than the bit of news I am interested in but that's just the way it goes.
The final question in the interview concerns the adaptation of Stephen King's "Dark Tower" series, a series Lindeloff optioned with J.J. Abrams almost two years ago for the miniscule price of $19 keeping in tow with the recurring number in the series. King told SCI-FI Wire, "My attitude is, 'Go make a movie, and if it's good, that's terrific, and if it's bad, then it will go to the video stores and back shelves of Blockbuster, and I still get royalties on the book."
For a long time it was thought they may try and take the series to television, but it seems Lindeloff is still considering a movie adaptation… actually he is considering seven of them to correspond with the seven books in the series centered on the gunslinger Roland Deschain of Gilead and his search for The Dark Tower. Here is what Lindeloff had to say about the potential film series:
The Dark Tower is to me every bit as daunting an adaptation as the Lord of the Rings trilogy must have been for Peter Jackson, except we've got seven books we're looking at. And the idea of doing that at the same time Carlton and I are bringing Lost to a close is simply not viable. There are always Dark Tower conversations, but the figuring out of what this will look like as a movie has not begun. If The Dark Tower were in the right hands, I would love to see seven movies executed just right. But you have to get people to see the first one to get them to come and see the second one.
Speaking as someone who is 250 pages into the seventh and final book I really don't see this happening, especially as a seven film series considering the final three books beginning with "Wolves of the Calla" are not that good and only seem to get worse. Thus the reason this seventh book is taking me so damned long. The first four books in the series are monumental and I have a hard time deciding which is my favorite between "Wastelands" (yup, I loved Blaine the Mono) and "Wizard and Glass" and I don't think I will ever be able to decide between the two. However, while "Wolves of the Calla" is a decent read the ending is seriously lacking and the introduction of Stephen King into the narrative and actually into the story as an actual character in "Song of Susannah" was a terrible decision. It is distracting not only for the egotistical reasoning, but more for the fact that it just doesn't work.
"The Dark Tower" is a series that bounces in and out of worlds and back and forth in time and it really seems to work through the majority of the fifth book and even "Song of Susannah" isn't that bad as it serves as a means only to get to the seventh book. There is still plenty to enjoy in the final three books, but that Stephen King character thread is one that really has me bummed and I don't think I am alone in my opinion on the final three books, which makes me think a seven film series really wouldn't pay off unless they want the last three films to be the worst of the bunch.
Obviously since I still have about 900 pages to go in the final book I may be singing a completely different tune by the end, but as it stands right now this is where I sit.
Have any of you read all seven and do you agree or am I in the unknowing minority?
Showing 237 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New CommentNOTE: The Facebook login option has been disabled. We apologize for any inconvenience. |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
I love these books to death. I would love to see a movie for each book. It would be hard to make that Stephen King cameo in the books come to life. I think the story would have to be changed towards the end to make a better film.
I actually think that these books could be compressed into 5 or 6 films. A lot of stuff could be cut out. The Waste Lands is a big flash back. Its awesome, but could be cut. Maybe made into some kind of prequel later a la The Hobbit.
Or they could start by adapting the graphic novel that recently came out which is pretty much The Waste Lands. It would be an awesome start to the franchise and it would introduce the characters to an audience.
I know the story gets a little weak at the 5th book, but I still love the story. It just brings all of Stephen King's work together. As a fan, I would love to see a separate film for each book. Potter did it. I would even like to see the last book get split in two since its so long.
I love the last book because it goes so many places. It is very sad but I love it. Look I could go on about these books for hours. And I am a little jealous that someone other than me is making these films. It would have been something I would have liked to do after I kicked off my career as a director.
Just finish that shit Brad.
I agree with you ckybltz in that the later books need a lot of good editing to remove the extra fat and crappy ideas.
I wish king had teamed up with another great author the way other authors do when their ideas seem a bit stale,sometimes there needs to be a fresh mind to bounce ideas around with.
In a movie or three it is possible to rework the later books into a more polished tale.
I definitely think that the last several books are a bit too long and slightly bloated, not nearly as incredible as the first few.
As far as the whole movie thing….meh. I just dont see it, nor do I really want to. Personally Id much rather see someone get film versions of the Talisman and the Black House done, though I think miniseries would be the best thing to do.
And on another "book" topic, I finally read The Road…absolutely incredible, Im so glad I finally got around to reading it. The film adaptation is now my most anticipated movie coming out this year.
I would agree that not Only are these books amazing….Each one of these books could easily a corresponding movie in amongst themselves. I see the problems one would have making each movie all together….especially all seven. As for the Cameo of Stephen King. I would leave it up to Him due to There his stories. I just can't wait to see if the right direction is picked can hold the interest of audiences in Film as it did me in the books. I hope that we could all agree, we've all waited long enough for these books to be completed that we should all have the patience for the Movie to come out well made and fascinating.
Heres to Hoping!~ May it do ya!
I would love to see a set of movies based on the dark tower series. While you are correct that books 5 and 6 were not as good as the first 4 (4,7,and 1 being my favories in that order), if you take it "as a journey and not a series of events you read through to get to the end" then it makes the entire series a masterpice. While Wolves may be too long and Song may be too convoluted, the ending of the seventh novel is the end of a journey which took me 4 months to read, and Steven King 30 years to write. I would genuinely enjoy seeing these books come to life on the screen. Plus, one of the beauties of theater is that you can shorten books and keep the details intact (this would work well for wolves). they could make 5+6 one movie and the 7th book two seperate movies. That way books 5 and 6 would not feel so drawn out. I think the Dark Tower movies are a great idea and i sincerely hope that they are made properly, doing justice to all of King's characters and the story as a whole.
I cannot wait for any film adaptation of the Tower. I loved the way the whole series ended. It had a symetry that I have never ever found in all my years of reading novels. I was slightly turned off by King putting himself in there but on the whole I didn't mind it. For what it's worth I thought Wolves of the Calla was a solid story that stood alone from the rest. The wastelands for my money is the best of the series. I love any sort of post apocolyptic story/movei/tv show ect. and this was absolutely top shelf. Wizard and Glass another awsome story that stands alone in the series
it think to say that the last 3 books are any thing but amazing is pure blasphemy and these peoples opinions do not matter. heres why. while the last few books are dauntint and a little drawn out they are still never the less relevant and nessicary to the story. the only book i ever had something bad to say about was songs of susanah, but thats only due to my particular dislike for the character. the best book by far in the series though is the dark tower followed closely by wizard and glass.
i am also of the opinion that the story should be made into a mini series by an actual king/dt fan.
long day and pleasent nights to you
I want to see this done and I think these are the right guys to do it. However, I do have a few reservations, especially with regards to the "one movie per book" aspect. For one thing, I fear that by doing the first movie as a strict adaptation of "The Gunslinger", it will not produce enough profit or excitement to get the other movies done. Personally, I wasn't hooked on the series until "The Drawing of the Three". In retrospect, after several readings, I do like the first book, but I just never found it as compelling as books 2 and 3. If the project ever got past the first movie to the second, the rest could be huge… but that's a big "if".
Jake would be a logistical nightmare because even if they could do a film a year (personally, I'd expect it take at least 10 years), they would have to either do an enormous amount of early filming for the later movies or else allow the kid to age much more than he does over the course of the books.
To assign one movie per book, they would have to drastically cut some of them and expand on others. The Gunslinger and Song of Susannah are much shorter than the other novels. Wizard and Glass and Wolves of the Calla could probably be condensed to movie-length easily enough and are somewhat self-contained. But how can you fit the epic scope of books 2, 3, and 7 into a single movie each? And do you keep the same breaks? Surely they wouldn't end the third movie in the middle of Blaine's riddling contest?
I would like to see Stephen King show up in his usual cameo bit parts, but written out of the actual story.
My ideal scenario would have been to see this project done as a 3-season series on HBO or Showtime with 12-13 one-hour episodes per season. But obviously the budget for ths would far exceed anything either network would be able to commit to. So, given that it will be done as feature film(s), I think maybe I would start with The Drawing of the Three and either condense the events of The Gunslinger at the beginning or intersperse them as flashbacks throughout, then divide Drawing and Wastelands into 2-3 movies (although not with the given break points from the books.) Incorporate the opening part of Wizard and Glass into the previous movie and the ending into the following one and keep Wizard and Glass as a pure prequel, except for maybe a few cutaway scenes at beginning and end. Then, do a little rewriting and modify the last three films into a different path to arrive at the same end, because I definitely don't want them to mess with the ending(s).
@ravidlaz:
I think you the Wizards Glass
I think making a movie would be a bad idea. There is no way that you could get all of the concepts and subtle ideas that make this series of books great. The movie business would just butcher the books. I will agree that it gets slow for a while, but it diffently picks up. It is one of my favorite book series.
Finish the book for sure. This is one of my favourite sotries of all time. The whole thing is incredible. The drawing of the three was probably my favourite book, it was just fun.
As far as the production of a move or mini series……… what is everyone so worried about? This is Stephen King, I think he knows what he is doing and he surely wouldn't leave his crowning achievment to guess work.
This is one of the greatest stories ever and will also be one of the greatest movies ever. Trust.
@Greg: I finally did finish the books and did enjoy how the final book actually brought it all back around and started to feel much more like how the story started with "The Gunslinger".
However, as for your statement about Stephen King, I have heard him say he isn't too concerned about how the movies based on his films turn out. And why should he? He is getting paid.
Personally I don't think these books could be made into movies. They are too big and I am afraid would cost too much money and be seen as too risky for a studio to make them. I can see them trying for TV, but then they will be made on the cheap. Personally, as Simple Jack said, I would like them to remain as head movies.
@Brad Brevet:
I think they could be successful movies if they are released as summer blockbusters, but well-timed so as not to coincide with other huge movies; if they are majorly hyped with quality, action-packed trailers; and if they have sufficient star talent. King's name plus good marketing plus big stars (Green Mile, 1408) equals box office success.
I think the only way to do justice to this story is to make it into a serial TV show along the lines of Lost or Heroes. I like the idea of starting with the Drawing of the Three and pulling in The Gunslinger story in as flashbacks. It was the second book that really hooked me and I think it would work well to create a viewer following.
I hope however it is brought to the screen that it will be given enough budget to not come across as a hack job. I would want this storyline to gain the same respect and enjoyment that Shawshank Redemption and Stand By Me did.
I was very happy with how King ended the series. I was kind of dreading it. He's wonderful at building characters and totaling immersing the reader in a different world but not always so great at ending his stories. The ending to the The Dark Tower series was perfect.
Any thoughts on who may be cast? I can definitely see Josh Holloway playing Eddie, Clinton Eastwood as Father Callahan, Daniel Craig as Roland (he has that thousand mile stare), Colm Feore as Flagg, and Thandie Newton as Odetta. Not sure who could play Jake. Haley Joel Osment would have been ideal if he was younger. Is there another young actor of his caliber out there?
@Susan Stevens: I think Freddie Highmore would be a good one to play Jake. I am not sure about Daniel Craig, but I like everyone else you picked.
Definitely NOT Daniel Craig as Roland, Clint as Roland would rock and maybe someone like Pacino as Callahan. Steve Buscemi would be an awesome Eddie. Wanda Sykes as Susannah/Detta. Finally the coupe de grace……..Christopher Walkin as Flagg.
No offence Chad but thank gan you're not in charge of casting, Steve Buscemi as Eddie a handsome man in his mid twenties and Wanda Sykes as Susannah a beautiful woman also in her mid twenties? You have actually read these books?
I don't lean too much towards the physical descriptions of a character but towards their attitudes and who can pull that off. I am sure that you can appreciate the fact that many actors could look like a given character but to find one that encompasses that character's attitude and persona is rare and some of the "look" may be lost in translation.
I understand where you're coming from, Steve would have Eddie's wise cracking down, and I'm sure wand could pull off Detta, but these are only one side of their respective personalities. I also wasn't just worried about their looks but also their ages both actors are 20 + too old for the parts they're suppose to play. On top of everything else I could never believe Steve and Wanda as a couple on screen.
I am not finished with the series yet, so my comments are limited, bit I think this could be made into a weekly series. Follow the books and when it ends it ends. If it took three years then so be it. Movies would be great, but I think too much would be cut out. It could be like the Sopranos.
These books are the best books i have ever read! I grew up reading Lord of the rings books I even managed through the Silmarilion!
The question that needs to be answered is:
Should it start at the beginning of rolands child hood or
With the words
The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed
??
And on the fact that King stated he didn't care about the films that is a misinterpretation and couldn't be further away from the truth he actually said
“I mean, this is my life’s work (referring to the Dark Tower Series), since the time I was 22 years old. It’s very important to me. Usually, with the other books, I don’t give much of a shit. My attitude is, ‘Go make a movie, and if it’s good, that’s terrific, and if it’s bad, then it will go to the video stores and back shelves of Blockbuster, and I still get royalties on the book.’
which means he actuallyu really cares about these books adaptations which is also apparent in the comic books too as he has final say over the editing.
I feel the only way to do all the books properly would be to do a mini-series on HBO or SHO. If you put these wonderful books (yes all of them) on the big screen then you give up the chance to get to really know the characters. Now if you do it in a "lost" type of show then you have time and anticipation to build up just as if you were to read a few chapters at a time. I will say for me, to see one of my absolute favorite books put on the big screen and have it be sub par would leave me with a bitter view of one of the most inventive characters I have ever read. Do it right and you have an amazing chance to give those who did not read the books the pleasure all of us who did.
Oh for sure the later! When I was done reading Dark Tower I re-read the Gunslinger and it was those words, those wonderful yet simple words, that made me read the whole thing in one sitting!
After seeing Appaloosa I am totally convinced that Viggo Mortensen would be PERFECT as Roland. If you doubt it, go check out the movie. He plays a hired gunslinger in the movie and can do the silent but expressive thing really well. Think about Strider in the Fellowship of the Ring, when the hobbits first meet him. Then when it comes to Wizard and Glass, he can play the romantic type as well…
For me the best possible thing for The Dark Tower would be a big budget TV series, let it run for 7 series!
I've got to know these characters so well through reading the books, if they were to be dumbed down ofr the purpose of sqeezing them into films, I'd be very dissapointed.
I'd love to be able to watch the stories unfold week by week, it would be fantastic. And I reckon, keep the chronology the same, you need the mystery of Susan before you find out who she is. When you go back to rolands childhood, you already feel like you know the characters.
If they dont do it well, I just hope they don't do it at all!
If they're going to do it on TV, it damn well better be HBO. Consider all the bullshit they'd have to do to it to make it fly on a network… it wouldn't be worth it.
As far as seven individual movies, there's no way that's ever going to happen. Three might be too few. Four or five is the golden number, I think.
We must also remember that film is a different medium than literature, and it calls for certain changes in narrative structure. For example, it might make more sense to begin with Roland's backstory from "Wizard and Glass" rather than going back to that story three movies into it… but that's debatable.
why would it be so impossible to make this a mini series with a big budget that you would spend on a movie. That seems to be the trend lately on such premium channels such as hbo and showtime.
1. These books already have a huge following, so you could get and enormous viewing audience with little advertisment.
2. The books are way to big to cram into movies unless you wanted to condense them into two books per movie leaving out an enormous lot of material.
3. A good miniseries done right would be such a great break from reality t.v. which I'm personally sick to death over.
4. The box sets, when they came out, would break record sales.
Please whichever route you choose movie or series, don't butcher it and please please don't stop this project!!!!
@lance: Because that isn't going to happen. There are too many installments and no one wants to put that much money into something that could flop after one episode. It just doesn't make good business sense to spend a lot of money on it. Too risky.
@Brad Brevet: Why the hell would it flop after one episode, its one of the greatest stories of our generation! I'd think that a series thats based on a massively popular series of novels is much less of a risk than an unknown screenplay. It makes great business sense to spend a lot of money on it, other wise it will be rubbish and not even the fans it has now won't want to watch it!
Just think how complex the stories and characters in Lost, Prison Break, 24, etc are, they pulled huge viewing figures and are still selling well all over the world. People would lap this up.
@hol: I am not saying it would, I am saying it could.
Let's say they make it in seven installments, mini-series style. Let's say they spend a TON of money on it as has been suggested. Then let's say no one watches it, at least not enough people to warrant such a production budget on television. Now you have a flop on your hands and you are in the whole mega bucks.
For a comparison, at least Lord of the Rings was only three books, not seven. It's a far larger investment for a production company. As much as The Dark Tower is a favorite of yours and mine the fanbase doesn't compare to the likes of say Narnia, Rings, Potter or I would even say Twilight. It is also a much darker far more niche audience with films that would have to be rated R on the majority.
I am not saying this because I don't want it, I am just being realistic. It would be a HUGE monetary risk.
The Potter movies spawned the fandom, not the other way around. If this series was given a chance on the big screen or as a mini series I expect that it would be a groundbreaking endeavor and would shatter sales records. Harry Potter is getting by with eight movies and while I absolutely love Potter I love the Tower series a billion times more may it do ya.
Do it in CG format like Beowulf. You can get Clint Eastwood to voice Roland (George Guidall would be an option too, he was great in the audio book). The special effects and locations would be much easier to portray, and the actors could look like whoever (Angela Basset as Susanna Dean *please*, I see a lot of people suggest Halle Berry, but she's in everything already for god's sake). Really, the whole Blaine The Mono arc demands cg.
True, I don't think 7 movies in a theater could adequately cover the epic. A tv series would be best.
@Roe: I totally agree…Wizard and Glass would be the best start for film. Marvel did it this way for the graphic novels and it worked out well – introducing an entire new audience to Dark Tower. Roland's character as he approaches manhood (in W&G) might help ease (the new audience) into the much darker gunslinger that he ultimately becomes.
Man I hope they do a TRUE version that can match the Epicness of this Magnum Opus. It would need to be AT LEAST 7 movies…one per novel… and it needs the correct budget… something like Lord of the Rings got.
To understand the last 3 books you ahve to understand that Stephen King has created a 'Universe' of his own to make sense of all the crazy stories, world, creatures, dimensions, spirits and everything. The Dark Tower uses Charters from all kinds of book as he has literally dozens of stories that are reall Dark Tower stories(though you don't have to read them as one…they are also just their own story) such as Balck House, Insomnia and even Classics like Salems Lot and The Stand play roles in the Dark Tower Saga.
The Dark Tower is showing kinda how he created this world and once you finsh the whole saga, you will understand. It is one of the most Epic saga's written since The Lord of the Rings and seriously…when Stephen King passes away he will be such a HUGE Legend…though he already is. I personally loved the Dark Tower and I dunno, he said he felt he HAD to do it that way…it just makes it that much more intriguing to me.
HOnestly though… you don't HAVE to have Stephen King in the story…it just truely brings the whole SK Universe together.
@dub: I would be sooooo pissed if they did it CG style like Beowolf.
I think that if they go the movie route they might need to go "Terontino style" and start at the end… I'll try not to spoil anything for those that haven't quite gotten to the end, but I agree with some that perhaps "The Gunslinger" would make for a rather uninteresting start to what should be at least a 6 feature film series. But if you started at the end then perhaps you would want to know how you get there and the gunslinger chasing a man in black across a desert would make much more sense to those who hadn't read the books. Because while there is a large-ish following of the books it is not nearly large enough for the box office hits the major studios are looking for.
It makes me happy to know that J.J. Abrams is working on this project, even though it sounds to be on his back burner. His shows make me want to cry with the plot twists and what have you, I think the DT would be just his cup of tea and would be sadly disappointed if it were to flop after just one movie.
Finish the book. I agree with you, the last three books are not the best in the series, even compared to the first book, which I NEVER finished reading. I only made it to book II because while working as a proof operator a buddy loaned me the books on audio.
I promise you, even the worst of the series will hold you enthralled by the guy they chose to read the audio books (though sadly he is not on Books I and VII; he suffered a terrible motorcycle accident before VII was released).
The journey is irritating. Books V-VII seems so bloated, not like his short stories and the early Dark Tower books. His writing style didn't change, but I think we can see the books got longer and longer without really adding anything through the length.
I also felt irritated when robots came into the story. Personally, one of the big appeals of the story was reading about a gunslinger from a kind of wild west transported into our world, then vice versa. As many of you know, the books turn into something quite different.
But the ending is one of the best I have ever come across in literature. I won't spoil it, but King is a master at tying all the threads together. You will find yourself jumping right back to the first book to read it all over again.
i think if cut out stephenkings character you cant finsh the series. every book of this series could be an amazing movie by itself. nothing should be left out.
This series is definitely the best fantasy/sci-fi series I've ever read. And to me, it far surpasses Lord of the Rings. These books include every genre of literature + film. It's got fantasy, sci-fi, romance, action, philosophy, comedy, poetry, psychological suspense, and of course horror. I really do hope they can make a film adaptation worthy of the books, and it seems like it's in good hands if the people who are responsible for Lost and Alias are working on this.
I do agree with Brevett though, not all the books were done with equal success. My favorite was definitely The Wastelands. But it's easy to pick a favorite because King seems to change to a different genre with each book. This way he can reach any audience, but it also keeps the atmosphere of the stories somewhat inconsistent. With the first book it was a western, then it moved to a gangster action type, then to hardcore sci-fi, and later fantasy romance.
Making 7 films that really stay faithful to the 7 books might not work out as well as it's imagined. One film would be packed with plot twists and action, while another is going to be dull and dragged out on one event. They definitely need to consolidate the material into less than 7. Plus the amount of time that passes through the whole journey the characters are on isn't as long as 7 years. They have to take into consideration that one of the main characters is a pre-pubescent boy, and if they're going to drag out the films over 7 years, that kid is going to have some obvious physical changes throughout. And in the books, Jake still dies a boy. Having a 7 movie series can also get redundant. A movie trilogy is typically the limit on keeping any series still watchable. Once you get past the third people usually lose their interest. If they make these movies into 3 hr movies like LOTR, then they definitely have enough time to get all the plot content in. I can see squeezing the last 3 books into one movie.
@mia: I think King already envisioned a movie version of his books when he put himself in the book. DT is definitely his masterpiece and legacy as an author. He's put himself in a cameo role in every movie adaptation of his book since the 80s. It's his signature on his work.
@Hugh Deppman:
Frank muller was definitely the best voice actor to work on the audio books
@dub:
Regardless of whether or not it becomes a movie or series, how about making it into an anime? That wouldn't cost too much. I'm not sure how much cg movies cost to make but what about just a normal, badass, anime?
I didn't have time to read the whole thread so sorry if this is a repeat, but I wouldn't object to the movie or movies being a "based on" rather than a completely faithful adaptation…in other words, another "The Shining". To me, Kubrick's version was a rare example of the movie being far more masterfully done than the book, with many parts altered and the ending completely redone in order to fulfill the director's vision. The entire scenario with Stephen King writing himself in, for example, turns out to be quite pointless and doesn't affect the way the series ends anyway…if I were to direct, I would disregard this part.
I would be wary of attempting 7 movies…the series was not on par with Harry Potter or Twilight in the popularity department, and even with an all-star cast a successful 7-movie Stephen King series is probably not in the tarot cards. Success, but not for you Lindeloff and Abrams. I think this would further justify altering/rearranging events in the story to be more economical and feasible in hooking the viewer in.
Perhaps books 1-3 and 5-7 could be divided into 2-4 parts, and depending on their success, book 4 could be made as a prequel. What would be awesome is a prime-time TV series just like Lost, lasting 6-7 seasons. Sure, we know what happens, but perhaps Roland will discover something different…Maybe Lost is some story parallel to Roland's? Perhaps both stories will meet up at their conclusions?
I'm very excited at any prospect of the DT being made into a movie! Here's hoping… ::raises a Coors::
Thought I'd chime in with my two cents. Sorry didn't read the whole thread!
I do agree with what seems to be the general opinion that the last few books were somewhat weaker than the first few, and that ditching the King cameo would be a good idea for a movie adaptation. The 7th book is quite good in my opinion, I'd say the 6th is the worst of the bunch and should be de-emphasized. The 5th one is decent though it's not really on par with the earlier ones. I think the 4th is one of the best, and it would be a shame to chop this one out.
So… when deciding how to split it up, I just hope they weight the books well… maybe a trilogy is possible… 1 and 2 combined, 3 and 4 combined, and then 5,6,7 combined.
Also, it was a real shame how Flagg was so easily dispatched in the story.. honestly, I wouldn't mind if he played a stronger role in the movie.
Look regardless how the movie is made we will not have our say in it, as far as which book is better or which was worse….did it not keep you on your toes all the way from one to seven? They are great and complex, some things can be cut and in hollywood always are cut. Personally making a movei good is something you have to put your faith in. I never thought i would like something like Lord of the Rings, but i went ahead and watched the Fellowship and loved it so it all boils down to personal taste, and the fact is you take a risk with any film, people are either going to like it or they're not. My complete and personal opinion is if you only do Gunslinger as the first movie some people won't go and see the second. It should be combined with the Drawing of the Three.
@Amy: You're right…..it is a matter of personal taste. No matter who is involved with this project or how good it turns out or what format (movie, HBO, etc.) you'll have nay-sayers. This "triumph of literature" should be made into film. Let's face it….King obviously wants to see it happen….otherwise he would have turned down everyone including J.J. Abrams down when the idea was initiated. He considers this his "magnum opus", his "greatest work"……so it will probably happen…..with any push at all (from him). Dark Tower being made into film…..translates into a gazillion new fans getting turned onto Roland & Co. The bottom line is……it is a masterpiece and by making it into film, just expands on the Dark Tower mythos. (like the Marvel Graphic Novel series did and continues to do). Personally, once work evolves from one format to another, I have no problem separating them……you can love the book and hate the movie/s or vive-versa. There is no way that this can be contained as a singular body of work (from book to graphic novels to film, etc.)…..it's out of the bag now and in different (creative) hands moving forward. The singular King vision of the Dark Tower ended when he invited Marvel to the party and gave Peter David, Robin Furth, etc, the go-ahead to expand the world of Roland. With J.J. Abrams and Damon Lindeloff now invited…..it should be one hell of a party.
Adpating a novel to film is quite a difficult task. Causing the mind's eye to reveal itself through even the utmost CGI is utter choas.
I think that each novel should not have it's own movie. Books 1 & 2: Movie #1. Book3: movie #2, Book 4: Movie #3; Book 5 & 6:, Movie #4; Book 7: Movie 5.
Movies from the books? Say True. I say thank ya.
Well I have read alot of good ideas here. Viggo Mortensen can make himself into anyone he chooses or so i have read. Very solid choice for Roland. Maybe Ed Norton for Eddie and well I always pictured susannah as the black chick(Lanei Chapman) from the movie Rat Race (she now does Hardees commercials) pretty sure she's free.
But as much as I want to see the a Fullblown Movie.. i would hate anything less that 8 or nine Movies and that is not happening. A couple of the books are just too big. What are ya gonna leave out the first to make it fit with the second in one movie… Nope not for me… And Doing book seven in ONE MOVIE HAHA
It has to be a HBO/Show/ hell USA and FX do fine work. JUST DONT LET ANYONE FROM THE SCIFI CHANNEL NEAR IT… I LOVE Science fiction HATE the channel though.
Well off to make me a popkin before bed…
May we meet again on the path, before we all meet in the clearing
Thankee Sai
@Susan Stevens:
I think the actor Viggo Mortensen would be best for Roland. That's all I want.
Frank Darabont needs to write the screenplay!!!
Honestly, I feel that after robin forth or firth joined the King team,things took a drastic turn. But all in all, I would feel less fortunate to have not finished the series init's entire result. Ex-consand dying grandmothers have written King asking for the end,and he couldn'ttell them. Not on the spoilerfear of ruiningit but just because he didn't know how it would end. That my freinds, says alot about the caliber ofthis story. Goodnight constant readers.
I really think that the dark tower series would be better suited as a television show than a series of movies. True, it would have to be on HBO or something because of the language and the violence. But I think that even trying to tell the stories in 7 movies would be pushing it. The last three movies would have to be 4 hours long to get everything in. But as a tv series they would have years to tell what's happening. As far as Wizard and Glass goes, JJ Abrams has proved with Lost that he can weave flashbacks into a story without letting it take over the main arc. I think that the story from W&G could be told as a series of flashbacks while the story in the other books are going on at the same time. It's worth a thought.
Hi there… I just saw this website and read it because i saw the Dark Tower topic.
I just can say I can't wait to see the first one… and i'll tell the truth, i would really love to see an adaptation for each book, but I know I can get disapointed because people who make movies allways made a bad movie from great books like this one.
By the way I alredy have read all the Dar Tower books, and to be honest… THEY CHANGE MY LIFE. I LOVE STEPHEN KING. HE SHOULD BE A GOOD AND HEAVEN THE DARK TOWER'S WOLRD :D
i would like to see a movie for each book. i think the series was great i finished it several years ago and just keep reading it over and over. i agree that it would be pretty hard to make a good film out of this series but i think with the right people it could be done. you would just need a good director that liked the series as much as the fans do.
I think making DT into a movie is a terrible idea. The only movies that have not been hack jobs are The shawshank redemtion and the green mile. And the green mile didnt even end the way it was supposed too. I have no faith in Hollywood to do it right and im actually very upset that it is even in the works.
IF this has to happen i think it would be best to just do it in 3 or 4 movies. I absolutly think The Gunslinger and The drawing of the three need to be one movie. It will put the story line out there, it will start with all of the main characters it needs to make the next movie too. As much as i LOVE the Wizard and Glass it really isnt going to help the movies. Directors cut everything to pieces as it is and they might as well cut the part that isnt actually necessary to make the story. I agree about it being a prequel. That is an excellent idea. Combine Wolves of Calla and Song of Susanna. They are gonna cut a ton as it is may as well put those together so its a hit movie and Of corse The Dark Tower book needs to be by itself. Its so long and has so much pertinant to the story in it that they need to keep so much of it. There it is…3 movies with a prequel a few years later.
As far as actors go i would say we need a big name for Roland, then just cast the rest as unknown actors. I cant imagine any currently popular actors as any character. Clint eastwood is obviously the right choice as Roland…we will see. But the rest just cant be old names. This is movie project like the lord of the rings, you cant have actors in it that make you think of other movies. It could ruin the amazingnes of the story.
I will protest made for TV until the day I die. Its a horrible idea. Not enough money, not enough freedom. If the Lord of the rings would have been made for TV it would have been terrible too. Although i still say that this movie idea is absolutly terrible and will probably disgrace the whole thing, if it has to be done it has to be done right with people that truly want an amazing movie, not the money it may bring.
I would love to see this made into movies. However I agree that they have to be done right, and with the right actors. I've seen so many of his books ruined by poor production and would hate to see this with the Dark Tower series. I could easily see Viggo Mortensen in the role of Roland Deschain. The fear I have though with the books being turned into movies is that so often I end up disappointed. Green Mile is one exception, and Misery. But most, Meh. They would have to bring in just the right people or it just won't be right.
Ok, first off, introducing Stephen King as a character was not stupid or have anything to do with being egotistical. The meaning behind it, if you understood the backbone of King's work, is quite simple. The Tower series are his life. His life-work. The reasons behind there being a lag between Wizards and Wolves is all explained by him… the character him. The way that they bounce between worlds, have characters from other books, the prim, todash, walk-ins. ALL FOR A REASON. King was trying to convey a message, to confuse and open minds.
EXAMPLE: the way Roland's world was before it moved on…. the machines that the old ones left behind… how east is no longer true east… the destruction of the beams….
Think about it. The way our world was before war… any war, take your pick… how things change…. from bad to worse, from good to better. Our machines… our technology… nuclear warheads…. you know… see where Im going with this?
Maybe it's nothing. Maybe we look too much into things. But King is known to put things into perspective, to add things into his books to make us think… and cringe. I assume you have read or seen NEEDFUL THINGS? GREED AND ENVY! THE STAND? Superflu = AIDS! CUJO? People not taking care of their pets! (lol…. ) Not all of his books equal something else, but there is truth behind a lot of them. If you look for it.
When you get to the end of the last book, and you read past the "ending" you will understand so much more. Who knows by now, you may already have finished it. Maybe even changed your mind. I am not trying to make up your opinion, alter it in any way. I am just trying to express to you WHY the Tower has such a following. Most people I talk to about it, love it. They fall in love with the characters, respect them. I know they are just ink and images of the mind, Im not that dense to think otherwise, but people tend to connect themselves with characters in books. Tend to put themselves into the story to escape from an otherwise boring day.
King is not egotistical, he is probably one of the most humble famous people I have ever read about. He doesnt always do it for the money, he doesnt always do it to please other people. From what I get from any article or book (On Writing for example), he is a down to earth, albeit morbid, individual who has the talent to keep people interested. If you didnt like WOLVES or SUSANNAH, then why did you keep reading? I'll tell you why… there is an ending, sometimes boring to get to, (as in Wastelands for me, or even in the LOTR trilogy) but an ending that may explain so much! I skipped alot of stuff when reading LOTR because Tolkein had a flair for over creating backgrounds and histories. It bored me to death! But I read all the books, saw all the movies, and loved them! Wastelands, to me… had a lot of "wasted" words. It was the most difficult for me to get through. But that's just me. I still tell people, READ the Tower books, trudge through Wastelands, it's worth it.
I actually want to see more of the story. The ending…. why do you think it keeps getting repeated? Because there is something that Roland keeps fucking up. Read the poem "The Childe Roland to the Dark Tower came" and maybe you will understand that more.
Ok, I have written a small novel myself with this and should just quit now. Look for Stephen King: The Dark Tower group on facebook. Come discuss this more with me and other people who just cant get enough!
@Katie:
I very much agree with Viggo as Roland. I think that Sam Elliot would be great as either Roland or Eldred .. the Big Coffin hunter!
@Erika:
I disagree. If Peter Jackson would do it, it would be phenomenal! As much as I would love to see 7 movies, I agree with you that maybe there should be some combining. Gunslinger and Drawing would be great if made into one movie. However, I worry about that a little too. Wolves and Susannah, all though they do seem to have key points that waver from the rest of the story ( at least in some people's opinion) they are important.
@JayVee: I have a lot to say on this subject but I have to start here. It canNOT start with Wizard and Glass. And don't use the comic books as an excuse to start there. The comic books started this way because that was what they were hired to do: provide the background for Roland's character. They aren't telling the whole story of Roland from his trial against Cort to his walk in the field of roses at the base of the tower. They specifically set out to tell the story of Roland from his trial against Cort to his final battle with his original ka-tet, at Jericho Hill.
It has to start with the Gunslinger. It has to start with the visual image that corresponds to this line: "The man in black fled across…"And the Gunslinger would be the best of the movies or shows. Imagine all the action in the book as well as all the moments that would provide depth into Roland's psyche. The destruction of Tull, his test against Cort, being chased through the mountains by mutants. Letting Jake fall.
Roland only reveals the events that make up the bulk of Wizard to his ka-tet after they pester him for weeks. It takes him that long to get to that emotional state. Because at the heart of that story is once again the idea that he will leave everyone behind in order to get to the Tower. And he is telling that to his friends. Admitting to them that he will leave them if it is a choice between them or the Tower. Or at least he is admitting it would be a difficult decision. The viewer needs to be in that emotional state with him when he tells of Susan's death and the rest of his time in Mejis. The story in Mejis isn't just background info on Roland. It develops the character of Roland. If you just start with this young Roland then you're developing nothing and it's basically useless.
As for if it should be movie or show, I would vote show but I would say either way it will be extremely difficult. Jake will have to be recast at least once. But that wasn't the point of the post. I just wanted to put to rest the idea of starting with Wizard and Glass.
I agree with the post above. The Dark Tower series is about Roland searching for the Dark Tower. Starting with Wizard and Glass would give the wrong image. I also agree in that you have to get to know Roland's character in order to feel any sympathy for him at all. What happened with Susan and at Jericho Hill shape Roland into the person he is, into the person who continuously searches for the Dark Tower.
In all honesty I think if they made the books into a movie or into shows, they would suck. The books are so detailed, the characters are depicted in such a way that no human actor would ever be able to live up to the image the readers have in their minds.
I love these books. I just ate them after I found out about them. Although I must admit that the Wolves of the Calla and Song of Sussanah were pretty bad. The way they were, I wouldn't be surprised if they meshed those two together, or even skipped the two!
Yes, those were bad, but the last book will fully and completely make up for it. 250 pages is just the beginning, just setting the stage. I assure you, the other 870 pages are pure and completely in tune with the Song of Gan.
I have given more thought to who should play Roland…While Viggo makes good sense.. I can't help seeing the looks of Roland in Hugh Laurie(aka House).. And being that he is English and plays an arrogant Amercan, one who have to believe he had the acting ability…
Probably be good for his career as well with House winding down…
Would LOVE to see adapted to a movie but it's EXTREMELY unlike to happen because of the length of the books and character development. I agree with most of the opinions on this web-site that the last three books are too long and not as good as the first four. A good point is in the final book when Roland and Susannah are being chased through the tunnels by some kind of monster in the darkness. Why was that needed in the story?
To the the writer: You shouldn't have spoke negatively on something you haven't finished reading. Until then, everything your wrote is a waste. Get back to me when your done. Then let's discuss everything.
@ImprisonedNtheDarkTower: I have since finished these books and while I thought the seventh book was a massive improvement over "Wolves" and "Susannah" I am still not a fan of the Stephen King thread in the story. No change there.
I also don't think a TV adaptation would do the series justice and a feature film franchise would cost too much money and not be able to develop enough support from the movie-going audience. Just look at what happened to the Narnia series, Disney dumped it and Fox is trying to save it, doesn't bode well considering the Narnia franchise of books has been around much longer and has far more admirers.
Now what was it you would like to discuss?
I didn't know whether to laugh or cry when sai king wrote himself into the book.. so I'm with you on that point..but as to the other..
I'm not sure that's a fair assessment..if we're talking about what's more popular and what's been around the longest.. look at tolken's lord of the rings.. it took 50 years to get it put to film and it was a massive success. I think the biggest factor here is the shoddy reputation of sai kings past film and tv adaptions. Desperation, IT, Sleepwalkers, dreamcatcher, the graveyard shift, the dead zone, christine.. all horrible adaptions of the books. whether it was the fault of the directors/screenwriters or the fact that sai king had a hand in them, I don't know, but it does not bode well for the attempt at his greatest written work.
I'm partly into listening to the audio recordings of the series, having already read them once. I've long been of the opinion that these books would lend themselves well to film; King wrote an amazingly lush and believable world for Roland and his tet to travel in, and it would be a shame to never see it realized onscreen.
However, I do think the first book would be a serious challenge that perhaps should be handled a little bit differently than as a conventional film. As King himself stated, it ran in reverse up to Roland getting to the Waystation in the Mohaine Desert, and I'm not at all certain that could be shown onscreen without quite thoroughly confusing the audience.
Another issue I have with the first novel as a film is a decided lack of chronological plot points up to Roland's first encounter with Jake. There's very little that's actually relevant other than as a way to establish Roland's character, and in a film, it's the actor that does that as much as the plot. For example, describing Roland as a person (how he looks, acts, walks, dresses, talks, etc) may take several pages of the first book, but can be accomplished in mere seconds on film.
That said, the period Roland and Jake spend under the mountain could be used to dream up a few new horrors (and/or maybe a "boss fight" in gamerspeek) and further establish that Roland's world, for all its visual beauty, really isn't all that nice of a place in some cases. Let's be honest- not a lot happens that terribly crucial in those early pages of "The Gunslinger" from a character development standpoint, again, until Roland meets Jake. Shoot- to replace or add to those moments that *are* needed, we could flash back to Mejis for part of a scene. The Mejis story is one of my favorites by far.
As to the other books, the ending of "The Wastelands" might tick some people off, but could well ensure that those same people come back for the next one. It's very important that "Wizard and Glass" in particular is done right, as this will necessitate not only the use of a much younger actor to play !Roland, but also a great deal of tact given the ages of the participants in that story. Their youth may be all well and good in the books- after all, Roland is considered an Apprentice Gunslinger at that point, and not a boy by any stretch as far as everyone in his world is concerned- but American audiences will squirm in their seats if Roland's age at that time in the films matches his age at that point in the books. Right or wrong, we throw people in jail for exactly that over here.
The scene with Jake and the Doorkeeper is one I eagerly anticipate- but showing it as it occurs in the book would earn a quick and decisive NC-17 rating. I think even completely pantomiming the scene in question, without any additional effects for Susannah's character, would do that. Unfortunately, that incident is vitally important as a plot point later on. I'd like to point out here that no popular or successful serious American motion picture I'm aware of has ever been shown under the Nc-17 label. People still consider this "Rated X", which means Pr0n, which means "this theater will not show adult material". Sad situation, but there it is.
As to King appearing in his own film as his own character: no. It *might* *partially* work in the books (I'm still hung on that one), but people would walk out of the theater if they tried it in the films. Rework the plot so the actual "Gan's Navel" *looks like* King, but isn't, and it could work a bit better. You could even establish that in advance by "twinning" other, secondary and tertiary characters in our world, as seen by Jake, Suze, and Eddie to people they meet in Mid/End World prior to "the Writer" ever being a consideration.
Make the piecemeal removal of the tet's members as emotionally brutal as possible. I want the last scene with Oy to rip out my heart, stomp it on the ground, and grind it in the dirt. That scene made me *cry* when I read it. If every audience member isn't silently sobbing after that, "you're doin it rong".
The prospect of films is exciting to me; as a hobbyist 3D animator and modeler, I read the Doorkeeper scene with a mind as to what I would expect it to *look* like, given what I know about the capabilities of 3D animation. If these are done anything close to "right", they'll be well worth the watching.
Crap! I have to stop writing; this is long enough as it is. Just my $.02… or, in this case, my $20.
:D
The whole idea of a dark tower movie (or series of movies) is just too big for us to grasp and agree on. No one is going to be completely happy, that just never happens. You obviously need 99% of the gunslinger, which could run into the drawing of the 3, but would have to be cut off somewhere around the introduction of Eddie. If there are 7 movies, the true fans will see them all. The financing for the later films may come directly from ticket/dvd revenue, because getting a studio to greenlight a seven movie series(with consistent budgets, that doesn't involve teenage wizards) would take an act of God.
@Occulus: @Occulus: I would pay cash money to see the look on an audience's cumulative faces with that ever so wonderful "Blaine the Mono" cliffhanger.
@redeyeconflict:
*riddle contest finally begins*
*interior shot of train with faded-out walls*
*camera climbs out of cabin to show the Wastes*
*train whooshes off with a sonic boom*
*ROLL CREDITS*
ROFL. It's such a totally classic cliffhanger, too. And after all that- the Doorkeeper, Lud, Big Blaine/Little Blaine…
I believe in these books or rather-the Paths of the Beam-that bind all of its readers together. There is no pretention behind anyone here, and its beautiful. I hope that when this massive epic is put on film-and it will, eventually-that the same beauty-of-life falls upon the viewer, as it has the reader. Hardly any LOtR fans seem to use the dialects from the books in posting on message boards, or in my case, occasionally conversation. Whether or not we liked the whole of the stories, we all are bound together, and all are gunslingers, sometimes inside. Roland Deschain is the ultimate superhero, if you could call him that-we all want to be like him-walking our path.
I have porphyria-an allergy to the sun-and when I started this story at 12 years old, I nearly hospitalized due to the neurological and physical effects of my own personal day-long treks through the the mountainous areas in east TN, pretending inside to be looking for lobstrosities in ponds and perhaps a door…when really I was taking a long trip to the video store.
Now at almost 25, say thankya, sometimes I look up off my balcony, smile at the clouds, hoping to see the Beam. And that is what the dark tower means to me.
I'd like to see a movie adaption, but not necessarily one per book. IMO, Wolves of the Calla doesn't have enough story for a full movie on it's own.
@tooterfish:
Although I would love to see Hugh Laurie in a long movie… I dont think he could be Roland. He is too famous for his role as HOUSE. We need some new sexy but rough actor. Having an all star cast just wouldnt flow right. I dont know, maybe it's just me.
@Niki Spencer:
tooterfish: I agree that you can't have an actor like Brad Pitt or somebody play Roland because he's just too well known and would detract attention from the actual movie. But you can't have a complete nobody come in like they did with Superman Returns. You want someone just big enough to catch everyone's attention, someone they recognize but maybe can't name. I think Hugh Laurie fits that. Everyone will recognize him but most people can't name the big TV stars. I mean can anyone out there tell me the name of the stars on Heroes, CSI, Mad Men or Life without googling it. I'm sure some of the really big fans of those shows could, but most people wouldn't know that person by name. That's what we want here. If there's a role out there that could be played by a bigger named actor it would be Eddie or Walter. Hugh Laurie has the acting chops, the look and would be perfect for the role in my opinion.
There is another question I haven't seen mentioned above which I would like to pose which is this: Is JJ Abrams the right director for this. MI 3 and Cloverfield were good but neither was great. To me, especially with the Gunslinger, that movie would have to be spectacular. I don't know if JJ has the ability for it. I hope he does, because it would be great to see Roland's destruction of Tull, riddling with the Mono and the de-think-capping of the Wolves all on the big screen. I just worry about Abrams. Hopefully my worries are all misplaced.
The s-shape at the end is the key. They will have to get all of it. Book 1 should be its own movie. Walters visions sent to Roland would make a great ending, and leave those who haven't read the story scratching their heads. The Drawing of Three should also include up to Jake's drawing as well. The Watelands should take us all the way to Topeka. Wizard and Glass as a true prequel. I think Woles could stand on its own. Song of Sue should be combined with the first half or so of The Dark Tower, and then the grand conclusion. Seven movies if it do ya.
I never thought of Hugh Laurie. I like it. Vigo, Hugh Jackman or (don't laugh at this) Patrick Swayzee. Shia LeBeouf would make a great Eddie. Jada Pnkett-Smith as Susan. Billy Zane as Walter. Donald Sutherland as Jonas. Michael Chickliss as Cort. John Goodman as Herk Avery. Clint Eastwood (as an omage) as Father Calahan. Famke Jansen as Mia.
Just afew thoughts.
Also, anyone who hasn't, should listen to these on audio. If it wasn't for Frank Muller, I may have never become a fan. Say thank ya.
Final thoughts…….BIG SCREEN, BIG SCREEN, BIG SCREEN
@ravidlaz: You're mistaking "The Wastelands" for "The Wizard and Glass"
People! Please, there really only is one way to this: and it starts with, "The man in black fled across the desert. And the gunslinger followed." If you try to do it any other way, it will just piss off the hardcore fans (like myself). I personally have read the entire series 4 times, and each time I do, I picture the way I would do it.. if I were making the movie. Picture this:
-SETTING: Desert
-TIME: dusk
At a distance we see a man walking briskly over the crest of dune, he is tall and wears a black robe. We cannot see his face. As he is moving across the desert, we see words fade in at the bottom of the screen: THE MAN IN BLACK FLED ACROSS THE DESERT…
-CUT TO-
Desert, much farther away…
The screen fades in on a sun-bleached human skull, half buried in the sand. A black, dusty boot comes down on the skull; crushing it. As the camera pans up the leg, we see the words, "…AND THE GUNSLINGER FOLLOWED." Cue music (Bad Company by Bad Company). The camera pans up the leg to the gun on his right hip, showing the scrollwork and engraving, also the sandalwood grips. Pan the camera across the waist to show the gun on his left hip. We follow the camera up the gunslinger's back to show the waterskins, and his gear; finally up to the back of his head. As the camera slowly rotates arounf the gunslinger's head, the camera zooms in on his eye.
-CUT TO-
Dusty road, with a beat-up old wooden sign proclaiming: "TULL"…
I could go on like this for a while, I actually have written a screenplay for the first movie. I know EXACTLy how it would work. For those of you who want to change the story and still call yourselves fans? I say boo to you, everything in the story is told for a reason. Don't you see that changing the story was what made a lot of his other films so terrible? Have you ever read "IT" and then seen the movie? It's like night and day!! Keep the progression, keep stephen king as a character, don;t cut out anything that makes the stories what they are…
I'm a fan of most of this series of books but I have a big problem with Wolves of The Calla as it was just a straight rip-off of Seven Samurai (I know King acknowledged its influence but that doesn't excuse it) so I think you could get away with five or six films – just miss Wolves out – nothing much of any importance really happens in it anyway. Could be a great series of films though – if done properly.
@fonziespice:
Wow, I actually got chills thinking of Billy Zane as Walter. Looking at it, you really can't go wrong with that match up, Billy's got that kind of creepy superiority thing that he rocks in a few of his films (Demon Knight definitely comes to mind), and his voice has that right combination of arrogance and power to really bring Walter to life. Very nice choice, my friend.
Come on guys, listen to yourselves! No CG, no big budget movie! Make it an animated tv series on HBO like Spawn. It would be cheaper, look better, and just be better. They could even get the guys who did the comics to work on it. And they can put in everything. You want Clint Eastwood as Roland? You got it! Worried about Jake aging? Cartoon characters dont age unless you want em too! Dear lord, the state of the world these days… Has old fashion animation completely died already?
I devoured all seven books, and actually liked the last three the best. The ending is shocking and had me reeling for days. I don't know if I could stomach the film versions, though, since SO much of this stuff comes to life in the imagination of each of us. Could we all be happy with what a couple of filmmakers put up on the screen? I dunno. But I would love to see a movie version of Black House…
As for the Dark Tower series, it is the most moving writing I've read in years, and I read voraciously. I will never forget these characters and their stories, and am just not sure seeing someone else's visualization of them would help or hurt. We always have the books!
I think the screenplay could be adapted to squeeze all seven novels into 3 or 4 feature films with a running time similiar to the LOTR films. If this thing is born in the form of an HBO series or a cable tv series then you can count me out. "The Langoliers" could've been special but was botched. Thank God "The Mist" was put into good hands people.
The backstory in "W & G" could be severely downsized IMO.
@ckybltz: Is "the Road" new? i have not heard about it yet and i am pretty up to date on my SK books even the new short story collection.
I have almost all the books and movies and i am working on collecting the Graphic novels.
It is just a thing for me…i decided a long time ago if i was going to have a collection it would be complete, and so for it is. I am only missing a few rare books,such as, the one with the original printing for "The Mist". i would appreciate a reply when you get around to it.
Thank you,
Jennifer
If Lindeloff and Abrams end up making the Dark Tower series, they already have the perfect Roland working for them on LOST. Jeff Fahey, who plays Frank Lepidus the chopper/airline pilot. He's got the blue, bombadier's eyes, the gravelly voice, and the whole Clint Eastwood thing going for him. Seriously, the only thing he'd have to do to prepare for the role is smile less.
HAHA!! I just did a bit more digging on Jeff Fahey. I had totally forgot that he's already starred in a previous Stephen King adaptation as Jobe from Lawnmower Man. It's just the sort of symmetry you gotta love if you're a fan of the Dark Tower.
4 8 15 16… 19! :-)
The Dark Tower……mmmm… surely one of the most romantic and astonishing stories of our generation.
When i was reading these books, my only thought was of the tower, it enraptured and captivated my mind's eye, the vision, so to speak, haunted me; and i loved it.
As films, these books will surely suffer from hollywood's lack of discipline and (might as well go there) CARE. However, evidently enough Mr. King himself wants it to occur, so it will. Will it be good? I'm not a big fan of lost, and i feel that Abrams does not have enough 'vision' to render this series in its entirety. Will the Dark Tower be a good film or series, the answer is probably no, either way you look at it. Abrams may have a good pop-directing background but i feel that he won't be able to approach DT in that way, not if he wants it to be a success (even mildly) Abrams is too…. new age. This story to me feels like it is aged, and we are adoring members of a society looking back on the journey and reverently recalling the legend just for its place in our history. Personally, i feel that DT medias (film, series) will never live up to the books, never come close to the craftsmanship that Stephen King has used for this epic. I would want someone more artistic to do it, Coppola maybe. These things need to be spot on for DT to be truly represented. My opinion, Abrams, thanks but we're looking at others.
The series encompasses so many differing thoughts and notions, plays with complex and deep threads so expertly that we are all on here typing and arguing about it. the cast will have to be a distinctly good mixture of unnamable members and decently famous ones. If for TV, then use new talent or somewhat newish talent for all but Roland.
This is the crux here, the gunslinger, Roland of Gilead; if not for his character, would any of us care? would we spend the time on here looking and reading other posts? no, the gunslinger, as a character, ties it all in, so trusting the role to a somewhat unproven actor seems a large risk, I believe that Viggo might just be the best of all selections, recently i looked at Clive Owen, of Sin City fame, but i am unsure how well he would perform. The gunslinger MUST be the best, mainly due to his role and the depth and clarity of such. He must be Roland, the hard-ass, Roland the softy, and Roland the anti-hero all at once. The doggedness of his mind and the format of his thinking must also be played just right, or the film/ series will no doubt stink like Rhea of Coos.
but also, it WILL be done, like it or not, agree or disagree. The epic is too prolific in the annals of our time to have not picked up the media interest. The movies, (or so i feel) need to be more operatic than action-esque. While reading the books i always had this vision of the somewhat ethereality of this work, it must not be just spaghetti western style, dramatic/ yes, Action-packed? at parts, but there is a fluid notion of love and romance, fear and grit hard reality that must be put forth, Don't use the pop-culture music even if it is a direct influence, and don't correlate the action to westerns either, this story is a form of sorcery for the mind, we are trapped by the stupid devotion of Roland to his tower, and the Ka-tet that forms around him, but is not including him. There must be an art to these films/ series, one which was approached in LOTR, that may have never been done before in cinema. Otherwise, the majesty and magic of the whole epic journey, the cruxing points of reality and falsality in the story, will never be acheived
Long Days and pleasant nights
there are other worlds than this
Camuss111
and another thing, Roland is old and worn in the books, even in The Gunslinger he is at least 30, you folks are all choosing (in my little world the closer to the book the better) way too handsome and good looking men. Roland must be rough gruff and in Eddie's own words, 'long tall and ugly'
Viggo is still my pick, he has the rough side down and he can be a badass, (watch history of violence)
May your road lead you home
Camuss111
These books are amazing and yes a movie would be cool but they would not do a good job with them and cannot explain or even attempt to recreate the things that happen during the course of the books. Try and film the part which Susannah at the time was Odetta held off the demon by having it screw her as she explained felt like a cold icicle would be hard to do as graphic as Stephen king describes it to you. If u really want an adventure read the books because movies are never the same. If they do come out with a movie series i would see it to see how they did but I don't feel like hearing people think that the movie was ridiculously crazy that it was the best cause compared to the books and way he describes everything to you, it can't be acted out. If god wills it there will be water will see how ka lets things role. And If u ever get the chance Read these 7 books they will change the way you think about everything.
I loved these books. Honestly in a lot of ways book one was dry…. till i read thru all of them and went back and re-read it. As for book 5-7 they were great in their own way. Book 7 was a perfect way to end the series and definately changes the way you look at the series.
If they were going to pick an actor to play Roland he would have to be "Worn". He was old at the beginning of book one and how long was he out after the meeting with the man in black toward the end. His journey was extremely long and arduous. Viggo would be a great choice i think. only problem might be making him young and handsome looking for book 4. If they eventually do make movies.. i just hope they put tons of effort into making it right. (the only thing that matters is the ending)
@jordan: I have to agree,a T.V. series is the only way to go for this work of art, there is no way a movie ,or seven, could grasp every aspect that needs to be captured to fully display how good this story and it's characters are. Personally would not go see the final book in a cinema because crying like a baby in public just isn't my scene.
@Psychomiklos: No question there, should start the exact same way as the book and finish the exact same way.
look if its good its good and if its bad its bad.i would love to see how it turns out. how can n e 1 say not to make the movie b/c they dont think it would b n e good, or for n e other stupid reason they can think of, its about support of a great or the best author, and to see what he thinks would please us as a movie as it did a book.and jj is a great dir, the best for the job if u ask me. iam kind of pissed of at the lack of support, sure it may not be the best, but i will pay to see it, all of them.so to end this before i ramble on and on about my own opinons, i think this is a great idea, and could b one of the best series of movies, or at the least a nother good way to enjoy stephen king in a new day and age
I would love to see The Dark Tower portrayed in 7 movies, but most likely myself and other readers would hate it. They can't acurately put thousands of pages on the big screen. It would be better to make a TV series. Not a mini series, but a full blown tv show. I think there is more then enough story in King's epic tales to make a TV show out of.
honetly, i doubt very seriously that this epic of modern literature will ever be a movie or tv series or anything. it would cost way too much because the only way to make the series great on screen is to not delete a single detail because i would not like it any other way. there would also be way too many risks involved. what if one of the actors died in the middle of production? accidents do happen you know. thats ka. i just don't believe j.j. or anybody else would be the right person to do it and if they did and the movie or tv series was actually good, maybe even great, there's no way in heaven, hell, or earth that it would ever be as good as the novels.
in my opinion i would vote for about 4 movie adaptations. movie 1-books 1&2; movie 2-books 3&4; movie 3-books 5&6; movie 4-book 7. and i think they could manage most if not all of the details in the books. i mean they wouldn't have to spend a lot of time on most of the parts because most of the battles and conversations and shit that seemed long would not take as long on a movie.
i think if the right people were working on the movie and if stephen king feels the same way as the majority of us, the movie would be hugely amazing. and it has to start with the first book exactly like post 72 describes only i would rather somebody with a really awesome deep and raspy voice should say "the man in black fled across…" instead of having the words appear on the screen. the rest of the movie is obvious the way it should go (EXACTLY LIKE THE BOOKS!)
As a set of movies, The Dark Tower could be done. However, it couldn't be done perfectly accurate to the novels and the idea of doing a seven-film series is next to impossible in today's movie market. And of course, I think there is a lot in the books that could be dropped in favor of keeping things engaging for those who haven't yet read the books. Either way, it's quite a gamble because some of the series' most amazing scenes and set pieces call for an R-rating, and the days of the R-rated blockbuster may be at an end…at least for the time-being. Here's a few things they could do to shorten the film series yet still make it good:
1. Combine "The Gunslinger" and "Wizard and Glass." Intercut Roland's journey across the desert with flashbacks.
2. Make Marten, Walter, and Flagg the same person, even I get confused as to who is who sometimes.
3. Get rid of the characters and settings from other King novels, including King himself. Having the characters walk through a Captain Trips-laden Topeka in "Wizard" and bringing in the preacher from "Salems Lot" into "Wolves of the Calla" is great for a die-hard King reader, but would be ultimately confusing and unnecessary for the movie audience.
4. So the film series could go like this:
Movie #1 – Gunslinger/Wizard
Movie #2 – Drawing/Wastelands
Movie #3 – Song/Dark Tower
Simple trilogy, could have the same actors and director, "Lord of the Rings" for the R-rated crowd.
Stephen King got into accident in June in 2009 which would have been between The Dark Tower 4 and 5. Here's a description from the Wikipedia….
Car accident and thoughts of retirement
In the summer of 1999, King had finished the memoir section of On Writing: A Memoir of the Craft, but had abandoned the book for nearly eighteen months, unsure of how or whether to proceed.
On June 19, at about 4:30 p.m., he was reading a book and walking on the shoulder of Route 5, in Center Lovell, Maine. Driver Bryan Smith, distracted by an unrestrained dog moving in the back of his minivan,[9] struck King, who landed in a depression in the ground about 14 feet from the pavement of Route 5.[4] According to Oxford County Sheriff deputy Matt Baker, King was struck from behind and some witnesses said the driver was not speeding or reckless.[10] King's website, however, says King was walking facing traffic.
King was conscious enough to give the deputy phone numbers to contact his family but was in considerable pain. The author was first transported to Northern Cumberland Hospital, in Bridgton, and then flown by helicopter to Central Maine Medical Center, in Lewiston. His injuries—a collapsed right lung, multiple fractures of his right leg, scalp laceration and a broken hip—kept him at CMMC until July 9, almost three weeks.
Earlier that year, King had finished most of From a Buick 8, a novel in which a character dies after getting struck by a car. Of the similarities, King says that he tries "not to make too much of it."
After five operations in ten days and physical therapy, King resumed work on On Writing in July, though his hip was still shattered and he could only sit for about forty minutes before the pain became intolerable.
King's lawyer and two others purchased Smith's van for $1,500, reportedly to prevent it from appearing on eBay. The van was later crushed at a junkyard after King had severely beaten it with a baseball bat. King later mentioned during an interview with Fresh Air's Terry Gross that he wanted to completely destroy the vehicle himself with a sledgehammer.[11]
A fictionalized account of the accident was written into the last novel of the "Dark Tower" series. Parts of the conversation between Smith and King, as he awaited medical attention, were used in the book, as well as an accurate description of the injuries sustained.
Two years later, King suffered severe pneumonia as a direct result of his lung being punctured in the accident. During this time, Tabitha King was inspired to redesign his studio. King visited the space while his books and belongings were packed away. What he saw was an image of what his studio would look like if he died, providing a seed for his novel Lisey's Story.
In 2002, King announced he would stop writing, apparently motivated in part by frustration with his injuries, which had made sitting uncomfortable and reduced his stamina. He has since resumed writing, but states on his website that:
"I'm writing but I'm writing at a much slower pace than previously and I think that if I come up with something really, really good, I would be perfectly willing to publish it because that still feels like the final act of the creative process, publishing it so people can read it and you can get feedback and people can talk about it with each other and with you, the writer, but the force of my invention has slowed down a lot over the years and that's as it should be."[12]
That was the Description from the Wikipedia. Most of it is true, but not all of it. Stephen King received moderate brain damage from the accident and has never recovered. That's why on the "19" of june 1999 he never was quite the same again and therefor the Dark Tower series was never really finished.
Well i must say that you must not not not make it in a movie. I want a complete series. As in a movie no director on the face of the earth can do it justice. I loved all the books, hated none of them, and whoever says that the last three books were…. whatever….well then God help you! The Last books are the cream of the whole series, Rolands final stand! God what kind people are here on Earth!
The series is way too long to be translated into film. It needs to be a miniseries. My favorite installment is definitely the Waste Lands. I never really like Wizard and Glass or that Stephen King was a character in the series. Oh well, still my favorite series.
Wow this is a big thread. So I didn't read the whole thing. I had a thought the other day about this:
**************SPOILER ALERT********************
I warned you…so here goes.
With the way the last book ended there could easily be changes. They could pick up where the last book left off. Roland is getting another chance at the tower and this time something's changed; he has Eld's Horn with him. This opens the possibility of changing a few story arcs that would otherwise prove extremely difficult to film. I know I may be speaking blasphemy but I would rather them try this than attempting to film a story that in many ways can't be filmed. I love these stories and I think it would be nice to see Roland finally end his journey. The adaptation could never equal the books so why not pick up where they left off and give Roland some closure. It would also tie in more with the poem…just putting that out there.
Brad Brevet, interesting review you gave. I agree, Book 3 (Wastelands) was excellent and is probably my favorite out of the 7, but to bash the last 3?! I loved them and they are all a close 2nd to my enjoyment of Wastelands. Stephen King inserting himself into the story was brilliant I thought, and still think so. I thought it worked very well, added to the plot beautifully and unexpected, and I especially loved the explanation of how the Crimson King was giving him nightmares to try stopping him from finishing the series.
Anyway, I'm crazy excited about the news that J.J. Abrams and his team have bought the rights. I am concerned but still hyped about the possibilities of seeing this wonderful story brought to life on screen. I would love to see it as a tv series, like Battlestar Gallatica was so superbly done. Mostly, I hope they get the casting right. But you never know, when Heath Ledger was announced to have landed the Joker role in Dark Knight, I remember everyone including myself saying WTF!! However he was amazing, so in the hands of the right script and director this could be very cool. Fingers crossed!
I grew up reading this great story and bought every one as they were completed. If a bunch of movies are made it would be best to start out and end from the "The man in black fled accross the desert and the gunslinger followed." But like in Tarrentino's pulp fiction movie it should thoughtfully skip around a bunch in a well thought out way so it keeps you wanting more of the story while bringing new parts and completing others. Also for star power Viggo Mortensen should be cast as older Roland and Orlando Bloom as the younger Roland and Sam Elliot or James Brolin as his dad. Cort should be played by Jesse Ventura. Russel Crowe should absolutely be the man in black walteror Marten because not only can he be an asshole in real life (no offence love his acting) but he has a natural brit well austrailian accent.
I began reading these books a few years ago, and finished all seven in about two months. The story is absolutely amazing, and King's blending of all his books into one story is incredible. But, as much as it pains me to say so, I don't think a seven movie epic is the way to go for the Dark Tower. In my miniscule opinon, the best way to go would be a mini-series, a-la The Stand. Though the Dark Tower mini-series would need six or seven epsiodes of roughly 1 1/2 to 2 hours. I think a cool way to approach Rolands Mejis flashback, would be to have the first few chapters of "Wizard and Glass" take place at the end of the third episode. This would set the fourth episode up to start in the flashback, and end with the confrontation at the Emerald Palace.
Oh, I forgot to mention. Hugh Laurie (House) would make an EXCELLENT Roland. He has the haggard appearance and the blue eyes. As well as the barely detectable dry humor.
I love these books. I have read all seven and think they're all great. I am so happy that they're making it into movies. I've been waiting for it since I started reading the series a few years ago.
I honestly wish Clint Eastwood wasn't too old, because he'd be the oerfect Roland, considering the character Roland was based off him.
Im all for a movie series….but 7 is a big ask. If they were worldwide bestsellers than yes…go for 7, but they are not….I think they should for 4 movies
Part I Gunslinger and the drawing of three….(drawing of the three is so damned exciting…gun fights and races against time)
Part II wastlands and Wizard(aching love story, and crazy train)
Part III Wolves and Sussanah(back to the actiion!!)
Part IV The Dark Tower( I agree, get rid of King as himself story line)
I agree that the first one has to be a hit for the others to get made.
But it would have enough action and character development to please both critics and audeinces alike….Christian Bale certainly has the star power to get asses on seats!!
if the day ever comes where these movies are made i think my life will be complete. ok i over react, but still, this saga blew my mind. i began reading it at a time in my life when i was failing and life was pretty much at its worst for me. the story between those covers made me think, made me take a good hard look at life around me and what my actions were doing to my life, and why i was repeating mistakes made over and over. from the end of the fight at algul siento to the very last page tears spilled from my eyes. my heart was heavey, but also hopeful. it got me through, and i connected with not only roland, but eddie and susannah as well. i saw parts of me in all of them, and each of them learned a lesson that changed their lives. i want to see this on screne. it deserves to be done. if there is one story out there with a massive lesson that needs to be told its the dark tower saga. it CAN be done properly, and all it will take is paitence to make it happen. ~long days and pleasent nights~
I'm don't really like the idea of Christian Bale playing Roland. I don't really care for him much as an actor. He was good in the Dark Knight, but that's only because he spent most of the movie running around in a costume and talking in an extremely gruff voice.
If I were in charge of casting it, here's who I'd like to see:
Roland: Jeff Fahey
Eddie: Giovanni Ribisi
Rhea of the Coos: Cloris Leachman
Father Callahan: Clint Eastwood (I don't think he'd be into this kind of thing though. But it would still be cool because it would be sort of ironic playing a priest named Callahan after being so well known for playing "Dirty Harry" Callahan.)
Jake: Some random kid who can act well
Susannah: Rosario Dawson
Walter: Ralph Fiennes
I started reading the Dark Tower books in the seventh grade and waited eagerly for each one to be released. While I would love to see 7 movies based on the story I think in this day and age an MMO or other computer game might be a better fit. No worries of casting or aging actors and the ability to step into Roland's world on your own. Think of it you could go from the glory days of Giliad as Roland's father and take the big guns with the sandlewood grips in your own hands, all the way to the top of the Dark Tower itself.
@Michael: I'm currently playing fallout 3 on my xbox, and I've gotta say, your last comment really made me think! What would be better than entering the wasted desert and having to find your way to the dark tower yourself. Each book could be new downloadable content. Oh man. I just wet myself. I know this will never happen, but its good to dream…
while I'm on it, for me, the only format for this would be a long series along the same vein and prison break, the wire and lost. That way you could get all the information, all the characters, all the storylines without having to cram it into cinema timeslots.
If you've only read the books, I really recommend you listening to the audio recordings. They are nothing short of incredible, hearing the voice of roland is something very special indeed!!
@Niki Spencer:
I read recently that house is the number 1 show in the world.
If this is even close to true he might be the difference between selling this properly and a flop.
AND FOR THE LOVE OF GOD SQUASH this Fahey crap. COME ON JEFF FAHEY to be the cornerstone of a seven movie deal. CAN YOU SAY STRAIGHT to the 1.99 dvd bin
Roland has bombardier blue eyes so does hugh
narrow hips 6 or so foot tall.
how old do you picture Roland 35-55 depending on the setting for me.
Take a good look at hugh laurie. Could be 38 could be 48 hard to tell. Good looking and
an extremely gifted musician check out his first SNL appearance. IT IS CLASSIC
He could dance the commala(excuse dont recall exacts sp)
Loved this series. Can't wait to see what and if anything comes in the way of a movie. Haha I always pictued Tick Tock as Dennis Hopper. Don't know if it could go 7 films, but the Books one and two are close enough in time span that they could easily be condensed into one episode.
Hmm House is my favorite TV show for sure. But I don't see Laurie as Roland sorry.
I think it's funny how people keep trying to guess which role Stephen King would play in the series. o.O Don't you guys think he would play himself? I mean, seeing as how he IS a fairly large element in his own books.
King is too old to play himself, for most of his time in the book he's a young man,plus I doubt he'd do it any way
OMG.. can't wait for the movie but I worry that J.J will ruin it. I think Peter Jackson would do a much better job of it. As for who should play these legendary characters well let me tell u I have read and re-read all 7 books a dozen times and as much as I love Hugh Jackman and Viggo I can not see them as Roland. I always thought he was more like clint eastwood, but sadly he is too old for this part. I had also considered Sam Elliot, but again he too is too old to play the part. I also think that the parts should be playe by recognizable, but not so popular and well known actors. Anyone else would distract from the story, so here is my list
Roland- Joaquin Phoenix …
I know he has been having trouble lately, but did anyone see Walk the line? he was amazing..
Eddie Dean- Josh Lucas is my first choice I could definately see him as the smart a** New Yorker
Susannah/ Detta – Halle Berry, though she is well known Halle is very versitle. just imagine Detta's nasty voice out of her beautiful face…eerie.
Jake Chambers- Josh Hutcherson.. the boy from Zathura, Journey to the center of the earth and Bridge to terabithia. If he is too old then possibly the kid from the spiderwick chronicles would do just as well.
The Man in Black/ walter Dim- the books never really gave him a definate description aside from his black robes. His face was always hooded so I always pictured him as Flagg from kings "The stand" in the way he spoke always giggeling and capable of anything. what do you all think? we need someone capable of both humorous and scary. I am open to suggestions but what do you all think of Jack Black as a possibility? perhaps john travolta if age is not an issue.. he is also well known but one heck of an actor remeber Face off? he was wickedly good as both the good and the bad guy.
As to whether this series should be done as films or a tv series… FILM all the way, the could condense the boks into 4-5 movies without losing too much from the books. The flash back in book 4 when Roland meets Susan I think is important because it shows not only his ruthlesness at such a young age, but just what he gave up in his quest. this part of his story should perhaps be the start of these movies and then fade to the infamous part "The man in black fled across the desert, and the gunslinger followed…"
Hi tower junkie…you have a lot of really great and interesting things to say about the DT series! I can't believe its taken me this long to come across this blog! DT are the best books ever written (as far as I'm concerned!)
This was the first blog I've ever been on let alone posted comments about..I posted my ideas as to who should play whom WHEN the movie gets made…if you want to check it out plz go ahead- I take back my Tim Roth for your John Travolta….your rt…he is awesome and wld be perfect!
But what I wanted to say to you directly was in regards to your idea about Rolands destiny and entering the DT. I think roland was totally supposed to kill the cri.mson king. But I think he was never ever supposed to actually enter and climb to the top! I think he was supposed to what it took to straighten out the balance between good and evel- sing out the names of his friends- and then just leave!
I really love so many of your opinions and points of views and have been DYING to find someone ANYONE to have these kinds of discussions with! So please, when you get some time, read my posts and tell me what you think?!
PS- If it was possible, id sink every penny I have into getting this movie made! Just as long as its as true to the books as possible!
It's fun to imagine who might play these characters whether a movie is made or not. I could certainly see several of the above suggestions working in a visual conceptualization of the books; it's funny how many of them I had thought about before reading this thread. Here are a few others I've thought about, for what it's worth:
Roland: Daniel Day-Lewis – Probably not his cup of tea, but who knows? And for that matter, who cares? These are all dream-scenarios in any case. As far as I'm concerned, Lewis can play anyone (I hear he just got edged out by Denzel Washington for the role of Malcolm X). Several of Lewis's roles can be said to possess an "otherworldly" quality and I can easily imagine him shouting "For Gilead! For the Tower!" just before unleashing a hail of gunfire. Hugh Laurie, Hugh Jackman, and Viggo Mortensen could all certainly carry the Gunslinger "look" as well.
Eddie: Jared Leto, Jake Gyllenhal, Adrian Grenier – I've probably thought about Eddie's appearance more than the other characters. Any potential Eddie would have to have a convincing "junkie" and "little-brother" look as well as display a certain immature, teenage-like rebelliousness to Roland at first. Physically, these three guys could be quite gaunt at the beginning of the tale, when Eddie is still held in the tight grip of addiction, yet easily add muscle mass as the story moves forward. Leto and Gyllenhal have also been convincing enough in tough-guy roles (i.e. Fight Club and Jarhead, respectively) that each should be fine when the bullets start to fly….Oh yeah, and Leto's got addict experience too (Requiem for a Dream).
Susannah: Thandie Newton – I've got to admit, I stole this from above. I had a hard time placing Suze and thought about several of the others that have been mentioned but I think this would be a great pick. I think Newton could be exceedingly convincing as Odetta/Detta/Susannah. Not convinced? Just check out the scene in "Crash" where she calls Matt Dillon a cracka'.
As far as the other characters are concerned, I don't really have any other good/novel ideas. Certainly at least some of them should be relatively unknown and fresh faces.
I think it's great this thread has lasted nearly a whole year. I hope I'm not coming along too late to get some responses. Feel free to let me know how much you hated my suggestions.
There will be water if God wills it.
Daniel-Day Lewis would be a brilliant casting for Roland! He can bring the intensity, and he can bring the subtlety needed for other scenes. Good choice. What do you think of Shia La-whatever his name is as Eddie? He's upposed to be a man in his early twenties. Someone suggested it earlier, I'm just seconding that opinion. How about Tom Hanks for Walter?
I am so glad to read all these suggestions for the characters (except Hugh Laurie… I mean Cmon!!! Jesus, Mary and Jojo The Carpenter)
Anywayyys I would 'need' to see The Dark Tower as a SERIES! PLZZZ!
Movies wont be enough and I wish so hard that J.J. Abrams does it justice!
Ive read the Dark Tower series over and over again but i couldn't imagine 'any' Hollywood actor…big screen or small screen… that can carry out the legendary role of the anti-hero Roland Deschain of Gilead! All the suggestions are great infact e.g Daniel Day Lewis, Viggo Mortenson and even Jeff Fahey but I have a face of Roland of my own in my mind and there is no actual person like that!
And as for the suggestions for Eddie then how about Joseph Gordan Levitt or Giovanni Rabisi or even (Plz people dont murdalize me) Jason Mraz! I know he's a singer but look at him…. he looks like a total ex-junkie and he will also look good in some muscles as the story progresses!
Susannah… Rosario Dawson!
Jake…. Josh Hutcherson wud've been gud but he's grown now or except that just some random kid who can act really well!
Now please comment how much you liked or hated my suggestions!
Long Days And Pleasant Nights!
I've very few people in mind for the main cast because I've my own image of them in my head, I think unknowns would be a safe bet as you don't want to be familiar with anyone on screen, I think that could take away from their own story, but to completely contradict myself I would like to suggest Robert Knepper ,T-bag from Prison Break, as Randell Flagg, he got the whole meanacing/grinning thing down to a tee(excuse the pun).
Im worken on the seventh book now and cant wait for the movie adaptation of the books. all i wanna know is who is gonna play roland? its a shame eastwoods sooo old cause he is exactly how i picture roland.
Okay.
The first four books are clearly the better of the seven, and as a die-hard fan with a Dark Tower oriented tattoo, I will admit that. That is not to say that the fifth, sixth, and seventh book are horrible novels, because I read them quickly and truly enjoyed the story….BUT, they were a bit long, dragged out, and seemed forced.
On a different note, making seven movies (for each book) is a FANTASTIC idea. Why do we need to get so nit-picky about whether the fifth…sixth….seventh book is "hollywood movie material'?? If any body who read the series is a true SK fan, you will love and embrace the idea of his magnum opus being created into absolutely awesome and phanomenal films! I am not only a Dark Tower fan, but a Stephen King fan, are if you are as well, don't you think it's time he is recognized for this fantastic series?!
Really, Shawshank Redemption is over…let's get to SK's real work and make seven DT movies!!
@Caprichoso:
I have been reading and re-reading these books over the last 20 some years and as I read I can see the characters as plain as any movie. Because of this I think I will marginally disappointed in a few of the characters that are chosen to play these parts simply because they will never quite be as I have pictured and known them for so long in my mind. Does anyone know what I mean?
I spent so long deciding if I even liked the gun weilding, back-stabbing, narrow minded, insensitive, brilliant, dancing, silver-tongued Roland. He had so many faces and I never knew which one to trust or to believe. Especially after I read the ending of the 7th book. That had me mixed up for WEEKS!! not to give anything away for those who have net read it, but I wondered if he deserved such a fate, or those that were forced into the journey with him. At the same time I argued with myself that it was the only way for it to end because it showed, while he was slow, he could learn and it left you with the hope that it could/would be better.. the next time. I still don't know who could play this part but I"m sorry I just can NOt agree with Hugh..ever
That being said.. I like your choice for Eddie with Jared Leto, I could definately see him starting out the strung out, lost junkie and growing into his part of gunslinger. Susanah I think will be harder, but I can almost see your Thandie play the part. while I haven't seen Crash, she really was quite evil in "The Chronicles of Riddick".
I can't wait to see what they do with it these books I just hope they don't take another 20 yrs.. I would love to see it done in my lefetime.. But that I guess is up to Ka….(greedy Ka) lol
@Matt: What if instead of CG they did it manga or animated serial like the original Heavy Metal movie,they could do it way more justice that way and it could be gritty and dark and faded,moved on as the world should be portrayed.
Check out the manga series Beserk as an example of what I mean by grit. Hope I contributed something valuable to the discussion.
I was just watching the new "Outlander" movie and it occured to me that James Caviezel would make an awesome Roland. he has the right body type, coloring, the bombbadier eyes and by the time the films are made would be the perfect age.
Check him out and let me know what you all think…
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0001029/
Good one!
@ravidlaz:
You have your books mixed up son. Wizard and Glass is the flashback book you are thinking of, not The Wastelands.
OK Tower Junkie,
I guess i could see Caviezel as Roland. But,maybe it's just that no one is going to be as perfect for the role as Clint Eastwood would have been.
On the subject of doing this thing as a cartoon, i say it could be done and it could be done wonderfully. More of the story would be captured, no actors to worry about really…..except for the voices…..and OOOOOH! had a thought!
If it was animated it could be Eastwood! for that reason alone i think it would work. No more debating about who will play Roland or anybody else. It would be far easier to find a voice for Eddie,Jake, and Suze. Besides….Oy would have be CG in a real life film….what else are they gonna do? Dress up a Raccoon?
ok..i am gonna end this before it stops making sense….it is still WAY too early for me to have more that one good idea.
i am going to come back to this train of thought when i am more awake.
so i'm on my third go around with the series.
i love the characters so much. and i've actually started contemplating how i would write a screen play for the series. yeah you could go about it by book or you could do it completely chronologically…but what if the first film was a bunch of shorts, introducing each character. or you start with the drawing and how each character finally ends up in Roland's world. maybe start to show some flash backs…
as for the actors, i think live action would be fabulous. to see the actors throw themselves into these characters…and there should only be one or two big names…or maybe some cameos…or maybe the man in black is someone super famous…
i just hope i get to see these films come to life…
i really could go on and on about the series…i wish my friends had the same passion for it that i do.
i need to find a fan site so i can talk about this more…
@lara:
I know exactly what you mean!!! no one I know has either read the Dark Tower books or at least not all of them and they tend to glaze over when I try to talk about it.. I was so excited when I heard they were going to do a movie and I had no one to share it with. I waited YEARS for the final 3 books and since their release I have re-read all of them at least 1/2 a dozen times and I have so many questions, theories and opinions and no one to share them with.. lfor example..
If there had not been such a long gap between books, would the influences u see in The WOlves of Calla still be there ie.. the harry potter influence, the 911 refrences etc..
–OR– would King have written himself into the script and let jake die (sorry to those who have not read this part>) though I am gratified to see that he "humbled" himself in his debut, nor am I surprised that he did include himself in them.
I would love to be able to ask someone what their favorite book is in the series or their favorite character and why..
this thread still seems to be going strong after a year. SO… bring on the discussion.. I am game!
Im sorry if I repeat something that has already been said, but its getting late and I am too tired to read through all of the comments. I read in the original article that you did not think that introducing Stephen King into the book as a character was a good decision, when I believe it adds an aspect of reality to the series which could enthrall readers, the kind of thing that fuels the fanatics, not just the soft-core fans. It adds a suggestion that one of the several alternate universes in described in the books could actually be real. I am not saying that I actually believe that the tower exists, I am saying that this sort of thing is an excellent literary tool to help sustain the reader's suspension of disbelief. Its the kind of thing that made me disappointed when I didn't get my owl from Hogwarts when I turned 13. Thats what the author strives for, and I believe that, for the most part, he succeeded.
@ravidlaz: Correction: Wizard and Glass is the big flash back.
The fact that this thread is still alive after a year should let you know that the movie would do well. If just a discussion about the possibility of the movie could cause this much talk. You know the movie would be a success.
I have done more thinking about this than I should, but the best in my eyes for roles:
Daniel Day-Lewis- Roland. In my mind this is a lock or no-brainer. I thought his character in there will be blood was damn close to a Roland Dischain. Few words spoken, to the point, and as serious as a heart attack. Physical attributes match as well. I think if Lewis read the series he would demand the part.
Eddie Dean- Jim Caviezel. I was really thinking hard about the best Eddie and it came to me one day out of no where and this to me is another lock. His performance and character, again, in Frequency were very similar to an Eddie Dean. physical attributes match as well.
Susanna Dean- Jada Pinkett-smith. I am not a huge fan of hers, but what she does have as an actress is range. Which playing a person who is both evil and kind would need. I think she fits the part perfectly. It's hard for me to see Thandie selling the evil ignorant racist side, Odetta, imo. And a plus for the part, Jada is buff, lol.
Jake Chambers- Based on the fact that we have no clue when this movie will be re-written and produced it is pointless to name a person close enough to 10 years old to play Jake at this point.
ok…have done more thinking. maybe some better thinking.
I, personally think that Jim Caviezel is too old for the part of Eddie Dean. Seems to me people keep for getting he is 24 years old. I have and idea…maybe crazy, but an idea all the same. What about the kid that played Malcolm on Malcolm in the Middle? at this point, he is just about the right age; and, looking back on it, he he's got the perfect look/sound.
Smart Ass mouth that never stops, skinny, pale, and prone to outbursts of complaint. in other words….total junkie Douche bag.
As for suze, jada would be great. i was also thinking about zoey….oh damn! i just saw her in a movie and i really liked her. She is a bit young,but with some good makeup artistry she will look the part.
As far a someone for Roland, Daniel Day-Lewis sounds good. So does Hugh Laurie, but on te other hand; I have the same train of thought as so many others…..it's too damn bad that Clint Eastwood is too old, ass he would have been perfect for the part. At least the the story wasn't started 10-15 years ago with him as the gunslinger b/c at this point we all know he would have been replaced with someone horrible.
I feel that same about jake….i just don't know.
On a more productive note, I am very close to introducing my 12 year old step daughter to the series. I am excited about this. She has just eaten her way through the Twilight series in a matter of six weeks and i started reading DT at the same age. i also got my dad to read the story after 4 years of badgering. He was recovering from surgery and had time to spare…got him to start and the adventure grabbed him from there. He was never a King fan(christine and IT scarred the crap out of him) but, he is a solid dark tower fan and so is my fiance…who did the book-on-tape thing b/c he is not a big reader. i can hardly wait for this movie…i don't even care if it sucks a little, i just want to see what hollywood cam come up with.
ok, done for now.
Jen
Wizard and Glass is the best of the 7! The flashbacks several books into is is the glue holding it all together, can't do without that. By far the most exciting moments were in Wizard and Glass. I think it would be to ambitious to make the series into 7 films. What film has sustained audiences for 6 sequels? The first book might not hold up on its own as a movie, as great as it is in the literary sense. They should probably combine the first 2, and cut out as much of Wolves of Calla as possible. Combing the Gunslinger with the Drawing of the Three would be a good way to give it more Hollywood appeal without ruining anything. Or at least release two films almost simultaneously, within the same year. But maybe I'm wrong. People might still be willing to wait a couple years on a cliffhanger in between installments. The fifth and sixth books were where it was getting a bit ridiculous, seemed like King was grasping at straws and I was starting to question whether this wasn't something that only has the same appeal in adolescence when I started them. The final book luckily redeemed all of that and I thought it ended well, save for a few minor things that I could have done without.
K fast simple and to the point. So many of you all agree wizards and glass is good. No great. I also agree that it is a great stand alone story. I think that it would be the one they do first. I mean they are doing it as a comic first.
I read all the books and loved them all. But the one I read first was wizards and glass. It got me hooked. If i had read the first one. I think I would have dismisses the whole series. "The man in black fled across the dessert and the gunslinger fallowed." any one else get that "It was a dark and stormy night." feeling when reading the first sentence of the THE GUNSLINGER? Your right you want the people to feel involved and motivated to watch. I'd start with the prequel as many of you call it. It's got everything love murder suspense and action plus what better place to start then there. Stand alone.
Then go to the beginning. The new comers hooked. Us the fans drooling with anticipation. Book1 book2 book3 all movies 2,3,4. we the true fans will end up calling a major movie marathon in the theaters to show them in book order. and book 3 aka movie 4 would could end however it wanted to lead into the first movie. movie 5 would pick up there. at the end of book 4.
Just a hook you know. A man telling a story over a campfire. concealed faces in the dark. flash backs, voice overs. Insertion of spoilers and visual hints. Die hard fans pointing them out.
any way I'm up for discussion on this too..
A year and counting. HaHa. I probably started this rumor with the words OMG I want to see this as a movie like 2 years ago. I'll probably be waiting for this longer than I have final Fantasy XIII versus.
I have to add that people are being so uncreative about suggesting some of the actors to cast. I would almost rather see unknowns from theatre or something. That is the most common thing to potentially ruin a good character, someone you already think of as their other most famous role. Few actors truly have the ability to transcend that. The more I think about it, the more likely it seems that someone will ruin a film adaption of this series trying to appease mainstream audiences. Even if Clint Eastwood weren't too old, that's totally missing the point to suggest him. Roland's character is an achetype based on Clint Eastwood's characters among others. Think outside the box, type-casting is the worst, aesthetically speaking. It's kind of like how I will never be able to buy Keanu Reeves as an action anything. He still has that same goofy voice he's been using since Bill and Ted's. Maybe they should bring back Jamey Sheridan from the Stand miniseries, though, since he was pretty creepy and it would be interesting.
I know not clint eastwood… he is too much of this character. How about Bruce he is still young. His eyes well put contacts in him. Although I don't think he would want to be stuck playing the same role for all that long..
Ogh and a little on the reason I think boor for should be the first movie. Is that because it is mostly a flash back you could actually be in production of the first book one and 2. I read that making them one movie and that is a good idea. so you have 2 movies come out at about the same time. making a 10 year project like 5 years. cause 2 years doing movie 1 and 2 based off of book IV(movie one) and book I and II(movie 2) boom four years of shooting down…
Any thoughts?
Soooo, anyone who says "this movie cant be made" are prolly the same ppl that thought that a new star trek would tank or the lord of the rings would suck.
I trust Bad robot to produce something of quality. just about everything so far (cept lost) has done very well. ive watched Abrams atually talk about it and he shows an interest in the subject that rivals a toddler on christmas.
Any thing can be done and done well and im sure that the last thing King wants is to watch his magnum opus to air on NBC right before nightline… hes done the tv movie crap.. this deserves way better.
as far as cast goes, eastwood as callahan is a fair match even though callahan breaks down crying about black 13 (i dont see clint crying EVER) i would have to drop danyiel day louis in there somewheres (he acts epically) and i even thought of Tom Cruse as Walter O Dim, just because he has that slender face (and i can see him leaping over a coffin laughing and spitting on a dead mans face). as for Roland i couldnt say (too scary to put a face to him). maybe Edward james almos as Shardik the satillite carrying bear j/k.
other than all that, i say posh to those who state Stephen King cares not. this is still his baby, and if he didnt care it would be John Woo considering this movie and not J.J.
@Wrathbone:
Agreed. Solid take.
My vision is (in a nutshell) Westworld meets LOTR meets The Matrix….mix it all up and keep a dark overtone to it all.
I've read all the books, and they're amazing. Even the last 3. I do not want this books turned into a movie. The directors, even the best in the world, could never grasp the awesomeness, the complexity, the just magical aspect of this amazing story.
The directors and actors, would destroy the story. These characters, cannot be fulfilled by anyone. They just can't.
I believe making these books into movies is a serious mistake. And people who have followed the story since the begining, will never be satisfied with anything you can do. Because compared to the books, your movie would be nothing. The story is the only thing that can work. The movie would be a tremendous mistake.
I had a thought the other day……
I was watching DOLAN'S CADILAC the other day with my husband and thought to my self that Christian Slater would make a great Walter O' Dim.
Just a thought though. i mean, when he plays an ass hole he really plays one. Well, Walter is and ass and Slater has that same blade of nose thing going on. Besides, her would look awesome in a robe and hood.
I am in total geek heaven with all of this buzz about a movie coming out. It took me so long to finally read the whole story; and then i found the comic series(which i am behind on sadly), now a movie is in the works……yea gods i can hardly wait. i don't even care really if the movie isn't that good, i will probably watch it anyway.
Jen
I say if your are going to make a movie out of the dark tower books then don't change a thing. The books are to complex in detail to cut things out.It will not make sense to those who have not read these books. The end is only the only way it can end. What else could have been in the top of that tower. Make the movie as great as the books. This story is most creative story i have ever read and look forward to watching a movie with the same creativity.
Here is how I would shoot the movies…
Movie 1: The Gunslinger, and Drawing of the 3 one movie. These 2 parts of the story could be easily pared down to a 2 hour movie, with out cutting too much.
Movie 2: The Wastelands. This book really needs a movie to itself.
Now I am not terribly sure about this, since Wizard and Glass is my favorite story in the series, but I think the back story could be cut. Maybe make the first movie Wizard and Glass, and stand alone. That way you get to know Roland and want to learn more.
Movie 3: Combine Wolves of the Calla and Song of Susana.
Movie 4: The Dark Tower.
As for Stephen King writing himself into the story, when it first came out. I though how arrogant can you be to write yourself into your epic story. by the end I felt there was no other way for the story to be told.
I started reading this series with The Drawing of The Three and when I was done that novel had to find the first book then found the next book and realized the next book in the series was not written yet. Before this I had been a King fan almost since I could read. So The Drawing of The Three is my favorite because it introduces Odetta, Eddie and Jake and is just a great read. I think the series could be done into seven movies but would have to be done like The Lord of The Rings was done, I think those could not have been done any better even though they had to leave out quite a bit from the books.
I really, really hope these are done right.
@ravidlaz: ARE YOU SERIOUS? ITS WIZARD AND GLASS THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT; THERE IS NO WAY THAT THEY COULD LEAVE THAT OUT. I EVEN THINK THAT SINCE THE LOST TEAM HAS SUCH A GREAT TECHNIQUE FOR DOING FLASH BACKS (AND FORWARDS) IT WOULD WORK. BESIDES, A LOT OF PEOPLE WOULD BE SERIOUSLY DISAPPOINTED. FOR MOST WIZARD IS IS THE FAVORITE BOOK IN THE SERIES.
OK, Stephen….please don't speak for me, and i mean that in the nicest way. Book Four is not my favorite( i know you say MOST), i have to say that books 3 and 5 are my personal faves. #3 because Odetta/Detta/Susanna,Eddie and Jake are introduced. and b/c you start to see Roland's humanity. #5 because things "start up" again. and the three "trainees" have to start acting like gunslingers, it's not practice anymore.
ON a happier note; My step-daughter has started reading DT. she is the same age as when i started reading it(12) and i am soooooo thrilled. This came about b/c she got me to read the Twighlight series. It's not too bad, even good in some parts; i told her that seeing as i gave something she likes a try that she should give something a like a try, so she did. the story is a bit harder than Twighlight, for sure but i am just glad to see her pick it up. On a scale of 1 to happy i would have to say it's almost as good as the day my dad came to me and said….'ok, i need a new book to read, let me try this Dark tower story you've been trying to get me to read for 3 years now'…..he liked it.
well, that's all i got for now.
Jen
I'm just wondering if they cannot shoot "The Little sisters of Eluria" within the first movie (meaning only "The Gunslinger"). There would be some more action and a little bit of Roland's character's description.
Moreover, I think that in "The drawing of the Three", there is a lot to show to the audience, so to compile it together with the first book would be a total waste of plot and time (especially Eddie's drawing would do a good chunk of a movie :)).
What do you say? After all, "The Little sisters of Eluria" story is a part of the DT.
I think it would be fun if they added "The Little Sisters of Eluria". That would diffently help get people who haven't read Dark Tower get hooked. The movie business need to make each book into it's own movie so people can get to know the characters and the feel of the worlds.
Your insane to say theses books are bad. This is one of the best book series ever. Yes I am a fan of Sai King but I am a fan of many writers. I agree with alot of the post here combine the 1&2 3&4 5&6 and then 7 by itself with maybe some left over from 5. I would love to see this movie but it would have to be done right. Most of kings books that are tuned into movies or tv series were ok. There are the exceptions ( Shawshank, The Body..) but I would rather never see it then see it done wrong. I believe it all starts with the screenplay and from there we will see………
Long days and pleasent nights
I was saying Shawshank and The Body were great adaptaions.
@Shanell:
I am a HUGE fan of Sai King's WRITTEN works. for the most part his tv and movie adaptions have mutillated the book version almost to the point that it is no longer recognizable. look at what they did to "It" the book was seriously scary. i read it first when i was 12 and didn't sleep for a week! forget about going to the bathroom by myself! or using anything with drains for that matter! LOL the tv movie was just rediculous. Every book that was adapted for TV or the big screen has been changed, either by the ending (the mist, dreamcatcher for example) or only part of the book was adapted ( Hearts in atlantis ) just to name a few.
My point is, i do not want to see this happen to the dark tower movies. I want to see it stay true to the written story and NOTHING changed for any reason. i see a lot of comments on how the movie should be laid out and which books to start with or even to leave out. i feel they should all be included and in the order they were written.
It was the way that they were written that got me addicted to them in the first place. I have been a Dark tower fan for overf 20 yrs, I just hope it doesn't take another 20 years for the movie! :)
Interesting which books are fan favorites. Most everyone seems to love book 4 Wizard and Glass, but this was my least favorite. I didn't hate it, but compared to the rest it was lacking for me. Of course I loved the final face off with Blaine the Train and the shootout with Flagg, but Roland's backstory left a bad taste for me. I love Roland's character and part of that is his brooding mystery and unknowing motivations. Finding out about Roland as a young man spoiled part of my fascination for his character.
As for book 5 Wolves of the Calla, I absolutely loved it!! This and Wastelands are my favorites, although the battle at the end of Calla was annoying and I thought the Wolves got defeated too easily. But the overall story, especially Preist Callahan's tales of him outrunning the Low Men, was fascinating. At first when King introduced himself into the story, I was a bit taken aback, but after he met the Gunslingers in book 6, I was blown away and loved it. Alot of folks talk bad about the last 3 books but to me they are just as strong, just different.
This adaptation should be done as a miniseries or series with HBO, Showtime, or Scifi. Has anyone here seen Battlestar Gallactica or Rome? Two amazingly done series with special emphasis put on characters and story arcs. Of course, one of the main challenges will be the actor who plays Jake. He doesn't age that much in the books although I would argue that he does age some, but getting an actor who doesn't grow up too quick is important. I've heard all sorts of ideas for who would play Roland, like Christain Bale, Viggo Mortenson, Daniel Craig, Jude Law, but the one that intrigues me the most is Hugh Laurie from the tv show House, he would make a very interesting conflicted Roland.
Whatever happens, movies or tv series, I'm sure it'll never meet our expectations. However, no one thought that LOTR could be successfully adapted and they turned out to be a movie masterpiece. There is hope, especially since the network that airs Lost lets J.J. Abrams have unlimited script control it seems. I love Lost and am amazed that they have been able to get away with the many complex plot arcs and character development. Fingers crossed for Dark Tower!!
This reviewer is great at writing reviews per his opinion. However, Stephen King is a freaking Master Storyteller. Think of the number of human beings capable of producing the sheer volume of entertaining stories! King is being compared to Tolkien by actual notable film makers, whom are having ongoing discussions about this work. How many books did Tokien write again? OH YEAH- not very many! If Sci Fi were smart (not very smart for changing there logo to the insipid "syfy" – like,.. what the HELL is that 'sposed to represent??), they would jump on making this series with every penny at thier disposal. Anyhoo, I see a reviewer on a might tall peice or equestrian beauty there Joko! Think with your dip-stick Johnny. The reviewer, sheesh, what a…(you fill in the blank per protocol). The Dark Tower series is an unparalled masterpiece in my somewhat well read opinion. Peace…….s4
@Camuss111: Camuss111, I was delighted by your insights and pragmatism. However, dear reader, I have more faith. How about the Dark Tower series in 3-D !??!? No, juuuust kidding. Maybe some budding young minds and untested actors can pull off something first rate. I just love the story and see that you do too. Thanks for pouring out some intelligence in a well written and expressed viewpoint…….Samuel M. Houston, IV
PS: How about syfy and "Children of the Corn"? They did an incredibly good job with that SK story…..s4
I am incredibly excited about the Dark Tower series (hopefully) being made into movies. I don't think Abrams realizes how many Dark Tower fans there actually are.
My only real concern is Roland. Without a good Roland, the movie is doomed. He's has so many different levels to him. The only person that I can see playing him correctly is a much skinnier Clint Eastwood. He's old and rugged and has the looks and the voice that I associate with Roland. I doubt he'd ever agree to do the part since he's a 'producer' now, but I sincerely wish he would.
People please get real, Mr. Eastwood is 79! It's just not going to happen, maybe 30 years ago it would've been perfect but the world has moved on.
Then please enlighten everyone and tell us who you think would be better. Seventy-nine or not, he'd still do it justice. If he can run around on sets all the time, he can act. Makeup would be needed of course, but I believe he could do it.
I don't know, I love Clint and he's sure shown he can play that type of role with the many great westerns he's done, but he is a bit old. Roland is aged but I never imagined him to be more than 40s or 50s. There's only so much makeup that can make someone look younger. Anyone remember Robert Redford in The Horse Whisperer? – dreadful.
So far, my choice would be Viggo Mortensen (go see the western Appaloosa) or Hugh Laurie (from tv show House).
I've no thoughts of who should play Roland, I like the Viggo idea that's been going around but an unknown would probably be my choice , for most of the characters not just Roland.
I only have one real suggestion and I've made it before on this thread and that is Robert Knepper as the man in black.
Not that it matters what I want, it's up to Abrams in the end and I'm pretty confident in his abilities judging by Lost and Star Trek.
Hmmmm, Robert Knepper as the Man in Black. I've never heard of him but after googling him recognized his face rigt away. Ahhhh the sign of a good character actor, recognizable but not remembered. He definitely has an interesting face and his eyes look capable of being very sinister.
I agree, it'd probably be better if they got unknown actors, but I also love toying with the known actors. Edward Norton would make an intriguing Man in Black, he's an underrated actor. Tim Roth would also do a bang up job.
Viggo, while I like him, I don't believe would do a good job. He doesn't have that rugged feel to me. Even while playing Aragorn, he still had that 'I'm a pretty boy but trying to not be' look. Roland is definitely not a pretty boy.
I enjoy Hugh Laurie as well, but again, he's lacking in Roland.
Loads of people are hoping for Hugh Jackman. I believe he could do a fair job. Maybe I'm just refusing to see anyone else in the role because I've always pictured Roland as Clint Eastwoodish and am unwilling to let go of that image!
As for the Man in Black, I can see both Knepper and Roth playing him. They do have those dark, sinister looks.
Casting the role of Odetta/Detta/Susannah/Mia will be difficult as well. An actress will have to be able to wrap her head around Four very different characters.
Also… I can't wait to see Oy!
I don't know how it is for you all, but when I read it's like a movie inside my head. Every time I read The Tower series the movie in my mind,gets bigger and better And because I have known these characters Roland, Eddie, Susannah and Jake for better than 20 yrs…they seem as real to me as anyone I have ever known.
I agree that these characters should be played by recogniizable, but little known actors. But age is a huge factor in these roles because it will take so long to complete the saga. In The book the only one that really ages is Roland. whom I always felt to be physically in his mid 40's. Eddie is only.. what? 24 yrs old. Jake is 11- 12 and susannah is in her early 30's.
The hard part is going to find actors who can age gracefully because I see this movie taking upwards of 10 yrs to complete and release. That's only IF they do a 7 part saga AND IF they find the perfect actors AND THEN film and release a movie per year. See what I'm saying?
The Infamous Clint Eastwood has been mentioned more times than I can count and while I agree that Roland was based on -at least in part- by this man he is too old to be considered for the part of Roland. so sad..
I loved Viggo in the Ring trilogy…but alas..he is no Roland.
And Hugh Jackman in the xmen and Austrlia.. but I can not picture him as Roland.. he is too short, too muscular and by the time the movie is started too old.
But Hugh Laury!??! JE$US CHR!ST Banannas! no flippin way!!! People.. Come On!!
So who do I think will make a perfect Roland????
James Caviezel
He played in G.I. Jane, Frequency, DeJaVu, and most recently.. Outlander. He is of a perfect age, right body type, has the eyes and the ability to play Roland and do it right.
As to the rest I will leave up to Ka…greedy 'ol Ka….
Ka-Ka…. :)
i see no reason that Viggo and Laurie should not be considered, both have the rough look that Roland NEEDS to have, the bullshooter-eyes are readily apparent, and they both would wear the mantle well. Age is a factor, but i would imagine that, although Roland is only so old physically, the first time he meets Randall Flagg,( the Dark Man,Martin the wizard, )
his age becomes completely relative to his mind set.
to clarify,
Read the Gunslinger and look at physicality for tell, but by the time the Wastelands occur, Roland is no longer a physical person, not so much as he has become an insurmountable force. How does this affect his age you may ask? well, SK is a master of innuendo, when Roland is acting as the Gunslinger, he is much older than his compatriots (i.e. End of Drawing) But when he is acting as Roland the human, he is described in a much lighter way, almost as if his mindset affects how old he is physically. Get to the latter books, where Mordred and The Crimson King become larger players, and Roland, as the gunslinger, acts more wise and aged. He rotates in and out, almost as if he is the last pulsating remnant of his own world. As if he is striving to be more in each plane than he can truly be in life. He ages with the events and his own attitude, Roland is myth, He is the hero of all legends, and legends only get better with age.
I see no reason why Eastwood couldn't play Roland for the less-taxing places, with a stunt double or something to do the action sequences. But on the same note, i see no issue with Viggo playing Roland, yes, he's known from LOTR, but so what? As far as choices go i think he's tops, his performance in AHOV is startling and could easily be transmuted over to the Dark Tower epic.
Same for Laurie, too, i'm not a big house fan, but i know good actors when i see them. Laurie would be another great candidate, His eyes are right on the mark, and he's weathered enough to make it seem real.
Caviziel? maybe, i think he's too good looking, honestly, I imagine Roland as an old broken, dirty cowpoke, you seen any of those lately? i mean, come on, Roland is a weathered man, he's traveled through the apotheosis of all deserts for god knows how long, he is tired and dryed, practically dies, and, oh yeah, seeking cold vengeance, that tends to eat up stamina and that affects how your body will react to the elements, Caviziel, an amazing actor in his own right, has not aged enough.
All in all, TDT series needs to be a masterwork to be anything like the books, and some of my favorite scenes will undoubtedly be cast aside. (Roland sticking his gun in the Tull fat lady.) i'll go see the movie, but i think in the end, it just won't do the books justice.
Along the road we'll meet again.
Camuss111
@ Sam Houston
thank you for your support. It is not in my heart to say that it won't happen, I love these stories, and the characters as if they were my own. But as previously stated, Hollywood is unfettered and lax currently, whether the director has free script control or not. I would love to see them done right (or do them myself) but i just can't see a clear way through all the bureaucratic hassle of Tinseltown. I wish for them to be perfect, i wish these characters to reach out with their message to people everywhere, this is a story and message worth getting right, by one of the greatest storytellers of modern times, no combination of this should be unconsidered, but it will be, because that is the nature of Hollywood. I can tell you that some of the best myths and legends have been ruined or maimed by the folks over on Beverly Hills, i hope to God that i am wrong, but somewhere deep inside, i know i'm not. When Roland loses it all to Mordred, when Jake dies the second time, these moments are so succinctly painted that i can't help but cry, Hollywood will draw them out, and, while the rest of the movie may be amazing, it is these minor, integral parts that i fear the most for.
May Ka look favorably your way.
Camuss111
Hey Tower Junkie, you had me laughing out loud (really) with your Hugh Laurie comment!! Have you seen the tv show House? He may not be your type but he has the acting chops. Remember when Heath Ledger was cast as the Joker? Everyone including me, thought WTF nobody can top Nicholson's performance, but Ledger was amazing. And, while I do like Hugh Jackman and James Caviezel is an excellent actor, too me they are too young and they are lacking somewhere in the eyes for me, for a good portion of Roland's character is his eyes. Of course, a younger Clint would be wonderful. Oh wow, I just found on another website, discussion of Gabriel Byrne or Daniel Day Lewis as Roland. Gabriel Byrne might be an inspired choice! He definitely has the eyes.
Camuss111, thank you for your comments, a beautiful description of Roland's age perception. Yep I agree, Viggo was splendid in A History of Violence, and his character had a transformation of sorts, something that Roland definitely experiences as he becomes friends with his ka-tet. I loved that scene (think it was book 4) where Roland said something to the effect of "I don't want to continue to the Tower anymore, your lives have become too meaningful to me."
@mikee
just doing my bit, and yes, i believe it was when they were in THE STAND's version of Kansas that he said that bit. I was the same when i heard about ledger, but my god, he brought the joker to a much higher realm than most villains in cinema, astounding performance (NTS watch Dark Knight again)
I'm glad that you folks enjoy my commentary, i'm just such a huge fan that i feel the need to discuss all the reasons for this movie to be made, i'm a writing major myself, so to see what SK has done with his short time on this earth has been a driving force for my own stories. The Dark Tower is not just a SK masterpiece, it is a soul-searching story, a new Illiad or Odyssey for our entire society, it is not only Stephen King's magnum opus, but it also our own, it is our epic as a society in the world, it is a tribute to the people of this time. We are part of it physically and mentally and spiritually, and for those reasons alone, i will do all in my power to try to bring about the best DT movie that can be made.
The path leads ever onward
Camuss111
@camuss111:
Camuss111… I agree with you to a certain extent that Roland's age reflects his mentality throughout his journey, but for 2 different reasons than you propose. I believe his aging is more of a result of his inability for human(mortal) emotions and in relation to his distance to the Dark Tower. I will try to explain my reasoning behind this, but I do not have your flair for words, or your eloquence, so please bear with me.
Roland is described as cold, methodical, stubborn,heartless- and having a slow, plodding single-mindedness; lacking imagination and inabilaty to think around corners. incapable of of humanities purest emotions such as love, honor or the ability to hope and believe.
He considers these to be weaknesses when in fact they will prove to be his most defining, worthwhile achievments.
Rolands quest for the Dark tower spans centuries adding to his air of immortality, yet, We see Roland physically age at critical points of his journey and at profound moments of realization and in his rare displays of humanity. For example:
when he catches up to the man in black, he is closer to the dark tower than he has ever been. After their palavor and the vision of the dark tower, he wakes up aged and 2 dawning truths. first, that he truely loved Jake, regretted killing him to get to the man in black and secondly, the enormity of the quest he had taken on and only now began to understand the importance of the tower itself.
The first sign of his mortality is when he nearly dies from the lobstrosities. I believe this is punishment for Rolands inability to grow, to love, to change- to know what things truely matter and killing Jake whom could have been was his chance at redemtion.
he ages again when in the very end of the 4th book closer yet to the dark tower; after he is forced to remember his past..he realizes he has found something more important than the tower and instead of ordering them as dihn to stop the quest to the tower, he takes the cowards way out and allows them convince him to go on. as a result this is when the tet begins to break up.. in book 5 they start to keep secrets from each other Roland begins to doubt himself, his body grows older and more unreliable. he manipulates the others and opens them up to all the chaos that follows in the last 2 books.
Throughout these books was the constant reminder to Stand…Be True.. it wasn't untill Roland reached the top of the tower that he understood what those words meant. I believe that Roland was doomed to repeat his quest because he could not learn from his mistakes, because he was unable to let go of his selfish obsessions, his inability to see around corners and immagine what life could be like without the tower, his inability to change and was unable to open himself to the love of his katet.
I don't believe that Roland was ever meant to reach the dark tower. I think that the quest was what was important. I believe that eddie, susannah and jake yes, even Oy were his second chance.. his redemptiont for cuthbert, alain, susan and david.
what do you think?
You know for someone who says they don't use words very well, that was said very nicely. And I completely agree with you Tower Junkie.
Those types of thoughts and feelings are what make Roland a tragic hero, which is why he will always be remembered.
@Fenris:
Thank you Fenris.. I have been a DT fan since I first picked up the Gunslinger when I was 11 years old. and everytime I read the series, I pick up something new or come to a new understanding of their quest. It has been excruciating having no one to discuss these books with. Everyone I know has neither read them or only the first few, but have not finished them so the are not able to share my excitment, thrill, anxiety and even fear of the possibility of the DT movies.
So I jumped at the chance to get my thoughts and feelings of this epic saga out there and feared that I would not be able to put these ideals into the proper words. Thank you for agreeing with my sentiments…
There are still so many thoughts and opinions rolling around in my head and I welcome a get down and dirty discussion of these books.(LOL) I have been dying to ask someone if they ever considered the possibility of Roland being the bad guy rather than the hero of these tales.. or just what the real reason Jake kept showing up and what was his true purpose was in the role he played…
or what how the books would have ended if there had not been a 15yr gap in the series.. would we still the harry potter, star wars and other influences depicted in the later books….
Or.. was it pompass pride or ka that caused stephen king to put himself into this legendary saga..
the possibilities are as endless as they are exciting so people PLEEEASE bring on the discussion.. I am game.
I wouldn't say that Roland is the bad guy, just sort of an anti-hero. Someone who is on a noble quest, one to try and salvage or at least understand what is happening to his world, but someone who does not think twice about putting a bullet in the brain of someone standing in his path. My kind of hero! I have only read the last three books once, I am currently re-reading all the books in the series to try and get a better understanding or find anything I may have missed the first go-round. I'll get back on here soon. In the meantime, keep this up, I am as psyched about having someone to talk to about the DT as you are!
I know that Roland is truley not the bad guy, his quest is a noble one even if he is doing it for all the wrong reasons. I have read these books a dozen times over the last 20 yrs and I still find something new in them that I missed before. they catch the imagination of the reader and show both the beauty and the brutality of not only Roland'a world but all the worlds in a way that no other book has.
let me know when you have finished the other books
Roland being the bad guy is a good point. I've often felt like that while reading the series. I do believe that sometimes, but I always end up changing my mind by the end of the book.
I can't express my love for the Dark Tower series. It's not often that a story comes along that will make you cry every single time you read it even though you already know what's coming. While I'm reading, the characters are real enough for me to almost touch.
My sister in law told me about the Dark Tower series a few years ago and ever since then I can't stop reading them. I read the series at least once every few months. I must say though, that I don't like Stephen King as a writer. I find his work to be boring and I can't get into his stories. He must have been channeling the gods when he was writing the series.
I agree with you, Tower Junkie. I believe that Roland was not supposed to reach the tower. He was supposed to run with the loving family that he had scraped together. But that wouldn't make as good of story now, would it? (:
Resin.. i know what you mean.. I too love these books and have gone back and forth in my love and hate of Roland. I think that his complexity and our inability to know if he is good or bad is symbolic for his quest of the tower and the balance of ka,- white over red, -good verses evil – humanities weaknesses and their strenth and the simple/basic need and will to overcome.
I can not count the times I have laughed out loud at Eddie's smart mouth antics or Detta calling Roland a "Honkey" the God Bomb minister and countless others… But I can count the times that I have cried every time I have read these same books over and over again…
Each time that Jake dies
When oy says " I ache"
When Roland is afraid to sleep
When Susan dies
When Eddie loses Susannah and then finds her again
when Callahan dies
When Roland dances
When Susannah sings with the guitar player in the street
When Roland kills his mother
When Jake calls Roland "Father"
when he is able to read the sign at the rose
When he meets Susannahs god father and recieves his watch
When Roland finds sheemie again after all the lost years
When Eddie dies
When the beam speaks to them in their dreams
Everytime Roland cries
when Susannah is reunited with eddie, jake and oy in the other world
When Oy dies
When Roland reaches the tower and calls out the names of those he has lost.
What are some of your favorite scenes in the series?
I definetly shed some man tears during book seven. So much tragedy in that one! Every time, it felt like I was losing a member of my own ka-tet! *sniffle*
I can total see where you guys are going with Roland being the bad guy, but I am going to have to get all Aristotle on you. I spent a year studing Aristotle's Poetics which pretty much talks about tragedies. And let's all face it, this story is a tragedy. This story is nearly a perfect tragedy, except it last longer then a day. The "heros" in all tragedies are the cause of all other characters downfall.
So, if we go off Aristotle's Poetics (Poetics does not mean Poetry, it actually means stories), Roland is a hero, but is just the cause of everyones down fall or own tragedic moment. So there is my two cents.
@ tower junkie
That is all very probable, but there are times when Roland becomes younger in the eyes of his companions, and thusly his age changes for a time
When Eddie stops calling him old, tall and ugly
when SK observes hat Eddie can see the visage of handsomeness behind Roland's face
after R has related the tale of Wizard and Glass
in the cavern at the end of Wolves
in the battle with Mordred
when he makes the "ka-ka' joke
so on
I agree with your sentiments and am pleased that my comments still matter. I won't say that you're wrong, or not right, or any combination of those sentiments. But i do feel that Roland is a force, not a man. He is the epitomy of all heros, the anti-hero and savior in one. He is myth incarnate. Arthurian legend to be much more technical.
But he is a man, a broken and hardened shell. It takes the journey to the Tower for him to re-discover himself, but i don't think this is his first time on that journey.
I look at the series as just a repeated leg of his life, Roland will always reach the tower, but each time, his spirit will be broken, it 's much like the tortures of hell described by Dante. Repetitive, Roland must suffer all these event continually to keep the beams in place, balance out the universes etc…
I would argue that, even though this series takes place over different worlds, it all happens within the dead-lights, (read IT) the zone where the turtle and bear are constantly fighting each other, In fact, the turtle and bear are the sides of good and evil.
(Turtle creates, bear destroys.Also in IT) Roland is merely an extension of those forces, as is the Dark Man, Mordred, and the Crimson King. Roland is no different from them in how he goes about things.
Yes, he is unable to think around corners, and is stupidly dogged, but that doesn't mean that this is why he suffers, The Dark Tower is a symbol of salvation, (a lying one too) Roland is simply following the wrong path to get it right, and so is doomed to continue the same journey, lose the same friends and lovers and kill the same people, because he is such an unstoppable force, He is unable to look at others with true empathy, a point well made by your comment, but further than that, he is unable to look at his own life with empathy, he is startlingly dumb respectively, for a hero that we all love, he is nothing short of a cold-hearted bastard who thinks like a machine. But Blaine is the juxtaposition to this, Blaine is the catalyst as is Charlie the Choo-choo, It is only after meeting Blaine that Roland really become ROLAND, not the gunslinger, even his rescue of Jake is driven by selfish motives. But as he becomes more adept at either pretending or genuinely caring, we see some of the years melt away, freeze on his skin and chip off. Roland becomes the shadow of the gunslinger, he becomes a man. True he is still incredibly uncouth and shit-faced, but he cries and laughs, when Susannah dissappears, he shows compassion towards Eddie, at least in his mind. Roland is morphing and becoming someone different, And as this occurs the younger, more human Roland of Gilead comes out to make his own stand. I would argue that it is this Roland who fights Mordred (explains why he hesitates to shoot) and ultimately this Roland, who has changed, but not enough, who makes it to the top only to be returned to the beginning as the gunslinger.
interesting side note
The horn could represent Roland's sin, a new burden that he has to carry for his failure to change fast enough
Ka has come, yes this time there's no turning back
Camuss111
I don't think Roland is doomed, I think he is gifted.
He saved the beams and the whole multi-verse and at the top of the tower was his gift for doing so.
The gift is the chance to do it all over again, but do it better each time, the fact that he starts his quest again but this time with the Horn which was lost shows that things can change each time he goes through the loop and eventually he'll get it just right, possibly with his loved ones beside him and not in the grave or another world.
Roland will go through that loop many many times, but it will end some day and he will find peace, maybe even paradise.
@camuss111:
I wanted a "get down dirty discussion" and you delivered one.. YEAH!! :) lol
anyway… You bring up some interesting points.. and I have a few questions about your views.
First… you see Roland as a force and I agree, he is a force, but my question is this…
what type of force? and who or what deemed it so? What drives this force within him? The turtle and the bear?
Do you see Roland as a mere extension of the turtle and the bear because of his quest(the turtle) and his robotic mentality and lack of emotions and killing everything he loves(the bear)? good vs evil, white over red, ka..
You argue that Rolands story happens within the dead lights (described in the book it) even though in spans differents worlds.. Im not sure I can concede with this simply because the dead lights is death, despair. isolation and without hope. even the battle between stuttering bill and pennywise took place outside the dead lights in the space between worlds. But I often wondered if pennywise and the crimson king were connected, if not the same being. Both shape shift,(he darkles, he tincts) but their true forms seem to be spiders, both decorate their sanctum with skulls and each kill with an insanity uneaqual to anything i have ever seen.
NExt question.. when you said that "Roland is morphing and becoming someone different, And as this occurs the younger, more human Roland of Gilead comes out to make his own stand. I would argue that it is this Roland who fights Mordred (explains why he hesitates to shoot) and ultimately this Roland, who has changed, but not enough, who makes it to the top only to be returned to the beginning as the gunslinger." did you mean that the elemental force of the gunslinger is a seperate entity than Roland the mortal human???? if so than I can definately wrap my head around that idea.
It would make sense that the force would give roland his immortality as well as his inability for the "human condition" it would also confirm the theory that he ages (becoming mortal) during his rare displays of humanity: such as when he attempts humor, cries or expresses remorse or empathy therefore making him vunerable to physically aging, body pains and second guessing himself and his mission the ability to love again etc…
I could quote scenes from so many other books such as the dead zone, regulators, desperation, hearts in atlantis, insomnia, the talisman, black house, lisey's story and 1/2 dozen others that mention, the crimson king, the tower, ka and Roland in some way.. in my mind it only confirms my contention that these stories are an extension of Rolands quest of the dark tower. These other worlds and stories that exist in the different levels of the tower are what I believe to be Rolands past and failed attempts at his quest. And that possibly the horn is more a symbol of hope rather than past sins.. Hope that maybe this time it will be different. If he can find his humanity, if he stands and is true.
If J.J Abrams is on the helm for a TV series or a film franchise for the Dark Tower, people will watch and the show or the movies will do well.
@Fenris:
Fenris, thanks for your 2 cents.. and I agree with you(and aristotle) this is the perfect tragedy..and Roland is the tragic hero… sometimes it is almost easier to imagine him as the bad guy because of his many faults but as you pointed out, he is only doing what it is in his nature to do…
let me ask you.. if it is Rolands's fate to be the tragic hero, what is Jakes? in any other story he would have been utterly defenseless being torn out of his world, and thrown into the land of 19..so what is his purpose? why is he chosen to be part of this katet and why did he have to die, not once, but twice?
@Tower Junkie:
Jake is, as you have put it, Roland's salvation. But because Roland being the Tragic Hero that he is, will never be able to accept this salvation and there for poor Jake is doomed to die repeatedly. Also Jake's character also imbodies pity and fear for readers. In fact most of the katet imbodies this. We as readers pity them for what has happened to them and what as happened to Roland. We fear for them, because even at the beginning when we start to learn more about Roland's past we know he is destiny to end this alone and it makes us worry about the katet and what will happen them. And that is what Jake and the rest of the katet is, in my opinion.
im not much of a blogger, but when i saw this i thought that i had to put in my two cents. i've read the whole series and the graphic novels and as a matter of fact im on my second trip to The Dark Tower as i speak im half way through Wastelands again. and i would absolutely love to see a movie adaptation of these novels. as long as they were done well. but as with any movie from a book there are pros and cons. the pros for this is that we would finally get to see Roland and his little gang and see what a world that has moved on looks like. but the cons are that there is so much story here that if any was left out the viewers would just be lost and the ppl that have read the books would be all up in a twist cause they left this or that out me being on of them. but regardless it would still be great to see.
@Fenris:
Thanks for your fast response.. I love discussing these books…
The "embodiment of fear and pity"..strong statement, but also unfourtunatly..accurate. I refuse to believe that they are simply drawn as pawns in Rolands game and they are all meant to die. like you said, I want so badly for Jake, Susannah and Eddy to be Rolands salvation, I do not want their lives to be in vain. They go through so much, they grow and change and become "better" people in spite of Roland and because of their experiences and their quest; they are closer and love more unconditionally and purely than anyone; only to have their destiny turn around and bite them in the butt, it simply isn't fair.
I think too that they are reflections of the humanity that Roland has been incapeable of before. Eddie reflects the humor,wit and carefree nature Roland doesn't and can not understand.
Susannah reflects the conflict within himself(Odetta Holmes and Detta Walker) and the potential for something better(susannah)
Jake..poor Jake is the most important of them all. he represents hope, love, happiness and the connection they all share. he is the glue that binds them, he sees what they can't and understands better than all of them what that means. he knew what the outcome would when before he died in the first book ("go then there are other worlds than these") and yet he returns out of love and only to die for a second time.
Roland is destined to be alone because he is unable to change..I think their destiny, fate, ka, whatever is beccause of Rolands very nature. because I don't believe he is ever meant to reach the tower itself. I think his quest, finding Eddie, Susannah and Jake, are his quest..his key to saving the beams and the door to all of their salvations and rebalancing the worlds.
WHew! I hope I said that right, I didn't mean to be so wordy, lol…
Anyway, tell me some of your favorite scenes from the books that you think should be in the movies and why…
@Tower Junkie:
I am absolutly love talking to you guys about this, especially one Tower Junkie. I can finally use something that I learned in English for something important and have it make sense. Hurry!!
Some of my favorite parts are more of the little things, that lighten up the book a bit.
When the katet first me Oy. When Eddi keeps cracking the bughum joke. stuff like that. I also really like how King deals with Mordred. I truely love Arthurian mythology, and I have really always like Mordred, so I found it really interesting how King works him in the book. It is very much like a lot of the old tales about Mordred in King Arthur tales.
Another absolute favorite part of mines, is when Jake is reunited with Roland in the 7th book and he hugs Roland and says " hello father" or something like that. I just remembered that I cried for a few moments when he said that. I think that is the frist time I have evered cried, because of a scene in a book.
Ok, so now that I said stuff, what are your favorite parts?
Some of my more favorite moments in the boks are the same as yours.. the bumhug jokes, when Jake calls Roland father, I liked those as well. I also LOVED the entire Blain senquence when they riddle for their lives, fight the greys and pubes, meet the old folk, pretty much the entire wastelands book. I also enjoyed the wolves of calla and father callahans story, its shows the relation between their worlds. Especially the scene where Eddie shuts down the robot in the outhouse, I thought it very fitting he was to be buried in sh!t. lol
A lot of comments on here don't think that the 4th book with the flashback of Rolands first love should be included, but I beg to differ, I think it is vital to his story and their quest. I also enjoued the part in book 7 when Roland is mocking the crimson king and he throws a temper tantrum like a spoiled child. I loved the way that Sai King created his demise by erasing him, I loved it… there are so many, when Jake gets pulled through in his underware after the doorkeeper tries to eat him, when Roland confronts the preacher lady in tull or when Roland fights his teacher Cort trying to justify his need of revenge. that is why I feel all of these books should have their own movie, their is too many important and little things that need to be told. cutting any of them out would be sacriligous…
do you think Rolands story and ultimate end would have been different if there hadn't been abt 15yrs between the books???
@Tower Junkie:
No I think it would have turned out the same. I really can not imagine this story ending with a happily ever after, after all that the katet has gone through.
@ tower Junkie
Forgive my lateness in responding, i was concerned with midterms.
So here goes…
Roland is not a force, he is THE force. Without him there is no quest, without his despair and dryness, there is no ka-tet. I would argue that he is the binding glue between all these characters, Mordred and the Crimson King are reflections of the bad side of this force. Roland is immortally going to travel this quest, i mentioned before and do so now, that i don't think this is the first time he's been on this quest, i would like to believe that this may be just one of infinite loops where he is consistently making the same mistakes, (a la the talk that Roland and the Crimson King have when he is trapped in the Wizard's glass, "Roland, i know you, and will ever know you") this seems a clear indication that this is a continuous quest, a replay needed in order to balance the worlds every so often. This seems more possible because Roland's quest spans whole worlds, and who knows how much time elapsed between the journeys he made to each of the seperate doors, maybe not in his world (which i feel is a nexus since it is where he is from, and in my theory, MUST exist to balance the worlds, and therefore is integral to the nature of the universe) but in the other ones that rely on his ability to complete his journey.
this is all supposition of course, but if we look at the idea of multiverses, it stands to reason that there would be a leyline of sorts, eg; the tower, Roland's world and the world of the Stand where the green castle resides (with T-T man and Martin/ Randall Flagg)
and the dark lights, which represents despair and loss and horrors unimaginable. I am assuming that Pennywise is either The Crimson King itself, a version of Mordred, or Walter/RF in a different form
That being said, Elements of Roland are in EVERY CHARACTER that King has ever used. In fact, i would go so far as to suggest that These other Characters are embodiements of Roland, caskets for his soul and genetics that lay dormant (living their own lives) until they die and the parts of Roland head eternally towards the End.
To clarify, look at the end of The Stand, RF is reincarnated, and ones has to assume that the events that have just occurred will occur in exactly the same way again, Same thing with the nature of the magician in Eyes of the Dragon, there is a latent feeling of deja-vu, that these things have occurred before and will continue, even if its just a feeling.
Another theory i have about King's other stories and how they tie in is that Roland has been lax in his quest, got hung up in another world (either spiritually or physically) and has avoided his long journey, this type of thing could explain why he must suffer so, The fact (in this idea) that he defaulted from his appointed task would be cause enough for the other acting forces (the ones concerned with the balance of the worlds and Keeping the Crimson King from his goal) to make him elongate his journey eternally for avoiding the quest in the first forms.
There is one issue with this notion however, a single line that has discouraged this more and more in my mind. The fact that The Crimson King tells Roland that he has been waiting for longer this time. Implying through language that this is not the first time their encounter occurs at the tower. If the Crimson King is beyond actual realms and their limitations (as i think is the general consensus) then he would be aware (theoretically) of Roland's eternal journey and the possible endings. What if Roland has failed countless times to reach the tower, or has been able to change in the past, that would explain the reason for his suffering, I would argue on this basis, that Roland is not questing for the tower, but actually for The Crimson King, for the encounter between two evils, of which the universe can only sustain one to be rebalanced. This theory immediately dictates that the worlds have a set schedule of unbalance, coming to a close when Roland takes up this quest ( or is born to it) and that this Play must continually occur to re balance the worlds in preparation for the journey once again, Like resetting a timer or clock so that all the elements are in place.
Jake must exist in his world, eddie in his, Jack Mort, Walter/RF, Susannah, Blaine, Tick-tock man, Oy, The spirit that uses Roland's genetic identity, Callahan, so on and so forth. These elements must constantly be reproduced for the quest to happen as it must, suggesting a distinct time line, Even Roland's own world must be in the throes of doom
(much like in The Stand) All these elements (Alain, Cuthbert, Stephen, The Coos witch, Coffin hunters, Farson) must happen to be for the quest to happen the same each time.
So now i pose a question to any out there brave enough to answer.
What if Roland IS the Crimson King, what if the entire epic is backwards, and we are routing for Chaos, not order? What if Roland's Ka-tet is the unbalancing equation leading to the quest's continuance, the need for the quest. What if, should the 'Crimson King' be left alone, the worlds would be restored to order under his goal. I know what it says in the book, concretely speaking, but what if we are meant to see the Quest from a decidedly biased point of view, sounds like something that SK would do just for the hell of it.
Long nights, pleasant fields.
Camuss 111
@camuss111:
NO,
I have gone back and forth in my love and hate of Roland and his many faults, but I have never once felt him to be in the same league as the Crimson King. The reasons of their existance differ far too much for that idea to even be considered. and yes, I am extremely biased in my opinion in this matter. and while I will agree that the first 4 books have been told half ass backwards, and while his motivations are less than worthy, I repeat, he is not the crimson king.
You agree , though stated in different ways, that:
first, Roland has repeated this quest countless times, other stories and the influences that we see in rolands world are a result of his past failed attempts at his quest.
Secondly that Eddy,Susannah and Jake are reflections Roland himself, parts that he is incapeable of..
Thirdly that they are key parts of not only his quest, but his existance in that they exist because he does and vise versa
Fourthly that the major importance of his quest is to rebalance the wheels of ka..in turn saving the beams and all the worlds in the many levels of the tower.
And Finally, When Roland goes with Jake to the vacant lot and sees within the Rose everything that is right and good and worthwhile in this world and all worlds, he says "This is worth everything"..
That right there, those 4 words are enough to convince me, if nothing else that Roland is NOT the crimson king.
The one consistant theme throughout all of these books is that constant inuendos, constant contrasts and battles between good and evil.. you see it everywhere..
the old people at river crossing vs the pubes and greys… their world, recovering from the great evil done to it in the past; growing lush and green, yet still mutated. blain the pain vs little blain…the people of the callas, peaceful and kind, yet betrayed by one of their own, their babies taken away and returned as giant husks of what they should have been…roland and his tet saving them from one threat only to be rewarded with the key to the eventual destruction of their tet and their lives… and on and on and on..
It is more likely that the Crimson king is more a result of all of Roland wrongs than the man himself. we already know that roland has repeated this same quest countless times and has failed countless times. all of that negativity had to put somewhere..and I think the Crimson King is a result of it–the wheels of ka balancing..
the fact that he had to wait so long for Roland this time could simply mean that maybe Roland did something right this time. I still hold the contention that Roland was never meant to reach the tower.. the fact that he does and the Crimson King is there waiting to destroy him only verifies my contentions.. at least in my mind..
what do you think?????
I absolutely love this series. I've read it three times and am contemplating starting a fourth trip to the Tower. That being said, I don't think King should be allowed within 50 miles of the production of these movies. He is an amazing writer but his movies are always terrible (with the exception of The Green Mile, which he had little influence on). I'd love to see someone like a Peter Jackson take over this project, I think J.J. Abrams is too mainstream to take on such a task. As for mashing them together or keeping them separate, it would be almost impossible to omit enough from Wizard and Glass or The Dark Tower to make them an acceptable movie length (The Dark Tower would likely push the 5 hour mark, if not surpass it). I almost hope no one ever attempts this project because of the high likelihood for failure due to its magnitude. Besides, what's the chance of someone casting an acceptable group for the ka-tet?
And I don't understand why so many people are in love with Wizard and Glass. I've found this to be the most difficult book to get through every time due to the fact that it doesn't advance the main plot. I never really agreed with King's decision to insert a love story into a tale of an epic anti-hero who would let a child die in order to reach his tower. All the tale of Roland and Susan did for me was reveal where most of his coldness came from, although I found the betrayal of his mother and murder of his father to be reason enough. I was lucky enough to not be in the right age range to have to endure the agonizing wait after The Waste Lands only to be handed such a disappointment in Wizard and Glass. I personally thought that The Waste Lands was the best book of the series, and The Dark Tower is a close second, primarily because I was pleasantly surprised by the ending.
Any thoughts that King has decided to continue the series with another book? Something like The Wind Through the Keyhole? If it does anything but reveal side stories (i.e. Little Sisters of Eluria) I think it's a huge mistake.
This series is the best series Ive ever read..I began reading The Gunslinger when I was in the Seventh Grade. I hated it, couldn't even get to the point of meeting Jake. So I put it down until I reached High School and I finished the first and second in Freshman year, The 3rd one in sophomore year and then I read the Rest in my JUNIOR year. I'm 18 now and this series continues to stick to me and grow on me even tho Im done with it. It is probable the best literary work that I have ever read and is the reason why It's hard for me to read any other author than Stephen King. I continue to read his works trying to get more clues or just hints to the Dark tower but thats not the only reason why. HE's just A GREAT AUTHOR WITH BEAUTIFUL AND CYNICAL ideas that stay with you for years and years to come. And i would love for these books to be put into a movie adaptation and i think the first 2 should be combined along with the 5th and 6th being combined with the last one being 2 movies.
Plus wizard and glass is the best book of this series. Then it would be The Dark Tower in Second place. Not fact just my opinion
@Brian:
There's not much out there about the new book… but from what I have been able to figure out, it is a side story that takes place somwhere between the wizard and glass and the wolves of calla. I don't think it's even going to be about the tet.
I agree with you though, that it would be a mistake… I mean what's left to be sung for Roland and his tet? Sai King has his graphic novels for that purpose (for the stories inbetween) Sai king's books have always been like black and white for people.. either you love them or you hate them, there is no middle ground….ever.
I also agree that Sai Kings movies have always been a weak representation of his written master pieces…they are never the same. like I said in an earlier post, they have either changed the endings such as they did in the mist, cujo, dreamcatcher.. or they have only done a partial adaptation such as in the green mile, hearts in atlantis.. the tv movie done of the book IT was just rediculas..
so I agree that there is a great deal of trepidation in the idea of a dark tower movie.. not only for the fans that have followed it all of these years and know and love these and who have laughed and cried over these books but for the person who decides to take this task on.. There has been so much talk(and I have put in my 25 cents worth as well ) as to whom would play the parts of these legendary characters. but that is not as important as HOW they tell the story because all of it is important to the final outcome..if they leave out 1 iota of detail or god forbid change anything it would completley and utterly destroy it and that is my greatest fear.
Did you see the made-for-TV version of Desperation? Bleh… It makes Dreamcatcher look good!
No Kidding… After IT, Desperation was the "cheesiest" adaption I've seen.
Of all of the adaptions, I would have to say that Misery was the one that stayed closest to the book. I absolutely adore Kathy Bates.. that woman has skills!!
@Stephen: very well spoken
I absolutely love the books and would love to see a movie. I am agree on your comments concerning Stephen King's appearance in the book it is somewhat distracting at first but gets better and fits the story in part 7.
I think these books are amazing. I just finished Wizard and Glass and I'm a little nervous to start Wolves of the Calla after reading some of these comments. I was somewhat offput when King placed the Randal Flag character into this series and also referenced the captain trips virus from The Stand. It would be weird to see King as a character in his own story. Anyway, back to the topic at hand. While I think that it would be cool to see the books made into a movie, I also think that it would be much better received as a show on a network such as HBO or Showtime. The only reason I say this is because the Dark Tower series doesn't have as big a following as Lord of the Rings. If previews for this movie came out and people didn't know what the hell it was, they would be totally confused and less likely to see it. I think that Bad Robot (J.J. Abrahm's production company) would find a much larger audience and more success if they turned it into a television series on HBO.
Look at the Sookie Stackhouse books. Many people had no idea that the series even existed until it was made into an HBO series. Not only that, because it is on a premium cable network, they were able to leave a lot more content in and not have to worry about network censorship interfering with the quality of the product. I think they should take each book and make it into one season of a TV series. The Dark Tower series is just way too involved to be turned into a movie. If it were broken down into hour long episodes, then people would be able to get the full back story on things and not be left scratching their head. They would be able to transfer every detail to the screen and do this incredible series justice.
Pull a George Lucas and start in the middle lol…idk.. the books are amazing and not many people know they exist. If you throw it all into a movie it will surely be awesome, but in turn it would take away peoples abilitly to imagine the book themselves.
For those of you who suggested an HBO series, I think you're right on the money. There are so many comments on this page, I'm sorry I don't see who used the example of True Blood, and mentioning how many people didn't know of the Sookie books that that HBO series was based off of, yet when True Blood became a more popular show more people started reading the books the show was based on. This has proven to happen once, who not with the Dark Tower series. More people will read the books if HBO makes a series of Stephen King's grandest piece of art.
When it comes to the issue with the young actor they pick to play Jake aging possibly throughout the series, there is a time early on when Jake dies, and he comes back from a different world. Maybe they can have a new actor come in when Jake returns, Roland recognizes who he is, but no one else in the Katet knew Jake before, I'm sure the right screen writer can make this work, with a sligh tadjustment to the story, just there has been changes in True Blood from the novels, but both the novels and the show are still great. Also, maybe the right casting would work too, if the actor they choose remains the right height and has a young face.
None of use want to see a show that has too many changes from Stephen King's work, but I do believe that a show on HBO would draw more people to the novels, and it can be done well.
I've mixed feelings about putting DT on the screen. It's taken me 20 years to get around to the end (started with Drawing of the Three, when having my eldest kid, read the Gunslinger later, eventually also books three and four – I just finished re-reading the lot of them in a go this week. My head is still buzzing over the ending!
That being said, I have to say that my least favourite was Wizard and Glass. I simply don't consider all that western/romance crap to be important enough to make a full film out of it (plus, I hate westerns AND love stories.) IF they were going to encapsulate certain things (to keep movie length or number down), then all his flashbackss – the discovery of his mom's affair with Marten, his fight with Cort, his trip to the Mejis, Jericho Hill, AND Tull and the last homesteader before the desert – could be summed up (with narration and illustrative scenes) in all of 15 minutes screen-time or less. We just need to know the important bits and general framework – we don't need to know that Roland had "every hole" of Susan a dozen different times and places. This stuff could be in the same place as in the books (in between Blaine and the Emerald Palace) but of course, that would make W&G very, very short – since most of the book is devoted to that western love story – and so could be combined with Wolves of the Calla (which could also be shorter). And of course, this backstory cannot, absolutely cannot, be where the film starts. The desert is where Roland really begins – every time. Of course, moving Tull to Wizard and Glass would make the Gunslinger shorter too, but I think the Drawing of the Three could be combined with it, to make a decent 2 – 2.5 hour film.
Remember, no film would be quite as long as the books seem, because King is very wordy and descriptive, and most of that can be summed up just by _seeing_ it.
As for where to break The Waste Lands off, well, the original break would be great, but maddening for audiences – but you could show the whole riddle contest, and end with them crawling out of the train to behold an empty post-Trips Kansas.
No, I wouldn't mind if they did make all seven films following the books – but I doubt I would want to sit through a W&G film if it was done in its entirety. To overbloat a simple flashback like that is just, well, pointless, really. I wouldn't have minded if it only took a chapter or two to recount, not the major bulk of the book.
As for taking King out as a character – how then do you suppose to kill Jake the second time? The whole reason he dies is because they come back to rescue King from the accident. You could change it to just "The Writer" with no name, but King is so stamped on this story, it wouldn't make much sense to do so. I suppose you could take the Writer out completely, but then you have to come up with another way to get rid of Jake – as they all have to die (or leave) before Roland can attain the Tower. (and I don't quite get that bit about Susannah leaving. I think that's one thing that changed in this iteration of Roland's Eternal Journey, because she just had the sense that she had to get lost, that if she even saw the Tower, then something had gone horribly wrong. In previous iterations, it may be that she did die, but something happened that saved her life – but she knew she still couldn't be there, dead or not .. and maybe this iteration wasn't the first where that happened.)
And actually, Oy, for me, was the most interesting character, simply because he was routinely overlooked as an integral part of the ka-tet. He was also the only ka-tet member whose death was foreseen when Walter showed Roland that vision. A little more could have been done with him, I think – he was probably also a bit of an afterthought. :s However, I'd hate to see, in a movie, Oy become just the cutsey little comic relief bit aka Disney style ….
Because someone mentioned that the days of the R-rated (or X-rated, or whatever it is that under-18s can't get into) blockbuster is dead. I don't see why that should be so. Let the Focus on the Family types bitch and yowl that they can't take their kids to see the Dark Tower films. It's an adult story, for adults, and even with all of the extraneous sex removed, there's still the matter of the Drawing of Jake … not to mention the casual violence so integral to the story. It should NOT be dumbed down/cleaned up just so teenyboppers can get in to see it. That would TRULY ruin any DT franchise right there. The teenybops can wait for the DVD to come out, if they want to see it.
i have read through as many of the above posts as i could and in my opinion i would like the story to remain unchanged when made into movies!!! some of the aforementioned posts did raise some great issues about how many films whilst i agree that the waste lands and wolves are pretty much flash back territory and COULD be interspersed throughout the other books to shorten the franchise to 5 or 6 films and also that obviously ending a film in the middle of the blaine riddle contest would not be conjusive to a good movie ending. i personally like the interjection of the characters visiting king and planting the reason for the books in his subconscious and also explaining the reason for the way that king reuses characters and scenarios in his books, as all constant readers such as myself must surely agree that this is the quintessential reason for buying and reading every single word that king puts to paper and that whilst all his books stand alone its reassuring to know that the people that sometimes suffer in kings stories are in fact living their lives having endured thier trials. but then again maybe thats just me .
i cant wait for these films and hope to god that these guys stop coming up with other great projects such as fring star trek lost et cetera and can finally concentrate on the daunting task of sitting down and actually deciding not only HOW to do these films but WHO to cast aswell with the logistical nightmare of jake being the biggest problem as his age doesnt really change throughout the saga and who to play roland deschain maybe viggo mortensen but certainly please please whoever gets the task of casting clint eastwood MUST be stephen deschain the gunslingers father or cort the teacher
Just a a quick update for those of you who don't already know, but the Movie/TV adaptation has been put on hold indefinitely.
"During an interview with MTV Abrams made the following comments: "The Dark Tower thing is tricky. "The truth is that Damon and I are not looking at that right now." Furthermore, in an interview with USA Today Damon Lindelof stated that "After working six years on 'Lost,' the last thing I want to do is spend the next seven years adapting one of my favorite books of all time. I'm such a massive Stephen King fan that I'm terrified of screwing it up. I'd do anything to see those movies written by someone else. My guess is they will get made because they're so incredible. But not by me."
Source wikipedia, I know not the most reliable but I have seen these reports else where I just couldn't be bothered searching.
@sam: Thanks man!
@sam: Or woman.
a show would be great ala Lost, but could you really sit thru so many cliffhangers? i also think that the series would have to begin and end with the man in black fleeing across the desert.
stand and be true, filmmakers! and he sold it to you for 19 dollars there is no way you can not make this movie and sleep at night long days and pleasant nights filmmakers
As much as I would love to see a movie version, and as much as I have fantasized about it, it is unlikely to ever happen. I would say though, that a cable series might do the best job of conveying a live-action version of the saga, without having to condense too much of the story to fit in the three-hour time frame of a movie. So what if they have to re-cast Jake? I'm sure young actors with the same face are a dime a dozen in Hollywood! Viggo Mortensen is a perfect fit to cast as Roland, but I heard he's quitting acting. Maybe Russell Crowe? Christian Bale might fit, too. Someone on this board suggested Shia Lebeof for Eddie: perfect! For Walter I would choose someone like Tom Hanks, or if not Walter, find some way to cast him in a role. Idk, just fantasizing here. I recently started re-reading the series so I'm all enthused about it again! Oh well, I hope everyone on here has enjoyed the books as much as me over the last 20 or so years. Remember to stay on the path of the beam!
Stephen Colbert as Walter! or Flagg! Tee-hee, the possibities are endless in this fantasy!
after watching "Taken" its gotta be liam neeson as roland!
I did not read all posts but has anyone thought of it being an awsome Anime series? Kind of something based on the style of the graphic novels but of course over the books! It also has a very anime theme I think. Thoughts?
IMHO the only way to do this series is 100% CGI. This solves the problem of filming time issues, set costs, and character's (nobody but Clint Eastwood should play Roland). I also think that a full out TV series could work to tell the tale, otherwise the movies would be too long or too hacked up. The problem with converting a great book to screen is the author of the book doesn't give thought to movies when spinning their tale. Their whole concern is to tell their vision of the story. The only SK story that I thought was a very accurate reproduction too screen was The Langoliers. A SK "short story" that required a 4 hour TV tale. There has been many of SK's stories put to film, some good, some not so good. I don't think King's Opus should be left to some writers translation of his work. King spent 30 years of his life to write the script and story board, why waste the work he already put in.
I can't believe I just found this site… I read all the time and all I read is stephen king- just his books over n over. Once in a while I'll throw in a dean koontz- but that just makes me love SK even more
I spend SO MUCH time thinking about the cast of The Dark Tower series. It will get made- it has too! The only reason why its NOT being worked on is bc no one really has the guts to attack such an amazing and comprehensive take AND stay true to the story. Once it gets done, itl beat the ring trilogy, all the Potter movies and the twilight saga COMBINED!
BUT! Here's some of my casting ideas:
Roland- russell crowe or mel gibson- they both have the look- weathered, unhappy and big blue eyes. (Bombariers eyes!)
Eddie- I kinda like shia lebouf or jake gylenhall…its wld def be a role where they could really show off their talents
Detta/odetta n susahnah- look up kerry washington…she is EXACTLY what I always pictured susanah to look like!
Jake- freddie highmore is the only actor I can think of that has whatit takes to pull it off
Henry- jim caviele is how I always thought of henry!
Regarding young roland, cuthbert and alain….zac effron for young roland, john patrick amedori for cuthbert and haven't found just the right person for alain yet.
Jack mort- that's where hugh laurie wld be great.
Flagg- tim roth
Crimson king- think vincent d'anofrio in the cell…totally crimson king!
Those are just a few. I actually have a notebook with the entirecast listed. I know -its sad! But I totally love love love these books!I so want them made into a movie and for them to be done right!
Also:
Calvin Tower- wayne knight
Aaron depneau- ian mckellan
Mia- id love to hv seen demi moore as mia, but she too old now (sorry demi!) But sm1 just as beuatiful like megan fox
Gasher- cain marco
Coral thorin- angelica houston
I can't find my notebook- but names and characters keep coming to me. Most people won't car, I know- but it feels good for me to be able to share my thought since I really do love these books that much! I want 2 b BURIED w them! (Brand new hard back copies- no flowers but if u insist- RED ROSES OF COURSE!
Hart horin- john malcovich
The chancelor (4get his name rt now) john leinthgow
Susan- amanda sigfried
Jonas- sam shepard (I think that's his name- gar from mask w cher)
STEVEN deschain (NOT roland)- liam neeson
Gabrielle deschain- helena bonham carter (but I think that may b bc of the comic book drawing of gabrielle- it looks JUST like hbc
Ill b back w more as I read the series again n it all comes back to me!
Ps- ianother thing I think about all the time is all the misery roland goes thru over and over and over- just to keep the tower from falling. And how eddie susanah and jake found their way together again in some parrallel when. Do u really think those 3 gunslingers will find happiness and contentment in a world like new york- WITHOUT their ka-mate? If they really exist I don't think they sleep very well bc they feel rolands suffering all the time. They just have to find their way back to roland ans save him. Call it rolands redemption or something like that- just please! Someone save roland fromhaving to go thru all that pain again!
Trish,
Loved your question
And how eddie susanah and jake found their way together again in some parrallel when. Do u really think those 3 gunslingers will find happiness and contentment in a world like new york- WITHOUT their ka-mate?
I wondered about that too, because they stated in the books that if one dies in the keystone world, they stay dead, that's why they had to risk everything to save stephen king from the accident, because if he died their story could not be sung and all of the worlds would be lost. Since Jake dies saving SK, in the keystone world, how is it that he ends up with Eddy and Susannah in New York? Eddie I could believe because of where he died and Susannah was fated to go..
a part of me cried with joy when I read that Jake was alive and well because he deserved his happiness possibly more than the others and i I hated that he had to die not once but twice..they all deserve their happiness together, but in a way i doubt they will be drawn again because of what happened to Rolands gun when Susannah went through the door. If you remember is was old and rusted and looked as though it would never fire again so she threw it away. Rolands guns had always gone through on the other worlds. He took them through the door for the shoot out at Balazzar's, Eddy took one with him to save Calvin Tower, the fact that it was useless to Susannah when she went through her door may indicate that they can and will be happy together in their when. Perhaps in time if Ka allows Roland may join them in their when
Olive thorin- cathy bates
I'll roche- ok its not very original but james gandolfini. In fact- I see a few people from tonys crew as I'll roches crew- pussy wld make a great jack andolini…the young kid w the big nose (who played the kid w cancer n dies in basketball diaries) is 'cimi. I think it COULD work, especially for those who buy one of the concepts of the whole story that so many things make their way into all the parrallel worlds we don't get to see. That's also why I think it WOULD work (and does work) stephen king being worked into the actual story. I BELIEVE in these books the way kids believe in the tooth fairy and santa clause. Having sk in the story, seeing the all the similaries between wolves and calla and the seven samauris, seeing father clahan AGAIN after 20 years, those things actually REINFORCE my belief. I know it sounds so corny…but to me there's no that much difference between the moral of "the 5 people u meet in heaven" by mitch album (that we r all connected and EVERY thing we do- big or small- has meaning and purpose) and what I got from these 7 books!
Sk- ur awesome. I hope u read this some day. I started my own buried life and meeting u is on that list!
Hey tower junkie and camus111- I don't know if y'all still red the blog but I have to comment on your opinion that roland ISN'T meant to reach the dark tower…that if he would just leave the crimson king alone everything would be ok.
I would say (but just IMO) that your close, but no cigar!
I totally think he's supposed to destroy the crimson king, then call out the names of his friends who have died in the quest (omg how I cry when he's shouting out those names!)…but then just roll out.
In every single book- dozens of times- he says how something is wrong w the dark tower, its his quest to reach the dark tower, something wrong and he's gotta put it right. And then- THEN! He says how will go in and climb to the top. Well I don't think ANYONE is ever supposed to go in. The crimson king did -but then got locked out. So w/o looking to deep into the story- the crimson kings presense alone could have been what was so wrong w the dark tower. I thinkthat roland is just supposed to have faith and just let the tower be once he's killed the crimson king. Its his sense of entitlement- his relentless pursuit to climb to the top of the tower…that seems unforgiving (in the eyes of the tower or whatever force it is that makes him do it over and over) to me. After he kills the crimson king, and shouts the names of his friends, he COMMANDS the tower to open it door to him- and the door opens with a loud sigh. Whenever I read that part I cn practically HEAR that sigh and I always think that sigh is like the voice of the towers heart saying "not again roland! Uv done what you came here to do so why can't you just leave? Why do you think your so special that I should let YOU make your way thru me? Ok then? You still don't get it? Well then let's do it all again….and agin and again…until you DO get it."
Seriously- I all 7 stories I never was uncomfortable (for want of a better work) w all the things roland has done/said/or commanded…but when he commands the tower to open its door I think to myself "you better watch it there buddy! This isn't someone from you ka-tet here! Who do you think you are!?"
Interesting concept about Roland being to pushy with the Tower. I would have never thought of that, though it does make a lot of sense.
Thank you fenris! I just posted a reply to towerjunkie regarding sm other things, but I aslo told him (her?) How I came up w that idea and its pretty funny if you want to read it!
Trish,
Thanks for your response and your choices in actors is refreshing, a saw several names that have not been posted yet. I'm not sure if you know.. but JJ backed out of the tower films so unless it is opted by someone else i don;t think there will be a dark tower movie….sigh..
in response to your comment, I hold to my contention that Roland is not meant to reach the tower. There really is no need for him to. He already saved the tower when he saved the beam. I can see why you feel that calling out the name of those who died is important, and it is a very emotional scene, and one I can not help but cry over. but it is not necessary for Roland to do that. The roses have been singing all of their names since before memory.
again Roland does not need to kill the Crimson King, he has already destroyed his physical self and is, like you say, already trapped there, and imo, and is no longer a threat to the worlds.
The Crimson king..ugh.. this is one character i just do not get at all. I mean, when I read these books, I can see all of them in my mind. I can laugh and cry with them, I can smell the dirt of the trail everything is so vivid with the tet… but with the crimson king, I'm blank, its like an abyss in my mind and it is so frustrating. the Crimson king is the catalyst for all of this.. the reason Roland became the man he is, the reason the beams are failing, the reason that jake, eddie and susannah are drawn.. the sorce of everything, yet its like he is tabooed, there is hardly a mention of him anywhere, no resoning behind his madness. there is nothing to explain the WHY of him.. Just the absolute fear his name invokes..do you know what I mean?
Do you know what really gets me? at the end when you finally get to
"see" the crimson king, the portrayal of him is so infintile, petty and weak, you're left wondering what the big deal was. and ultimately it isn't Roland that slays him at all, but Patrick,
I like what you said there at the end of your comment
when Roland demands entrance to the tower, it was great..
he demands entrance to the tower and goes through the rooms reliving his life he starts to feel the dejavu and the doubt is there at the back of his mind,an inkling of the truth, but does he stop? then he reaches the top and realizes the truth, it's too late to turn back and we find him once again in the desert..do you see the futility?? After centuries of searching, losing everyone and everything he has ever loved….
Roland is destined for more, he is meant to BE more than that and he will repeat his quest untill he is able to learn that.
YOU DON'T KNOW HOW GOOD IT FEELS TO HAVE SOME1 COMMENT ON MY POVs N OPINIONS ON THIS SERIES! If you were to ask anyone who knows me 2 say 3 things about me the 2 things EVERYONE wld say that I curse to much and that I spend way too much time reading stephen king! I dnt really know what they'd say about me for the 3rd thing-and altho id be curious- the point I'm tryin to make is that as obsessed as I am I've never had anyone to discuss these books w! Its like a you don't know until you do know kind of thing!
Real quick- my cast- I always make this stupid mistake- gasher…I said cain marco who is jaugarnat from xmen. Jaggaurnats real name (in the comics) is cain marco…he's played by vinny jones (pretty sure that's his name).
And- I think roland saving the beam restored the health of the tower (best word I cld come up w) and maybe he didn't need to kill the crimson king- but roland killed him beleiving it was neccesary to align the balance between good n evil. But iafter thinking about it, you cld b right…but it feels more like a situation that wouldn't have made a dif if he did or didnt . Like if he left the crimson king alive and then exited the scene it wldnt have been like a punishable offence in the eyes of the tower (as entering the tower was).
And the only reason I think Roland had to sing their names is bc he promised so many people- including himself- that he wld. And I also feel that after all the sacrifice R made, going to actually lay his eyes on the tower was just a matter of fairness. He went thru so much turmoil his whole life- ALL his lives it seemed- for the dark tower…I'm sure that Gan wld be cool w R just looking at it!
N I'm w u on the crimson king- CORNY!- I like that he's destroyed and just his eyeballs are left for all eternity, but he just didn't portray the terror he actually is. I thought he was more creepy in insomnia as a big flying catfish in a rocking chair. But if and when you reread it- picture d'nofrio from the cell…bc that dude is creepy. Apply that image nd it might work better for you. Especially the scene where he's hopping up and down in a very infantile way!
And! C'mon now! What's the last thing jake said to roland b4 he let him drop? Go then, there are other worlds than these. He and eddie were just still living in another world- and a brothers (which was so frickin awesome). And I think the reason the gun was like that was to indicate that now that they r in this new world- their hardcore gunslinging days are over. I know it sounds lame…but I wish they would find there OWN way to the tower and just like hide behind it and just as rolands about to walk thru the door they jump out and say "dnt do it roland! U'll totally screw yourself if you actually stepped thru that door? What the heck makes you think your supposed to reach the top anyway?!just bc its the only thing in ur life ur curious about?!"
I'll tell u 1 more thing tho… you know right b4 roland starts walking up to go in the tower- how stephen king totally messes w u and says he's not gonna tell u what's in the tower? He gives you this song n dance about how if we REALLY want to know what's in the tower we shd learn that the real pleasure is in the journey not the arrival- well I took 7 to work w me to finish it. Cripes after almost what? 30 years of waiting – I'm sure I'm wasn't the only 1- but when I read that I went BALLISTIC! I was so furious! I threw an actual fit in my office! I threw the book- I was yelling- my assistant came in and said "what happened?" Well boy o boy did she lose a lot of authoritative respect for me that day. I just flipped out! I was like "I've been waiting 30 years to find out what's at the top of the tower and kings not gonna tell me! Nfw!" Well she picked up the book for me, flipped thru the pages and sd "well I don't think you finished the book yet". It was so embarrassing- but that's when I realized that stephen king didn't owe me anything- he clda left it like that and then roland wldve lived (at least in our head) and that the tower doesn't owe roland anything either. He put things right for the tower and continued existence is his payback. He wants to see what the tower looks like w his own eyes? By all means- have a looksy as long as ud like. But if you really want to see what's inside here you'll regret it forever. So to me- its kinda like sk did to all of us what the tower did to roland. We all clda shut the book when he told us too and we all wld just assume he saved the day and that he and he alone got to see the inside the tower…but we didn't! We turned that page and read what happened bc WE wanted to know what was in the dt- especially the top! And now we are all heartbroken for him -having to tredge thru his life over and over!
Its crazy to me to think that we had a chance to NOT know just how devestating rolands existence really is…cripes- we thought he had it bad thru just those 7 books! Now imagine there's 7000 sets of those 7 books- and its just roland having to do a new set of books, or new miserable life over and over! That's SO morbid! Smtimes I wish my secretary had just left it on the floor and I put it on a shelf w/o knowing how it really ended! Its like if I had just left it alone, roland wldve had happily ever after!
to Trish
When i say that roland is never meant to reach the tower, i mean that he is not meant to achieve his peace. In my mind, Roland is a traveler that HAS to exist for the universes to continue turning. What i mean is that he is the sacrifice, the continued quester for everything else. Without him, there is no tower, without the tower there is no Roland Deschain, nor Mordred nor Randy Flagg. Roland is doomed to continue his quest forever, renewing the beginning threads when the worlds become out of balance again and again. He has to break the cycle, has to make the decision to quit the quest (which he will never do.) so he is eternally caught in the quest, retracing his steps for all eternity. All the tower has to do is call him. He does command the tower to open to him, and that is interesting in its own right; and to a certain degree, i agree that this is hubris of the highest level. But it is not what dooms him, his MIND and Doggedness do this. Roland is the medicine that the Dark Tower can not quit, he is the placebo that drives the wheel of ka onward. I think that he has already obtained the Horn of Eld before, losing it time and time again with his memories. He has already experienced Eddie's sudden frailty and Oy's golden, firelit i-know-i'll-die stare. He forgets it all, he MUST forget it all, for he needs to continue his quest eternally or existence will cease. He has a choice, but truly, he has a false one, the universes have chosen him and him alone to suffer for existence, for lives he cares nothing about. He will always drag the same members back, Susannah, Jake and Eddie will always end up the same way, Oy will always die and Mordred will always be a-hungry for the white daddy. The Crimson King will always go insane and shove the spoon down his throat and he will always be destroyed by Patrick. Gan will always return Roland to the desert, and the man in black will always flee. Roland will forever travel this quest, he is eternal, leaving the same despair and misery, blood and joy that follow his tracks like a faithful dog.
In short, Roland is KA incarnate.
Camuss111
to Tower Junkie
Long time, eh?
about your last post, I believe that the stretchability of Roland and his world is open wider than most stories i've ever read. And to be clear, i am assuming that you mean 'i take contention with your ideas' if not so, i apologize for this post.
I believe that Roland is never meant to reach the tower, the Crimson King (to me) is the incarnation of the Tower's will. Roland is meant to heal the beams, he is meant to destroy the Crimson King's army, that is all. The Tower is temptation, longing, a medicine he feels he NEED obtain. But in reality all he truly needs is the Ka-tet. Their companionship is really what matters. He CAN get to the tower, and does, so he is eternally cast back to relive his fate.
There is a paradox, Roland is too stubborn to quit his journey, and he is too cold to change his goal. He will never settle for a peaceful life, even good'ol Randall says the same thing. He can't, Roland is not good, although he may be the representative of it. His ka mates are the good ones, they are cured of it all by their dinh, and as a result become the balancing good that Roland needs to change again.
I would argue that the reason they all die is due to the Tower's will. Roland is it's eternal slave, and so he is the only one it wants. They all die because the Tower kills them. (note; i do not believe the beams are a part of the tower, only that they flow through it.) it needs to kill them so that it can have Roland all to itself, and here is the second paradox.
The tower is not the end all be all, it is merely part of something greater, something larger than imagining, Gan resides at the top of this tower, but maybe it is only and extension of Gan, maybe this tower is only one of many, colors coinciding with the wizard's glasses (black 13)
maybe Roland is not the last gunslinger, maybe he is the last of his WORLD, what if there are others out there, others following the same quest, reaching the same towers (of varying colors and names) at the same time, what if there is an emerald King, or a Sapphire one, what if there are multiple Roland's across the expanses of universes and we are only allowed to follow one.
either way, the paradox remains, Roland will never be satisfied, he will always chase this dream, I personally don't think he will ever get it right, i think he will always act the same, always lose the things that would have cured him of his sick devotion. he will never get it right because he is not meant to.
answers, questions? Vannay is gone.
Camuss111
camuss111,
Yes, it has been a long time… I thought I had scared you off! lol
But welcome back to the debate. I'm sure I am not the only one who has missed your antagonistic views as they make for a lively discussion.
As to whether or not you are in contention with me, I really do hope so, this would be utterly boring without a little debate! :)
Now as to the rest of your coment;
Instead of debating the finer points with you, I would like to ask you some questions about your latest theories in hopes you may enlighten me to the workings of your most remarkable brain. I am not being facetious, I truly am curious.
Why is it that you do not believe that the beams are attached to the tower? what was it in your reading of the series that led you to that belief? and more to the point, if the beams do not support the tower what was the point of the Rolands obsession and the tet's ultimate fate if not to save the beams therefore saving the tower?
I agree that there different levels of the tower and the variety of worlds that Roland and his tet travel through verify that. But you completely lost me with the theory of 13 different Rolands and 13 different towers. I always felt the wizzard's glass represented the beams of THE tower. you know, one glass for each guardian, and the 13th, the black glass, represented the crimson king.
finally as to your last paradox when you state that Roland is not ever meant to get it right, well.. I've been pondering that concept myself, but I don't know that it because of "sick devotion" that you claim.
I am going to go theological(?) on you for a minute ok? so brace yourself…
I always felt that the DT series was an epic tale of good vs evil, white over red, etc. much like our own history..on one hand you have the constant war, bigotry, racism, and prejudices that have plagued humanity since time out of mind. on the other you have the "good" side of humanity that reaches out to those in need and are ever batteling to change the negative side of our nature, a constant, viscous circle.
now, here's the "theological" part(if that's the word I want)
What if Roland's quest is simply a reflection of us, Humanities battle between good and bad, right and wrong, temptation of what is right vs what is easy.
The Crimson King reflects all of humanities bitter ugliness.
Roland reflects humanities weakness, stubborness, pride and determination. the desire to want to do / to be better, but unable to know how.
Eddy, Susannah and Jake represent everything good and right about humanity. Eddy, our sarcastic,dark humor. Susannah, our duality in nature and Jake our unknown innocence and purity.
So the next question I pose is this: what if Roland can't get it right untill we do? what if they are all fated to repeat this tragic quest, damned to the eternal suffering, repeated deaths and the obscure knowledge they have done it all before..
What if Roland can't learn to better himself untill humanity can learn to accept our differences, see the beauty in those differences and find a way to live together in peace and find that balance for ourselves?
If the Crimson King reflects all of humanities ugliness, maybe that is why you have always pictured him as a weak and disappointing character. The awful things that happen in our own world is not that horrifying when it is just one thing, but when there are more then one people or thing that ugliness because greater and more threatening. Throughout the whole series you read all of these awful things that are happening to people and places, but slowly the tet destroys those things and all we are left with is the Crimson King. When he is alone he is not very scary or dangerous, but when he had all those people and creatures doing things for him it became horrifying and scary.
you make a good point Fenris..I haven't really put as much thought into the "why" of the crimson king as much as I have focused on Roland, his tet and the quest of the tower.
With all of the other characters I get them, I can understand where they are coming from. the people of tull and their mob mentality, the people of lud driven by their fear and ignorance. blain and is obsession with riddles, the people in hiding at river crossing, the people of the calla's threat of the monsters, I can even grasp the breakers mentality.. and Mordrid..there's more to him than was written, I think..but the crimson king and the utter blackness..agh! I still can't wrap my head around that guy at all.. maybe you're right, maybe I just shucked everything bad onto him and wrote him off..I don't know.. what's your take on him? what do you think his purpose is?
My take on the Crimson King… That is a tough one. I have never really thought much about the Crimson King. He just allows seemed to be just another hurtle for the Katet to jump over. He never seemed to really play a big enough role for me to consider him a real threat to the Katet. He just seemed to help make trouble happen. He seemed to almost be like an evil "god like" character. He could even be the evil about of Gan. Wouldn't that be a funny thing.
It is funny how addiction is a commen theme in this book. Every character has there own type of addiction to over come and they will die or worse in Roland's case. Eddie and drugs, Blain and riddles, Roland and the tower. It really is amazing to go through and to try and look for all of these types of things. Kinda shows you the bigger picture for these books.
Hey Fenris.. Glad to see Im not the only one having a hard time with the crimson king! LOL.. u make a good point though about the possibility of he being the opposite of Gan.. I suggest to Camus111 in an earlier post that the crimson king may a result of all the negativity having to go somewhere and that the crimson king is a result of everything trying to balance out…afterall,u can't have light without the dark ..
in earlier books there are only vague refrences to him almost like he had been tabooed..it builds you up because u just know that he is the reason that everything has gone to h*ll and the beams are breaking and that he is the cause of everything bad..then u get to the last book after 20 yrs of anxious,fearful, morbid curiosity and he ends up absolutely cheesy! maybe i just expected something more fearful and looking forward to roland kicking his red butt all the back to hoboken..u know what i mean???
Out of curiosity.. which book is your favorite and why? There is a major love/hate battle going on with the wizard and glass book and I honestly loved that book for several different reasons which I will get into later if u r interested.. but I would have to say that book 7 is my favorite of the series. only because it was so powerful, well at least it effected me powerfully. with the earlier books I laughed out loud, shook my head with incomprehension hated characters, chewed my fingernails in anticipation, cowered in fear for the tet and cried..but with book 7, i did all of that and more..to this day I still can not tell u if I loved or hate this book and that is why it is my favorite.
These stories have been with me a long time and I was excited as anyone at the idea of them being put to film..then JJ opted out and I thought it was over.. but now I read that Ron Howard and his team have now been given the rights to make this epic tale a reality and I don;t know how I feel about that. He has done a great job with several of his films but I still see him as the "gosh, Pa!" Opie shame on me right? But what do u all think of him doing the DT Movies??
i loved all of the books but my LEAST favorite be far was wizard and glass. and the final book was by far my favorite. and i didnt find the steven king character distracting. stephen king is a genious. i love most of his books. and seriously LOVED all the dark tower i hope thgey take the time to make each book into a movie….come on harry potter got repetitive and some books were worse but they made millions of dollars off each by giving each book a chance as a movie.
Hey Coralyn, u aren't alone in your dislike for the wizard in glass there is a major love/hate feud going with that book. But, I'm curious about why didn't you like it?
I happened to love this book. IMO, it explained a lot about Rolands mentality and why he is the way he is. I have gone back and forth in my love and hate for roland and it was nice to see him capable of love and friendship..up untill this point he seems so heartless. this story let me see another side of him that untill this book, I did not think him capable of.
it opens the way for the the wizards glass in later books and lets us understand the start of of his journey to the tower. it also gives us hints of later events in the series…for those who paid attention…the shoes,the man in black, sai king, oys fate etc..
I loved the way these books were written, stories within stories.. its pure genius!
and so here i am again, silence is fortunate when one enjoys it. My personal complications aside, here is my, unfortunately very tardy answer to Tower Junkie's queries, Oh, and TJ, my friend, It will take the Crimson King himself to scare me off ;P
Ah, but you mistook my meaning. The beams are part of the tower's workings, to be sure, and even it's foundation structure. (holding it up) but i do not feel that the beams emanate from the tower. I don't see why Gan would need to create a tower to issue something, especially something so easily destroyed (fragile). the beams only represent the guardians, and who knows, maybe THAT notion was by human design, they named the beams, not Gan, they named the guardians, not Gan.So that's about it on that.
and no, the tet's job was to attempt to change Roland, to pacify the fire he contains. Look at what they represent, Sussanah, Dean (Susan Delgado) Eddie (Cuthbert) Jake (Alaine) people that affected Roland in profound ways. What was his old Ka-tet about, not WHAT THEY SAID it was about, what was it, as far as reality is concerned, all about. If it was to reach the tower, then why did they fall at Gilead?
Why did Roland lose the horn? No, Roland's duty (and by extension, his Ka-tet's) was to find their peace, saving the beams was the only way they could preserve the peace they all wished for. You can't have peace without existence (maybe you can?)but for the purpose at hand…I think their fate was to help each other, the beams were just there, i don't think that this was their destiny, nor was it their purpose, but father Gan uses those most broken to do his bidding (i think that is verbatim) and so they did what they did. Another piece to support this idea, why did only Eddie die at Blue Heaven? Why not them all, especially if they had achieved their fate? Why did Jake die in the manner he did, why did Susannah follow Roland as far as she did, if they had already reached their destiny? No it was about renewal, sacrifice and hard won answers. Stopping the Crimson King and saving all of creation, yes, but more importantly, it was about the journey and all the events that it brought about for our wayward adventurers. Moving on.
Why couldn't there be more than one? What if the tower is dimensional, and manifests in 13 different realities? Is it really so far fetched to see this story played out across 13 different dimensions/realities? How do you see the gates of the Green castle then, different species in 13 different pipes, all revolving around the castle. what is your take on that? What if each glass contains another reality? There is evidence of the pink one doing so, and black 13 may hold the Hell for them all. Maybe Roland is within the white glass, and thats why he must fight the King.
How do we know? I'm only making calculated guesses and theories, only SK knows these answers (and maybe not even he does)
I too agree that the tale is and epic masterwork of good vs. evil, but it also blurs that line, and his quest is just that. but more so, (my feelings and personal readings now) it is about confrontation, learning about the evil and good we are all capable of. But more so, it is about our stupidity towards things, Roland is (and i quote) 'Stupidly devoted to the tower' Wearing blinders, one-track mind, you name it. but no, i believe that his quest represents what we must do to transcend all that, after all, if he can reach for an object of supernatural solace, why can't we?
Good tidings, fellows
Camuss111