The Song Fight Bulletin Board

c hack wrote:

tviyh wrote:

j$ wrote:.....the later 'Dark Tower' ones ... I really liked the start of it, and I love the way 'Black House' crossed over with the concept, but it's becoming a bit too like a late night monday night roleplaying session for me.

i thought the first book was fabulous, and each of them have gone WAY downhill from there. actually i believe i've only read the first four of them.

I'm gonna put in the "Don't get it" thread how I don't get how you guys don't get the Dark Tower books. I'm in the middle of the third one now, and I'm hooked.

Well, that's about when it starts to go downhill. Book four sucked. And book seven has the worst cardinal sin that any author can inflict. I don't want to spoil it for you, but you'll know what I mean when you get there.

J$

Rabid Garfunkel wrote: Jackson totally diminished Faramir's nobility, humanity, and his dignity, IMNSHO, all for the effect of showing off a CGI monster in the second film. Boo. Pissed me off so much that I still haven't seen Return of the King. Reading the trilogy + 1 is a yearly joy for me.

Faramir is my fiancee's favorite character and she was way pissed off, as I was, by that travesty. Plus where they brought in that CGI monster was COMPLETELY nonsensical. No way would that have worked. Stupidest part of the movies. Anyway, Jackson didn't do anything like that in the 3rd movie. I'd say do watch it, it's worth seeing. And nothing so stupid happens in it.

On that topic, I like to listen to books on tape. The LotR books read by Brit Rob Inglis kick ass. Anyone that has trouble getting into the songs - he sings them on the tapes and makes them sound good! Also he does a great Gollum.

tonetripper wrote:Especially getting rid of Tom Bombadil. I was sooooo bummed that it didn't seem to hold as much relevance in the director's eyes.

The way I see it, you have to cut some things out for a movie. I'm not so upset about that. Far worse, in my opinion, to change something that already works into something that's broken. Woulda been nice to see Tom though.
-bill

HeuristicsInc wrote:

Rabid Garfunkel wrote:
On that topic, I like to listen to books on tape.... -bill

Yes - books on tape are great.

I used to do a lot of work at mine sites in NW Queensland. Driving hundreds of kilometres a day by yourself with nothing to see but spinifex and road-kill can be dull - books on tape probably saved my life many times by helping me keep awake.

Murder mysteries are the best for a long drive. The linear nature of the story helps keep the interest up. Ian Rankin's Rebus storys were my favourite - although it was hard to imagine dark rainy nights in Edinburgh when your driving across tropical savannah dodging dead roos and cattle.

I always wanted to write a murder mystery myself about somebody driving from Mt Isa to Townsville listening a murder mystery on tape - and as he goes from town to town, he keeps bumping into charachters just like the ones in the story - then it's finally resolved that the driver is the murderer.

The Harry Potter books are also awesome on tape - read by Stephen Fry (from Blackadder)

For some reason I am reminded strongly of Misery although I haven't read the book. I did see most of the movie, hot damn it gave me chills at the end when they started playing that song "I'll be seeing you, in all the old familiar places..." et cetera. I should probably read the book - what are y'alls opinions on how they compare, movie and book?

the Jazz wrote:For some reason I am reminded strongly of Misery although I haven't read the book.

The book's better, of course. By the main premise of the story, there is very little action, and the "scariness" is all psychological. You don't really get to see into the guy's mind as much in the film version.

Not to say that the movie was bad, though. This is one of King's few stories where you almost sort of feel like, "yeah, that could happen," which makes it rather more intense (and less silly).

yes, the book's definitely worth reading.
-bill

i haven't read or seen misery in a while, but i seem to recall enjoying the book somewhat more than the movie.

i'm just bummed because a local theatre company was doing a stage production based on the movie throughout october, and i forgot about it until it was too late.

I don't believe anyone can make a movie of a Stephen King Novel that measures up to the book. You just can't get into the same detail in a movie as a book, especially with King's excellent writing style. The only ones to come close, Misery was pretty good & Shawshank Redemption of course was excellent. Everyone know that Shawshank was a Stephen King short story??
To all the people that liked the movie 'IT' because of the clowns, if you haven't read the book then you are REALLY missing out. 'IT' is the best book I've ever read & the movie is nowhere close to it.

"Stand By Me" was also an excellent movie based on a King novella ("The Body").
-bill

You're right, how could I forget that classic. 'Green Mile' was also pretty good. 'The Shining' & 'Dead Zone' were very eerie but as not as eerie as the books. Films like 'Pet Semetary' 'Graveyard Shift' 'Christine' & 'Cujo' all left much to be desired.

Bolio wrote:'IT' is the best book I've ever read & the movie is nowhere close to it.

"IT" wasn't my favorite King, but definitely the movie wasn't anywhere near as good as the book. The book was good; the movie was barely passable.

The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile were both excellent as movies, I think partially because they weren't straight horror, which almost always is made under par because horror fans will see it anyway.

We talking about 'It' the TV mini-series? Or is there a version I haven't seen? [/fanboy excitement]

It the tv mini-series encapsulated everything that's wrong with King adaptions. The childhood sections were excellent (like Stand by Me only creepier) the modern day stuff forgettable, Tim Curry's only other good tv performance, and the crap Jason & the Argonauts Spiderrrr at the end totally trashed it for me.

Bad SK adaptations far outweigh the good. In fact I'm not entirely sure there is a really good one. He sure as hell can't write for film (Maximum Overdrive? Please!) I really liked Needful Things right up to the overthetop ending, but felt the same with the book. SbM, Green Mile, Shawshank, Misery - all good but manage it by evading the essential Kingness of the stories on which they're based. I have a fondness for Graveyard Shift and Cat's Eye. Pet Semetary sucked (bar the Ramones theme song). I actually really enjoyed his adaptation of 'Kingdom', although there were one too many 'Kingisms' in it.

I would very much like to see the Dark Tower converted into a sprawling 13 part mini-series in the style of 'Deadwood' meets 'Hex'. That would work better for me than the books do.

J$

'The Talisman' by Stephen King and Peter Straub is a damn good book. They are supposed to be making a movie of it next year, and it's either going to be brilliant or a total dog... Fingers crossed.

Another Peter Straub goody is 'Shadowland' which I also recommend.

[hmmmm i started writing about the movie vs the book of "dolores claiborne" (the other one kathy bates was in) but then i realised it's been so many years since i watched and read that, i couldn't really remember which was which! either the movie or the book was totally told from the point of view of dolores, in the form of a deposition in court or something, and the other one (book or movie) was more like showing it as it happened, i think. i was going to make some kind of a statement about that but i honestly can't remember which was which, so i guess just ignore me.]

Bolio wrote:To all the people that liked the movie 'IT' because of the clowns.......

that is precisely why i will never watch that movie, or read that book.
but j$, yes there is a movie version of "it" which i thought was fairly well known, but maybe not in engerrrrland. (i wasn't aware of the existence of a mini-series version).

j$ wrote:Bad SK adaptations far outweigh the good. In fact I'm not entirely sure there is a really good one. He sure as hell can't write for film (Maximum Overdrive? Please!)

It's been mentioned before, but The Dark Half t'wasn't half bad onscreen. And I put "Apt Pupil" and "Creepshow" on the plus side of his film category... heh.

But then, I'm partial to his shorts.

I believe the 'IT' movie was just the miniseries all put together. Tim Reid, the late John Ritter, Annette O'Toole. Beep Beep Richie. By the way, I'd love to see a good movie based on 'The Stand', mostly to hear what the song 'Baby Can You Dig Your Man' really sounds like!!!

Rabid Garfunkel wrote: I'm partial to his shorts.

*snicker snicker*

I agree with Dolores Clairborne (although they reduced even further the very slight supernatural element of the book and turned into yet another [spoiler]incest[/spoiler]thriller as was the fashion of time. I also agree with Rabid on The Dark Half. I actually think that was probably the most faithful of all the adapations I've seen. Creepshow is ok, coupla stories are better than the others. Good to see ted Danson eaten by goo, bad to see Stephen King 'act'. Someone tell him, please!

Apt Pupil (the film) should have been better, imo. It was getting to the point where they would have made the author's introduction to that book of novellas into a film. They underplayed the massive homo-eroticism of that book, sadly but understandably, and it became a psycho-teen thriller instead. As was the fashion at the time. And any film with David Schwimmer is appalling, by default. Nice moustache though.

J$

j$ wrote:
Creepshow is ok, coupla stories are better than the others... bad to see Stephen King 'act'. Someone tell him, please!

Forgot about that one! "Meteor Shit!"...... Quitter's Inc...... They Creep Up On You

Has anyone mentioned the <i>Dune</i> series yet? Man. Best sci-fi ever. But it's so much more than sci-fi. Frank Herbert was quite the genius. (The movie and tv series both pale horribly in comparison, as do the Dune books written by Herbert's son and some other guy.)

Also, Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars series is pretty cool. Not nearly as epic and fantastic as the Dune universe, but the painstaking attention to detail makes it almost as complicated. Though that's not always a good thing.

And H.P. Lovecraft in general rocks my socks off.

user wrote: Also, Kim Stanley Robinson's Mars series is pretty cool. Not nearly as epic and fantastic as the Dune universe, but the painstaking attention to detail makes it almost as complicated. Though that's not always a good thing.

And H.P. Lovecraft in general rocks my socks off.

The Mars books are great. Which reminds me, I don't think I read all of them yet.
I read some Lovecraft on Halloween while giving candy to the kids
-bill

HeuristicsInc wrote:I read some Lovecraft on Halloween while giving candy to the kids
-bill

To the kids? You are the creepy old man who lives at the end of the street in all those horror movies! (don't worry though he always turns out to be the hero/nice bloke after all)

Anyone reccommend me some good steam-punk? I like the concept but I read 'anti-ice' and was much unmoved.

j$

hmmm, i'm in the middle of the street, and i'm only 31...
-bill