Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
Ben Affleck chosen to direct the remake of "The Stand"
74 views
Skip to first unread message
Mr. Hole the Magnificent
Oct 21, 2011, 10:38:10 PM10/21/11
to
by Adam B. Vary
Ben Affleck’s transition from an actor-who-directs to a director-who-
acts just took another interesting step today. With Oscar-bait The
Town and Gone Baby Gone under his belt — and the period thriller Argo
currently underway — Deadline is reporting that Warner Bros. is keen
on hiring Affleck to direct its feature film adaptation of Stephen
King’s epic tome The Stand.
That could honestly mean anything. But the fact that Affleck is even
under consideration to helm The Stand is a good sign for fans eager to
see King’s book make it to theaters. Warner Bros. announced its co-
production with CBS Films last January, but mum’s pretty much been the
word on any major developments since then.
In the meantime, King’s oeuvre has been very much a hot potato in
Hollywood: Universal famously scuttled its wildly ambitious TV-and-
movie adaptation of King’s The Dark Tower; MGM hired a screenwriter to
adapt a new version of Carrie; Showtime is developing Under the Dome
as a possible series with Steven Spielberg exec producing; and Silence
of the Lambs filmmaker Jonathan Demme snapped up the rights to King’s
impending novel 11/22/63 (an excerpt from which you can read in this
week’s issue of EW).
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/10/21/ben-affleck-stephen-king-the-stand/
Ben Affleck’s transition from an actor-who-directs to a director-who-
acts just took another interesting step today. With Oscar-bait The
Town and Gone Baby Gone under his belt — and the period thriller Argo
currently underway — Deadline is reporting that Warner Bros. is keen
on hiring Affleck to direct its feature film adaptation of Stephen
King’s epic tome The Stand.
That could honestly mean anything. But the fact that Affleck is even
under consideration to helm The Stand is a good sign for fans eager to
see King’s book make it to theaters. Warner Bros. announced its co-
production with CBS Films last January, but mum’s pretty much been the
word on any major developments since then.
In the meantime, King’s oeuvre has been very much a hot potato in
Hollywood: Universal famously scuttled its wildly ambitious TV-and-
movie adaptation of King’s The Dark Tower; MGM hired a screenwriter to
adapt a new version of Carrie; Showtime is developing Under the Dome
as a possible series with Steven Spielberg exec producing; and Silence
of the Lambs filmmaker Jonathan Demme snapped up the rights to King’s
impending novel 11/22/63 (an excerpt from which you can read in this
week’s issue of EW).
http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/10/21/ben-affleck-stephen-king-the-stand/
tobymax43
Oct 21, 2011, 11:06:53 PM10/21/11
to
On Oct 21, 10:38 pm, "Mr. Hole the Magnificent"
is
one of the great miniseries plus I don't know how one can compress a
1100 odd page novel into a 2 hour film.
Gary Sinise is Stu, can someone really besides Ruby Dee play Mother
Abigail?
This is almost like saying "oh lets make a new movie based on Roots".
Stand like
Roots was made to be a miniseries not a 2 hour movie.
<classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> by Adam B. Vary
>
> Ben Affleck’s transition from an actor-who-directs to a director-who-
> acts just took another interesting step today. With Oscar-bait The
> Town and Gone Baby Gone under his belt — and the period thriller Argo
> currently underway — Deadline is reporting that Warner Bros. is keen
> on hiring Affleck to direct its feature film adaptation of Stephen
> King’s epic tome The Stand.
>
>
Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story. This
> by Adam B. Vary
>
> Ben Affleck’s transition from an actor-who-directs to a director-who-
> acts just took another interesting step today. With Oscar-bait The
> Town and Gone Baby Gone under his belt — and the period thriller Argo
> currently underway — Deadline is reporting that Warner Bros. is keen
> on hiring Affleck to direct its feature film adaptation of Stephen
> King’s epic tome The Stand.
>
>
is
one of the great miniseries plus I don't know how one can compress a
1100 odd page novel into a 2 hour film.
Gary Sinise is Stu, can someone really besides Ruby Dee play Mother
Abigail?
This is almost like saying "oh lets make a new movie based on Roots".
Stand like
Roots was made to be a miniseries not a 2 hour movie.
Brian Thorn
Oct 21, 2011, 11:22:58 PM10/21/11
to
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:06:53 -0700 (PDT), tobymax43
<tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
That would be "The Shawshank Redemption", nothing else comes close.
<tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>This is one of the great miniseries
without flaws. Adam Storke as Larry wasn't very good. Shawnee Smith
was terrible as Julie.
>plus I don't know how one can compress a
>1100 odd page novel into a 2 hour film.
Hobbit", "Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows", and "Breaking Dawn".
>Gary Sinise is Stu,
Bill Faggerbakke was perfect as Tom, too.
>can someone really besides Ruby Dee play Mother
>Abigail?
makeup now, but she'd still be great.
Brian
Ian J. Ball
Oct 21, 2011, 11:58:46 PM10/21/11
to
On Oct 21, 8:22 pm, Brian Thorn <bthor...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:06:53 -0700 (PDT), tobymax43
> <toby...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
> That would be "The Shawshank Redemption", nothing else comes close.
>
> >This is one of the great miniseries
>
> It was very good, especially for a King treatment, but it wasn't
> without flaws. Adam Storke as Larry wasn't very good.
> Shawnee Smith was terrible as Julie.
What?! Are you effing nuts?!!
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:06:53 -0700 (PDT), tobymax43
> <toby...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> >Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
> That would be "The Shawshank Redemption", nothing else comes close.
>
> >This is one of the great miniseries
>
> It was very good, especially for a King treatment, but it wasn't
> without flaws. Adam Storke as Larry wasn't very good.
> Shawnee Smith was terrible as Julie.
Michael OConnor
Oct 22, 2011, 12:34:12 AM10/22/11
to
> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story. This
> is
> one of the great miniseries plus I don't know how one can compress a
> 1100 odd page novel into a 2 hour film.
trying to cram everything into one movie; just take your time and
break it up into three movies to tell the entire story. There was a
three hour script for The Stand written in the late 70's-early 80's
when George Romero was trying to film it:
http://www.subcin.com/stand.html
Thanatos
Oct 22, 2011, 3:37:04 AM10/22/11
to
In article
<82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
Shawshank Redemption.
> Gary Sinise is Stu, can someone really besides Ruby Dee play Mother
> Abigail?
I think they could do a helluva lot better than Molly Ringwald as
Frannie. Kate Beckinsale maybe...
<82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
tobymax43 <tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
Shawshank Redemption.
> Gary Sinise is Stu, can someone really besides Ruby Dee play Mother
> Abigail?
Frannie. Kate Beckinsale maybe...
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 8:31:21 AM10/22/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>In article
><82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
> tobymax43 <tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
>Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
>Shawshank Redemption.
"The Shining"?
>In article
><82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
> tobymax43 <tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
>Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
>Shawshank Redemption.
Jim T.
Oct 22, 2011, 10:09:12 AM10/22/11
to
book. As someone who has read a few other King books before I wised
up, I think that was a very good decision.
Brian Thorn
Oct 22, 2011, 10:44:42 AM10/22/11
to
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:58:46 -0700 (PDT), "Ian J. Ball"
<ijb...@mac.com> wrote:
>> It was very good, especially for a King treatment, but it wasn't
>> without flaws. Adam Storke as Larry wasn't very good.
>> Shawnee Smith was terrible as Julie.
>
>What?! Are you effing nuts?!!
About which, Storke? The guy was a lightweight who was rarely seen
<ijb...@mac.com> wrote:
>> It was very good, especially for a King treatment, but it wasn't
>> without flaws. Adam Storke as Larry wasn't very good.
>> Shawnee Smith was terrible as Julie.
>
>What?! Are you effing nuts?!!
again. Smith? Nope. She's another pretty face with little to no acting
talent.
Brian
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 10:46:00 AM10/22/11
to
heard it wasn't absolutely true to King's novel, and initially, he
wasn't too happy wish the results.
However, the film has become a classic, and King changed his mind.
Professor Bubba
Oct 22, 2011, 11:32:38 AM10/22/11
to
In article <nil5a7tr1q0me9dhv...@4ax.com>, Mack A. Damia
Success will do that to you.
The closest adaptation to a King book I can think of right now was
Firestarter. The only significant difference in it was the name of the
newspaper at the end, which I think ignored one of the most clever
things in the book.
I thought they did a good job with The Stand.
The closest adaptation to a King book I can think of right now was
Firestarter. The only significant difference in it was the name of the
newspaper at the end, which I think ignored one of the most clever
things in the book.
I thought they did a good job with The Stand.
RichA
Oct 22, 2011, 12:35:11 PM10/22/11
to
I hope he can make the movie far less dull than the book was.
Brian Thorn
Oct 22, 2011, 12:54:23 PM10/22/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 07:46:00 -0700, Mack A. Damia
<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Wasn't King in on the filming of the first and best version? Yes, I
>heard it wasn't absolutely true to King's novel, and initially, he
>wasn't too happy wish the results.
King was producer and wrote the screenplay. He also made a cameo as
<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>Wasn't King in on the filming of the first and best version? Yes, I
>heard it wasn't absolutely true to King's novel, and initially, he
>wasn't too happy wish the results.
one of the residents of the Boulder Free Zone when Stu and Tom return.
I really think the ABC version was about as good as they could do on
free TV at the time, a few examples of miscasting notwithstanding.
Brian
Thanatos
Oct 22, 2011, 2:06:07 PM10/22/11
to
In article <krd5a718p2qi3klu9...@4ax.com>,
The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
story.
story.
Thanatos
Oct 22, 2011, 2:07:17 PM10/22/11
to
In article <lvs5a7pil1m4g25ui...@4ax.com>,
Shining.
Brian Thorn <btho...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 07:46:00 -0700, Mack A. Damia
> <mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Wasn't King in on the filming of the first and best version? Yes, I
> >heard it wasn't absolutely true to King's novel, and initially, he
> >wasn't too happy wish the results.
>
> King was producer and wrote the screenplay. He also made a cameo as
> one of the residents of the Boulder Free Zone when Stu and Tom return.
He was asking whether King was involved with Kubrick's version of The
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 07:46:00 -0700, Mack A. Damia
> <mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> >Wasn't King in on the filming of the first and best version? Yes, I
> >heard it wasn't absolutely true to King's novel, and initially, he
> >wasn't too happy wish the results.
>
> King was producer and wrote the screenplay. He also made a cameo as
> one of the residents of the Boulder Free Zone when Stu and Tom return.
Shining.
trotsky
Oct 22, 2011, 3:14:27 PM10/22/11
to
Jerry Brown
Oct 22, 2011, 3:24:24 PM10/22/11
to
novella, although the giant pacmen eating the airport and chasing the
plane looked a lot sillier on screen than my mind's eye version from
the original reading.
--
Jerry Brown
A cat may look at a king
(but probably won't bother)
Thanatos
Oct 22, 2011, 4:05:45 PM10/22/11
to
In article <ep56a79fbudohbrqo...@4ax.com>,
Yes, there are some stories that can only work in the written-word.
Langoliers is one of them. And Balky's over-the-top performance didn't
help matters, either.
Langoliers is one of them. And Balky's over-the-top performance didn't
help matters, either.
Wull
Oct 22, 2011, 4:27:42 PM10/22/11
to
"Jerry Brown" <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote in message
news:ep56a79fbudohbrqo...@4ax.com...
I used to read all of King's book and saw all the movies but after I read
Pet Cemetary, I lost interest in him completely.
I have not read or watched anymore of his issue.
Wull
Invid Fan
Oct 22, 2011, 4:28:08 PM10/22/11
to
In article <h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7T...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
--
Chris Mack "If we show any weakness, the monsters will get cocky!"
'Invid Fan' - 'Yokai Monsters Along With Ghosts'
Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
--
Chris Mack "If we show any weakness, the monsters will get cocky!"
'Invid Fan' - 'Yokai Monsters Along With Ghosts'
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 4:42:34 PM10/22/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:27:42 -0500, "Wull" <wma...@sbcglobal.net>
wrote:
Well, yes, I have to agree with you. I'm not a big fan of novels; I
read mostly non-fiction. My suspension of disbelief has become rather
picky over the decades, and I can only exercise it if it's believeable
disbelief! :)
I posted to the Dean Koontz group for a while - even visited some of
the others, but I could never get into one of his novels. Something
about his prose bored me.
wrote:
read mostly non-fiction. My suspension of disbelief has become rather
picky over the decades, and I can only exercise it if it's believeable
disbelief! :)
I posted to the Dean Koontz group for a while - even visited some of
the others, but I could never get into one of his novels. Something
about his prose bored me.
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 5:01:20 PM10/22/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 16:28:08 -0400, Invid Fan <in...@loclanet.com>
wrote:
>In article <h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7T...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
><gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/22/11 1:06 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>> > In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu9...@4ax.com>,
>> > Mack A. Damia<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> In article
>> >>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>> >>> tobymax43<tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>> >>>
>> >>> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
>> >>> Shawshank Redemption.
>> >>
>> >> "The Shining"?
>> >
>> > The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
>> > story.
>>
>>
>> Other than the entire premise.
>
>It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
>Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
>good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
Not certain I follow your second sentence. Jack slowly descends into
insanity as the film progresses, but he's perfectly sane at the
beginning of the film.
wrote:
>In article <h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7T...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
><gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
>> On 10/22/11 1:06 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>> > In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu9...@4ax.com>,
>> > Mack A. Damia<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> In article
>> >>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>> >>> tobymax43<tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>> >>>
>> >>> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
>> >>> Shawshank Redemption.
>> >>
>> >> "The Shining"?
>> >
>> > The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
>> > story.
>>
>>
>> Other than the entire premise.
>
>It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
>Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
>good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
insanity as the film progresses, but he's perfectly sane at the
beginning of the film.
Thanatos
Oct 22, 2011, 5:16:41 PM10/22/11
to
In article <221020111628082580%in...@loclanet.com>,
an ordinary man to insanity and murder.
From the moment Jack Nicholson appears on screen, it's obvious he's
already completely insane. The hotel was incidental.
Invid Fan <in...@loclanet.com> wrote:
> In article <h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7T...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
> <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
> > On 10/22/11 1:06 PM, Thanatos wrote:
> > > In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu9...@4ax.com>,
> > > Mack A. Damia<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> In article
> > >>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
> > >>> tobymax43<tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
> > >>>
> > >>> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
> > >>> Shawshank Redemption.
> > >>
> > >> "The Shining"?
> > >
> > > The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
> > > story.
> >
> >
> > Other than the entire premise.
>
> It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
> Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
> good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
Yep. The entire point of the story was to chronicle how the hotel drove
> In article <h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7T...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
> <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>
> > On 10/22/11 1:06 PM, Thanatos wrote:
> > > In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu9...@4ax.com>,
> > > Mack A. Damia<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> > >>
> > >>> In article
> > >>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
> > >>> tobymax43<tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > >>>
> > >>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
> > >>>
> > >>> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
> > >>> Shawshank Redemption.
> > >>
> > >> "The Shining"?
> > >
> > > The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
> > > story.
> >
> >
> > Other than the entire premise.
>
> It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
> Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
> good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
an ordinary man to insanity and murder.
From the moment Jack Nicholson appears on screen, it's obvious he's
already completely insane. The hotel was incidental.
trotsky
Oct 22, 2011, 5:20:57 PM10/22/11
to
On 10/22/11 4:16 PM, Thanatos wrote:
> In article<221020111628082580%in...@loclanet.com>,
again--kudos.
> In article<221020111628082580%in...@loclanet.com>,
> Invid Fan<in...@loclanet.com> wrote:
>
>> In article<h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7T...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
>> <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/22/11 1:06 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>>>> In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu9...@4ax.com>,
>>>> Mack A. Damia<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article
>>>>>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>> tobymax43<tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
>>>>>> Shawshank Redemption.
>>>>>
>>>>> "The Shining"?
>>>>
>>>> The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
>>>> story.
>>>
>>>
>>> Other than the entire premise.
>>
>> It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
>> Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
>> good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
>
> Yep.
Yep? Are plot and premise synonyms? You pegged the stupidity meter
>
>> In article<h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7T...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
>> <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 10/22/11 1:06 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>>>> In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu9...@4ax.com>,
>>>> Mack A. Damia<mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> In article
>>>>>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>>>>>> tobymax43<tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
>>>>>> Shawshank Redemption.
>>>>>
>>>>> "The Shining"?
>>>>
>>>> The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
>>>> story.
>>>
>>>
>>> Other than the entire premise.
>>
>> It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
>> Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
>> good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
>
> Yep.
again--kudos.
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 5:21:14 PM10/22/11
to
beginning and the job interview but slowly descends into insanity as
the film progresses.
trotsky
Oct 22, 2011, 5:22:24 PM10/22/11
to
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 5:37:54 PM10/22/11
to
mind.
It was the hotel and its spirits that drove him crazy.
trotsky
Oct 22, 2011, 5:58:25 PM10/22/11
to
Professor Bubba
Oct 22, 2011, 5:59:30 PM10/22/11
to
In article <R72dnQQSn-eOqT7T...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
I don't think so, as his desire to isolate himself at the hotel in the
first place suggests. As for his drinking, Jack admits (to the valet,
I think) that he got drunk and broke Danny's arm while punishing him,
and blows it off as "an extra ounce of pressure" or something along
those lines. (It's been a while.) Also note that Wendy immediately
goes to Jack's history of abusing Danny (and, presumably, herself) by
shrieking at him when Danny goes missing.
I like the spooky ending of the movie much better than the pat ending
of the book.
BTW, you guys really ought to see this, uh, trailer, if you haven't
already:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmkVWuP_sO0>
first place suggests. As for his drinking, Jack admits (to the valet,
I think) that he got drunk and broke Danny's arm while punishing him,
and blows it off as "an extra ounce of pressure" or something along
those lines. (It's been a while.) Also note that Wendy immediately
goes to Jack's history of abusing Danny (and, presumably, herself) by
shrieking at him when Danny goes missing.
I like the spooky ending of the movie much better than the pat ending
of the book.
BTW, you guys really ought to see this, uh, trailer, if you haven't
already:
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KmkVWuP_sO0>
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 6:04:37 PM10/22/11
to
novel, and the job at the hotel would work out well for him.
Alcoholism isn't a sign of insanity, either.
At the beginning of the film, Jack may have been a recovering
alcoholic who abused his son on one or more occasions, but he was by
no means insane - either that, or you don't understand what insanity
means.
Thanatos
Oct 22, 2011, 6:22:25 PM10/22/11
to
In article <hrc6a7tutplo67f9q...@4ax.com>,
Telling me that it's not true how I experienced the film is rather
presumptuous on your part.
presumptuous on your part.
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 6:43:46 PM10/22/11
to
Jack's sanity at the beginning of the film - that's the whole fucking
story, buttercup - that the hotel and it's spirits drove him crazy.
You have no more credibility - at least with me.
nick
Oct 22, 2011, 6:45:34 PM10/22/11
to
On Oct 22, 4:28 pm, Invid Fan <in...@loclanet.com> wrote:
> In article <h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7TnZ2dnUVZ_qSdn...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
> > > In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu98j2a4clcinaifl...@4ax.com>,
> > > Mack A. Damia<mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atro...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> In article
> > >>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b-aa15-d13c6db81...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
> > >>> tobymax43<toby...@comcast.net> wrote:
beginning, never having found any fulfillment or happiness, any sense
of belonging, but then he lands this job at the Overlook Hotel and he
loves it. It might drive him all the way into homicidal mania but at
last he's found a job he likes and a place he can call home. On that
grimly comic level, it's a great film. It wasn't the adaptation that
King wanted but so what, it's still one of Kubrick's best films.
> In article <h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7TnZ2dnUVZ_qSdn...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
> > > In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu98j2a4clcinaifl...@4ax.com>,
> > > Mack A. Damia<mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atro...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > >>> In article
> > >>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b-aa15-d13c6db81...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
> > >>> tobymax43<toby...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
> > >>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
> > >>> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
> > >>> Shawshank Redemption.
>
> > >> "The Shining"?
>
> > > The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
> > > story.
>
> > Other than the entire premise.
>
> It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
> Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
> good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
>
But that's why I liked the movie. Nicholson's fucked up from the
> > >>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
> > >>> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
> > >>> Shawshank Redemption.
>
> > >> "The Shining"?
>
> > > The Shining was a good movie, but it had very little to do with King's
> > > story.
>
> > Other than the entire premise.
>
> It follows the plot, but not the story. At no time do you think Jack
> Nicholson's character isn't crazy, where as in the book he's actually a
> good guy with a drinking problem he's trying to overcome.
>
beginning, never having found any fulfillment or happiness, any sense
of belonging, but then he lands this job at the Overlook Hotel and he
loves it. It might drive him all the way into homicidal mania but at
last he's found a job he likes and a place he can call home. On that
grimly comic level, it's a great film. It wasn't the adaptation that
King wanted but so what, it's still one of Kubrick's best films.
nick
Oct 22, 2011, 6:42:35 PM10/22/11
to
On Oct 22, 4:27 pm, "Wull" <wmai...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
> "Jerry Brown" <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote in message
>
> news:ep56a79fbudohbrqo...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 11:32:38 -0400, Professor Bubba
> > <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>
> >>In article <nil5a7tr1q0me9dhv6t14hl1mqb8vru...@4ax.com>, Mack A. Damia
> "Jerry Brown" <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote in message
>
> news:ep56a79fbudohbrqo...@4ax.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 11:32:38 -0400, Professor Bubba
> > <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>
> >><mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 10:09:12 -0400, Jim T. <x...@y.z> wrote:
>
> >>> >On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 05:31:21 -0700, Mack A. Damia
> >>> ><mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 10:09:12 -0400, Jim T. <x...@y.z> wrote:
>
> >>> >On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 05:31:21 -0700, Mack A. Damia
>
> >>> >>On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >>> >>>In article
> >>> >>><82c1f7b7-131f-435b-aa15-d13c6db81...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
> >>> >>On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> >>> >>>In article
> >>> >>><82c1f7b7-131f-435b-aa15-d13c6db81...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>
> - Show quoted text -
I'm reading Pet Sematary right now and all I can say so far is "what
the hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was
that terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
Professor Bubba
Oct 22, 2011, 6:58:25 PM10/22/11
to
In article <i8f6a7dfj5sq4783p...@4ax.com>, Mack A. Damia
It's certainly not a sign of mental stability, and this particular
symptom was not isolated.
> Jack had plans to write a novel, and the job at the hotel would work
> out well for him.
It seems more likely that Jack used his writing as an excuse to cover
his ... odd ... desire to separate himself and his family from society
for five months. He wound up not writing a thing, of course.
> Alcoholism isn't a sign of insanity, either.
One of the reasons people become drunks is to avoid dealing with their
demons. Unfortunately, it doesn't help at all and, in fact, it adds to
them.
> At the beginning of the film, Jack may have been a recovering
> alcoholic who abused his son on one or more occasions, but he was by
> no means insane - either that, or you don't understand what insanity
> means.
Jack packs his family off to what amounts to Antarctica for five months
in what he refers to as a fresh start, and then he doesn't do anything
except not-write and, eventually, terrorize his family and freeze to
death. Further, we don't see any incident in the film that triggers
his insanity. Everything that happens to Jack at the hotel feeds
what's already there, inside him.
symptom was not isolated.
> Jack had plans to write a novel, and the job at the hotel would work
> out well for him.
his ... odd ... desire to separate himself and his family from society
for five months. He wound up not writing a thing, of course.
> Alcoholism isn't a sign of insanity, either.
demons. Unfortunately, it doesn't help at all and, in fact, it adds to
them.
> At the beginning of the film, Jack may have been a recovering
> alcoholic who abused his son on one or more occasions, but he was by
> no means insane - either that, or you don't understand what insanity
> means.
in what he refers to as a fresh start, and then he doesn't do anything
except not-write and, eventually, terrorize his family and freeze to
death. Further, we don't see any incident in the film that triggers
his insanity. Everything that happens to Jack at the hotel feeds
what's already there, inside him.
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 7:33:36 PM10/22/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 18:58:25 -0400, Professor Bubba
Obviously, you don't understand "insanity" - or you just like to
argue.
I don't play childish games.
argue.
I don't play childish games.
jack
Oct 22, 2011, 8:51:49 PM10/22/11
to
On Oct 22, 3:37 am, Thanatos <atro...@mac.com> wrote:
> In article
> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b-aa15-d13c6db81...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>
> In article
> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b-aa15-d13c6db81...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>
> tobymax43 <toby...@comcast.net> wrote:
> > Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
> Shawshank Redemption.
A fan of Family Guy?
> > Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
> Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
> Shawshank Redemption.
jack
Oct 22, 2011, 9:08:46 PM10/22/11
to
On Oct 22, 6:58 pm, Professor Bubba <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
> In article <i8f6a7dfj5sq4783privdcobe1r2t72...@4ax.com>, Mack A. Damia
> > >> >>> <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> > >> >>>>> Mack A. Damia<mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >>>>>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atro...@mac.com>
If you recall, the last shot of the movie is a slow close-up of a
picture on the wall of the hotel of a New Year's Eve's party from 1927
that shows the Nicholson character. In the Kubrick version the
Nicholson character keeps on being reincarnated as a killer spirit
linked to the hotel. He was the previous caretaker, Grady, who killed
himself and his family, and unless the hotel is demolished, will
probably show up again sometime in the future as another winter
caretaker.
So, his character was doomed from the start in the movie, unlike in
the book. If you dig out the TV mini-series it's pretty clear how
different the two Jacks are.
As to The Stand, leave it alone. The mini-series is as close as you
can get to such a long book. Not everybody's favorite minor character
could make it into the mini-series and the show did mold some of the
characters more to the personalities of the actors playing them. The
mini-series misses the potential for a sequel that the book has and
some purists have dissed the final confrontation in Las Vegas. For a
close read of the book if you don't want to slog through it, see the
current comic book series by Marvel.
> In article <i8f6a7dfj5sq4783privdcobe1r2t72...@4ax.com>, Mack A. Damia
>
>
>
> <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 17:59:30 -0400, Professor Bubba
> > <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>
> > >In article <R72dnQQSn-eOqT7TnZ2dnUVZ_t2dn...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
>
>
> <mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> > On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 17:59:30 -0400, Professor Bubba
> > <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>
> > >> > On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 14:16:41 -0700, Thanatos<atro...@mac.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >> In article<221020111628082580%in...@loclanet.com>,
> > >> >> Invid Fan<in...@loclanet.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >>> In article<h4CdnTwIRNCLiz7TnZ2dnUVZ_qSdn...@mchsi.com>, trotsky
>
> > >> >> In article<221020111628082580%in...@loclanet.com>,
> > >> >> Invid Fan<in...@loclanet.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >>> <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >>>> On 10/22/11 1:06 PM, Thanatos wrote:
> > >> >>>>> In article<krd5a718p2qi3klu98j2a4clcinaifl...@4ax.com>,
> > >> >>>> On 10/22/11 1:06 PM, Thanatos wrote:
> > >> >>>>> Mack A. Damia<mybaconbu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> > >> >>>>>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos<atro...@mac.com>
> > >> >>>>>> wrote:
>
> > >> >>>>>>> In article
>
> > >> >>>>>>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b-aa15-d13c6db81...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
> > >> >>>>>>> In article
>
> > >> >>>>>>> <82c1f7b7-131f-435b-aa15-d13c6db81...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>
picture on the wall of the hotel of a New Year's Eve's party from 1927
that shows the Nicholson character. In the Kubrick version the
Nicholson character keeps on being reincarnated as a killer spirit
linked to the hotel. He was the previous caretaker, Grady, who killed
himself and his family, and unless the hotel is demolished, will
probably show up again sometime in the future as another winter
caretaker.
So, his character was doomed from the start in the movie, unlike in
the book. If you dig out the TV mini-series it's pretty clear how
different the two Jacks are.
As to The Stand, leave it alone. The mini-series is as close as you
can get to such a long book. Not everybody's favorite minor character
could make it into the mini-series and the show did mold some of the
characters more to the personalities of the actors playing them. The
mini-series misses the potential for a sequel that the book has and
some purists have dissed the final confrontation in Las Vegas. For a
close read of the book if you don't want to slog through it, see the
current comic book series by Marvel.
Mack A. Damia
Oct 22, 2011, 9:41:02 PM10/22/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 18:08:46 -0700 (PDT), jack <jr...@columbia.edu>
wrote:
Roger Ebert wrote:
"If Jack did indeed freeze to death in the labyrinth, of course his
body was found—and sooner rather than later, since Dick Hallorann
alerted the forest rangers to serious trouble at the hotel. If Jack's
body was not found, what happened to it? Was it never there? Was it
absorbed into the past and does that explain Jack's presence in that
final photograph of a group of hotel party-goers in 1921? Did Jack's
violent pursuit of his wife and child exist entirely in Wendy's
imagination, or Danny's, or theirs?... Kubrick was wise to remove that
epilogue. It pulled one rug too many out from under the story. At some
level, it is necessary for us to believe the three members of the
Torrance family are actually residents in the hotel during that
winter, whatever happens or whatever they think happens."
The "Heeeeeere's Johnny" exclamation was Nicholson's ad lib. Kubrick
lived in London and had no idea of Ed McMahon's famous introduction.
He almost didn't use that take in the final version.
wrote:
"If Jack did indeed freeze to death in the labyrinth, of course his
body was found—and sooner rather than later, since Dick Hallorann
alerted the forest rangers to serious trouble at the hotel. If Jack's
body was not found, what happened to it? Was it never there? Was it
absorbed into the past and does that explain Jack's presence in that
final photograph of a group of hotel party-goers in 1921? Did Jack's
violent pursuit of his wife and child exist entirely in Wendy's
imagination, or Danny's, or theirs?... Kubrick was wise to remove that
epilogue. It pulled one rug too many out from under the story. At some
level, it is necessary for us to believe the three members of the
Torrance family are actually residents in the hotel during that
winter, whatever happens or whatever they think happens."
The "Heeeeeere's Johnny" exclamation was Nicholson's ad lib. Kubrick
lived in London and had no idea of Ed McMahon's famous introduction.
He almost didn't use that take in the final version.
Professor Bubba
Oct 22, 2011, 10:37:33 PM10/22/11
to
In article <jkk6a710bo7846ufp...@4ax.com>, Mack A. Damia
No, I was trying to discuss the nature of a film I've seen a bunch of
times. You had no response except to make a weak insult.
> I don't play childish games.
The evidence before us suggests otherwise.
times. You had no response except to make a weak insult.
> I don't play childish games.
moviePig
Oct 22, 2011, 11:10:39 PM10/22/11
to
> I'm reading Pet Sematary right now and all I can say so far is "what
> the hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was
> that terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
I thought PS was one of the better Kings (albeit a ripoff), and I'm
> the hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was
> that terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
surprised the godawful movie left you able to read it. The film
seemed to me a director trying to make her mark with Kubrick-style
art, rather than simply serving up one of literature's great, reliable
horror tales. (Meanwhile, I don't know what Ben Affleck hopes to
accomplish with THE STAND, but I'll bet young director Clint Eastwood
would've turned it down flat.)
--
- - - - - - - -
YOUR taste at work...
http://www.moviepig.com
anim8rfsk
Oct 22, 2011, 11:16:28 PM10/22/11
to
Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
> In article <lvs5a7pil1m4g25ui...@4ax.com>,
> Brian Thorn <btho...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>> one of the residents of the Boulder Free Zone when Stu and Tom return.
>
> He was asking whether King was involved with Kubrick's version of The
> Shining.
King says that Kubrick would call him and ask stuff like "do you believe in
ghosts?" - King did, Kubrick didn't, which is why the movie is
schizophrenic on whether the Overlook is haunted or Jack is just having a
mental breakdown.
--
sent from a borrowed ipad
> In article <lvs5a7pil1m4g25ui...@4ax.com>,
> Brian Thorn <btho...@suddenlink.net> wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 07:46:00 -0700, Mack A. Damia
>> <mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Wasn't King in on the filming of the first and best version? Yes, I
>>> heard it wasn't absolutely true to King's novel, and initially, he
>>> wasn't too happy wish the results.
>>
>> King was producer and wrote the screenplay. He also made a cameo as
>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 07:46:00 -0700, Mack A. Damia
>> <mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Wasn't King in on the filming of the first and best version? Yes, I
>>> heard it wasn't absolutely true to King's novel, and initially, he
>>> wasn't too happy wish the results.
>>
>> one of the residents of the Boulder Free Zone when Stu and Tom return.
>
> He was asking whether King was involved with Kubrick's version of The
> Shining.
King says that Kubrick would call him and ask stuff like "do you believe in
ghosts?" - King did, Kubrick didn't, which is why the movie is
schizophrenic on whether the Overlook is haunted or Jack is just having a
mental breakdown.
--
sent from a borrowed ipad
William
Oct 22, 2011, 11:26:12 PM10/22/11
to
On Oct 22, 11:10 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
> I thought PS was one of the better Kings (albeit a ripoff), and I'm
> surprised the godawful movie left you able to read it. The film
> seemed to me a director trying to make her mark with Kubrick-style
> art, rather than simply serving up one of literature's great, reliable
> horror tales. (Meanwhile, I don't know what Ben Affleck hopes to
> accomplish with THE STAND, but I'll bet young director Clint Eastwood
> would've turned it down flat.)
>
That may be -- about Mary Lambert -- but her debut film -- "Siesta" --
>
> I thought PS was one of the better Kings (albeit a ripoff), and I'm
> surprised the godawful movie left you able to read it. The film
> seemed to me a director trying to make her mark with Kubrick-style
> art, rather than simply serving up one of literature's great, reliable
> horror tales. (Meanwhile, I don't know what Ben Affleck hopes to
> accomplish with THE STAND, but I'll bet young director Clint Eastwood
> would've turned it down flat.)
>
was an extremely interesting, if somewhat flawed outing. Haven't seen
or don't remember Pet Semetary -- her second film -- so I can't
compare them. Things haven't gone well for her as she just directed
"Mega Python vs. Gatoroid." At least she's working.
William
sproing
Oct 23, 2011, 12:11:54 AM10/23/11
to
On 22/10/2011 12:35 PM, RichA wrote:
> I hope he can make the movie far less dull than the book was.
Troll alert.
> I hope he can make the movie far less dull than the book was.
Troll alert.
Thanatos
Oct 23, 2011, 3:04:08 AM10/23/11
to
In article <oih6a7tno587bjis3...@4ax.com>,
Yes, heaven forfend I should do anything other than just concede that
you must be right in that I didn't think Nicholson's character was crazy
from his first scene onward. I guess I must just be misremembering,
because otherwise you'd be wrong and we know that can't possibly be the
case, right?
> You have no more credibility - at least with me.
I'll cry myself to sleep over that.
you must be right in that I didn't think Nicholson's character was crazy
from his first scene onward. I guess I must just be misremembering,
because otherwise you'd be wrong and we know that can't possibly be the
case, right?
> You have no more credibility - at least with me.
Thanatos
Oct 23, 2011, 3:07:09 AM10/23/11
to
Keeno
Oct 23, 2011, 3:19:37 AM10/23/11
to
On Oct 21, 10:38 pm, "Mr. Hole the Magnificent"
<classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> by Adam B. Vary
>
> Ben Affleck’s transition from an actor-who-directs to a director-who-
> acts just took another interesting step today. With Oscar-bait The
> Town and Gone Baby Gone under his belt — and the period thriller Argo
> currently underway — Deadline is reporting that Warner Bros. is keen
> on hiring Affleck to direct its feature film adaptation of Stephen
> King’s epic tome The Stand.
>
> That could honestly mean anything. But the fact that Affleck is even
> under consideration to helm The Stand is a good sign for fans eager to
> see King’s book make it to theaters. Warner Bros. announced its co-
> production with CBS Films last January, but mum’s pretty much been the
> word on any major developments since then.
>
> In the meantime, King’s oeuvre has been very much a hot potato in
> Hollywood: Universal famously scuttled its wildly ambitious TV-and-
> movie adaptation of King’s The Dark Tower; MGM hired a screenwriter to
> adapt a new version of Carrie; Showtime is developing Under the Dome
> as a possible series with Steven Spielberg exec producing; and Silence
> of the Lambs filmmaker Jonathan Demme snapped up the rights to King’s
> impending novel 11/22/63 (an excerpt from which you can read in this
> week’s issue of EW).
>
> http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/10/21/ben-affleck-stephen-king-the-st...
I thought The Stand had been cancelled.
<classic.mr.h...@gmail.com> wrote:
> by Adam B. Vary
>
> Ben Affleck’s transition from an actor-who-directs to a director-who-
> acts just took another interesting step today. With Oscar-bait The
> Town and Gone Baby Gone under his belt — and the period thriller Argo
> currently underway — Deadline is reporting that Warner Bros. is keen
> on hiring Affleck to direct its feature film adaptation of Stephen
> King’s epic tome The Stand.
>
> That could honestly mean anything. But the fact that Affleck is even
> under consideration to helm The Stand is a good sign for fans eager to
> see King’s book make it to theaters. Warner Bros. announced its co-
> production with CBS Films last January, but mum’s pretty much been the
> word on any major developments since then.
>
> In the meantime, King’s oeuvre has been very much a hot potato in
> Hollywood: Universal famously scuttled its wildly ambitious TV-and-
> movie adaptation of King’s The Dark Tower; MGM hired a screenwriter to
> adapt a new version of Carrie; Showtime is developing Under the Dome
> as a possible series with Steven Spielberg exec producing; and Silence
> of the Lambs filmmaker Jonathan Demme snapped up the rights to King’s
> impending novel 11/22/63 (an excerpt from which you can read in this
> week’s issue of EW).
>
> http://insidemovies.ew.com/2011/10/21/ben-affleck-stephen-king-the-st...
I thought The Stand had been cancelled.
Merrick Baldelli
Oct 23, 2011, 5:01:45 AM10/23/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:42:35 -0700 (PDT), nick
<nickmacp...@AOL.com> wrote:
>I'm reading Pet Sematary right now and all I can say so far is "what
>the hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was
>that terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
I disagree. I think Hollywood needs to do more original and
<nickmacp...@AOL.com> wrote:
>I'm reading Pet Sematary right now and all I can say so far is "what
>the hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was
>that terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
unusual instead of remakes and re imaginings.
--
-=-=-/ )=*=-='=-.-'-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
_( (_ , '_ * . Merrick Baldelli
(((\ \> /_1 `
(\\\\ \_/ /
-=-\ /-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
\ _/ You can't spell 'disgust' without
/ / 'SGU' - Anim8rFSK
moviePig
Oct 23, 2011, 10:25:40 AM10/23/11
to
Seems SIESTA isn't library/Netflix available. Probably just as well
for me, as I'm not sure I could unburden my impartiality of resentment
still lingering from 'Pet Sematary'...
William
Oct 23, 2011, 10:44:40 AM10/23/11
to
On Oct 23, 10:25 am, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>
> Seems SIESTA isn't library/Netflix available. Probably just as well
> for me, as I'm not sure I could unburden my impartiality of resentment
> still lingering from 'Pet Sematary'...
>
It probably is just as well. It's one of those "what the hell just
>
> Seems SIESTA isn't library/Netflix available. Probably just as well
> for me, as I'm not sure I could unburden my impartiality of resentment
> still lingering from 'Pet Sematary'...
>
happened" films. I saw it because Ellen Barkin is in it. And Gabriel
Byrne, Jodie Foster, Martin Sheen, Isabella Rossellini, Grace Jones,
Julian Sands and Alexei Sayle. If you bump into it, see it. But you
could probably live a full life without it.
William
anim8rfsk
Oct 23, 2011, 11:04:46 AM10/23/11
to
jumping out of the tree or whatever. I remember we played hooky from work
and saw it first run, and were so bored we ended up sitting there
discussing how poorly crafted it was. Like (it's been a LONG time) the car
pulls up and we see MD plates from Rhode Island (or wherever) and I said to
my viewing accomplice "that's a lot more clever than having somebody 'you
the new doctor from Rhode Island?' and the next thing that happens is,
somebody walks up and says ... Or the kid taking the construction paper
pumpkin out of the window and putting up a turkey, but they still felt the
need for the next line of dialog to be 'can you believe it's November
already?
Mega Python showed the same low level of craftsmanship, and lack of caring
and attention to detail, but at least it's understandable in that case.
Plus, it was so bad it was kind of fun.
trotsky
Oct 23, 2011, 4:24:08 PM10/23/11
to
nick
Oct 23, 2011, 5:27:51 PM10/23/11
to
On Oct 22, 11:10 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
it were offered to the old director Clint Eastwood he'd say, sure,
what the hell.
moviePig
Oct 23, 2011, 6:54:45 PM10/23/11
to
relevance/importance. Admittedly, you and I disagree on the quality
of King's book. (I side with Rich that it's boring -- can I still
play?) But, even so, you'll need a mettle detector to find me
something in it that sounds potentially attractive to America's
Director Emeritus.
Invid Fan
Oct 23, 2011, 8:13:13 PM10/23/11
to
In article
<958b86ab-86be-47cc...@n18g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
If you go in with the right mindset, those are suppose to be fun to
direct. A full movie, from first draft to finished film, in four weeks.
Something you can easily fit in between other projects, although
naturally I don't know if she has others.
--
Chris Mack "If we show any weakness, the monsters will get cocky!"
'Invid Fan' - 'Yokai Monsters Along With Ghosts'
<958b86ab-86be-47cc...@n18g2000vbv.googlegroups.com>,
direct. A full movie, from first draft to finished film, in four weeks.
Something you can easily fit in between other projects, although
naturally I don't know if she has others.
--
Chris Mack "If we show any weakness, the monsters will get cocky!"
'Invid Fan' - 'Yokai Monsters Along With Ghosts'
nick
Oct 23, 2011, 8:17:27 PM10/23/11
to
through 1000 pages to find out if Rich's verdict is the correct one,
especially since I'll be reading Mr. King's latest 1000 page opus in a
few weeks time. But what I remember is being with it until the
climax, and after that, being with King until Cujo, or maybe it was
the first section of It, where I got the impression that King was
spending about 20 pages to describe a character he was going to kill
off anyway. In the last few years, I've started to re-appreciate
King, hence reading Pet Sematary. But did you read Mile 81? That was
awful.
But re Affleck directing The Stand. It seems to be that in the modern
era that no matter how much potential a filmmaker shows, or how
successful a young filmmaker might be, he still jumps at the chance to
make an event picture or get in on a franchise. I don't understand
the temptation but its there. Why would someone like David Fincher
agree to The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo? Why would Christopher Nolan
do Batman movies? If the seventies were like the first couple of
decades of the 21st century, Martin Scorsese would have directed
Superman and committed to two sequels.
Eastwood's been promiscuous enough in his recent cinematic choices
(Invictus? Changeling?) that I wouldn't put The Stand past him if the
offer came up.
Kujo
Oct 23, 2011, 9:08:54 PM10/23/11
to
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:01:45 -0400, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:42:35 -0700 (PDT), nick
> <nickmacp...@AOL.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm reading Pet Sematary right now and all I can say so far is "what the
>>hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was that
>>terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
>
> I disagree. I think Hollywood needs to do more original and
> unusual instead of remakes and re imaginings.
This a million times. I couldn't agree more.
> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:42:35 -0700 (PDT), nick
> <nickmacp...@AOL.com> wrote:
>
>>I'm reading Pet Sematary right now and all I can say so far is "what the
>>hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was that
>>terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
>
> I disagree. I think Hollywood needs to do more original and
> unusual instead of remakes and re imaginings.
moviePig
Oct 24, 2011, 10:20:03 AM10/24/11
to
tropes in INVICTUS and CHANGELING (or even HEREAFTER). I think
Eastwood would be about as likely to take up a STAND as he would a bad
HOBBIT.
Still, that does sound right about young filmmakers not being able to
resist driving Dad's car ...almost as though it were the only way to
prove they ever really had the chance. (I'd exempt Fincher,
though ...as DRAGON TATTOO doesn't feel to me all that distant from
SE7EN.)
nick
Oct 24, 2011, 6:16:46 PM10/24/11
to
novel?
trotsky
Oct 24, 2011, 7:36:23 PM10/24/11
to
moviePig
Oct 24, 2011, 10:19:31 PM10/24/11
to
trotsky
Oct 25, 2011, 8:01:30 AM10/25/11
to
gave me "The Gunslinger" to read and I stopped halfway because it was
stupid. I think fans of Stephen King simply haven't read many writers
that have some capacity to write readable prose, because his "way with
words" appears to be nonexistent for me. And I'm talking about compared
to other writers of genre fiction. He seems to be capable of generating
a lot of plots that can be made into movies, so more power to him. But
I wouldn't call him a "great" writer or even a "good" writer. I could
see why you'd like him, though--he's like the Wes Craven of horror
writers. If somebody else likes something that's there business, but I
won't say that I find it be of any level of quality for that.
sproing
Oct 25, 2011, 8:12:47 AM10/25/11
to
On 25/10/2011 8:01 AM, trotsky wrote:
> A roommate of mine once gave me "The Gunslinger" to read and I stopped
> halfway because it was stupid.
What.
> A roommate of mine once gave me "The Gunslinger" to read and I stopped
> halfway because it was stupid.
suzeeq
Oct 25, 2011, 9:31:18 AM10/25/11
to
story in an entertaining way, but doesn't really know how to end them.
The endings are always pretty weak.
moviePig
Oct 25, 2011, 10:12:00 AM10/25/11
to
clearly on the asset side of his ledger. And, fwiw, I, too, sailed
through 'Carrie' and 'Salem's Lot', yet couldn't clear my holster with
'Gunslinger'. But the point about 'Pet Sematary' is that it's an
absolutely terrific and creepy premise ...and, though it's not King's
own, he doesn't fuck it up. (Iirc, he was also a particularly sharp
existential observer throughout that book -- maybe inspired by the
classic material.) You needn't read it, of course ...but, until you
do, neither can you class it as, say, a Craven romp.
BroTHeR zAcHaRy
Oct 25, 2011, 3:58:59 PM10/25/11
to
nod to Salem's Lot, is one of his scariest stories. It doesn't suffer
from needless character development (and I use that term loosely) and
endless tangents that most of his novels do. My favorite novel by him
was his most conservative: Eyes of the Dragon, a PG-13 "rated" fairy
tale written for his daughter. I stopped reading him in high school
(around the release of IT and The Tommyknockers). I tried him again a
few years later with Dreamcatcher, which was a rehash of the ones I
just mentioned. But that was it for me, no pun intended. A few years
later, I discovered Brian Lumley's Necroscope/Vampire World books. Now
those are great horror/fantasy, even if the series went on a bit more
than it should have.
trotsky
Oct 25, 2011, 7:20:06 PM10/25/11
to
say 'he doesn't fuck up' the premise of "Pet Semetary". Here's what I
don't get: Stephen King has a legion of followers, but, like John
Grisham, the movies made from his works largely suck ass. Why?
suzeeq
Oct 25, 2011, 7:32:33 PM10/25/11
to
nick
Oct 25, 2011, 8:08:16 PM10/25/11
to
>
> - Show quoted text -
The ones that suck ass are usually the ones from filmmakers who don't
have the money, resources or talent not to suck ass; but on the other
hand, Carrie, The Shining, The Dead Zone, Stand By Me, The Mist, The
Stand, Shawshank Redemption . . . these aren't bad adaptations.
nick
Oct 25, 2011, 8:14:03 PM10/25/11
to
On Oct 25, 8:01 am, trotsky <gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> On 10/24/11 9:19 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 24, 7:36 pm, trotsky<gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> >> On 10/24/11 5:16 PM, nick wrote:
>
> >>> On Oct 23, 9:08 pm, Kujo<k...@noname.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:01:45 -0400, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:42:35 -0700 (PDT), nick
> >>>>> <nickmacpherso...@AOL.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> I'm reading Pet Sematary right now and all I can say so far is "what the
> >>>>>> hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was that
> >>>>>> terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
>
> >>>>> I disagree. I think Hollywood needs to do more original and
> >>>>> unusual instead of remakes and re imaginings.
>
> >>>> This a million times. I couldn't agree more.
>
> >>> Why not do a remake when the original was a bad adaptation of a good
> >>> novel?
>
> >> Define "good".
>
> > A top 5 from the most successful horror writer ever. Did you read it?
>
> No, I stopped at "Carrie" and "Salem's Lot". A roommate of mine once
> gave me "The Gunslinger" to read and I stopped halfway because it was
> stupid. I think fans of Stephen King simply haven't read many writers
> that have some capacity to write readable prose, because his "way with
> words" appears to be nonexistent for me. And I'm talking about compared
> to other writers of genre fiction.
I don't read much modern horror fiction. I love the horror movie
> On 10/24/11 9:19 PM, moviePig wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Oct 24, 7:36 pm, trotsky<gmsi...@email.com> wrote:
> >> On 10/24/11 5:16 PM, nick wrote:
>
> >>> On Oct 23, 9:08 pm, Kujo<k...@noname.com> wrote:
> >>>> On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 05:01:45 -0400, Merrick Baldelli wrote:
> >>>>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:42:35 -0700 (PDT), nick
> >>>>> <nickmacpherso...@AOL.com> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> I'm reading Pet Sematary right now and all I can say so far is "what the
> >>>>>> hell was up with that film adaptation?!?" I didn't think it was that
> >>>>>> terrible until I started reading the book. It needs a remake.
>
> >>>>> I disagree. I think Hollywood needs to do more original and
> >>>>> unusual instead of remakes and re imaginings.
>
> >>>> This a million times. I couldn't agree more.
>
> >>> Why not do a remake when the original was a bad adaptation of a good
> >>> novel?
>
> >> Define "good".
>
> > A top 5 from the most successful horror writer ever. Did you read it?
>
> No, I stopped at "Carrie" and "Salem's Lot". A roommate of mine once
> gave me "The Gunslinger" to read and I stopped halfway because it was
> stupid. I think fans of Stephen King simply haven't read many writers
> that have some capacity to write readable prose, because his "way with
> words" appears to be nonexistent for me. And I'm talking about compared
> to other writers of genre fiction.
genre but it doesn't extend to modern horror literature. I like
Richard Matheson and Shirley Jackson, early Clive Barker. I'll read
something by Joe Landsdale every now and then, but mostly modern
horror literature is a turn-off, especially these days when it's
impossible to maneuver through all the zombie and vampire and fantasy
series' clogging up the bookshelves. But I do like Stephen King. I
mean, I hope I've read writers capable of readable prose, but maybe I
haven't and I don't know any better in liking Stephen King but I'll
give most anything he writes a shot. Aside from that Gunslinger
stuff.
Merrick Baldelli
Oct 25, 2011, 8:55:50 PM10/25/11
to
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 18:20:06 -0500, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>Interesting, you manage to be somewhat persuasive while only managing to
>say 'he doesn't fuck up' the premise of "Pet Semetary". Here's what I
>don't get: Stephen King has a legion of followers, but, like John
>Grisham, the movies made from his works largely suck ass. Why?
Jeez, is this a trick question or something? Hollywood
>Interesting, you manage to be somewhat persuasive while only managing to
>say 'he doesn't fuck up' the premise of "Pet Semetary". Here's what I
>don't get: Stephen King has a legion of followers, but, like John
>Grisham, the movies made from his works largely suck ass. Why?
executives see those flocks of King and Grisham fans thinking, "how
can we get money out of those sheeple?" without once actually
understanding the material for which they're trying to get contracts
signed to make such movies from.
What's worse is that generations of ass-sucking,
money-grubbing bottom feeder, conservative types -- otherwise known as
the Hollywood Producer -- instead of trying to study and perhaps even
read the material, thinking they're "artists" warp the material into
something not unlike gruel paste... completely destroy the material
that seemed to make so much money before they touched it.
Don Bruder
Oct 25, 2011, 9:35:53 PM10/25/11
to
In article
<1d2f392c-f048-4005...@m19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
Then that makes two of us. I forced myself to wade through the
gunslinger crap on the strength of so many people (some I know
personally, some I don't) raving about how great and wonderful it's
supposed to be. And my final take on it? The best thing that could have
happened to it would be for it to have never existed. Aside from a
handful of very short segments scattered through it (for me, these were
nearly all related to the glimpses of doings in The Stand) the whole
thing boiled down to a gigantic waste of time that went nowhere but in a
circle, said nothing particularly interesting, and took *FAR* too long
to get there and say it.
--
Email shown is deceased. If you would like to contact me by email, please
post something that makes it obvious in this or another group you see me
posting in with a "how to contact you" address, and I'll get back to you.
<1d2f392c-f048-4005...@m19g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>,
gunslinger crap on the strength of so many people (some I know
personally, some I don't) raving about how great and wonderful it's
supposed to be. And my final take on it? The best thing that could have
happened to it would be for it to have never existed. Aside from a
handful of very short segments scattered through it (for me, these were
nearly all related to the glimpses of doings in The Stand) the whole
thing boiled down to a gigantic waste of time that went nowhere but in a
circle, said nothing particularly interesting, and took *FAR* too long
to get there and say it.
--
Email shown is deceased. If you would like to contact me by email, please
post something that makes it obvious in this or another group you see me
posting in with a "how to contact you" address, and I'll get back to you.
Thanatos
Oct 25, 2011, 9:50:15 PM10/25/11
to
In article <KfCdnbQKxMuGODvT...@mchsi.com>,
[And the irony is you were criticizing someone else's writing ability
when you wrote that little gem.]
trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
> If somebody else likes something that's there business, but I
> won't say that I find it be of any level of quality for that.
What?
> If somebody else likes something that's there business, but I
> won't say that I find it be of any level of quality for that.
[And the irony is you were criticizing someone else's writing ability
when you wrote that little gem.]
Jerry Brown
Oct 26, 2011, 5:24:55 AM10/26/11
to
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:58:59 -0700 (PDT), BroTHeR zAcHaRy
<victorth...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>SK's best works are his short stories, IMO. Jerusalem's Lot, a prequel
>nod to Salem's Lot, is one of his scariest stories. It doesn't suffer
>from needless character development (and I use that term loosely) and
>endless tangents that most of his novels do. My favorite novel by him
>was his most conservative: Eyes of the Dragon, a PG-13 "rated" fairy
>tale written for his daughter. I stopped reading him in high school
>(around the release of IT and The Tommyknockers).
The Tommyknockers was the last King I bought in hardback; an
entertaining 300 page novel, unfortunately comprised of 563 pages.
<victorth...@gmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
>SK's best works are his short stories, IMO. Jerusalem's Lot, a prequel
>nod to Salem's Lot, is one of his scariest stories. It doesn't suffer
>from needless character development (and I use that term loosely) and
>endless tangents that most of his novels do. My favorite novel by him
>was his most conservative: Eyes of the Dragon, a PG-13 "rated" fairy
>tale written for his daughter. I stopped reading him in high school
>(around the release of IT and The Tommyknockers).
entertaining 300 page novel, unfortunately comprised of 563 pages.
Stephen Newport
Oct 26, 2011, 6:02:29 AM10/26/11
to
Stand By Me, and The Shawshank Redemption.
---------------------------------------
SN: Those were tolerable. I usually hate anything based on King's work.
trotsky
Oct 26, 2011, 8:20:38 AM10/26/11
to
you're having trouble understanding what I wrote, though, let me know
and I'll try and help you with it.
moviePig
Oct 26, 2011, 9:03:47 AM10/26/11
to
mere entertainment, I think ...or so I mean it to be. And, fwiw, I
never thought 'Pet Sematary' should've been a *great* movie, just a
damn scary one.
Re your question about why so many King movies suck, I'll note that,
among the good ones, CARRIE had De Palma, SALEM'S LOT had Hooper, CUJO
had Lewis Teague (who wisely de-Kinged it), and THE MIST had Frank
Darabont finally growing a pair. Still, there's probably a more
insightful answer, and if I think of it I'll let you know.
trotsky
Oct 26, 2011, 10:20:50 AM10/26/11
to
Thanatos
Oct 26, 2011, 10:31:57 AM10/26/11
to
In article <moedndyJKOSLZjrT...@mchsi.com>,
Well, you can start by learning the difference between 'their' and
'there', dumbass.
Live by the typo flame, die by the typo flame, you reeking blob of goo.
'there', dumbass.
Live by the typo flame, die by the typo flame, you reeking blob of goo.
trotsky
Oct 26, 2011, 10:42:27 AM10/26/11
to
Stephen Newport
Oct 26, 2011, 11:30:07 AM10/26/11
to
among the good ones, CARRIE had De Palma
---------------------------------
SN: The musical version was a mega disaster, which I saw.
Professor Bubba
Oct 26, 2011, 2:43:39 PM10/26/11
to
In article
<2f43f29d-fed5-4612...@gk10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
... by, among other things, completely changing the ending. What a
waste of time.
<2f43f29d-fed5-4612...@gk10g2000vbb.googlegroups.com>,
... by, among other things, completely changing the ending. What a
waste of time.
Mason Barge
Oct 26, 2011, 3:18:41 PM10/26/11
to
On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 22:22:58 -0500, Brian Thorn <btho...@suddenlink.net>
wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:06:53 -0700 (PDT), tobymax43
><tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
>That would be "The Shawshank Redemption", nothing else comes close.
It doesn't even get "distant second", which would go to "The Green Mile".
Oh heck, I'm forgetting about The Shining. Well, taste is personal, maybe
some people think The Stand is the bee's knees. I actually liked it okay.
wrote:
>On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 20:06:53 -0700 (PDT), tobymax43
><tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>
>
>>Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>
It doesn't even get "distant second", which would go to "The Green Mile".
Oh heck, I'm forgetting about The Shining. Well, taste is personal, maybe
some people think The Stand is the bee's knees. I actually liked it okay.
Mason Barge
Oct 26, 2011, 3:23:12 PM10/26/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 10:09:12 -0400, Jim T. <x@y.z> wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 05:31:21 -0700, Mack A. Damia
><mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article
>>><82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>>>Shawshank Redemption.
>>
>>"The Shining"?
>
>"The Shining" is a great movie. But I understand it's not true to the
>book. As someone who has read a few other King books before I wised
>up, I think that was a very good decision.
IMHO, you have to be a Stephen King fanboy to see major differences. I
read the book, I saw the movie - the only huge difference I could see was
the distortion that Jack Nicholson brings to any role he plays, just
because he's such a powerful personality.
>On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 05:31:21 -0700, Mack A. Damia
><mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 00:37:04 -0700, Thanatos <atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In article
>>><82c1f7b7-131f-435b...@j20g2000vby.googlegroups.com>,
>>> tobymax43 <tob...@comcast.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>>>
>>>Actually, that's a three-way tie between Misery, Stand By Me, and The
>>>
>>>> Why mess with the absolute best filmed version of any King story.
>>>
>>>Shawshank Redemption.
>>
>>"The Shining"?
>
>"The Shining" is a great movie. But I understand it's not true to the
>book. As someone who has read a few other King books before I wised
>up, I think that was a very good decision.
IMHO, you have to be a Stephen King fanboy to see major differences. I
read the book, I saw the movie - the only huge difference I could see was
the distortion that Jack Nicholson brings to any role he plays, just
because he's such a powerful personality.
Ian J. Ball
Oct 26, 2011, 3:23:24 PM10/26/11
to
On Oct 26, 12:18 pm, Mason Barge <masonba...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 22:22:58 -0500, Brian Thorn <bthor...@suddenlink.net>
My take? I like "The Stand" miniseries, but it got weaker with every
succeeding 2-hour episode. The first 2-hours are pretty darn awesome.
The second 2-hours are pretty good. It's pretty much all downhill from
there.
> On Fri, 21 Oct 2011 22:22:58 -0500, Brian Thorn <bthor...@suddenlink.net>
succeeding 2-hour episode. The first 2-hours are pretty darn awesome.
The second 2-hours are pretty good. It's pretty much all downhill from
there.
Mason Barge
Oct 26, 2011, 3:28:34 PM10/26/11
to
On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 15:27:42 -0500, "Wull" <wma...@sbcglobal.net> wrote:
>
>"Jerry Brown" <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote in message
>news:ep56a79fbudohbrqo...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 11:32:38 -0400, Professor Bubba
>> <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <nil5a7tr1q0me9dhv...@4ax.com>, Mack A. Damia
>>><mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
[...]
>> The TV movie of The Langoliers was fairly close to the original
>> novella, although the giant pacmen eating the airport and chasing the
>> plane looked a lot sillier on screen than my mind's eye version from
>> the original reading.
>I used to read all of King's book and saw all the movies but after I read
>Pet Cemetary, I lost interest in him completely.
>I have not read or watched anymore of his issue.
Lucky you. The book was MUCH better than the movie.
And yeah, all his conventions begin to show a lot of seams after you read
a couple of his books.
P.S., wasn't it Pet Semetary, with an "S"?
Oh, and P.P.S., you didn't watch The Shawshank Redemption?
>
>"Jerry Brown" <je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote in message
>news:ep56a79fbudohbrqo...@4ax.com...
>> On Sat, 22 Oct 2011 11:32:38 -0400, Professor Bubba
>> <bu...@nowhere.edu.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>In article <nil5a7tr1q0me9dhv...@4ax.com>, Mack A. Damia
>>><mybaco...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>>>
[...]
>> The TV movie of The Langoliers was fairly close to the original
>> novella, although the giant pacmen eating the airport and chasing the
>> plane looked a lot sillier on screen than my mind's eye version from
>> the original reading.
>>
>> --
>> Jerry Brown
>>
>> A cat may look at a king
>> (but probably won't bother)
>
>I wonder if any of you feel about Pet Cemetary as I do.
>> --
>> Jerry Brown
>>
>> A cat may look at a king
>> (but probably won't bother)
>
>I used to read all of King's book and saw all the movies but after I read
>Pet Cemetary, I lost interest in him completely.
>I have not read or watched anymore of his issue.
Lucky you. The book was MUCH better than the movie.
And yeah, all his conventions begin to show a lot of seams after you read
a couple of his books.
P.S., wasn't it Pet Semetary, with an "S"?
Oh, and P.P.S., you didn't watch The Shawshank Redemption?
Mason Barge
Oct 26, 2011, 3:36:50 PM10/26/11
to
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 07:25:40 -0700 (PDT), moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com>
wrote:
>On Oct 22, 11:26 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 22, 11:10 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I thought PS was one of the better Kings (albeit a ripoff), and I'm
>> > surprised the godawful movie left you able to read it. The film
>> > seemed to me a director trying to make her mark with Kubrick-style
>> > art, rather than simply serving up one of literature's great, reliable
>> > horror tales. (Meanwhile, I don't know what Ben Affleck hopes to
>> > accomplish with THE STAND, but I'll bet young director Clint Eastwood
>> > would've turned it down flat.)
>>
>> That may be -- about Mary Lambert -- but her debut film -- "Siesta" --
>> was an extremely interesting, if somewhat flawed outing. Haven't seen
>> or don't remember Pet Semetary -- her second film -- so I can't
>> compare them. Things haven't gone well for her as she just directed
>> "Mega Python vs. Gatoroid." At least she's working.
>
>Yes, I'd surely call that work.
>
>Seems SIESTA isn't library/Netflix available.
Dude, count your blessings. The shadow of death passed you by untouched.
Siesta could be the worst movie I ever saw. Or in a 100-way tie, at
least.
Of these three movies, "Mega Python v. Gatoroid" is the clear winner. It
was actually enjoyable!
> Probably just as well
>for me, as I'm not sure I could unburden my impartiality of resentment
>still lingering from 'Pet Sematary'...
Wouldn't matter. It would be like trying to overcome an irrational
dislike of Germans while imprisoned at Auschwitz. Or trying to blind
someone with a flashlight at high noon in Death Valley.
Siesta was so bad that any prejudice due to disliking Pet Semetary would
shrink to insignificance in two seconds.
wrote:
>On Oct 22, 11:26 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 22, 11:10 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>
>> > I thought PS was one of the better Kings (albeit a ripoff), and I'm
>> > surprised the godawful movie left you able to read it. The film
>> > seemed to me a director trying to make her mark with Kubrick-style
>> > art, rather than simply serving up one of literature's great, reliable
>> > horror tales. (Meanwhile, I don't know what Ben Affleck hopes to
>> > accomplish with THE STAND, but I'll bet young director Clint Eastwood
>> > would've turned it down flat.)
>>
>> That may be -- about Mary Lambert -- but her debut film -- "Siesta" --
>> was an extremely interesting, if somewhat flawed outing. Haven't seen
>> or don't remember Pet Semetary -- her second film -- so I can't
>> compare them. Things haven't gone well for her as she just directed
>> "Mega Python vs. Gatoroid." At least she's working.
>
>Yes, I'd surely call that work.
>
>Seems SIESTA isn't library/Netflix available.
Dude, count your blessings. The shadow of death passed you by untouched.
Siesta could be the worst movie I ever saw. Or in a 100-way tie, at
least.
Of these three movies, "Mega Python v. Gatoroid" is the clear winner. It
was actually enjoyable!
> Probably just as well
>for me, as I'm not sure I could unburden my impartiality of resentment
>still lingering from 'Pet Sematary'...
Wouldn't matter. It would be like trying to overcome an irrational
dislike of Germans while imprisoned at Auschwitz. Or trying to blind
someone with a flashlight at high noon in Death Valley.
Siesta was so bad that any prejudice due to disliking Pet Semetary would
shrink to insignificance in two seconds.
Mason Barge
Oct 26, 2011, 3:39:07 PM10/26/11
to
On Sun, 23 Oct 2011 15:04:46 GMT, anim8rfsk <anim...@cox.net> wrote:
>moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 22, 11:26 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Oct 22, 11:10 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I thought PS was one of the better Kings (albeit a ripoff), and I'm
>>>> surprised the godawful movie left you able to read it. The film
>>>> seemed to me a director trying to make her mark with Kubrick-style
>>>> art, rather than simply serving up one of literature's great, reliable
>>>> horror tales. (Meanwhile, I don't know what Ben Affleck hopes to
>>>> accomplish with THE STAND, but I'll bet young director Clint Eastwood
>>>> would've turned it down flat.)
>>>
>>> That may be -- about Mary Lambert -- but her debut film -- "Siesta" --
>>> was an extremely interesting, if somewhat flawed outing. Haven't seen
>>> or don't remember Pet Semetary -- her second film -- so I can't
>>> compare them. Things haven't gone well for her as she just directed
>>> "Mega Python vs. Gatoroid." At least she's working.
>>
>> Yes, I'd surely call that work.
>>
>> Seems SIESTA isn't library/Netflix available. Probably just as well
>moviePig <pwal...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>> On Oct 22, 11:26 pm, William <wlahe...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Oct 22, 11:10 pm, moviePig <pwall...@moviepig.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I thought PS was one of the better Kings (albeit a ripoff), and I'm
>>>> surprised the godawful movie left you able to read it. The film
>>>> seemed to me a director trying to make her mark with Kubrick-style
>>>> art, rather than simply serving up one of literature's great, reliable
>>>> horror tales. (Meanwhile, I don't know what Ben Affleck hopes to
>>>> accomplish with THE STAND, but I'll bet young director Clint Eastwood
>>>> would've turned it down flat.)
>>>
>>> That may be -- about Mary Lambert -- but her debut film -- "Siesta" --
>>> was an extremely interesting, if somewhat flawed outing. Haven't seen
>>> or don't remember Pet Semetary -- her second film -- so I can't
>>> compare them. Things haven't gone well for her as she just directed
>>> "Mega Python vs. Gatoroid." At least she's working.
>>
>> Yes, I'd surely call that work.
>>
>> for me, as I'm not sure I could unburden my impartiality of resentment
>> still lingering from 'Pet Sematary'...
>
>PS was a truly dreadful film.
>> still lingering from 'Pet Sematary'...
>
Yes but . . . you didn't see Siesta! ;)
>
>Mega Python showed the same low level of craftsmanship, and lack of caring
>and attention to detail, but at least it's understandable in that case.
>Plus, it was so bad it was kind of fun.
It may not have been "Starship Troopers", but Mega Python was really
pretty good cheese.
Mason Barge
Oct 26, 2011, 3:45:25 PM10/26/11
to
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 17:32:33 -0600, suzeeq <su...@imbris.com> wrote:
[...]
>Some books don't translate well to movie screenplays.
I think it's more correct to say, some books have not been translated into
good screenplays. I think the question of whether some books are
impossible to translate into a good screenplay is one of those things you
could debate until we invade Jupiter.
I will say, I have seen several very difficult adaptations done quite well
by a clever and inventive screenwriter. The French Lieutenant's Woman
would be an example.
[...]
>Some books don't translate well to movie screenplays.
good screenplays. I think the question of whether some books are
impossible to translate into a good screenplay is one of those things you
could debate until we invade Jupiter.
I will say, I have seen several very difficult adaptations done quite well
by a clever and inventive screenwriter. The French Lieutenant's Woman
would be an example.
Mason Barge
Oct 26, 2011, 3:47:24 PM10/26/11
to
there fun?) It just makes them look petty, to me.
Professor Bubba
Oct 26, 2011, 4:10:09 PM10/26/11
to
In article <pbnga7l28k5t45v90...@4ax.com>, Mason Barge
I don't think you had to have been a fanboy to spot the differences.
One major one: At the end of the novel, Jack Torrance manages to throw
off the influence of the hotel, and then he blows it up by overloading
the boiler, sacrificing himself to allow Wendy and Danny to escape.
One major one: At the end of the novel, Jack Torrance manages to throw
off the influence of the hotel, and then he blows it up by overloading
the boiler, sacrificing himself to allow Wendy and Danny to escape.
moviePig
Oct 26, 2011, 4:12:39 PM10/26/11
to
overdue in my rewatch queue...
Thanatos
Oct 26, 2011, 11:15:12 PM10/26/11
to
In article <qroga75vqsq38vkp3...@4ax.com>,
Yeah, trotsky is the only one I turn it around on. He's such a
relentless asshole about it when he catches someone else, it's fun to
watch him try and squirm his way out of his own hypocrisy when he gets
caught himself.
relentless asshole about it when he catches someone else, it's fun to
watch him try and squirm his way out of his own hypocrisy when he gets
caught himself.
trotsky
Oct 27, 2011, 8:49:49 AM10/27/11
to
On 10/26/11 10:15 PM, Thanatos wrote:
> In article<qroga75vqsq38vkp3...@4ax.com>,
> In article<qroga75vqsq38vkp3...@4ax.com>,
> Mason Barge<mason...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:31:57 -0700, Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article<moedndyJKOSLZjrT...@mchsi.com>,
>>> trotsky<gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/25/11 8:50 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>>>>> In article<KfCdnbQKxMuGODvT...@mchsi.com>,
>>>>> trotsky<gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If somebody else likes something that's there business, but I
>>>>>> won't say that I find it be of any level of quality for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> What?
>>>>>
>>>>> [And the irony is you were criticizing someone else's writing ability
>>>>> when you wrote that little gem.]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you think that's "irony" you're even more stupid than I thought. If
>>>> you're having trouble understanding what I wrote, though, let me know
>>>> and I'll try and help you with it.
>>>
>>> Well, you can start by learning the difference between 'their' and
>>> 'there', dumbass.
>>>
>>> Live by the typo flame, die by the typo flame, you reeking blob of goo.
>>
>> Eh. I vote, let anyone who makes typo flames have their fun. (Or is it
>> there fun?) It just makes them look petty, to me.
>
> Yeah, trotsky is the only one I turn it around on. He's such a
> relentless asshole
Irony alert!
>
>> On Wed, 26 Oct 2011 07:31:57 -0700, Thanatos<atr...@mac.com> wrote:
>>
>>> In article<moedndyJKOSLZjrT...@mchsi.com>,
>>> trotsky<gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 10/25/11 8:50 PM, Thanatos wrote:
>>>>> In article<KfCdnbQKxMuGODvT...@mchsi.com>,
>>>>> trotsky<gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> If somebody else likes something that's there business, but I
>>>>>> won't say that I find it be of any level of quality for that.
>>>>>
>>>>> What?
>>>>>
>>>>> [And the irony is you were criticizing someone else's writing ability
>>>>> when you wrote that little gem.]
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> If you think that's "irony" you're even more stupid than I thought. If
>>>> you're having trouble understanding what I wrote, though, let me know
>>>> and I'll try and help you with it.
>>>
>>> Well, you can start by learning the difference between 'their' and
>>> 'there', dumbass.
>>>
>>> Live by the typo flame, die by the typo flame, you reeking blob of goo.
>>
>> Eh. I vote, let anyone who makes typo flames have their fun. (Or is it
>> there fun?) It just makes them look petty, to me.
>
> Yeah, trotsky is the only one I turn it around on. He's such a
> relentless asshole
BroTHeR zAcHaRy
Oct 27, 2011, 7:03:24 PM10/27/11
to
muse. In retrospect, the inner torment over his own duality was
blatantly obvious throughout most of his fiction. I think it was
summed up by the reintegration of the male and female natures of the
Nilotic in his last great book, Sacrament.
RichA
Oct 28, 2011, 8:29:37 AM10/28/11
to
On Oct 26, 5:24 am, Jerry Brown
ALL King novels die at the halfway point. I find myself really
engrossed in the first half or so, Tommyknockers (especially the part
about the kid who "wished" his brother onto the surface of a planet
with no breathable air), the fusion device in the furnace of the
house, the buried ship. But, after people start mutating, I just lost
interest. The whole extrasensory control exhibited by "higher
species" tends to get boring since it's been used so much.
<je...@jwbrown.co.uk.RemoveThisBitToReply> wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:58:59 -0700 (PDT), BroTHeR zAcHaRy
>
> On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 12:58:59 -0700 (PDT), BroTHeR zAcHaRy
>
engrossed in the first half or so, Tommyknockers (especially the part
about the kid who "wished" his brother onto the surface of a planet
with no breathable air), the fusion device in the furnace of the
house, the buried ship. But, after people start mutating, I just lost
interest. The whole extrasensory control exhibited by "higher
species" tends to get boring since it's been used so much.
Jerry Brown
Oct 28, 2011, 11:30:39 AM10/28/11
to
On Fri, 28 Oct 2011 05:29:37 -0700 (PDT), RichA <rande...@gmail.com>
wrote:
I was the other way round; I hated the long setup about the
protagonist's politics and paranoia, and then really enjoyed it once
they started digging up the ship and mutating.
wrote:
protagonist's politics and paranoia, and then really enjoyed it once
they started digging up the ship and mutating.
Mason Barge
Oct 28, 2011, 12:56:06 PM10/28/11
to
Stephen Newport
Oct 28, 2011, 8:33:48 PM10/28/11
to
No more Stephen King on stage, screen, and television would make me very
happy.
happy.
Derek K. Wodenhouse
Oct 28, 2011, 9:18:59 PM10/28/11
to
On 28/10/2011 8:33 PM, Stephen Newport wrote:
> No more Stephen King on stage, screen, and television would make me very
> happy.
Dickhead.
> No more Stephen King on stage, screen, and television would make me very
> happy.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages