British fan here. Loved stephen since forever. Read all his books, seen most, if not all tv/films (well all I know about).
I only wanted to ask one question though .....
I only wanted to ask one question though .....
Just wanted to comment
- Thread starter Dayzeerae
- Start date
-
This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.
Welcome to the site, ask away... and we will answer if we can.
Well my question is simple really. I have read just about everything King has written, and seen just about every film/TV adaptation of said writings (any I have missed have been through ignorance of their existence.) On the whole I have thoroughly enjoyed them all. My favourite? Hard to say, although I do have to say that for shock value The Mist has to be up there. However there are some 'adaptations' or really productions claiming to be 'based on' which leave me totally confused and dare I say, thoroughly disappointed.Welcome to the site, ask away... and we will answer if we can.
The main culprit is the recent tv 'adaptation' of the absolutely brilliant stand alone novel Under the Dome. So when, earlier this year, I read that this was to be a new TV series I was so very excited. What a let down. What an absolute crock of the mucky stuff. The only correlations between book and tv series were the actual name, the dome itself, and a handful of characters. I have only just got around to watching the last few episodes, and was dumbfounded to see it was going to be dragged out into a second series.
So yes Speilberg is a brilliant film maker yada yada, but why oh why did stephen agree to allow him to totally barstadise a book which would have been excellent in its original state? A small town, idyllic on the outside yet rotten on the inside, being turned into an alien child's 'ant farm' type toy? The citizens unable to comprehend what has happened to them, the egotistical and already corrupt town councilman attempting to totally take over, a small group desperately attempting to solve the problem, then finding a way to communicate with the alien in the hope that they can save everyone. The accelerating corruption of the bad guys, the mounting desperation of the few good guys left creates such tension which the tv series totally fails to produce. In fact the TV series just gets dafter and dafter with its quasi religious thread weaving an erratic way through the story. So again I ask why?
This may help you:
A Letter From Stephen:
For those of you out there in Constant Reader Land who are feeling miffed because the TV version of Under the Dome varies considerably from the book version, here’s a little story.
Near the end of his life, and long after his greatest novels were written, James M. Cain agreed to be interviewed by a student reporter who covered culture and the arts for his college newspaper. This young man began his time with Cain by bemoaning how Hollywood had changed books such as The Postman Always Rings Twice and Double Indemnity. Before he could properly get into his rant, the old man interrupted him by pointing to a shelf of books behind his desk. “The movies didn’t change them a bit, son,” he said. “They’re all right up there. Every word is the same as when I wrote them.”
I feel the same way about Under the Dome. If you loved the book when you first read it, it’s still there for your perusal. But that doesn’t mean the TV series is bad, because it’s not. In fact, it’s very good. And, if you look closely, you’ll see that most of my characters are still there, although some have been combined and others have changed jobs. That’s also true of the big stuff, like the supermarket riot, the reason for all that propane storage, and the book’s thematic concerns with diminishing resources.
Many of the changes wrought by Brian K. Vaughan and his team of writers have been of necessity, and I approved of them wholeheartedly. Some have been occasioned by their plan to keep the Dome in place over Chester’s Mill for months instead of little more than a week, as is the case in the book. Other story modifications are slotting into place because the writers have completely re-imagined the source of the Dome.
That such a re-imagining had to take place was my only serious concern when the series was still in the planning stages, and that concern was purely practical. If the solution to the mystery were the same on TV as in the book, everyone would know it in short order, which would spoil a lot of the fun (besides, plenty of readers didn’t like my solution, anyway). By the same token, it would spoil things if you guys knew the arcs of the characters in advance. Some who die in the book—Angie, for instance—live in the TV version of Chester’s Mill…at least for a while. And some who live in the book may not be as lucky during the run of the show. Just sayin’.
Listen, I’ve always been a situational writer. My idea of what to do with a plot is to shoot it before it can breed. It’s true that when I start a story, I usually have a general idea of where it’s going to finish up, but in many cases I end up in a different place entirely (for instance, I fully expected Ben Mears to die at the end of ’Salem’s Lot, and Susannah Dean was supposed to pop off at the end of Song of Susannah). “The book is the boss,” Alfred Bester used to say, and what that means to me is the situation is the boss. If you play fair with the characters—and let them play their parts according to their strengths and weaknesses—you can never go wrong. It’s impossible.
There’s only one element of my novel that absolutely had to be the same in the novel and the show, and that’s the Dome itself. It’s best to think of that novel and what you’re seeing week-to-week on CBS as a case of fraternal twins. Both started in the same creative womb, but you will be able to tell them apart. Or, if you’re of a sci-fi bent, think of them as alternate versions of the same reality.
As for me, I’m enjoying the chance to watch that alternate reality play out; I still think there’s no place like Dome.
As for you, Constant Reader, feel free to take the original down from your bookshelf anytime you want. Nothing between the covers has changed a bit.
Stephen King
June 27th, 2013
For those of you out there in Constant Reader Land who are feeling miffed because the TV version of Under the Dome varies considerably from the book version, here’s a little story.
Near the end of his life, and long after his greatest novels were written, James M. Cain agreed to be interviewed by a student reporter who covered culture and the arts for his college newspaper. This young man began his time with Cain by bemoaning how Hollywood had changed books such as The Postman Always Rings Twice and Double Indemnity. Before he could properly get into his rant, the old man interrupted him by pointing to a shelf of books behind his desk. “The movies didn’t change them a bit, son,” he said. “They’re all right up there. Every word is the same as when I wrote them.”
I feel the same way about Under the Dome. If you loved the book when you first read it, it’s still there for your perusal. But that doesn’t mean the TV series is bad, because it’s not. In fact, it’s very good. And, if you look closely, you’ll see that most of my characters are still there, although some have been combined and others have changed jobs. That’s also true of the big stuff, like the supermarket riot, the reason for all that propane storage, and the book’s thematic concerns with diminishing resources.
Many of the changes wrought by Brian K. Vaughan and his team of writers have been of necessity, and I approved of them wholeheartedly. Some have been occasioned by their plan to keep the Dome in place over Chester’s Mill for months instead of little more than a week, as is the case in the book. Other story modifications are slotting into place because the writers have completely re-imagined the source of the Dome.
That such a re-imagining had to take place was my only serious concern when the series was still in the planning stages, and that concern was purely practical. If the solution to the mystery were the same on TV as in the book, everyone would know it in short order, which would spoil a lot of the fun (besides, plenty of readers didn’t like my solution, anyway). By the same token, it would spoil things if you guys knew the arcs of the characters in advance. Some who die in the book—Angie, for instance—live in the TV version of Chester’s Mill…at least for a while. And some who live in the book may not be as lucky during the run of the show. Just sayin’.
Listen, I’ve always been a situational writer. My idea of what to do with a plot is to shoot it before it can breed. It’s true that when I start a story, I usually have a general idea of where it’s going to finish up, but in many cases I end up in a different place entirely (for instance, I fully expected Ben Mears to die at the end of ’Salem’s Lot, and Susannah Dean was supposed to pop off at the end of Song of Susannah). “The book is the boss,” Alfred Bester used to say, and what that means to me is the situation is the boss. If you play fair with the characters—and let them play their parts according to their strengths and weaknesses—you can never go wrong. It’s impossible.
There’s only one element of my novel that absolutely had to be the same in the novel and the show, and that’s the Dome itself. It’s best to think of that novel and what you’re seeing week-to-week on CBS as a case of fraternal twins. Both started in the same creative womb, but you will be able to tell them apart. Or, if you’re of a sci-fi bent, think of them as alternate versions of the same reality.
As for me, I’m enjoying the chance to watch that alternate reality play out; I still think there’s no place like Dome.
As for you, Constant Reader, feel free to take the original down from your bookshelf anytime you want. Nothing between the covers has changed a bit.
Stephen King
June 27th, 2013
direct link
Under the Dome - A Letter From Stephen
Sorry to say that in my very humble opinion, this response has actually made what was done, worse. A total cop out. Oh dear, they took my brilliant story, shook it up, mixed it around a bit, stretched it here and there, swopped and changed characters, but that's okay cos you, constant reader, can always read the book again if you want the real story, as opposed to the imitation.
Of course we would know what was coming! That is what we were looking forward to, that is where the expectations were, and that is where this reader feels so very let down. When we know that a favourite and well loved book is being made into a film or TV series, that is what we expect to get, not some totally altered version and a load of excuses. I hate to say this about the man, but there is a truly awful sneaky suspicion that the real reason has more to do with how. Uch wonga was offered by Speilberg.
Neesy
#1 fan (Annie Wilkes cousin) 1st cousin Mom's side
Welcome to the boards
I used to feel as you do. I was horribly disappointed that the novel wasn't followed. I was also disappointed it didn't end after the first season... like a 13 part movie. BUT! I now love the series and realize that if the story wasn't altered, I'd lose interest in it. I wouldn't want to watch something for years if I knew what was going to happen and how it was going to end, y'know?I'm also a big fan of Haven
I haven't read The Colorado Kid but from what I've read on the threads here, the series doesn't follow the novel at all lol
...I'm still waiting for a question...so far it's all been commentary and complaint....
Well, just don't watch it then.
I feel the same way about the series. I gave up on it after the first season. So I don't watch it and will continue to love the book!
It is only a tv series. I do not watch tv at all and haven't for years. No show would be deemed that important in my life. There are so many other things to worry about. Stephen did not sell anyone out. This was a business deal and that is it. I would just go on and enjoy his other books. Welcome to SKMB.
