Gosh, that erie town and the movie theatre. I loved the cozy feel of all the characters hanging out there. This is my type of story. Who felt this way?
This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.
I really enjoyed it as well. A classic King story: great character development, fast paced, good vs. evil. I read this before The Regulators, and I've always wondered if I read them in reverse, would I have looked at it differently based on the character behaviors in the other book. I think they were meant to be read in this order, asGosh, that erie town and the movie theatre. I loved the cozy feel of all the characters hanging out there. This is my type of story. Who felt this way?
I really enjoyed it as well. A classic King story: great character development, fast paced, good vs. evil. I read this before The Regulators, and I've always wondered if I read them in reverse, would I have looked at it differently based on the character behaviors in the other book. I think they were meant to be read in this order, asI viewed Collie with a certain level of distrust in the Regulators because of his character in Desperation
Thanks for the info - didn't know about the film.Probably no AMC pick up for this as it's already been done as a made-for-TV movie. It's available on DVD.
Desperation is my number one sK. I know why only with respect to certain aspects of it, otherwise, it being my favorite is a mystery to me, and especially since the other aspects are the main reasons. I know it came along at a time when I needed something that would jolt me, so my attachment is due to timeliness. I know this happens periodically if not frequently with readers, some of whom will be relative newbies, as was I.Gosh, that erie town and the movie theatre. I loved the cozy feel of all the characters hanging out there. This is my type of story. Who felt this way?
Niether have I, but I do own it. Play.com is a brilliant kind of online thrift store for books. I think I paid about £2.50 for my copy in excellent condition, I was ripped off - it's £1.91 now. But I don't think they ship to CanadaLooks like Spidey got a hold of a copy of this book too!
(I have yet to read it and I do not own it) I took it out of the library once but returned it unread.
So this book is on my list of "yet to obtain" but I am still looking for it at thrift stores in my area.
Yes. See what you mean. but one thing i personally never got clear is why some people that figure in both books have a very different characterization. I know that that regulators was supposed to have been written by bachman but i only got a bit confused after reading both and wondered why the big difference? I mean, it is the same persona but they act totally different. Don't understand the point. Do yopu have a clue?I really enjoyed it as well. A classic King story: great character development, fast paced, good vs. evil. I read this before The Regulators, and I've always wondered if I read them in reverse, would I have looked at it differently based on the character behaviors in the other book. I think they were meant to be read in this order, asI viewed Collie with a certain level of distrust in the Regulators because of his character in Desperation
Wikipedia says the characters exist in parallel realities, which share certain elements, such as the characters, but are otherwise different.Yes. See what you mean. but one thing i personally never got clear is why some people that figure in both books have a very different characterization. I know that that regulators was supposed to have been written by bachman but i only got a bit confused after reading both and wondered why the big difference? I mean, it is the same persona but they act totally different. Don't understand the point. Do yopu have a clue?
Ok. thats a good opinion but wikipedia is chockfull of unsupported opinions. Is it based on anything other than a personal thought? Something like a line from SK perhaps or something else like a quote perhaps. I'm sorry to sound a bit doubtful but i have read wikipedia and knew that some entries are almost totally unsupported while others are well founded in facts. Don't know which this is. And by the way, thanks for the answer. it is the closest i have come to understand it but it leaves a few questions, doesn't it. Even if these parallell realities share some characters why do they have to be so different. It is if one person is good in reality number 1 and bad in reality number 2. Doesn't make sense. Much better then to give the character another name just because it is a totally different character. You have to be able to recognise something more than just the name otherwise the belief in the parallell realities explanation gets a crack. At least according to my humble opinion. What do you out there think? Is it me who have gone bananas over this little item or do I have a point?Wikipedia says the characters exist in parallel realities, which share certain elements, such as the characters, but are otherwise different.
I know that theyr'e not always wrong. Just wondered what of the things it was this time. I got it sorted out by a quote from SK himself that someone posted me. Guess i can't help it, being raised in an academic world i like to have my sources.quite liked it...agree with rudiroo: good call, there, R...
read 'the regulators' right after...big mistake: while i quite liked TR...i could not help but find it all, at times, confusing...
and...just because the wiki isn't perfect, doesn't mean they are always wrong, either: if'n i 'member right...that is pretty much the explanation i recall being hefted about...y'know...BackInnaDay
May I have have the right to an opinion or is that banned in your worlds too?raised in an academic world ??
ah, yes...education...spelling, grammar 'n the like...hmmmm...i can now see that this is true, my erudite friend...so sorry to have erred, if but only on the side of caution...
but i was amiss...you posed some querries back in good ol' #13...so, if i may...
"why do they have to be so different...doesn't make sense...give the character another name...it is a totally different character"
well...not so quick...maybe in some cases, yes...but not necessarily in all...
in this case, this is a world that belongs to a particular writer and he gets to make the rules up, being fiction, as he sees fit...
there are no laws on this sort of thing, just as there are no laws on exactly what, say, a werewolf looks like...king himself has had several different variation of just that critter...so, who knows...
i'm not entirely sure that ever character we've ever come across in the different parrallel worlds have always had the exact same characteristics...
besides...it keeps coming back to that ultimate caveat: this is fiction...the rules can be, and quite often are, made up as we go along...so, relax and enjoy the ride !
"you have to be able to recognize something..."
ah...sort of, but no, not really...
have you ever watched star trek ? they've had quite a few parrallel stories...sometimes, there is but a shade of a semblance to the charcteristsics of the character we know and love...and that sort of thing appears throughout each of these two books, even if it is something as simple as a name...
but just like in those classic ST episodes, it then veers wherever the authors mind decides to twist and turn...see, that is the fun of it
look at it this way: if every roller coaster followed 'the rules' they'd all be the same...and, well...kinda boring: it's the unexpected twist that brings new joy
again, enjoy the ride as it is...not the expecation you've created
and lastly...you have not, if i may so boldly offer, gone bananas...strawberries, maybe...but certainly not bananas
trust me...i know bananas...i'm intimate with bananas..............wait, that didn't sound right...is there an edit key...
Ok. thats a good opinion but wikipedia is chockfull of unsupported opinions. Is it based on anything other than a personal thought? Something like a line from SK perhaps or something else like a quote perhaps. I'm sorry to sound a bit doubtful but i have read wikipedia and knew that some entries are almost totally unsupported while others are well founded in facts. Don't know which this is. And by the way, thanks for the answer. it is the closest i have come to understand it but it leaves a few questions, doesn't it. Even if these parallell realities share some characters why do they have to be so different. It is if one person is good in reality number 1 and bad in reality number 2. Doesn't make sense. Much better then to give the character another name just because it is a totally different character. You have to be able to recognise something more than just the name otherwise the belief in the parallell realities explanation gets a crack. At least according to my humble opinion. What do you out there think? Is it me who have gone bananas over this little item or do I have a point?
Thanks. Didn't get much of an explanation in the version that we got in sweden. So of course you got a bit confused. But i get the idea. Still don't think it is a really good idea, though.You can read Stephen's words about it from this entry in the Library's Inspiration section for The Regulators. Also from the Publishers Weekly interview he did for their August 5, 1996 issue, he said "When I put on my Bachman hat, I feel everyone just starts at 'Go' and there's no guarantee of a happy ending....It's tremendously liberating; Bachman doesn't have a conscience, he's not afraid to say things that I may be afraid to."