Elba's Casting CONFIRMED?!!

  • This message board permanently closed on June 30th, 2020 at 4PM EDT and is no longer accepting new members.

Steffen

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,233
12,800
View attachment 19593

sony poster release ?

i was hoping the movie poster would be a bit more...well...a bit more...

Nah, that's not the poster. There's just been bits and pieces like this thrown out into cyberspace by the studio. To date, there has been no official release material other than the EW articles and the odd tweet. For example...

fathers-day-tweet.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neesy and GNTLGNT

stormsiren801

Member
Apr 1, 2017
10
27
43
I don't have a problem with the actor or his color. I admit I was surprised at first when I saw they were changing Roland's race for the movie, but not angry about it. Anyone who is actually angry about it has some issues they might not want to admit to. Elba's a fine looking man who I think can do the character plenty of justice, as long as his skills are up to the job. I would have been actually disappointed if they had, for example, given the role to a short, fat white dude instead of a tall handsome black one.

What I'm far more concerned about is whether they are going to preserve the mature quality of the story, or if they are going to dumb it down for a PG-13 rating. For example, I'm already disappointed to learn that Jake's entry into Mid-World is apparently going to be far less traumatic than either of the two times it was portrayed in the books (no car accident or haunted house that nearly devours him), from what I've read about it so far, which has me worried.

I'm still willing to give the movie a chance anyway, but I will not be happy if it turns out to be kid-friendly. That is my #1 concern about how this movie is going to turn out. And I am afraid of them going that route just because since one of the main characters happens to be a kid, and they might think they have to tone things down just in case kids will watch it just because of that, which will really suck for us adult fans of the book series.
 

AnnaMarie

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2012
7,068
29,564
Other
I don't have a problem with the actor or his color. I admit I was surprised at first when I saw they were changing Roland's race for the movie, but not angry about it. Anyone who is actually angry about it has some issues they might not want to admit to. Elba's a fine looking man who I think can do the character plenty of justice, as long as his skills are up to the job. I would have been actually disappointed if they had, for example, given the role to a short, fat white dude instead of a tall handsome black one.

What I'm far more concerned about is whether they are going to preserve the mature quality of the story, or if they are going to dumb it down for a PG-13 rating. For example, I'm already disappointed to learn that Jake's entry into Mid-World is apparently going to be far less traumatic than either of the two times it was portrayed in the books (no car accident or haunted house that nearly devours him), from what I've read about it so far, which has me worried.

I'm still willing to give the movie a chance anyway, but I will not be happy if it turns out to be kid-friendly. That is my #1 concern about how this movie is going to turn out. And I am afraid of them going that route just because since one of the main characters happens to be a kid, and they might think they have to tone things down just in case kids will watch it just because of that, which will really suck for us adult fans of the book series.

Bold added by me.

You misunderstand. My objection (anger if it please ya) is because it results in deleting Suzanna's backstory, which I expect would change who Suzanna is.

Sounds like Suzanna isn't...at all...so now Roland's colour does not matter.

I would have been fine with kid friendly. I don't think it's necessary because it's nit a story that would draw many kids. They'd have to completely rewrite the story.....oh! Never mind.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GNTLGNT

stormsiren801

Member
Apr 1, 2017
10
27
43
Bold added by me.

You misunderstand. My objection (anger if it please ya) is because it results in deleting Suzanna's backstory, which I expect would change who Suzanna is.

Sounds like Suzanna isn't...at all...so now Roland's colour does not matter.

I would have been fine with kid friendly. I don't think it's necessary because it's nit a story that would draw many kids. They'd have to completely rewrite the story.....oh! Never mind.

Well, to each their own, but personally out of all the aspects of the story that they will inevitably have to cut to fit it into a movie, Suzanna's racism is one of those I would miss the least. I don't even know if Suzanna is going to be a character in the movie, or Eddie for that matter. If they take her out, so be it. Although I did like her in the book and would like to see her in the movie as well, the racist aspect of her Detta personality can be removed easily enough and still preserve the core integrity of her character, in my opinion.

If you disagree with that, it's up to you, but I feel that trying to base the whole of Suzanna's character solely on racism drastically cheapens her overall value, and I am not convinced that the main reason for her existence was to provide a racist barrier as an obstacle for the tet to work through, and nor do I believe that having a racist character in any form is oh-so-important to the story at large. Still not really sure why you are so stuck on it yourself.

Actually, I would rather prefer to see the only important female character in the story portrayed as strong and mostly competent, rather than a drag on the tet in too many scenes, like I think she kind of was in the book to be honest.

In the end, most importantly to me at least, I definitely want the horror aspects of the story to be preserved in all their glory as much as possible, and there is no such thing as kid-friendly horror in my book. Kid-friendly material is not what I rely on Stephen King for.
 

AnnaMarie

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2012
7,068
29,564
Other
Well, to each their own, but personally out of all the aspects of the story that they will inevitably have to cut to fit it into a movie, Suzanna's racism is one of those I would miss the least. I don't even know if Suzanna is going to be a character in the movie, or Eddie for that matter. If they take her out, so be it. Although I did like her in the book and would like to see her in the movie as well, the racist aspect of her Detta personality can be removed easily enough and still preserve the core integrity of her character, in my opinion.

If you disagree with that, it's up to you, but I feel that trying to base the whole of Suzanna's character solely on racism drastically cheapens her overall value, and I am not convinced that the main reason for her existence was to provide a racist barrier as an obstacle for the tet to work through, and nor do I believe that having a racist character in any form is oh-so-important to the story at large. Still not really sure why you are so stuck on it yourself.

Actually, I would rather prefer to see the only important female character in the story portrayed as strong and mostly competent, rather than a drag on the tet in too many scenes, like I think she kind of was in the book to be honest.

In the end, most importantly to me at least, I definitely want the horror aspects of the story to be preserved in all their glory as much as possible, and there is no such thing as kid-friendly horror in my book. Kid-friendly material is not what I rely on Stephen King for.

As I said, sounds like she is not even in the movie. One of the main characters...poof.

Eddie...poof.

Obese, one scene character becomes sexy lead. TaDa!

King is so much more than horror. Especially in DT. And if horror is the only thing they thought was worth keeping then the movie is doomed to fail.

Whatever. I'm over it. But please, do not assume racism just because some people feel differently than you about the casting. It may be the reason some oppose Idris being cast, but I for one object for completely different reasons.

I also object to the white-washing of some Asian characters that are big in the news right now. They are not books I have read, but my son is ticked off about one, and a good friend of his ticked about the other.
 

stormsiren801

Member
Apr 1, 2017
10
27
43
As I said, sounds like she is not even in the movie. One of the main characters...poof.

Eddie...poof.

Obese, one scene character becomes sexy lead. TaDa!

King is so much more than horror. Especially in DT. And if horror is the only thing they thought was worth keeping then the movie is doomed to fail.

Whatever. I'm over it. But please, do not assume racism just because some people feel differently than you about the casting. It may be the reason some oppose Idris being cast, but I for one object for completely different reasons.

I also object to the white-washing of some Asian characters that are big in the news right now. They are not books I have read, but my son is ticked off about one, and a good friend of his ticked about the other.

I agree that King works are much more than horror, but what I'm really trying to get at is the mature tone of his stories, which I don't enjoy having watered down in the movie adaptations for the sake of making them kid-friendly. This would include sex scenes and language, as well as certain acts of violence in scenes that don't count as horror, which would also largely have to be removed to achieve a PG-13 rating, along with all of the major horror parts that were in the books.

And, for the record, I've never assumed someone was racist just because they "feel differently" than me about the casting. It depends on what those feelings are, exactly, and how they justify it. I already specified that if it's to the extent that they are angry about it, though, then I think there is likely a problem there. I also suspect that some people (not naming anyone in particular) might be over-blowing the importance of Suzanna's racism in the books to the overall story as an excuse to bitch about a black guy getting to play Roland.
 
  • Like
Reactions: evrasno1

AnnaMarie

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2012
7,068
29,564
Other
With Suzanna gone, there is no necessary sex scene. And to be honest, I think there were no sex scenes that were necessary anyway. Easy to write out without taking from the story.

But they did add a sexy star, so why do that if you are not planning some above PG13 scenes? Violence too. Though it really wasn't a major part of the story, it's probably what the movie is all about.

I disagree with everything in your last paragraph. It was the first sign that the movie was a complete rewrite. So, yes, the disappointment for some could have felt like anger. Not because of colour...because it means it's a different story. (And it IS a different story. Even King has agreed with that.) I guess it's an "agree to disagree" moment.

FWIW, I hope those who choose to go see it do enjoy it. I am not in any way hoping for failure.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GNTLGNT

stormsiren801

Member
Apr 1, 2017
10
27
43
With Suzanna gone, there is no necessary sex scene. And to be honest, I think there were no sex scenes that were necessary anyway. Easy to write out without taking from the story.

But they did add a sexy star, so why do that if you are not planning some above PG13 scenes? Violence too. Though it really wasn't a major part of the story, it's probably what the movie is all about.

I disagree with everything in your last paragraph. It was the first sign that the movie was a complete rewrite. So, yes, the disappointment for some could have felt like anger. Not because of colour...because it means it's a different story. (And it IS a different story. Even King has agreed with that.) I guess it's an "agree to disagree" moment.

FWIW, I hope those who choose to go see it do enjoy it. I am not in any way hoping for failure.

I don't know that any sex scenes are truly necessary in any story, or movie, but they do add something to them when they are done right. As for this "sexy star" you keep referring to, I have no idea who you're talking about. You would have to be more specific, but it seems like you are being deliberately cryptic about that for some reason I don't quite understand.

Whoever it is, sexy is of course a subjective term, and a person's looks alone has practically nothing to do with what rating a movie they play in ends up having. Unless you have seen this person wearing some sort of overtly revealing outfit, or has been shown naked in a scene that you know is from the movie? Otherwise you're not making much sense there.

As for the movie being what you call a "complete rewrite", I thought it was already made clear that the movie is going to be a pseudo-sequel to the ending of the book series, in which case it would be stupid to expect the movie to contain all the same story elements that the book series had. Of course we can all wish for certain things to be preserved, as I have also done, but in the end all we can hope for is that the new version of the story will be interesting and entertaining enough to be enjoyable. I still have hopes that it will turn out that way, regardless of the changes that have already been revealed.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: GNTLGNT

AnnaMarie

Well-Known Member
Feb 16, 2012
7,068
29,564
Other
I don't know that any sex scenes are truly necessary in any story, or movie, but they do add something to them when they are done right. As for this "sexy star" you keep referring to, I have no idea who you're talking about. You would have to be more specific, but it seems like you are being deliberately cryptic about that for some reason I don't quite understand.

Whoever it is, sexy is of course a subjective term, and a person's looks alone has practically nothing to do with what rating a movie they play in ends up having. Unless you have seen this person wearing some sort of overtly revealing outfit, or has been shown naked in a scene that you know is from the movie? Otherwise you're not making much sense there.

As for the movie being what you call a "complete rewrite", I thought it was already made clear that the movie is going to be a pseudo-sequel to the ending of the book series, in which case it would be stupid to expect the movie to contain all the same story elements that the book series had. Of course we can all wish for certain things to be preserved, as I have also done, but in the end all we can hope for is that the new version of the story will be interesting and entertaining enough to be enjoyable. I still have hopes that it will turn out that way, regardless of the changes that have already been revealed.

Sorry, not trying to be cryptic, though I see how it could have looked that way.

Abbey Lee is playing a character who, in the book has one scene in book 5 (I think). This was announced as the "leading female". The character is described as "grossly obese". And I did not say she dresses sexy....I said she is. If you are unfamiliar with Ms Lee, google her and tell me whether you think "grossly obese" or "sexy" is a better description.

I'm not sure what you mean by pseudo-sequel. It's a different story...so why pretend it's the same story? Why take a few of the character's names, make them different characters, have them do different things (maybe different places maybe the same) and give the movie the name of the book? Why not just call it something else, since it IS something else?

People are STILL angry that Kubrick's Shining is so different from the book. But it's a heck of a lot closer than everything I've heard about DT.

Personally, I'm no longer angry about DT. I'm disappointed and somewhat disgusted, but not angry. I got involved in this discussion with you only because I wanted to correct your misunderstanding that objecting to Idris probably means people are probably racist. Maybe some are. But most (like me) saw it as the first sign that this is not going to look anything like a movie depicting the books we so love. And FYI....we have the right to feel this way. You have the right to feel the way you do. I don't look down my nose and say anyone looking forward to this movie must not love the books as much as I do. (I have heard people say that...and I do not agree with it. So, I only ask for the same respect.
 

OldDarth

Well-Known Member
Jul 10, 2006
730
2,994
Canada
As I said, sounds like she is not even in the movie. One of the main characters...poof.

Eddie...poof.

Obese, one scene character becomes sexy lead. TaDa!

It's already been confirmed that if the first movie is successful, the rest of the ka-tet will follow in the sequels. While the first movie pulls elements from the entire series, it is mostly focused on telling the story of The Gunslinger.

Also there are, unfortunately, many other forms of prejudices to pick from to use to fuel an antagonistic relationship between Roland and Susannah.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neesy and GNTLGNT

the hero factor

New Member
Feb 18, 2017
3
15
47
Also there are, unfortunately, many other forms of prejudices to pick from to use to fuel an antagonistic relationship between Roland and Susannah.
It could be about Roland taking her away from her world into a new, strange one and keeping her there against her will.

And that deep down on some level Detta knows that Roland knows about her and Odetta both being in there.

IMO this is where a lot of Detta's hostility was coming from in the first place.

Then again, I've always thought the honk mahf**k stuff was kinda icky. Detta sounds like a racist stereotype. And I don't mean that Detta sounds racist. I mean she sounds like what a racist might think a black person sounds like. King acknowledges this by having Eddie mention it, that Detta sounds like a cartoon character of a black person. It's just never worked for me and has alway seemed silly and cringey.

I've spent the past couple decades thinking about this series being brought to the screen. And my thoughts have always involved leaving this nonsense out of it, even when the Roland I was imagining wasn't black.

As for that, I think Elba is inspired casting. I never had a definite picture of Roland in my head (no, not even Eastwood). I've had some possibilities over the years, Daniel Day Lewis and Benicio Del Toro being two of my faves. But now Idris Elba is my Roland.

And now I get to be forever disappointed that I won't be getting a several season long Netfix, true adaptation of DT starring Elba as Roland. I would give a lot to have that.

But maybe the movie(s) can be that. If there is more than one. Sure, they won't be a page by page adaptation, changes have already been made, and will probably continue to be made. And it seems they'll be jumping around the timeline. But if they get the important stuff in there, and do it well, then maybe...

I try not to be optimistic when it comes to King movies, but I can't help it this time. Because Idris Elba is my Roland, and this is the only shot I'm gonna get.
 

muskrat

Dis-Member
Nov 8, 2010
4,518
19,564
Under your bed
Aw, heck, pards--reckon the flick will either suck or it won't. I shore hope it rocks mah world, but I'm prepared for yet another Hollywood clustermug. Hope fer the best, plan fer the worst and all that.

Luckily, I don't need my DT spoonfed to me in cinematic mouthfuls. I still have my books, and they ain't never let me down.

(Can't help wishin DT could be part of the MCU series of movies, though...)
 

Robert Gray

Well-Known Member
Well, to each their own, but personally out of all the aspects of the story that they will inevitably have to cut to fit it into a movie, Suzanna's racism is one of those I would miss the least. I don't even know if Suzanna is going to be a character in the movie, or Eddie for that matter. If they take her out, so be it. Although I did like her in the book and would like to see her in the movie as well, the racist aspect of her Detta personality can be removed easily enough and still preserve the core integrity of her character, in my opinion.

Really? What exactly do you define as Detta's core integrity then? :D I am always curious when I see someone talking about gutting a character, removing pillars of their design and backstory, who implies it doesn't change the fundamental truth of that character. We as people (same with fictional characters) are made up of our experiences. We are also a part of everyone we meet. Detta is horror because she was born of horror. Her hate is born of the real racist experiences all her personalities endure and a horrible physical trauma which she clearly associated with racism (accurately or not). What is more, all stories at their core have only a few basic strains. It is the specifics of character which make them different. If you vanilla down Detta, you change the story. Those that take these things away are destroying, not creating. Would you feel the same way about Stephen King villains whose primary motivations are racist? Should that be removed too? Would that alter the "core integrity" of those characters? Or are those facets/defects of character acceptable only in bad guys?

If you disagree with that, it's up to you, but I feel that trying to base the whole of Suzanna's character solely on racism drastically cheapens her overall value, and I am not convinced that the main reason for her existence was to provide a racist barrier as an obstacle for the tet to work through, and nor do I believe that having a racist character in any form is oh-so-important to the story at large. Still not really sure why you are so stuck on it yourself.

Did we read the same book? Yeah, it suffices to say I disagree with you. Stories are about people, hopefully interesting people. The racism of the Lady of Shadows is so many things that it would be difficult for me to address in a post. Detta isn't just an obstacle for the Tet to work out, nor has anyone suggested that. That would make her merely a plot device. The monster that is Detta is a fundamental part of Suzanna, and in no small way a bedrock of her strength. The entire Dark Tower series is full of monsters, Roland being no less so. You cannot walk a path of redemption without having sinned. You cannot have character development without change. Stories are about characters facing changes. I would suggest people who (as you up it) are stuck on not gutting the Lady of Shadows believe that her story is intricate and layered and is enormous in its import.

Actually, I would rather prefer to see the only important female character in the story portrayed as strong and mostly competent, rather than a drag on the tet in too many scenes, like I think she kind of was in the book to be honest.

We clearly didn't read the same book. The success and survival of the Tet are born on the back of the Lady of Shadows and even when evil and racist, she was never incompetent. It is her very strength and savagery which convinces Roland that he must have her. The forging of steel is done in fire. The journey and adventures in The Drawing of the Three are that fire. They are necessary not only to forge steel but also to carry us along vicariously and make us feel part of that Tet. The Lady of Shadows was many things, but almost always strong and extremely competent. She came closer to killing Roland than the Crimson King.

In the end, most importantly to me at least, I definitely want the horror aspects of the story to be preserved in all their glory as much as possible, and there is no such thing as kid-friendly horror in my book. Kid-friendly material is not what I rely on Stephen King for.

You don't find the racism to be an aspect of horror?
 

muskrat

Dis-Member
Nov 8, 2010
4,518
19,564
Under your bed

That's baddash, Shoomer. Except, at the bottom, on the credits it should read River Phoenix as Jake, score by Ennio Morricone, and Directed by Sam Peckinpah. Or John Huston, maybe.
(With Scatman Crothers as Hax the cook).

Hell, while we're wishing, let's have a cameo of Paul McCartney as the piano player in Tull hammering out Hey Jude on a beat-up old stride piano...