Share your thoughts after viewing the movie **DEFINITE SPOILERS**

  • New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
  • The message board will be closed from Thursday, May 21st at 4pm EST until Tuesday, June 2nd at 8:30 AM ET
    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.

  • The message board is open 8:30am ET Tuesdays to 4pm ET Thursdays. Posts cannot be made outside of board hours.

    As always, the Board will be open to read and those who have those privileges can still send private messages and post to Profiles.

skimom2

Just moseyin' through...
Oct 9, 2013
15,683
92,167
USA
I am sorry but how that answers my question?
I know the deal with the horn. Thats why i was so exited about the movie. (Stephen kings post on instagram with the horn and the message. "Last time around")
I thought you were asking why his focus in the movie wasn't on the tower. Sorry if I misunderstood you.

If your question is why they were called diplomats in the book and knights in the movie, saying Gunslingers are the descendants of the knights of Arthur Eld in the books implies that they are knights in Roland's time, as well (in comparison, Jedi knights are diplomats and peacekeepers, but also in charge of protection of all that is good). Movies don't do implication well, so they said it explicitly.

If that's not what you're asking, I give up.
 

17021jude

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2009
394
1,915
Kansas
My husband and I went to see The Dark Tower yesterday. My husband has never read an SK book. Usually anything I want to see is not something he likes and vise versa, but he goes and I go and well...he said he genuinely liked the movie! My youngest son who also hasn't read an SK book is pretty excited to see it also, and I didn't want to spoil it for him in any way by being negative, so I let my husband give him his review and like I said his review was a positive one! I did not find myself struggling with the cast...they did a really great job! I find I struggled with the sequences, while my husband just flat enjoyed watching the movie, I was trying to puzzle out why they jumped a book or two ahead, or what I thought would be the next turn in the journey was left out all together, or why certain things popped up that I didn't remember reading about at all...So walking out of the theater I was still puzzled trying to figure out all the angles etc. It was impossible for me to turn off the part of my mind which read the series, and be able to turn on another part of my mind to just enjoy seeing a movie. But hey, how can I really be that hard on it when anyone attempting to put a series the size of The Dark Tower into a movie (s) and have it please everyone!
 

17021jude

Well-Known Member
Nov 12, 2009
394
1,915
Kansas
Besides all that have been set about the movie I think, for the fans, the most enjoyable aspect of the film was the Easter Eggs.

BIG SPOILERS AHEAD....


For Easter eggs, of the many, I loved three in particular: one was at the very begging, before the title screen, where one of the production companies is called Tet Corporation with a picture of a small Maturin, the other was at the end, when they exit the Dixie Pig, there's a sign at the left side of them walking that read Barlow and *something else* (it was too fast), obviously referencing the grandfather vampire from Salem's Lot .
The third and most awesome Easter Egg is the appearance of The Pusher. Those who saw him could notice that he was actually sticking out like a sour thumb. He was a tall, slender man with a blue suit. He was standing next to Jake when he was waiting for the bus. He stood with Jake all the way to the inside of the bus. It was terrifying, I thought something was definitely going to happen, but alas nothing did.
And you forgot PennyWise was in there both the word and an old clown head
 

GNTLGNT

The idiot is IN
Jun 15, 2007
87,507
357,524
58
Cambridge, Ohio
It cost $60 million to make and I would expect the bottom to fall out after the opening weekend given the brutal reviews. When all is said and done it will be deemed a minor flop. Maybe breaking even or a little better if it does about the same in the international market. I would be shocked if there is ever a sequel. Interestingly, I think King comes off as the winner to the extent there is any here. The Dark Tower books likely get a boost in sales and reputation adding some new fans despite the poor performance of the movie.
I just wanted to add that I haven't seen it and therefore have nothing to add.
...YOU TELL EM HOSS.....MAGA!!!!!!.....:p
 

hliasdio

Active Member
Dec 26, 2016
29
110
35
Thessaloniki,Greece
I thought you were asking why his focus in the movie wasn't on the tower. Sorry if I misunderstood you.

If your question is why they were called diplomats in the book and knights in the movie, saying Gunslingers are the descendants of the knights of Arthur Eld in the books implies that they are knights in Roland's time, as well (in comparison, Jedi knights are diplomats and peacekeepers, but also in charge of protection of all that is good). Movies don't do implication well, so they said it explicitly.

If that's not what you're asking, I give up.
first thanks for replying! Really! Second. I believe that in the book it says that roland didint now about the tower when he was a child. He find out when he see the tower in the vision inside the shere(wizard and glash) so he strarts looking for the tower. At this moment he realize that if the tower falls all will die, including susan delgado(his love);)
On the other hand. The movie it says that the ALL sworn to protect the tower. Like its something all gunlingers do.
 

skimom2

Just moseyin' through...
Oct 9, 2013
15,683
92,167
USA
first thanks for replying! Really! Second. I believe that in the book it says that roland didint now about the tower when he was a child. He find out when he see the tower in the vision inside the shere(wizard and glash) so he strarts looking for the tower. At this moment he realize that if the tower falls all will die, including susan delgado(his love);)
On the other hand. The movie it says that the ALL sworn to protect the tower. Like its something all gunlingers do.
Oh, okay. I get you now :) Roland also says that the existence of the tower is something all the children in his world know about. When he saw it in Wizard and Glass, it may have been the first time he saw it but it wasn't the first he'd heard of it. At that point, he knew that the tower was in trouble and he wanted to save it. I think it was a given that the Gunslingers protect the tower, because it protects life. We don't see/hear their actual vows in the book (that I remember, anyway), but without such why would Roland think he had a responsibility to the tower? My sense was always that he was fulfilling his duty. I haven't read the books in a while, so I don't have a direct quote.

Thank you for your patience :)
 

hliasdio

Active Member
Dec 26, 2016
29
110
35
Thessaloniki,Greece
Oh, okay. I get you now :) Roland also says that the existence of the tower is something all the children in his world know about. When he saw it in Wizard and Glass, it may have been the first time he saw it but it wasn't the first he'd heard of it. At that point, he knew that the tower was in trouble and he wanted to save it. I think it was a given that the Gunslingers protect the tower, because it protects life. We don't see/hear their actual vows in the book (that I remember, anyway), but without such why would Roland think he had a responsibility to the tower? My sense was always that he was fulfilling his duty. I haven't read the books in a while, so I don't have a direct quote.

Thank you for your patience :)
Thanks for replying. Again. That was it! I read the books only one time and dont remember some parts.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Neesy
Aug 7, 2017
1
7
40
So, I have just seen the movie.....

I have to say, that having been a lifelong fan of Stephen King in general, and more specifically the Dark Tower series, I am genuinely and thoroughly disappointed. Well, more than disappointed actually.

I managed to sit through the movie without muttering too much, enjoying the various Easter eggs, I let out a clearly audible groan at the final exchange between Jake and Roland.

I brought my wife along in the hopes of sparking her interest in the series, and was anticipating the reaction at "Go then, there are other world's than these". Unfortunately, this adaptation seems to be less focused on the unrelenting quest of Roland and more on the happy-go-lucky feeling that the good guys always win!

Casting of Idris Elba was surprisingly inspired, and Jake did fairly well. Walter O'Dim was unsurprisingly disappointing, though his magic use (pre-boss fight) was well done. He was always more of a wormtongue over Voldemort sorcerer.

I would like to say that I would not go to see a sequel (if there is one - doubtful) but I have to be honest and say that I really want to meet Eddie and Susannah. Though I have a feeling there will be no lobstrosities or missing fingers...
 

Robert Gray

Well-Known Member
The long and short of it is the film failed for three reasons, none of them having anything to do with fans who read the books.

1. It isn't good. It isn't terrible. It isn't bad. It is simply isn't good.
2. The Studio didn't promote it at all. Thus, even the percentage of people who might have enjoyed it didn't turn up.
3. Aside from not being good, it brought nothing new to the table. This was Hollywood schlock we have seen a 100 times.

I'm going to be brutally honest here, tell the truth and shame the devil. The people who are most forgiving and seem to like the film are the very people everyone was certain would hate it. People who read the books by in large are forgiving that it bears no resemblance to them. Why? Well we had a year to kind of go through the stages of grief. We wanted to like it, so we kind of talked ourselves into it. :D We aren't the problem though. The vast majority of popcorn devouring, soda gargling movie-goers are less well-read than we. They haven't read the series. Some might not even know there were books. They are judging the film purely on how it compares to others and whether it delivers the goods. It didn't. The audiences didn't warm up to it, or at the very least didn't find it interesting enough to drop their shiny coins in the bucket. Audiences, well-read or not, are much more sophisticated than anyone wants to give them credit for these days. They have seen a lot of movies. If you want to wow them, get them into a theater, and blow their socks off you can't just recycle the same damn story you have sold them a thousand times just by changing the names of the protagonist and generic, evil for evil's sake villain. Give them something they haven't seen, don't dumb it down, but sharpen it up and you put butts in seats.

At the very least, you have to show them something they have seen before but in a new light. Let's get down and dirty show we? How about I do a point by point breakdown comparing this film to the Last Action Hero starring big Arnold. It too is about a boy who travels to another world and brings a larger than life hero into what is supposedly the real world. That is also not a good film. My point is that it is almost the same story, albeit one played for laughs rather than melodrama. In fact, I'm betting if I put my mind to it, I could come up with TEN films which revolve around three main characters with one White Hat, one Black Hat, and one catalyst (male or female) and the stakes being the end of the world/universe. They would all have pretty much the same plot. Reluctant, jaded hero brought back to fight the big bad by the intervention of the younger, innocent or at least optimistic catalyst. I'll even go so far as to say the reluctant, jaded hero will be stoic and gruff with a heart of gold. The villain will be crazy and just appear to delight in being evil for no apparent reason. I could go on, but I won't. Most of you reading this know EXACTLY what I'm talking about and in the course of my description you are probably already on the way to filling out your own list of ten films.
 

Steffen

Well-Known Member
Aug 9, 2015
2,228
12,762
I liked this movie way more than I thought I would. I can't wait to see it again. And my heart overflows to think that at the turn of the next wheel Roland might have to ascend alone again (another hallmark of Arthurian legend--quests must be ended alone), but when he gets to the top he can blow that horn, save the Tower, and all those he loved will be with him again: Jake. Susannah. Eddie. Steven. his mother. Susan (Oh, Discordia!). Alain. Cuthbert. Cort. Jamie. Maybe even Mordred. Whoever else he's loved over the however long (decades? Centuries? Millenia?) that he didn't understand that love is the main support for the Tower that supports everything else.

*Sigh* Now I feel teary. I love Roland and his sad, sad eyes (Elba got that exactly, perfectly right).
Not a complaint, mind you, but oh god, reading your last paragraph just brought on such an overwhelming feeling of sadness at how much Roland has lost. The final volume of the books was really one damn heartbreak after another. So, so sad. If the series does in fact go on, I really want to see my hero fulfil his quest.

The film opens on Wednesday where I live. Hope I can catch it before the weekend. As much trepidation as I had early on, I'm still looking forward to seeing the film myself.
 

Mr. Chips

Well-Known Member
May 16, 2017
81
357
35
MS
Please. If you don't like the movie you are labeled a racist or a hater. That mantra was started by the director who actually said eff you to the constant readers who bemoaned the casting choice. If you didn't read the books it is a decent Hollywood super hero movie. If you did read the books do NOT go see this with any expectations. It is not an adaptation and to it's credit doesn't claim to be.
I don't think anyone who has provided a slightly positive review of this film is saying its a good adaptation. I think we are saying the same thing in different ways. Is it an awful film based on the film alone? No, not at all. It's a pretty decent action film. Is it a good adaptation? Absolutely not! I think we are all being too emotional about it and not seeing we are all saying the same thing in a different way.

The long and short of it is the film failed for three reasons, none of them having anything to do with fans who read the books.

1. It isn't good. It isn't terrible. It isn't bad. It is simply isn't good.
2. The Studio didn't promote it at all. Thus, even the percentage of people who might have enjoyed it didn't turn up.
3. Aside from not being good, it brought nothing new to the table. This was Hollywood schlock we have seen a 100 times.

I'm going to be brutally honest here, tell the truth and shame the devil. The people who are most forgiving and seem to like the film are the very people everyone was certain would hate it. People who read the books by in large are forgiving that it bears no resemblance to them. Why? Well we had a year to kind of go through the stages of grief. We wanted to like it, so we kind of talked ourselves into it. :D We aren't the problem though. The vast majority of popcorn devouring, soda gargling movie-goers are less well-read than we. They haven't read the series. Some might not even know there were books. They are judging the film purely on how it compares to others and whether it delivers the goods. It didn't. The audiences didn't warm up to it, or at the very least didn't find it interesting enough to drop their shiny coins in the bucket. Audiences, well-read or not, are much more sophisticated than anyone wants to give them credit for these days. They have seen a lot of movies. If you want to wow them, get them into a theater, and blow their socks off you can't just recycle the same damn story you have sold them a thousand times just by changing the names of the protagonist and generic, evil for evil's sake villain. Give them something they haven't seen, don't dumb it down, but sharpen it up and you put butts in seats.

At the very least, you have to show them something they have seen before but in a new light. Let's get down and dirty show we? How about I do a point by point breakdown comparing this film to the Last Action Hero starring big Arnold. It too is about a boy who travels to another world and brings a larger than life hero into what is supposedly the real world. That is also not a good film. My point is that it is almost the same story, albeit one played for laughs rather than melodrama. In fact, I'm betting if I put my mind to it, I could come up with TEN films which revolve around three main characters with one White Hat, one Black Hat, and one catalyst (male or female) and the stakes being the end of the world/universe. They would all have pretty much the same plot. Reluctant, jaded hero brought back to fight the big bad by the intervention of the younger, innocent or at least optimistic catalyst. I'll even go so far as to say the reluctant, jaded hero will be stoic and gruff with a heart of gold. The villain will be crazy and just appear to delight in being evil for no apparent reason. I could go on, but I won't. Most of you reading this know EXACTLY what I'm talking about and in the course of my description you are probably already on the way to filling out your own list of ten films.
It's got at least a 60% rating by audiences on RT which I said means more to me than critics earlier on this thread. I don't think that screams terrible. I agree that it didn't attract enough people to this movie. However I am surprised how many of my coworkers want to see it, despite my perceived lack of promotion. Again, it's not a good adaptation, but not an awful movie.
 
If It Bleeds - New Collection Coming 4/21/2020 The Institute - Available Now The Outsider - Now Available in Trade Paperback!