The Dead Zone Remake (2019)

  • New to the board or trying to figure out how something works here? Check out the User Guide.
  • New 2019 Hours: The message board is closed between the hours of 4pm ET Thursday and 8:30am ET Tuesday.

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

Should it be remade?

  • Yes

    Votes: 3 15.0%
  • No

    Votes: 17 85.0%

  • Total voters
    20

Matt Hancock

New Member
Aug 8, 2017
2
9
26
Okay well there isn't a remake as I know of yet, but I had an idea of how they could do it if it was released in 2019.

Similarly to IT, I think it could easily be done in two films. I think the first film could follow his life up to the crash, the crash, and him trying to solve the serial killer case. It could end where the news anchor congratulates Johnny on solving the case and then cuts to Greg Stillson campaigning saying "I'm going to make America great again, and nobody will stop me".

It ends there and the second film follows Greg Stillson and his rise to power. Also beef it up with a few more bits of Johnny and the rest of the book.

The reason why I'd want two films is because so much happens in that one book and so many short story lines which werent explored in the original film. Unless you made the film 3 hours long I'd feel robbed of a lot of book content.

Thoughts? (Also, who would you cast)?

Ps. Yeah I thought the original film was pretty bad compared to the book. It's due a Remake.
 

Zone D Dad

Well-Known Member
Apr 17, 2017
359
1,817
Chicago Suburbs
Welcome. I'm still pretty new here too. There are some great discussions - you'll enjoy them.

I liked the Dead Zone film quite a bit, but it's been a long time since I've seen it, so there might be some nostalgia lensing going on there. I love Walken and early Cronenberg and Martin Sheen, so I would not be in the remake camp. I'd rather see energy directed elsewhere like a Long Walk adaptation or a quality Firestarter remake.

Besides, nobody could ever yell "The ice...is gonna break!" like Walken.
 

Kingunlucky

Well-Known Member
Aug 20, 2016
368
1,679
Nah, Dead Zone doesn't need another go around.

Dead Zone, Carrie, Misery, Stand by Me, Shawshank, Green Mile, Christine, Cujo and maybe like a few more are all pretty solid. I think they capture the books well enough.

Dark Tower will, probably, need a reboot/remake eventually, Pet Sematary, The Stand, and The Shining all need a remake. The original Shining is a wonderful film. Yeah, it ain't accurate but its GOOD. I'm more of a character man and obviously prefer the novel by far but Kubrick's mastery of directing is a joy to watch.

It is a really surreal film.

Miniseries while more faithful...isn't all that good. I don't think television at the time was ready to handle it properly. Tony thing is silly, it's not scary, hedge animals and it's really more silly. Kubrick was right to really cut out those hedge animals.

Even in 2017 I don't think there is any reasonable way to make that scary off the page lol

I think a third adaptation should bring the emotional impact of the book, borrow a bit from Kubrick's adaptation in maybe tone, and do something new also.
 

Gerald

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2011
1,790
5,626
The Netherlands
I'm pretty sure SK would love to remake it and make it about Trump now. It's a book you could constantly remake and adapt to the current times.
The Cronenberg version is still one of the best King adaptations in terms of acting, but Cronenberg's films are usually short and he left a lot out, so I'm sure it could be remade with more from the book in it.
I never watched the tv-series though, so I don't know if that added anything to it.

What makes the perfect and definitive adaptation of a book? A film that's entirely faithful and has everything from the book in it, or a film that is cinematically superb and gets the spirit of the book across without necessarily including everything from the book? Ideally you would say both, but this seldom happens. So that's why there seldom seems to be a definitive adaptation of a book.
 

Matt Hancock

New Member
Aug 8, 2017
2
9
26
Wow I didn't think I'd get this kind of a response! ;-D Hello everyone! Yeah I was watching the film with friends who had never read the book and they mentioned how it jumped and rushed from one thing to another. (Also, did anyone else think the tutor boy had a really weird and creepy voice in the film)??

In the film you didn't see the back story to Stillson and I can't even remember seeing the part where he realises he has a tumor and will die soon. I just think with his accident when he was young, the fairground scene, the crash, all his 'episodes', the serial killer part and Stillson's lack of depth as a character could have all been developed more IMO. It's a lot to do in one film and rather it being choppy and jumping from one scene to another, just do one long film like The Green Mile/Shawshank Redemption or two films like IT
 
  • Like
Reactions: GNTLGNT and mal

Zone D Dad

Well-Known Member
Apr 17, 2017
359
1,817
Chicago Suburbs
What makes the perfect and definitive adaptation of a book? A film that's entirely faithful and has everything from the book in it, or a film that is cinematically superb and gets the spirit of the book across without necessarily including everything from the book? Ideally you would say both, but this seldom happens. So that's why there seldom seems to be a definitive adaptation of a book.
That's a great question! I'd go with the latter, but I think we've seen both done well (The Green Mile, at least as I recall, was about as faithful of an adaptation as I've seen). Plus, I think each reader interprets an author's work differently and personally, so I don't know that it's possible to create a truly faithful, definitive cinematic treatment of a novel.
 

Zone D Dad

Well-Known Member
Apr 17, 2017
359
1,817
Chicago Suburbs
Wow I didn't think I'd get this kind of a response! ;-D Hello everyone! Yeah I was watching the film with friends who had never read the book and they mentioned how it jumped and rushed from one thing to another. (Also, did anyone else think the tutor boy had a really weird and creepy voice in the film)??

In the film you didn't see the back story to Stillson and I can't even remember seeing the part where he realises he has a tumor and will die soon. I just think with his accident when he was young, the fairground scene, the crash, all his 'episodes', the serial killer part and Stillson's lack of depth as a character could have all been developed more IMO. It's a lot to do in one film and rather it being choppy and jumping from one scene to another, just do one long film like The Green Mile/Shawshank Redemption or two films like IT
I agree Matt. It would've been nice to see the story fleshed out more. You can bet if there was a remake in the Trump era, you'd probably get a lot of Greg Stillson backstory included. Certainly that first introduction to his character would make the cut.

The Dead Zone
film came out in 1983, and you didn't see too many long films in that period (Scarface exception noted). We were entering the 'MTV" era of filmmaking at that point - short and full of quick edits. Plus, I see that the film versions of Christine and Cujo were also released that year - all clocking in with pretty similar running times. Coincidence? I'm not so sure.
 

recitador

Speed Reader
Sep 3, 2016
1,704
7,951
36
idk, it'd have to be made really well, and that's no sure thing with hollywood. i also feel like 2 movies might be a bit much for this one. it's a fairly short book for him. maybe a longer film. i mean, we get 2.5 hour movies that are nothing but explosions and jokes, so why not this?
 
  • Like
Reactions: mal and GNTLGNT

Gerald

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2011
1,790
5,626
The Netherlands
It's been a while since I read it, but what I remember most about it (apart from the great overall story) is that it had a character I really strongly disliked - not that it was written bad, but just disliked it as a person. It was Johnny's mother, if I'm not mistaken. His parents aren't much in the film (if at all), but I recall in the book they figured quite a bit, especially in the first half. I seldom dislike characters in books, usually I can find sympathetic traits in everyone, even the 'bad guys' are often likeable in a way, but there was something about this mother-figure that made me really dislike her.

I don't get around to re-reading much. There's always new stuff, both from King and other writers. But I recently bought it as part of a promotion offer they have here for his 70th birthday, so I might re-read it at some point - I'm curious if I still feel the same about the character.

There also doesn't seem to be a Special Edition of the film. Nearly all Cronenberg films have some sort of edition with extras now, but this one still doesn't - at least not that I know of, or in my region (region 2).
 

Gerald

Well-Known Member
Sep 8, 2011
1,790
5,626
The Netherlands
The Dead Zone film came out in 1983, and you didn't see too many long films in that period (Scarface exception noted). We were entering the 'MTV" era of filmmaking at that point - short and full of quick edits. Plus, I see that the film versions of Christine and Cujo were also released that year - all clocking in with pretty similar running times. Coincidence? I'm not so sure.
I feel very much that the running time has a lot to do with Cronenberg's economic style. That's part of what makes him such a great director, he never puts in a scene too much - every scene is functional within the whole.
Dead Ringers is the first of his films to run close to two hours, 'til that point they all run around 90 minutes. Only Scanners and Dead Zone are a little longer, around 100.
 
The Institute - Coming September 10th, 2019 IT - Now Available in Trade Paperback! Flight or Fright - Now Available in Trade Paperback! The Outsider - Now Available in Trade Paperback!