I’m eagerly looking forward to
the upcoming film adaptations of two of my all-time favorite Stephen King
books: "The Dark Tower" and "It." I have some few musings…
→ The (initial) seven-part Dark Tower series was a grand, mindblowing saga, and with such magnitude, the risk that the movie would screw it up is big. Thus, I do worry about it. But the fantastic casting of Idris Elba as Roland Deschain and Matthew McConaughey as Randall Flagg inspires legitimate optimism that the movie would turn out being epic. Fingers crossed.
Elba looks ruggedly badass! |
→ Many of King’s books are
interconnected, with The Dark
Tower at the center. Several of
these books have already been adapted into movies through the years, but now that
we’re having a Dark Tower movie,
could a Stephen King cinematic shared universe be next? That would be awesome if ever!
→ Randall Flagg is a villain that
kept on mysteriously showing up in King’s novels. Aside from The Dark Tower books, he’s also the villain of The Stand (another one of my King favorites) and The Eyes of the Dragon. Now, a multi-part film adaptation of The Stand is currently in its early
stages. How cool would it be if
McConaughey reprises his role as Flagg there?
→ Fat chance for this to happen though,
since the rights of these movies are probably owned by different studios.
→ Still, a Stephen King cinematic
universe… the exciting notion of such a thing sends a slight tingle of chill
down my spine.
→ I love It, for aside from being a visceral horror story, it also has trippy fantasy
elements and deep themes like childhood, growing up, friendship, loss of
innocence, confronting traumas, bullying, and the gradual but eventual fading of platonic childhood bonds. It was already adapted as a
two-part TV movie back in 1990, and it was actually fairly good. But I think this story is worthy of a big
screen edition. That’s why I was pretty
glad when it was announced that there’s going to be a remake.
The cast looks promising. |
→ However, I’m very disappointed
that this remake will follow the narrative structure of the 1990 TV movie
instead of the novel. It’s going to be in two parts. Part one will cover the
events when the main characters – i.e The Losers’ Club – were
kids, while part two will cover their time as adults. I think the narrative will be more impactful,
intellectually satisfying, and intriguing if it will be told in the same way the
novel did it – by alternating between the past (kids’ perspective) and the present
(adults’ perspective). How they – as adults – recovered their forgotten childhood memories
along the way is an important aspect of the story. On the other hand, doing a linear narrative
will lose the sense of mystery.
→ I wonder if the movie will fully
adapt the shocking scene from the novel, in which the pre-teen Beverly Marsh, the
only female of The Losers’ Club, has sex with her pre-teen friends to
strengthen their bond (there’s actually a complicated and not so gratuitous rationale behind it). The 1990 movie skipped this, but the
filmmakers of the remake have said they would keep this integral scene intact
this time around. It’s a pretty bold move,
and it can easily become scandalous if mishandled.
Hence, I think the studio might likely dissuade them of doing it along the way. It’s just very risky.
→ Either way, my hope is that
the movie will retain the thoughtful themes of the novel, and won’t just be an unintelligent,
generic horror film.
No comments:
Post a Comment