[video:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fh8FLnFQj3o]
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1396484/
They are remaking movie adaptation of the Stephen King novel. I remember getting scared shitless by the first movie, when I was a kid.
Thinking I’ll hold off until the remake of the remake.
Is the book any good?
3rd time’s the charm.
It’s next on my list. I finished the Dark Tower series a few months ago and haven’t been able to pick up another book yet. From what I’ve heard from others whose opinions I respect, It is scary as hell. Looking forward to reading it.
It and The Stand were both pretty cheesy when brought to TV. Although as a kid Tim Curry did succeed in scaring the ever loving shit out of me down in that sewer. I’ll check this out.
Greeeat series. So many connections with the other king stories. Very interesting how he has many of them connected in that whole multiverse of his. Really looking forward to the HBO adaptation. Also really enjoyed misery. That scene with the ankles… freaky deaky.
I read the first Dark Tower book and thought it was OK. I assume it picks up? I need some fiction, I’ll give it another whirl.
It’s a commitment. All the books together are about as long as A Song of Ice and Fire, so give yourself several months to finish it. I thought the series was really well done. Their were certainly parts of the series that were slower, but each book is very different.
My biggest problem with King - and this applies to every book of his I’ve read - he absolutely sucks at endings. I have to stop getting my hopes up that he’ll finally write a book with a satisfying ending.
Yeah I’ve been reading quite a bit of Neal Stephenson recently and he has the same problem. Cryptonomicon especially.
Satisfying endings suck. Life doesn’t always, or usually, have satisfying endings. Stories shouldn’t either. I think an unsatisfying ending makes things better. Leaving a bit on the table.
You’re assuming you know what satisfies me.
What satisfies you/what would you consider to be a satisfying ending?
I guess it depends on how you define satisfying endings. I certainly agree that not all stories should have a happy ending, but it does seem as though many authors/screenwriters go out of their way to create twists at the end that really seem to have no basis in the overall story. I don’t need to know the remaining life story of every character, but don’t make the ending so ambiguous that I don’t know who’s dead or alive, or who’s guilty or innocent.
Hahahah
I get the preference, but come down on the other side on this. I think the authors are trying to make the somewhat theoretical view that the story’s about the journey and not our need for closure. If no authors finished stories at some point I’d want more complete endings, but as an occasional novelty used by select writers, I don’t mind. Plus, King tends to leave things open to create a feel that the horror may be continuing and leave a mystery around it.
He us just leaving the story open to create the possibilities of sequels, for instance “It 2: The Return”, or “It 3: Spawn of It”.
Theres nothing people fear more than the unknown
So you didn’t like the ending of the Sopranos?
For me, a satisfying ending doesn’t have to fall into a category of happy, definitive, or even absolute closure. It should be rewarding though. King’s The Stand is a great example of this. I read the unabridged version and 800 pages later I got to what was perhaps the lamest ending of any book I’d read aside from King’s Dome. It’s a testiment to King that I still really enjoy his books. 95% of the content is really great. Just those last few pages you can almost hear King say, “screw it. Aliens did it. The End.”
Edit: American Psycho (some of you may know I’ve read this a couple times) is a good example of a book that doesn’t really even have an ending and I consider it to be a fantastic way to end Bateman’s story. So there doesn’t even need to be closure. Basically, the author just needs to illicit any emotion other than “god damn it, that was lame” from me and I’ll consider it a good ending.