I saw parts of it, looked horrible. The people start rooting for him, ugh! :eek: Not that the Running Man (wasn’t his name Richard?) didn’t deserve encouragement, but the premise of the novel was that people have become so base and low that they won’t see the people on TV as real people. Its sort of a commentary on TV and people. It dehumanized people. (Kinda reminds you of the “reality TV” doesn’t it? Scary, hm?)
Definitely a good written story, though. i’m thinking it would defeat the purpose of it to make it into a movie considering the topic.
Getting back to Shawshank. First let me extend a -my bad- to Feather Lou about the quote goof. No offense. Nor any directed at Joe_Cool for that matter.
I’ll admit it has been years since I read the story. I read it after having seen the movie and couldn’t believe that so much seemed to be left out. Now granted, my memory may be a bit fuzzy on certain details but after I read the story, I was left with the impression that the book provided only a general framework for the story that was developed into the movie. Not that there’s anything wrong with that.
What I questioned was that the movie was NOT particularly faithful to the actual written work. No big deal. The only thing that Lawnmower Man the movie has in common with “Lawnmower Man,” the short story is, uhh… well let’s see… the title.
I think it would make a fabulous movie if they did it right. The premise of the story was not so much the baseness of humans as to watch “reality” TV, but the fact that the Government and The Network were covering up the smog problem. Richards (I can’t remember his first name) discovered that books had been tampered with to hide evidence of pollution levels. Poor people were sold useless, non-working nose filters, and the smog was killing them. The game shows were to mollify and “hypnotize” the masses into being chattel, working for The Government. Richards decided to go into The Network building to try and earn money to buy medicine for his sick daughter. I can’t remember the book ending very well, but I believe he held a “rich” woman hostage and convinced her of the conspiracy. We are to assume things change after his spectacular death, because he also had to make tapes during his “running”. Even though The Network over-dubbed them, he hoped lip-readers would see him as he told of the conspiracy. By educating the masses, a revolt was sure to happen. Great story!
I also loved The Long Walk. I don;t think that would transfer to film very well. Too much going on in their heads to translate well.
Sorry this is so long. I could talk about King all day!
You might be talking about Valeria Golino, but my favourite bunny in that movie was actually the blonde double agent Michelle Rodham Huddleston, played by Brenda Bakke.
She is also in another of my favourite movies, GunHed, where she plays Sergeant Nim of the Texas Air Rangers. Nim wears a skin-tight leather outfit.
Getting back to the OP, my favourite adaption of a Steven King (or should I say… Richard Bachman?) novel was The Running Man, starring The Arnold. It’s quite a bit different from the book, but Richard Dawson as Killian? That was just too cool.
The best part about Pet Sematary was the theme song by the Ramones.
Actually we agree on who the real babe was from Hot Shots. I was indeed talking about Miss Huddleston.
I liked Running Man, but as a Schwarzenegger movie, not as a Stephen King movie. There was very little left of the book. But it was a fun movie nonetheless.
I just bought Wizard and Glass this morning. Seems like each one of these Dark Tower books is thicker than the last by a factor of about 2. Not that I’m complaining. I hate when I get really into a book then it ends. I know, all books have to end, but still, I prefer a longer book when the story rivets me.
Maybe a Dark Tower miniseries or serial movie wouldn’t be so bad after all…
No offense taken. I just happen to disagree with you. There may be some extra dialog, change of color of one of the major characters, whatever (though for the record, I don’t recall the narrator’s race being discussed at all???), but concerning the character development, major story points, overall mood and tone of the movie, I think it was done flawlessly. I was impressed beyond words when I saw that movie, because somebody FINALLY did Stephen King properly in a movie.
I never liked It (too surreal for even me) so I didn’t really enjoy the movie. The Stand was a phenomenal book, and a good movie. It was faithful, but didn’t really capture the mood for me. Gary Sinise was really good, but didn’t really capture Stu for me (not completely, anyway). I like Molly Ringwald, but she didn’t quite get the essence of Frannie. Etc. Basically, to me, the biggest problem with movies based on Stephen King books is that they never capture the darkness and the mood of reading the story. Shawshank did it well. Pet Sematary did it, but came off as pretty cheesy.
OK i tried to post last night but it signed me off so if i repeat anything…bear with me.
About the Running Man, it’s almost like in gladitorial times during the Roman Empire. When the gladiator fights were used as a distraction for the lack of food and the horrible conditions for the masses. Much like the smog, and the TV game shows. Plus everyone in the Running Man had a TV no matter how poor they were, as almost everyone had access to the games in Rome. Both were pretty barbaric, obviously. (Yes I did watch Gladiator a few weeks ago in Latin class…the dude in the Running Man’s not too different from Maximus, if you think about it…)
Count me in for The Dead Zone. It’s a good movie in its own right – I’m a Cronenberg fan, and I appreciate his skill in making an atypically austere, crisp film, instead of the “goop” he usually works with. Also, I think it’s an excellent example of a literary adaptation that demonstrates exactly how a smart writer and director can change the source material juuuuust enough to make the movie have largely the same impact as the book, which, if filmed exactly as-is, wouldn’t work as well. (Did that make sense?)
Anyway, Misery, Stand By Me, and Shawshank also deserve mention. I thought Firestarter, Christine, and Cujo were mediocre, and Green Mile was overrated. And Kubrick’s Shining is in a class by itself – apples and oranges from King’s original. (See my post in previous related thread for details.)
I’ll agree that Apt Pupil, Lawnmower Man, Maximum Overdrive, and some of the other movies named were awful, but if you want to talk about truly hideous King adaptations, nobody has yet mentioned the bottom of the barrel: Graveyard Shift and The Mangler. You don’t know pain until you’ve sat through those steaming piles of donkey snot.
