I’ve just started reading The Stand - Complete and Uncut Edition by Steven King in the next step of my slow discovery of “classic” and “popular” books. This is the first book of King’s I’ve ever picked up and I don’t have a wide range of authors under my belt for comparison. Here’s my question, what’s your impression of it compared to the original? I read the Introduction and King basically said that he believes this is the version that he originally wrote and intended but ti was cut down to a managable size due to costs of printing.
I have no doubt that many of you have read the original and popular opinion seems to place the original version as one of his best, if not the best. I assume some of you have read both and I’m curious if you like one better than the other or not. I know that King has been accused of saying in 1000 words what can be told in 150, so I’m a little cautious that his “Uncut” version is merely a wordier version of the original with pointless tangents.
I’m only about 50 pages in so please keep spoilers to a minimum or box them appropriately.
You nailed it here, I’m afraid. Pointless side stories about Trashcan Man and Mother Abigail’s youth. Occasional “updated” pop references that were already obsolete by 1990. If there was an upside to King’s stream of consciousness ramblings that were added to the book (which, btw, is a still a great read), I sure as hell don’t remember it.
Elton John needs a songwriter. Steven King needs an editor. It’s as simple as that.
The most noticeable difference is the character of “The Kid” was edited out from the original. Just completely gone. So much of Trashy’s trip we never knew about. Not sure if it adds to the book as a whole to have it back in but it’s interesting.
I loved the book when i first read it, and I loved the book on several rereadings, and I loved the book when I read the uncut (I think of it as the “director’s cut”) But I definately had the experience of “Well, this is new, hmm interesting.” By the time I read the new editions I knew the story well, knew where thing were going, so the pace of the book was much less relevant to my reading experience. I’d be interested in your experience reading the expanded version cold.
No, I don’t think the book crossed into “suck” territory as a result of those additions.
I think added character of The Kid, who accompanies Trashcan Man along part of his journey, is the most important addition to the story. His return to the edit enables King to show one of the few moments of the supernatural which make the evil in the book more evil. (Trying to stay spoiler-free, here.) Prior to that, the evil was evil because King said it was (and as a writer he should show, not tell).
Some of the Mother Abigail additions, ditto on the emphasis on the supernatural bit (though they weren’t really as necessary).
Most of the other additions I barely noticed, except there were more entries to Fran’s diary than I think the book needed, and one action sequence that seemed a little too Hollywood for the bits of the book around it.
So I guess if you like a story about human beings and don’t like the red-eyes and glowing smoke and Night on Bald Mountain kind of evil, then the additions were a bit of a drag, but otherwise they’re better in than out.
Well, I’m back having just finished the book last week. I must say, I really enjoyed it. The extended edition didn’t feel painfully drawn out to me at all. Perhaps this is in part because my personality is one that always thinks more of a good thing is better. I loved the Extended Editions of LOTR movies and I usually prefer things on an epic scale, so long as the additional stuff doesn’t feel out of place or clash with the mood or style established.
I liked the character of The Kid, and I thought it did a good job of fleshing out the character of Trashcan Man. In a way, having no point of reference, I feel he’d have been largely diminished as a character without that chapter. I like the way it served to humanize him somewhat.
I’d like to know what other parts were added and expand the discussion to cover the book as a whole and the differences between the two books. In order to do so feel free to spoil away.
I have read a lot of King’s books. I think I stopped reading somewhere around “Geralds Game” and forward, and I haven’t read any of the Dark Tower series.
That said, “The Stand” is my favorite of the ones I have read.
How much was added overall? In the preface it says that over 400 pages of the manuscript were removed. I just read a paperback version, so I’m guessing that it’s not a 1 to 1 relationship of pages, but that’s still a huge chuck of the 1100 odd pages in my version. I feel like if anywhere close to 25% of the book was edited out there must have been some very major items removed, in addition to The Kid.
In the original version were the chapters about Stu Redman heading back east the same? It seemed to me that the trip back was a little anti-climactic. It took so long, and while the Ton Cullen and his dreams of Nick were cool, I felt it really softened the impact of his reuniting with Fran.
Did anyone else find the ending somewhat lacking? Part of it is what I mentioned above, but overall I felt that after the destruction of Vegas and Tom finding Stu the entire book’s summation was weak compared to the rest of the book. I’ve heard similar critisism of King’s other books, so is this just one of Kings problems as a writer?
Also, I never watched the miniseries that was on TV a few years back. Was it decent and did it follow the book very well? I tend to like seeing movies based on books I’ve read, if only to pick them apart, so I’d like to hear what everyone who liked the book thought of it. I gather that it was a ratings flop, but did fans take to it at all?
The Stand is my second-favorite King book (The Talisman being number one, if you’re interested). I read the “original” version when I was about 13, and the uncut when it came out circa 1994 or 95, I believe–around the same time as the miniseries. While it didn’t seem so at the time, the original is choppy in spots that are much more fleshed-out in the uncut version. The opening is better, though I’m not sure how I feel about the epilogue. I especially liked the little vignettes about people who survived the Superflu only to be done in by their own stupidity or random chance–like the heroin addict who overdosed because he found a stash that was too pure. Little pieces like that don’t strictly need to be there, but I think they added quite a bit to the finished product.
The miniseries was pretty much as faithful to the book as it was possible to be in only eight hours, I thought. And it was the first time in history some producer nailed my own personal casting choice–Ray Walston as Glen Bateman. If you love the book, it’s certainly worth a peek. The opening scenes with images of dead people all over the shop while “Don’t Fear the Reaper” played in the background were brilliant.
I loved this book in all its incarnations. More of a good thing is better!
I stopped watching the TV mini series when Laura San Giawhatever absolutely destroyed the character of Nadine Cross. And I mean destroyed - she absolutely had no concept of how the character fit in the rest of the story. I mean, Christ! Nadine Cross was a virgin! How did LSC read into that the high-test floozy that she portrayed is completely beyond me.
I didn’t find the end lacking. The story ended, but life goes on.
The Extended Version openly told readers that there was nothing new plotwise - old characters wouldn’t act in different ways, the story would remain the same, etc. Just that there was a lot of filler.
I totally agree. As I was reading the book in the back of my mind I was wondering if certain parts were missing from the original or not. I had the exact some opinion as you as I was reading them.
King’s most successful thing in this book was painting the mood and tone for it’s first half. Little vignettes like that added quite a bit to the bleakness and suspence over the potential for random catastrophe along the way.
Yes it did say that, but if that’s true 400 pages seems like a lot of filler. I didn’t feel like upon reading it that 400 pages could have been cut without damaging it. Anyone know how long the original paperback was?
I think the biggest mistake was the fact that they combined the characters of Rita (? I think that was her name, the socialite pill-popper Larry runs into in New York) and Nadine. This completely destroyed the complexity of the not-quite-relationship that Larry and Nadine had, since he was still recovering from his feelings of failure after Rita overdosed.
Other than that, I was actually very impressed with the miniseries. I own it on DVD and we break it out and watch the entire thing regularly. Gary Senise was great as Stu, as mentioned before Ray Walston was perfect as Glen, and Jamey Sheridan, altho not exactly what I had in mind whilst reading the book, did a good job as Flagg. Even Molly Ringwald was…tolerable. The only travesty I could not forgive them for was throwing Corin Nemec in a baggy sweatsuit, sticking some very badly done fake pimples on him, and trying to pass that for Harold Lauder. Ridiculous, that. I don’t know what they were thinking. :smack:
I read the original and then I have read the uncut several times. My opinion, both are great, the uncut has SO many GREAT stories, if not plot development, that I thought added entirely to the book as a whole… i was amazed to find out the stuff they CUT OUT was not boring crap but GRIPPING passages. On the other hand I thought CHAPTERS could be cut out of each book regarding yarns of description and idle commentary, that left me thinking about other things while in fact still reading.
That said… its still my favorite King book I think.
[QUOTE=NailBunny]
I think the biggest mistake was the fact that they combined the characters of Rita (? I think that was her name, the socialite pill-popper Larry runs into in New York) and Nadine. This completely destroyed the complexity of the not-quite-relationship that Larry and Nadine had, since he was still recovering from his feelings of failure after Rita overdosed.
[QUOTE]
Well, there’s also the small point that she was a virgin when Randall Flagg had her… There was NO was LSG was a virgin! :eek:
The Stand is my favourite Stephen King novel. I liked the uncut version. It didn’t have any parts that stood out to me as dross that needed to be cut, like so many “director’s cut” versions of films do.
Incidentally, “You ain’t no nice guy, Larry!” has become the stock phrase of my guilty conscience w/r/t women – complete with mental image of a flying spatula. Funny how some things stick with you.
