Friday, April 22, 2011

The Man in Black Fled Across the Desert and the Gunslinger Followed: An Ongoing and Comprehensive Look at how Stephen King's Epic 'The Dark Tower' Might be Translated to Film, Part 1


This is an ongoing look at how the seven part book series may be adapted to the silver screen. I will divide this into three parts the first being books 1 & 2, followed by 3 & 4, and concluding in books 5, 6, and 7. The film adaptation is being being spearheaded by director Ron Howard (The Da Vinci Code, Apollo 13) and his long time producing partner Brian Grazer. Writing duties belong to Akiva Goldsman (A Beautiful Mind). Oscar winner Javier Bardem (No Country For Old Men) is attached to star as the protagonist Roland Deschain. It is being produced as a trilogy of films and two seasons of television. The two seasons will serve as a bridge between the first and second film, and the second and third film. The first film in the series is due to hit theaters May 17, 2013. *POSSIBLE SPOILERS BELOW*

Something like this requires a huge investment from everyone involved. Imagine Entertainment, Weed Road Pictures, and Universal Pictures will being spending hundreds of millions of dollars to finance this. The cast and crew involved will being spending five maybe six years, if not more, of their life constantly working on this 'Event'. Nothing like this has never been done before and it could be a very big game changer is it is successful.

I first took notice of 'The Dark Tower' when in early 2009 it was announced that 'Lost' creator and 'Star Trek' director J.J. Abrams was developing the project along with his frequent collaborator Damon Lindelof. They left the project later that year claiming that the project is "tricky" and after reading the books I completely agree. Plus the two had a slew of other things on their plate like 'Star Trek 2' and 'Mission: Impossible 4'. I think that Abrams would have been a perfect fit for the property but if he wasn't 100% dedicated to it then he shouldn't do it. J.J. did the right thing and I applaud him for that.

The team of Ron Howard, Akiva Goldsman, and Brian Grazer came aboard the project in April 2010 and in the fall announced that the adaptation would span across both TV and film. The seasons of television that are going to be linking the films are also said to be prequels/backstory to the movies but, that has yet to be confirmed. If that is indeed the case I'll hold off on my thoughts on that until later in this section. Filming is set to begin in September of this year.
Javier Bardem officially signed on to the project earlier this month after a long period of speculation. Other contenders for the role of Roland Deschain were Hugh Jackman (X-Men), Daniel Craig (Cowboys and Aliens), Viggo Mortensen (Lord of the Rings), Christan Bale (The Dark Knight), Jon Hamm (TVs Mad Men), and Josh Holloway (TV's Lost). I, for one, was hoping that Josh Holloway won the role. I am a huge fan of  'Lost' and his character Sawyer on the show. His dry, sarcastic humor would have fit Roland like a glove. However, I am very pleased with the casting of Bardem. There was some low level, fanboy web chatter going around complaining that Bardem is a Spaniard and the character of Roland is white. I really don't think that matters. I feel that since most of the story takes place in an alternate version of our own world his accent will be perfect. He mustn't forget to bring that unshrinking intensity to role that won him his Oscar.  
 
As for the character of The Man In Black/Walter O'Dim/Randall Flagg the skuttlebutt is that the powers to be are looking at Idris Elba from the HBO series 'The Wire'. This is a casting choice I would read with a smile. He is one damn fine actor. This would also most likely bring up more race issues, though Elba is no stranger to that either. The black Englishman is playing the traditionally white role of the Norse god Heimdell in the upcoming 'Thor'. The description of the Man In Black is very vague and for good reason. He is sad to be able to blend in and be a "shapeshifter" due to his sorcerer ways. You can almost have a different actor playing him every time he changes names. If I had to choose someone other then Idris Elba, I'd cast the late Heath Ledger. He just had the rare ability to have his presence be felt even when he was off screen for long periods of time. Man In Black is not always present but his heavily felt throughout the entire series. So without an act of God, that won't happen. That being the case I would go with Ledger's co-star from 'A Knight's Tale' Rufus Sewell. He has these eyes that just seem to see right though you down to your very core.

The role of Jake Chambers is a hard one. He is a young boy that is violently murdered in our world and magically transported to the Gunslinger's. Max Records (Where The Wild Things Are) has a lot of talent. I can't wait to see more of him and what he has to offer.



Casting Eddie Dean is something one should not take lightly. You need someone that can convincingly portray the heroin addict with cracking wit but later becomes a real bad ass gunslinger. I never thought that I would say this, but Robert Pattinson is all that comes to mind. He's got the addict look about him too. 'Water for Elephants' looks promising and with 'Twilight' behind him this could be a step in the right direction for Pattinson


Odetta Holmes/Detta Walker/Susannah Dean was somewhat of an easy one for me. Taraji P. Henson has all the range necessary to play three people trapped in the same body, trapped in a wheelchair. One mean and violent, the other sweet, and Susannah Dean is a blend of the two.

As for the filming of the movie itself nothing is to out of the ordinary. Most of this section takes place in desert and a beach. The scenes where Eddie and Odetta are "drawn" take place in New York City just in different time periods. Eddie is taken from 1987 and Odetta is taken from 1964. If shooting in the Big Apple is too rich for the studio they'll move it to another stand in location like Vancouver or Cleveland.

When Roland draws his companions he does so by taking control of their minds. He controls the person while the rest of the world sees that person, not Roland. This is a major part of the film and needs to be done right or the whole thing could fall apart. This could be accomplished with the use of mirrors. Every time Eddie looks into a reflective surface he sees Roland or vice versa. I'm sure how ever they go about it Ron Howard will handle it with all the care and respect in the world.

This has to be rated PG-13. It is the only way for this to make back it's money. The books would clearly be rated R with all the language, violence and sex that King is known for. You have to tone the movie down so there isn't much of a drop off between film the TV series, that will most likely air on NBC. Films like 'The Dark Knight' showed us how much intensity and dark subject matter you can pack into a PG-13 film. You can tone down the language and sex a bit and keep the violence and still have a very heavy and intense PG-13 film experience.

As for the network television series that may or not be a prequel. If it indeed is they should be focusing on the Graphic Novels and parts of the novels that are flashbacks. However, Roland's time spent in the town of Tull is told as a flashback in the book but I feel that would be better suited as an opening scene to the first film. The fourth book Wizard and Glass is almost entirely a flashback. I'll expand on that more in Part 2. I like the idea of seeing Roland's hometown of Gilead before his world had "moved on". It might also take people out of the story that is happening in the movies. They are giving themselves plenty of time to work out the kinks they should have it perfect by the time the first season airs. They one think I don't like is the idea of a 22 episode season. That just feels to long to me. In my opinion an 8-12 episode Mini-Series would be best. That way you can keep production values high and not have any "filler" episodes. Air the first half of the season in December and the second in January.

As a huge fan of the books, I am looking forward to this epic adaptation. I have total faith in the team behind it and expect the very best from them. You can expect to me to be there from beginning to end, no matter what the outcome. Thanks for reading and feel free comment below. These are just my thoughts and opinions and I look forward to hearing yours. Look for Part 2 in the coming weeks.

3 comments:

  1. Good story David. I am a big fan of the books and think I agree with your casting choices, although I would prefer someone with a bit more personality to play Eddie. I just don't think Pattinson has enough charisma for it.

    Oh and as for your comment about toning down the sex, that's a great idea, but how do you see that working in connection with the Roland/Demon/Susannah/Mordred? Sex is integral to that part of the story. Personally I would drop Mordred altogether as he actually serves little purpose in some ways.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The biggest concern would be the amount of nudity. You can show sex without massive amounts of nudity just by changing how its shot. As for the Pattinson issue, that is really a hard one. I couldn't think a mid 20s actor that could pull that off. Maybe Shia LaBeouf? Who would you choose?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Yeah ok, I think sex could be removed altogether, just the demon sex part is essential if they keep Mordred.

    As for Eddie, Shia has the personality, but not sure he could play the junkie part. What about Ryan Gosling?

    ReplyDelete