comment #1

Jeremy Smith says ...

Looking to become?

comment #2

americanrat says ...

Gunslinger and Lord of the Rings have very little in common, save both series of books are very overrated.

comment #3

Craptastic says ...

While I've enjoyed his output..."The Gunslinger" needs someone with a heavier hand. Reading it as a teen, I always imagined it was something John Carpenter would've knocked out of the park. Somebody tear him away from his Playstation... a comeback is needed.

comment #4

Breedlove says ...

interesting...not familiar with the 'dark tower' series. i can go either way with king. i've read a couple of his books that were quite good, but i just made the colossal mistake of reading his latest, 'lisey's story,' which was sheer torture. just incredibly awful. i cannot remember ever reading a worse novel in my life. as for abrams, at this point i'm a fan and have high hopes. i'm a huge 'lost' addict and i also thought M:I 3 was very good. i would say this sounds promising, on paper.

comment #5

sutter kane says ...

I actually think Abrams is a good fit for the gunslinger books, which I enjoyed but won't endeavor to defend here. Whedon on the other hand is a very talented writer who- like many who work in the oft shat-upon genre- uses fantastic elements as a way of getting at real emotions or ideas. Some of his self-referential humor undermines that, I think, but choosing to work in sci-fi/fantasy doesn't automatically make him, or Abrams, an underachieving, fanboy hack. Remember, Rod Serling was able to say some tremendously controversial and important things because he did it under the guise of the twilight zone.

comment #6

jeffmcm says ...

First of all, Wells reveals his ignorance by misspelling Whedon.
Second, I don't see how this could be a single movie, and I can't imagine Paramount being willing to sign on for a Lord of the Rings-style cycle - miniseries? Or maybe a first movie to test the waters for sequels?
Third, I'd rather have John Carpenter do this too - someone with an affinity for Westerns and better directing chops. Even better, go with Jodorowsky.

comment #7

JD says ...

The funny thing is that you're so willing to dismiss it out of hand...

"Imagine going ahead with a project that sounds so Tolkien-esque and not feeling the least bit chastened or embarassed about it. Remarkable."

I'm not even going to be a grammar Nazi on that last phrase.

Do you even have any wonder left, when it comes to the movies? I remember your railing against "A Night at the Museum" awhile ago, and while I respect your opinion greatly and read your site often, I still took my six-year-old son to see that movie (my first trip to the theater in over a year) and had a wonderful time. I saw the movie through his eyes. Of COURSE it was simplistic, and of COURSE it was trite, but from the viewpoint of a (thankfully so far) non-jaded six-year-old it was movie magic. I'm not defending that movie in the least, but COME ON. I respect the fact that you're a father also, of teenagers in one of the most jaded landmasses on the planet, but surely you can suspend that every so often to find joy again in the medium that you love so much? As it is, even the rumor of a fantasy saga being put to film already makes you yawn.

I've been meaning to bring this up with you for awhile. I'll grant you that the LOTR series could have been better, but it was a good adaption, considering. Yet, all you could do was write about your nausea whenever referring to it. Does it have to be in a foreign language before you'll respect it?

On that subject, I'll bring up Pan's Labyrinth and the scene where Ofelia is supposed to "touch nothing" when retrieving the knife. Besides being utterly terrifying, the scene is also so poorly shot and her motivations so utterly contrived that it moves the movie into parody (which it is NOT). Yet it's still one of your (and many other people's) favorite movies, and you seem more than willing to completely ignore those flaws.

It's one of my favorite movies as well. It is masterful, with some flaws. Yet you dismiss or forget or ignore that fact for God-knows-what reason, while railing on other movies, which also have flaws but are otherwise good or worthwhile movies.

Just an observation from a longtime reader, but first time commenter. And now I've gone and been all earnest. Never mind, then.

comment #8

Dublin101 says ...

"Rod Sterling was able to say some tremendously controversial and important things because he did it under the guise of the twilight zone."

Whedon did promote a gay relationship on Buffy. It was upfront thing, not a cheap ratings stunt and it lasted for several seasons.

That's a pretty ballsy thing to do in America today (even post Brokeback) so I'll give him credit for that.

comment #9

JD says ...

What were you expecting Abrams to make, a Tarkovskian exercise in existential angst? I don't know why Jeff believes there's only one type of respectable film, particularly given his track record of enjoying a great deal of schlock and dismissing many artistically ambitious and complex works. Scorsese is condemned for making a heavy foreign language film that will bore Wells and Abrams is condemned for making an accesible, mainstream fantasy picture that will also bore Wells. If there are, for the sake of argument, 100 genres in the world, Jeff seems to approve of roughly 3 or 4.

comment #10

fnt says ...

Ah, Wells. Hating on popular young(ish) creator like Whedon and Abrams for no apparent reason. Way to increase traffic!

But here's my question -- how can you drag on someone for engaging in Sci-Fi, when your favorite movie of the year, CHILDREN OF MEN, was adapted from a sci-fi book?

True, it didn't end up quite as sci-fi as the book was, but it's still classified as such. It's just so grumpy old man, Andy Rooney of you to have those attitudes. Am I wrong in guessing it's because your college roomate's Star Trek obsession fucked up your Altman watching schedule way back when? Say it ain't so...

comment #11

Josh Massey says ...

I've read all seven Dark Tower books, and consider some of them to be among my favorites. I think Abrams is a fine fit, as long as he dedicates the time (and right amount of celluloid) to the project. It could definitely be done as three 3-hour epics.

comment #12

JD says ...

Dear "frist time commenter" JD. Please pick a new name. I don't want to be confused with anyone who endorses Night at the Museum (through the eyes of a six-year-old or otherwise). No offense.

comment #13

Doug says ...

Anyone who watched the series "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" on a regular basis knows and appreciates that Joss Whedon is a very gifted writer-producer-director. Anyone who didn't really shouldn't be commenting on him.

comment #14

lesterg says ...

"Third, I'd rather have John Carpenter do this too - someone with an affinity for Westerns and better directing chops."

Have you read above 1985 on Carpenter's IMDB profile?

comment #15

lesterg says ...

"Anyone who watched the series "Buffy The Vampire Slayer" on a regular basis knows and appreciates that Joss Whedon is a very gifted writer-producer-director. Anyone who didn't really shouldn't be commenting on him."

So because Joss wrote/directed a television series, we can't comment on his feature work? I enjoyed Buffy and Angel as much as anyone, but his film resume is wildly uneven.

comment #16

JD says ...

Um, yeah, not sure why it listed me as "JD" JD, but it wasn't me.

And yeah, call me when you've got a six-year-old of your own. This whole hipster children of aging hipster parent thing is already old before it even got started.

comment #17

DeweyY says ...

This is the second time in a week that Jeff has attacked Joss Whedon for apparently NO reason. I can't fathom it. Whedon has made exactly ONE major motion picture under his name and full authorship (Serenity)--which Jeff hadn't bothered to even see. (I happen to think he might like it, but apparently, probably a foolish idea on my part...) Whedon worked primarily in TV, on shows that Jeff did not watch. Explain this to me. It is not like hating Peter Jackson, who has made many many movies at this point. (Hell, Shawn Levy has many more credits than Whedon.) Yes, I am a Whedon supporter (don't hate on me.) I don't slam people who don't like him--I just don't understand why he would engender such dislike. And Jeff is slamming Dark Tower, which he has not read. (Does Jeff read any books that are not about Kubrick or Michael Mann? Is fiction dead to him?) Stephen King as inspired by Tolkien--and Sergio Leone, and his own fevered imagination. I personally think this JJ Abrams announcement is a BIG RUMOR, but if it is true--good for him. I know he is a big King fan, and Lost shows he can think big. I just don't know how Abrams will get a studio to commit to something of this scale. Well, if it does happen, I am pretty sure we can all look forward to Jeff pooping all over it, while he defends idiotic crap like The Departed. (Honestly everyone--all the great crime movies NOT nominated for Best Picture, and THIS is the one you want to win? Christ, Pulp Fiction went home empty? Hey Jeff, we can ALL hate something, I guess. At least I have SEEN The Departed.

comment #18

jeffmcm says ...

Lesterg, when you say 'above' I assume you mean 'after', right? Since 1985 Carpenter has made one classic (They Live) and four fun romps (Big Trouble in Little China, In the Mouth of Madness, Escape from LA, Ghosts of Mars). He's still got it if a studio is willing to give him the resources to do something.

comment #19

lesterg says ...

I should have been clearer (I was thinking about "scrolling up") and a little later (say, 1988) but the point stands. The guy has produced several classic films in his career, but that ship has sailed.

comment #20

Craig Kennedy says ...

I don't mind so much that Jeff is cranky and snobby, but it's annoying when his rants display such an epic cluelessness about the subject at hand. Worse is when you try to point out he doesn't know the first fucking thing of what he speaks and it never sinks in.

I'm not a King, Whedon, Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Tolkien or Abrams fanboy so I'll save my energy this time.

comment #21

jeffmcm says ...

Lester, my point is primarily that Carpenter has directed plenty of good movies, while Abrams has never done anything beyond episodic TV. And that includes the big Alias episode that starred Tom Cruise last year.

comment #22

lesterg says ...

Jeff, I understand where you're coming from (there are several Carpenter films I'd put among my all-time favorites) but you've got to admit his career since the late 80's has been one of regression rather than progression.

JJ's feature experience is limited, but I'll take MI3 or his "Lost" pilot over anything Carpenter has done in the past twenty years. It's all about potential.

comment #23

lesterg says ...

By the way: there's nothing I'd love more than for Carpenter to have a late-career resurgence...I just don't know if it's in him.

comment #24

The Movie Man says ...

Guys, this is like the detached, insensitive obit thing, its meant to piss you off. Here he shits on Whedon, Abrams (have to admit I'm with Wells on those two), King, and Tolkien in one fell thread, guaranteeing 200 comments.

Can't back you guys up on Carpenter though, he hasn't had anything that has really, truly, no bullshit worked in a very long time and there's nothing in his filmography to suggest the scope that The Dark Tower series would eventually require.

Yeah, I'm a King fanboy, you found me out.

comment #25

Craig Kennedy says ...

Did you like Dark Tower from beginning to end Movie Man? For me, each one seemed to have diminishing returns. I put down the last one half way through and have never gone back to finish it. Maybe because I read them all so far apart?

comment #26

jeffmcm says ...

I agree about the dimishing returns idea. I felt like the first book was a flat-out masterpiece; the second one was a fast-paced, intense roller coaster; the third started to get mired in fantasy elements, and the fourth was, hopefully being without too politically incorrect, pretty gay, and then I never have gotten to 5-7.

Back to the directorial thing: I can't deny that John Carpenter hasn't had a success on the level of The Thing in quite a while, (basically since The Thing) but I know of nothing in Abrams' work that suggests he has anything close to the visual/fantasy/Western chops needed to take this on. Emphasis on visuals. He seems to know his way around a windy narrative but this project calls for someone visionary and a little whacked-out.

comment #27

DarthCorleone says ...

Jeff, I've been following your column since the Mr. Showbiz days, and I've always found your opinions and topics engaging. I must say, though, that I'll echo some of the sentiments here and question why you're being so curmudgeonly about this news. It's just now that I'm fully realizing that - although I've agreed with you on many what-I-see-as-important opinions about film - we really don't have much in common in terms of genre preferences. Or rather, we appreciate similar genres, but there's one genre that I absolutely love - sci-fi/fantasy - in which you seem to have absolutely no interest.

Simply put, for fans of that genre, this is gigantic news. Dark Tower fans have been clamoring and dreaming about a screen adaptation for years, and Abrams is a guy with the clout to get this done. That said, I don't think this is a perfect match. That's interesting given that just last week I was referring to Lost and The Dark Tower as sister narratives. (This observation was borne of the Dark Tower comic's debuting on the same day as the return of Lost from its hiatus, the very public commentary that King has been making about Lost, and the statements of appreciation and very blatant homages that Lost's creators have made with regard to King.)

I guess I just feel that if you're not a fan, what's the point of this sort of grousing? Beyond the top two or three films that transcend the genre and are universally acknowledged as "great films," are you a fan of sci-fi/fantasy at all? Jackson's Lord Of The Rings films weren't perfect, but they're damn impressively made compared to what has come before and a godsend as far as the fantasy genre is concerned in terms of getting traction for future projects.

For the record, I'm a Dark Tower and Lost fanatic. And just so you know, aside from an epic scope and a universe that is not our own, The Dark Tower is not terribly Tolkien-esque. It's more like a fantasy/western/horror hybrid.

I guess the bottom line is that I appreciate your making note of this news, and you should be honest about your take on it. I just don't see the point of caustic negativity. I don't bother commenting on the bulk of comedies and romantic comedies simply because I know they're not my taste. Snarky remarks about that don't invalidate the fact that they are genres that others can appreciate. Sometimes I even find a comedy or romantic comedy that I actually love.

Who knows? Maybe The Dark Tower would be something that would transcend the genre for you.

comment #28

The Movie Man says ...

CJ-The Dark Tower series is uneven but I think as a whole its noteworthy and ultimately quite moving. As for specifics, I'm not sure I was completely down with the meta-games he plays toward the end of the series, but books 5 and 6, for me, were very strong and suspenseful. 7 has problems, I think King got sidetracked trying to cap off many of his other books, and demystified too many of his classic characters in the process. The very ending, the top of the tower, is ant-climactic, and that's clearly the point, what happens is a little philosophically richer than just having another baddie for Roland to vanquish. I thought it was interesting toward the end, how unlikable and obsessive King's character turned out to be, and King doesn't shrink or sentimentalize one bit.

I actually think the least interesting book of the series is the first one, THE GUNSLINGER, that could have been a prologue to one of the best books of the series, THE DRAWING OF THE THREE.

comment #29

Dave Polands Gut says ...

What has Abrams done besides fantasy crap?

Alias and MI 3 were fantasy stuff.

comment #30

Craig Kennedy says ...

Movie Man. I liked the Spaghetti Western meets EC Horror Comics tone of Gunslinger, but it does seem kind of like a prologue. I read the first 3 around '92. Reread them when the fourth came out around '98. Reread them again a couple years ago when the last 3 books were published, but as I said never quite finished the last one for some reason. Perhaps it's time I gave them another go.

comment #31

lesterg says ...

What in MI3 was fantasy-oriented or supernatural?

comment #32

OddDuck says ...

If I remember right, Wells liked MI3 quite a bit? I did too, although to be frank it receded from my mind and memory fairly quickly. One thing I do remember liking and yet being simultaneously dissapointed by was Abrahms style of directing action set pieces. On the one hand, the action fun-stuff was clear and straightforward, allowing you to actually see the whole picture of what's going on (unlike everything Bay does), and yet still offered a fair dose of visceral thrill. On the other hand, DePalma's MI was arguably an big-action-picture masterpiece in its cinematography, and offered set pieces that many can still remember today. In comparison, MI3 seems almost too modest.

comment #33

The Movie Man says ...

CJ-If you haven't already, the King books to read are BAG OF BONES and HEARTS IN ATLANTIS. Regardless of your feelings of the man's work in general, you should like these. There is an ease, a grace, in these books that many of his literary haters claim he doesn't possess. Strong, poingnat stuff, Hearts is actually a little reminiscent of Tim O'Brien. (Don't let the heavy handed movie steer you away.)

comment #34

Rich S. says ...

I was a King fanatic for many years, climbing aboard around The Stand and hanging with him until about Insomnia. I admire the man's work ethic, but as he's gotten more and more prolific, I think the quality of his work as suffered more and more.

I remember grabbing the first Dark Tower book in a comics shop when it was first released (in a very limited edition) way back in 1982. I really didn't think it was great shakes, but I have to admit the story gripped me with the second and third books. But then King really ramped up the flashback detours in the fourth book and when the fifth book came out, six years later, I had an impossible time trying to catch up.

I've never made it past the fourth book and I doubt I will. In my opinion, the story just wasn't strong enough to sustain seven books, especially with all the flashbacks. I'll probably watch the movies just to see how it all turned out (especially since some previous posters indicate that the end is a letdown).

comment #35

christian says ...

"i remember grabbing the first Dark Tower book in a comics shop when it was first released (in a very limited edition) way back in 1982."

me two -- it was so limited that i had to keep asking the clerk if it was indeed that king. (and boy, comic book stores were much cooler in my day...) but the books: disappointed! the idea sounded great, mythic apocalyptic landscape etc, but it just never perked up. i agree with movie man, DRAWING OF THE THREE is the best, but even that felt...underwhelming. i stopped reading after that cos i didn't care anymore. didn't it end up with roland meeting king or sumthin' awful like that?

and jeff lost his sense of wonder long ago, or let it get buried under the weight of hollywood gossip. too bad. you won't need so much dye if you're not trying to grow old before your time...

comment #36

The Movie Man says ...

Christian-Roland does meet King in the later books, its not as bad as it sounds but it is kind of awkward, and doesn't serve much purpose. Roland also meets Father Callahan, from Salem's Lot, the boy from Insomnia (even I'll admit that that one is a snoozer, I've tried, and failed, to read it on two seperate occassions), Flagg from The Stand also makes an appearance, and the fan speculation that this is the same Flagg as The Eyes of The Dragon is made more clear. Despite all of this postmodernism, there is a lot to like, but if you lost interest that far back, I don't think I would bother if I were you.

comment #37

The Movie Man says ...

To pick up on something else in this thread, I watched LOST for two full seasons and a handful of this season, but then had to hang it up. I like ambiguity and I like not tipping your hand for a long time, but it seems to me like this show has no idea where its going, and its just going to jerk off for as long as viewers tolerate it.

comment #38

Craig Kennedy says ...

Movie Man, I like King quite a bit, just not an obsessive fan. I'll check out Bones and Atlantis one of these days.

I dropped Lost about this time last year. The writers might not be totally making it up as they go along, but they're definitely just treading water as the network milks the popularity of the show for all it's worth. Then once audience interest tapers off, they'll be forced to work doubletime to tie up all the loose ends before the show is cancelled.

It's a shame that the economics of American broadcast television dictate that a show must have at least 100 episodes in order to be syndicated successfully. If from the start Lost had been given a definite timeline of say 2 years, it would've been a remarkable program.

comment #39

christian says ...

just rewatched all of larry sanders -- perfect arc and finale.

but king's writing and i have parted ways. i got tired of the same interior voice popping in and...burn out. there was something raw and great about his work until 1982 or so...i think "night shift" is possibly the scariest american book of all time.

but the meta of roland bumping into other king characters...no...

i