All has not been well behind the scenes for Nikolaj Arcel's 2017 adaptation of the Stephen King classic The Dark Tower. The 95-minute installment is intended to be the beginning of a television spinoff with Idris Elba reprising his role as the Gunslinger, but the underwhelming reception from critics could scupper those plans.
While the reviewers have weighed in on the subject, the only individual whose opinion carries any significant currency is King himself. Opening up on his second coming of sorts, the writer outlined how he would change the follow up feature.
SK: I Agreed To PG, But Studio Must Be Bolder Now
Speaking with Cinemablend, the creator admitted that he understood the concerns from the get go about the title. At the end of the day, PG-13 does not exactly scream "Stephen King."
"I understand the rationale behind the movie that is PG-13," he explained. "I was totally signed off on that. I want as many people in the tent as possible, for all kinds of reasons. Part of it having to do with the dynamic between the Gunslinger and the boy. That's a father-son relationship. But I'd love to see the next picture be R. That's sort of where we're coming from now, and where the movie needs to go. PG-13 was the safe spot to go. When pictures were R, the studio execs would say, 'Well, we know that this is going to make 20% or 30% less money because we're going to exclude a prime tenderloin part of the moviegoing public.' I think that movie's like Deadpool have changed that."
Switching outlets to Vanity Fair, King backed the final product. Yet the devotion by those that love the books means that common sense rationale might be impossible.
"The Dark Tower fans are rather to the point where they show up in autograph lines and they’ve got tattoos on their body—of The Dark Tower, or Roland, or guns, or whatever it is. So sure, I want the movie to please them, and I don’t know if it will or not. But I always say, if you don’t like it—and I do—go on back and read the book again, because you can’t change that, so. But like I say, you just have to see what happens. I think they made a hell of a movie."
2017's IT - Precisely What The Book Intended
Sticking to the subject of movie ratings, there was never going to be any other choice for a 2017 adaptation of IT than an R-rating. King believes this rendition is the nearest thing to what the novel explored.
“My only requirement was that they go ahead and try to do as much of the novel as they could, which meant an R rating," he argued. "(It is) more balls to the wall. The first one was true enough to the book, and its heart was certainly in the right place, but TV is a hurry-up medium, and the budget is a little bit on the low side . . . and in the 80s, there were a lot of things you can’t do on TV. You weren’t supposed to show children in jeopardy on TV, and that’s what It’s all about.”
Source: Cinemablend, Vanity Fair
Comments