Jump to content

The Stand (2020)


Recommended Posts

CBS are having another go at The Stand. And it will have a new ending, written by King. Not a changed ending, but a substantial portion of the final episode (of 9) is going beyond the ending of the book.

 

James Marsden as Stu Redman

Whoopie Goldberg as Mother Abigail

Amber Heard as Nadine Cross

Greg Kinnear as Glen Bateman

Odessa Young as Frannie Goldsmith

Henry Zaga as Nick Andros

 

Marilyn Manson will also be appearing in some unknown role as well as doing a cover of The End (The Doors) with Shooter Jennings for the show

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Timmo said:

The only thing that really matters is who plays Randall Flagg AKA the greatest character in fiction.

 

Garrett Dillahunt. 

 

That's the Deadwood fan in me talking, not walking dead (though he's still good in that considering).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, that hand of god was truly awful. I didn’t mind bits of the mini series, but as The Stand was my favourite King book it saddens me that Romero never got to do his adaptation. Different times I know, but as one of my favourite film makers would have loved to have seen it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...

Casting news - 

 

Quote

 

Collider is reporting that Emmy and Golden Globe winner Alexander Skarsgård (Big Little Lies) will be playing the infamous Randall Flagg (also known as The Man in Black, among other nicknames) in CBS All Access’ upcoming series adaptation of Stephen King’s The Stand.

 

Skarsgård joins a cast that includes James Marsden (Westworld) as Stu Redman, Amber Heard (Aquaman) as Nadine Cross, Greg Kinnear (As Good as It Gets) as Glen Bateman, Whoopi Goldberg (Nobody’s Fool) as Mother Abigail, Odessa Young (Assassination Nation) as Frannie Goldsmith, Henry Zaga (The New Mutants) as Nick Andros, Jovan Adepo (Overlord) as Larry Underwood, Owen Teague (IT) as Harold Lauder, Brad William Henke (Orange Is the New Black) as Tom Cullen, and Daniel Sunjata (Rescue Me) as Cobb, a new character.

 

The 10 episode series from writers Josh Boone (The Fault in Our Stars, The New Mutants) and Ben Cavell (SEAL Team), reveals that this is the way the world ends: with a nanosecond of computer error in a Defense Department laboratory and a million casual contacts that form the links in a chain letter of death. And here is the bleak new world of the day after, a world stripped of its institutions and emptied of 99 percent of its people. A world in which a handful of panicky survivors choose sides — or are chosen. A world in which good rides on the frail shoulders of the 108-year-old Mother Abigail — and the worst nightmares of evil are embodied in a man with a lethal smile and unspeakable powers: Randall Flagg, the dark man.

 

King wrote the 10th and final episode of the series, which will reportedly include a new “coda” to the story that wasn’t part of the author’s novel. Boone will also direct the series for CBS Television Studios. Boone, Roy Lee, Jimmy Miller, Richard P. Rubinstein, and Cavell will executive produce. Will Weiske and Miri Yoon will co-executive produce with Owen King serving as producer.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 5 weeks later...
  • 10 months later...
On 11/10/2019 at 20:54, Raoull duke said:

It should have a new second half. Book went to shit so hard half way through. 

This is Stephen King all over, and I speak as a fan.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the book was awesome. One of my favourites ever. Only poor bit is 

 

Spoiler

Trash can man returning to Vegas with a nuke which made no sense at all


but given it was about a billion pages long, I’ll forgive that. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Mawdlin said:

This is Stephen King all over, and I speak as a fan.

 

Depends how long it is. Haven't read everything he's ever done but most of his shorter stuff that I've read is consistent from start to finish. And everything longer he's done that I've read has started strong and then completely shat the bed. Best possible example is the Dark Tower. The Gunslinger is the best thing he's ever done. It doesn't read like him at all (which sounds like an insult since I've said how much I like it, but I've probably read more Stephen King than any other author), it's like a mad document that somehow made it from that world to this world. Whereas all the rest are very much Stephen King writing about that world. It's like when he writes something really good he tries to milk it or something.

 

He's a hard writer to pin down. A masterful storyteller and a total fucking hack. Often in the same book. Often on the same page.

 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Raoull duke said:

A masterful storyteller and a total fucking hack. Often in the same book. Often on the same page.

 

He'd agree with you on that, in fact I think he's said as much himself. He's very clear-eyed when it comes to his own limitations.

 

IT remains the quintessential King novel - it's staggeringly good for the first 75%, the best stuff he ever wrote, then it completely fucks the landing. And I can never work out if it was simply a bad idea for an ending, or whether he simply didn't have the writing skills to pull it off. Maybe both. Given his penchant for revisionism, I've often wondered if he's been tempted to go back and have another crack at it, if for no other reason than to take out THAT scene (yes, you know the one I mean).

 

Ironically The Dark Tower had a great, great ending (talking about the post-ending reveal) despite the whole of the second half of the saga being a little... strange. For something that was written over half a lifetime and barely hangs together, it's quite the achievement. Maybe the one time he actually managed to pull it off.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read loads of King, you really have to go in with the aim of enjoying the ride rather than focusing on the destination. He really is shit at destination. Possibly the only book of his which has a good ending is Pet Semetary. It might even be his overall best book because the journey is up there as well.

 

That said, I enjoyed The Stand throughout as well. Needed editing down, though.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I've read all of King upto about 20 yrs ago and agree he is both a pulp writer AND a master of storytelling.

 

I absolutely love, with a passion, Needful Things and TommyKnockers and Dark Half despite the fact they are on the "hack" end of the spectrum

 

But then  Pet Semetary , The Shining, Cujo and The Body etc  are fantastic taut stories that fill you dread as you turn the page, knowing what is going to happen but unable to look away. 

 

The last book of his I read was The Girl who Loved Tom Gordon and I am not sure why as I loved that book too. I can't think of a King novel that I didn't enjoy on some level and there aren't many novellists I could say that about (Pratchett and Adams are also on that list).

 

Adaptations of his work generally don't work and I think this one will also fall foul of that as the Stand doesn't work on screen as written and King is hugely protective of his source work. Kubrick did the best adaptation by a country mile with the Shining and it only worked because he knew you had to strip out the stuff that only works on the page.  To make a good adaptation of a King novel you have to first ensure King has very little say in it as he has no eye for the screen.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Clipper said:

I've read all of King upto about 20 yrs ago and agree he is both a pulp writer AND a master of storytelling.

 

I absolutely love, with a passion, Needful Things and TommyKnockers and Dark Half despite the fact they are on the "hack" end of the spectrum

 

But then  Pet Semetary , The Shining, Cujo and The Body etc  are fantastic taut stories that fill you dread as you turn the page, knowing what is going to happen but unable to look away. 

 

The last book of his I read was The Girl who Loved Tom Gordon and I am not sure why as I loved that book too. I can't think of a King novel that I didn't enjoy on some level and there aren't many novellists I could say that about (Pratchett and Adams are also on that list).

 

Adaptations of his work generally don't work and I think this one will also fall foul of that as the Stand doesn't work on screen as written and King is hugely protective of his source work. Kubrick did the best adaptation by a country mile with the Shining and it only worked because he knew you had to strip out the stuff that only works on the page.  To make a good adaptation of a King novel you have to first ensure King has very little say in it as he has no eye for the screen.

 

I agree with a lot of this, will have to try The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon.

 

I did enjoy the adaptation of Doctor Sleep.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I genuinely don't understand the criticisms of his endings. Not to the degree it's reached in pop culture, at least. He doesn't plan them, so they feel fresh most of the time. As he says himself, if the story swings towards a character death, he goes for it. No-one feels like they're wearing plot armour. 

 

Some are weak for sure, but most are like the moment when the tornado blows away and your heroes are left with the detritus, destruction and the dead. For me, that's very fulfilling as it's more like real life - the evil is vanquished, but for how long and at what personal cost? - and that's satisfying. For me at least. 

 

Two caveats: the endings to his deliberately schlocky books tend to be much more scary and thrilling (Thinner, Dark Half, Pet Sematary... anything that reads like a horror or mystery comic) as they are closest to his novellas and short stories (his best writing). Whereas the more convoluted, Machean/Jackson/Lovecraftian stories are the 'tornado' endings that focus far more on the impact of the characters' lives (IT, Revival, DT series amongst others) and let a lot of people down. 

 

Second caveat is more positive: all the books with 'weak' endings read better when tied into the Dark Tower series. Particularly The Stand (to veer dangerously back on-topic!) and Insomnia

 

Final thought: its not worth judging King on his novels, really. His best work is in short story and novella writing. His best tales are the likes of The Mist, Umney's Last Case, Rita Hayworth/The Body/Apt Pupil from Different Seasons, all of Four Past Midnight, all of the stories in The Bachman Books (but obviously The Long Walk as the standout), N, and loads of others that are untouchable in terms of scares and atmosphere. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 03/09/2020 at 13:27, Mawdlin said:

I agree with a lot of this, will have to try The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon.

 

I did enjoy the adaptation of Doctor Sleep.

I should warn you that The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon is in King's introspective 1st person novels. Gerald's Game is a perfect example of this as is the long walk to a certain extent.

 

I mention it as people find those books marmite as "not much happens" in them... Personally I loved the time spent explaining how a handcuffed woman tried to get to a glass of water in Gerald's Game, I found it utterly compelling and tense but recognise it leaves alot of people very cold.

 

1 hour ago, Treble said:

Final thought: its not worth judging King on his novels, really. His best work is in short story and novella writing. His best tales are the likes of The Mist, Umney's Last Case, Rita Hayworth/The Body/Apt Pupil from Different Seasons, all of Four Past Midnight, all of the stories in The Bachman Books (but obviously The Long Walk as the standout), N, and loads of others that are untouchable in terms of scares and atmosphere. 

 

A lot of those short story and novellas are in fact really novels. Of those you mention only a couple are really novellas or short stories. Most are over 150 pages (the long walk is 300+ I think) nearly all of those could be sold as short novels and other writers in the 80s in the genre often did release those as novels.

 

Also many of those come from his most fertile period when he was writing Shining, Christine, Pet Sematary and Salems Lot etc and with that in mind I think those shorter works are on a par with those cracking early novels. I think the distinction with them is they were shorter (by king standards) and they were usually more "thinkers" so stuff that the publisher may not back and put on the shelves so he had to release as anthology or short story/novellas.

 

King has a habit of "overwriting" hence his longer works can feel a slog.  The issue for me with King is that his "overwriting" got worse and resulted in lengthy books with weaker parts which needed a good editor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't necessarily disagree about the quality, but I think what he sees as his Novellas are substantively different from what he sees as his novels. They are often two-handers (or have a small cast of characters) and a very high-concept setup.

 

The length is often far larger than what a normal human being would consider to be novella, yeah, but whatever we call them they are structurally different from his novels I think. No argument about his golden period. It was definitely when he was hungry. And, unfortunately, when he was pissed :|

Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, Clipper said:

Personally I loved the time spent explaining how a handcuffed woman tried to get to a glass of water in Gerald's Game, I found it utterly compelling and tense but recognise it leaves alot of people very cold.

 

I also loved the book when I read it way back when. I was surprised they made a movie adaptation of it. I was even more surprised it's a really decent movie. Tangent on tangents then, but Gerald's Game is worth a watch if you've not seen it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Wizcat said:

 

I also loved the book when I read it way back when. I was surprised they made a movie adaptation of it. I was even more surprised it's a really decent movie. Tangent on tangents then, but Gerald's Game is worth a watch if you've not seen it.

really? I might give it a try then - I stopped watching king adaptations years ago but I'll give it a try

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 1 month later...
20 minutes ago, the_debaser said:

Holy shit. That looks terrible.

 

You have one of the best books ever written and that's what you come up with? The man in black looks like a Samcro extra. 

 

Nah, Skarsgard as Flagg is class casting. Once they stick him in a decent pair of boots he'll be grand. 

 

No Harold though?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.