Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
slinker

Sandman TV Series

Recommended Posts

If I was placing bets , I'd say this one is doomed from the start....BUT Supernatural is far from a bad show. It's not in my A-list but the lore is very well researched and mostly based on real old legends of monsters for the most part and it gets huge points for the rogue angel's look based on JC.

 

My only big bitch about the show is the focus on "feelings" that occurs at the wrap up of each episode.

 

I would say that the CW is a strange home for Sandman and agree that AMC/FX would be best , but as long as the big 4 networks stay way it has a fighting chance.

 

The Dark Tower on NBC fills me with dread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Dark Tower on NBC fills me with dread.

 

Yuck, really? After what NBC did to 'the Stand,' King is going to trust them again?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind that Stephen King was so appalled by the way Stanley Kubrick ruined(!?!?) The Shining that he felt compelled to do a shitty, shitty TV miniseries version just to compensate. It's arguable that Mr. King may not be the best judge of quality when it comes to adaptations of his own work.

 

Come to think of it, one could draw a similar conclusion from the final three books of the Dark Tower series itself. The last twenty pages or so of the final book were ace, shame about the 1,000-odd which came between them and the end of Wizard & Glass...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just don't want to see any comics brought to the screen, unless they're highly simple forumulas (Spawn, Spider Man, etc.).

They couldn't even get HB right, and we've already seen movies which were close enough to HB to show that a concept like HB could be done reasonably well on the screen.

But, if they were going to go with a Sandman series, I'd want to see it on HBO.

Not that I'd "see" it there, as I don't get HBO, but a channel were they don't have to deal with censors or trying to write towards some coveted core key demographic. A place that will take some chances, by mass media standards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no idea what to expect from a show like this, but I think it would be very hard to adapt it into a series without losing all the details that make it so awesome. on any network.

 

but I disagree that only "simple" comic books can be adapted well: Ghostworld and American Splendor were both terrific, as are several Japanese live action/anime manga adaptations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind that Stephen King was so appalled by the way Stanley Kubrick ruined(!?!?) The Shining that he felt compelled to do a shitty, shitty TV miniseries version just to compensate. It's arguable that Mr. King may not be the best judge of quality when it comes to adaptations of his own work.

 

Come to think of it, one could draw a similar conclusion from the final three books of the Dark Tower series itself. The last twenty pages or so of the final book were ace, shame about the 1,000-odd which came between them and the end of Wizard & Glass...

 

I never even made it to the end of Wizard and Glass! Shame - those first three books are fantastic pieces of dark fantasy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sadly, the Kingified Shining revision isn't even the worst example of King misreading the virtues of his stuff. Maximum Overdrive, anybody? The additional material in the vanity rewrite of The Stand* is pretty dreadful as well.

 

And, as James and Mark have both made very clear, the man badly needs an editor who will actually dare to edit him and insist on him cutting out some of the huge swathes of pointless redundant drivel that overextend most narratives he's written since the mid '80s.

 

*(Apart from those lovely Berni Wrightson illustations)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind that Stephen King was so appalled by the way Stanley Kubrick ruined(!?!?) The Shining that he felt compelled to do a shitty, shitty TV miniseries version just to compensate. It's arguable that Mr. King may not be the best judge of quality when it comes to adaptations of his own work.

:ohmy: Really? Source?

I've always thought that King really has had the most awful, awful luck when it comes to people making films of his books (most of them are shit shit shit), but maybe my sympathy has been misplaced...

 

Edit: Looking over this list, I realise that actually, quite a lot of medium-to-good films have come out of King's works.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sleepwalkers is so shit that it actually skews the average.

 

Didn't know he was involved in Apt Pupil, though. That's interesting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:ohmy: Really? Source?

 

 

He's mentioned it quite a few times - for an example, try here.

 

As you say, there've been more decent King adaptations than you might think, but quite a few crap ones as well - and it's striking how many of the latter have been made with King's own direct involvement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Didn't know he was involved in Apt Pupil, though. That's interesting.

 

It's based on a novella he wrote. It's quite a decent film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:ohmy: Really? Source?

 

 

He's mentioned it quite a few times - for an example, try here.

Thanks. This little item was interesting:

Recently it has emerged that King used to be an alcoholic, and that parts of The Shining are, if not autobiographical, then very personal for the author. King was annoyed because Kubrick's adaptation, in his eyes, marginalised the book's most important theme, that of an good father can be turned into a monster through alcohol abuse.

In other words, he might not be thinking too clearly because of personal involvement, which might make sense, since his recovery from alcohol (and drug) abuse has apparently been deeply traumatic (as it would be).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
:ohmy: Really? Source?

 

 

He's mentioned it quite a few times - for an example, try here.

 

As you say, there've been more decent King adaptations than you might think, but quite a few crap ones as well - and it's striking how many of the latter have been made with King's own direct involvement.

I don't think he was very taken with Cronenberg's version of he Dead Zone either, was he? Cronenberg's gone on record describing King's script for that as pretty terrible, if memory serves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's probably because you can't keep making a film until it becomes interesting and is 750 pages long.

Word.jpg

Just look at Maximum Overdrive.

 

James, I'd have said King is a decentish writer, whose published a few great novels (mostly early in his career, when he was still willing to be edited, or around the turn of the '90s when he was pissed up and out of his mind on the Devil's dandruff) rather than a great one, myself. He's done some very good stuff, but he's also done a lot of shitawful dreck as well. There's lots of horror writers who are far more consistent and write to a higher standard, but don't get the massive brand recognition King received quite early in his career. I've always felt it was a terrible shame that King became the role model for the plagiarists to rip off rather than (say) James Herbert, Karl Edward Wagner or Ramsey Campbell, who were all producing vastly better work in the late '70s.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd have to agree with James - I also think King's a great author. It's absolutely true that he's done some shitawful dreck in his time but that doesn't detract from the greatness that much IMO, given how good some of his early work is. I don't think Francis Ford Coppola has done anything other than shitawful dreck (with a few better works here and there like Dracula) since the early 80s. But that will never erase the fact that he did Apocalypse Now, the first two Godfather movies and The Conversation in the 70s. I'm not saying that King is as good a writer as Coppola is a filmmaker but you get what I mean. He did some absolute classic work in the 70s and 80s.

 

I was rereading It recently and as much as I can see how a good editor could have made the book less self-indulgently long, I have to admire just what an effective bit of storytelling it is. King has produced enough outstanding work to be considered a great writer in my book. I've never admired anything by James Herbert near as much. I haven't read much by Ramsey Campbell - want to make a few recommendations?

 

Also agreed with James on King's apparently cluelessness re: film adaptations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not clear here, is James Herbert being rated above Stephen King by anyone?

 

By Dogpoet in the post above mine. Unless I misread.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes I'm seeing the qualifier "vastly better" in conjunction with a statement to do with James Herbet, perhaps he's become confused with James Herriot the author of All Creature Great and Small, they both write about bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Herbert is a much better writer than King, in every respect other than characterisation: much tighter plotting, less of a taste for padding and prevarication, better use of language. He also seems to have a bit more of a range.

 

As for Campbell, his early short story collections might be the best place to start looking.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not So Fast! 'Sandman' Adaptation Still On, Says Geoff Johns

by Rick Marshall in News, Vertigo

 

 

It was less than 24 hours ago that a report hit the 'net alleging that plans for a television series based on Neil Gaiman's award-winning "Sandman" comics had stalled out — but now it looks like rumors of the project's demise had been greatly exaggerated.

 

This afternoon, DC Entertainment Chief Creative Officer Geoff Johns took to Twitter to clarify yesterday's comments from "Supernatural" creator Eric Kripke, the former front-runner to helm "Sandman" on The CW. According to Johns, a "Sandman" series is not only still in the works, Gaimain himself will be involved with the project.

 

"Correction to world: The Sandman is AWAKE! :) Psyched to be working with @neilhimself on developing one of the greatest series ever!" wrote Johns.

 

Johns then went on to echo a sentiment many "Sandman" fans have voiced ever since the potential for an adaptation of the series was first mentioned years ago.

 

"Sandman in any form - comics to live action - doesn't work without @neilhimself," he wrote.

 

So, there you have it, folks. While it looks like Kripke's comments might indeed prove true regarding the absence of "Sandman" from this season's schedule, it looks like Morpheus and the rest of The Endless are headed for the small screen in some capacity — and two of comics' most beloved creators will be helping them get there.

 

Keep it locked to MTV Splash Page for more on "Sandman" as news develops.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...