Stephen King goes to the movies... (1 Viewer)

[TravisR]

I honestly was not a big fan of the It movies...

The adulation that the first one got kinda confused me because I thought it was an OK movie but nothing special. I didn't even bother to rewatch the first one before seeing the second one.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I think the first one was massively popular with the general public because it was basically seen as Stranger Things: The Movie since it had kids in the 1980's. That's not the movie's "fault" but once they shifted off them being kids in the second movie, there was less interest from the public.

I would add while not a big fan of It, part one was a lot better than part two, which was pretty awful in my opinion.

I think I wrote something about it here in one of the It threads but man, I thought part two was a crap fest.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

On the other hand, Doctor Sleep did a phenomenal job of adapting King’s book while telling the story in the vernacular Stanley Kubrick established, while bridging the differences between the source material so that it could work as sequel to the “Shining” film even though “The Shining” book is so different from the movie. I thought it was going to be an impossible task but Flanagan made a film that might actually be better than both King’s “Doctor Sleep” novel and Kubrick’s “Shining” film.

It’s really a tremendous film that just didn’t get noticed the way it should have.

 

[TravisR]

I would add while not a big fan of It, part one was a lot better than part two, which was pretty awful in my opinion.

I think I wrote something about it here in one of the It threads but man, I thought part two was a crap fest.

I really like Bill Hader and Jessica Chastain so I didn't hate the second one... but I basically have no interest in seeing it again either.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I also recall all the hype leading up to The Dark Tower. I was up in Maine before that came out and I recall walking into a store and the magazine stand was loaded with magazines with The Dark Tower on the cover. I bought a few of the magazines to throw on the counter to read while having morning coffee. They thought, or sold it like, the picture was going to be huge and the first in a franchise of films. Elba was hyped as this amazing choice to play the gunslinger.

That totally bombed and I don't know how expensive it was.

Doctor Sleep I thought was a good film and Flanagan nailed it. For whatever reason, it did not connect with people. I was in a movie club with a couple of guys and asked them if they wanted to go see it and both said, "No, does not look interesting."

Flanagan's longer cut was even better than the theatrical and I don't think that happens often.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I really like Bill Hader and Jessica Chastain so I didn't hate the second one... but I basically have no interest in seeing it again either.

On the other hand now I want to see Doctor Sleep again.

 

[TravisR]

Flanagan's longer cut was even better than the theatrical and I don't think that happens often.

For me, the director's cut of Doctor Sleep is the rare movie where I feel that the long version is really the only way to go.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I think Doctor Sleep underperformed for two reasons, both of which are versions of bad timing.

It came out a month or so after It Part 2, which audiences didn’t care much for. It’s hard to sell more of something to an audience when they’re already over it in that moment. If you’re disappointed with the Stephen King film you’ve just seen, you’re probably not rushing out to see another one right away.

And it also had a lousy release date. You don’t put out a new horror movie the week after Halloween. That’d be like putting out a Christmas movie in the middle of January.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

For me, the director's cut of Doctor Sleep is the rare movie where I feel that the long version is really the only way to go.

I have to watch that again - I’ve seen the theatrical twice and the directors cut once and I remember liking the shorter one more, but not significantly so. The original “Shining” movie also has two different cuts so there’s a nice symmetry there.

 

[TravisR]

And it also had a lousy release date. You don’t put out a new horror movie the week after Halloween.

The logic of having released Doctor Sleep then is about as unfathomable to me as how they built the pyramids.

 

[dpippel]

I'll throw in my vote for the Director's Cut of Doctor Sleep. I strongly prefer it over the theatrical.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

I'll throw in my vote for the Director's Cut of Doctor Sleep. I strongly prefer it over the theatrical.

You guys sold me, next time I watch it, I’ll put that version on.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

For me, the director's cut of Doctor Sleep is the rare movie where I feel that the long version is really the only way to go.

Essentially, when you do a longer version there really needs to be a good reason you are putting those scenes back in because there was probably a good reason why they were cut. With Doctor Sleep, they were only cut for time and Flanagan did not want to cut them but was under contract I believe to have the picture come in at a certain length. So, in reality the director's cut of Doctor Sleep is what Flanagan intended and wanted to release. I believe the story went that he cut a deal to have them put out his cut on the Blu-ray as part of making the film.

A lot of longer cuts stink. A lot of recuts after the fact stink. The version of Alien that Scott put scenes back into is kind of an abomination.

Funny thing, a great recut of a picture that got released on Blu was the "fan edit" of De Palma's Raising Cain. Which is not really a fan edit, the guy cut it the way De Palma had wanted it cut in the first place. The studio did not like the De Palma cut, thought it was too confusing so they cut the picture so it was all in chronological order. Which, did hurt the final product.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I think Josh has a good point about the fact that they were really flooding the market for a while with King shows and films and there is the issue of if you are disappointed with one it can deaden your interest in watching another. Also too much of something kind of kills the feeling that the picture is an event. It becomes just one more.

I believe they will make Revival because they seem to want to make everything King writes into a film or show or both. I just hope when they do make it they go all out or bring back Flanagan to do it. I want to see them make the picture but don't want to see it done in a bargain basement way. Maybe waiting to make it was/is the best thing.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

So, outside of the new Firestarter film, it looks like there is one other picture coming this year that is based on a King story, Mr. Harrigan's Phone, which is about a kid that keeps the cell phone of a dead man and it appears the dead man begins to respond to the messages he sends him.

Donald Sutherland, always good, plays Mr. Harrigan and John Lee Hancock directs. Sounds like a promising picture to me and I am more interested in it than the Firestarter remake. I should add this feature is being made for Netflix.

 

[TravisR]

Sounds like a promising picture to me and I am more interested in it than the Firestarter remake.

Well, it can't be worse than Firestarter. Either of them actually.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Well, it can't be worse than Firestarter. Either of them actually.

I've seen the original Firestarter, not a great film, and always wondered how it would have turned out if John Carpenter made it (he walked away from it during preproduction over a budget issue I believe). I also think Carpenter came up with a script that the owners of the property did not like because it changed things from the novel.

I have not seen, and probably won't see, the new Firestarter. Maybe if some night it pops up streaming somewhere and I have nothing else I am doing I may attempt to get through it but I really have no interest in it.

I'm big on Revival getting made and believe, as does Mike Flanagan, it has the potential to be one of the great Stephen King pictures. I certainly think Flanagan displays a feel for the material, so at the moment he would be my first choice to make it.

 

[TravisR]

I've seen the original Firestarter, not a great film, and always wondered how it would have turned out if John Carpenter made it...

I wonder how most movies would be if John Carpenter had made them.

I will give the original Firestarter one thing- the fire stunts are pretty great and probably insanely dangerous.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

I wonder how most movies would be if John Carpenter had made them.

I will give the original Firestarter one thing- the fire stunts are pretty great and probably insanely dangerous.

I think it is a good story and I like George C. Scott. I think De Palma's The Fury is a far better picture in this vein though and I am a fan of that film.

 

[Winston T. Boogie]

Also, in the crazy psychic powers genre, which seems to have kind of vanished after that mid 1970s to mid 1980s period, Scanners is fantastic and I also like The Sender. Firestarter was one of the weaker entries of this type of film.