Re: The Dark Tower
 

When Flagg shows up at the end of The Wastelands, that's not the introduction of a minor character. That's King promising readers, "This is going to be BIG." I know it sent a chill through me the first time I read the scene. If it's a minor character, why use Flagg?

And making him Marten, the central antagonist of both Roland and his father in Gilead, further raises him above the level of minor player.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

King also revised The Gunslinger so that Flagg is also the Man in Black.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dar...panded_edition

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I finally finished the 7th book over the weekend. Having gone into the last two books knowing that King wrote himself in, I was prepared for the worst but wasn't totally disappointed in how it played out. I didn't like how King likened himself to God (or Gan) over these characters but it's only a minor gripe.

I agree that the Flagg death was a HUGE letdown -- while the death itself was graphic as hell, the manner in which it was handled was out of left field. To me he played a major role in the novel from the first page of book 1 to book 6. He antagonized Roland his entire life.

I understand JJ Abrams owns the rights to these novels for future movie possibilities... if it's true, I wonder how he'd handle a story as long as this.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

My brother and sister-in-law were talking about that very topic over drinks a few weeks ago, Rob. I think the best possible scenario is an HBO mini-series or an up-front commitment for 30 or so episodes over 3 years.

No way any studio would bankroll it the way New Line did with LotR and even if they did, it would still be too rushed to do it any justice.

Either way, there's going to be a lot cut out.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I don't think it would have nearly the hype or "box office" power that LoTR did either. Having never read the LoTR books, I wonder if they had as many letdowns or plot question marks that TDT did (IMO)? With King adding himself to the novels it's not something you can really get away with in a feature film.

I could see a series on HBO, that would probably be the best way to handle it.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

That, disappointingly, fell through last year. From wiki:

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I'm kinda of surprised at his trepidation considering he rebooted Star Trek and most of King's adaptations to the big or small screen have been mediocre at best. The Stand was epic as a novel but fell flat to me as a TV movie. The Dark Tower would be hell to translate to a movie but I'd love to see him try.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

The question is why would King do that? He was fully aware of what he was doing. How could he not be? To me it seems that King was saying Roland has always been his worst enemy, not Flagg, in spite of the antagonism. So it's fitting in many ways that Roland doesn't get to directly kill him (indirectly of course his son does). He still hasn't overcome his own demons, so he can have no bigger enemy. Roland doesn't kill the Crimson King either, but he does kill Mordred who is actually Roland's physical manifestation of his inner demons.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

It also implies that Flagg was also his own worst enemy, getting himself killed by underestimating other forces.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Yeah, I really didn't have a problem with the way he handled Flagg. I always kind of thought Flagg was his own worst enemy.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Good point --- just given that Flagg was essentially with Roland from the very first sentence of the series it seemed like an odd way to exit him out. I expected Roland to do it.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

He'll be back. Other worlds and all that. I don't think the worldslinger would Boba Fett the ageless stranger like.

Hoping he'll make an appearance in Talisman 3.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Flagg is dead and I don't expect to see him again (unless Talisman 3 takes place prior to DT7, or some other work).

Re: The Dark Tower
 

He is Legion.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

The Vanguard of our Destruction?

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Flagg did have a very Boba fett way of going out in the Dark Tower. Very disappointing.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

He got away at the last second in Eyes of the Dragon(hit in the eye with and arrow and disappears), he got away at the last second of the expanded The Stand(nuked/hand of god and disappears). He had a last second when Mordred changes from baby to spider.

Probably not but a guy can hope.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I'm reading Book 4 again and thinking of the movie, Stephen Moyer popped into my head as Roland:


http://toddyenglish.files.wordpress....en-moyer11.jpg

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I just pictured Roland as a young Clint Eastwood... but the guy above looks eerily like him anyways.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I loved the first three Dark Tower books. Used to pester the local B. Dalton's asking them if they'd heard anything about a release date between books. I can re-read those three books again and again. Book 4....so-so. I thought the whole "Wizard of Oz" think was kinda flaky. But then, after an eternity, book 5 appeared and I loved every second of it. It was like he caught his second wind and got his mojo back. But then...book 6 was dull and went nowhere. Book 7 was fine, although it covered so much ground it was sorta tiring. I was okay with the ending, but some things along the way irked me.

I felt that King rushed the ending just to get it over with. He swept Flagg under the rug and introduced Spider-Boy just so he could kill Flagg then conveinently die from food poison and gunshot wounds. I'm not entirely against King appearing in his own book, I guess.

The worst thing King did though was revise Book 1. I wish I never read the revised version. It was awful. King painted himself into a corner so he just decides Martin and Walter are one and the same to make his job of finishing the series off easier. My head hurt after reading it, like Roland's did in The Waste Lands dealing with the fact that Jake was both dead and alive or something.

I stopped reading King after the Dark Tower ended (well...okay, I read Cell too, but I wish I hadn't). It just felt like the right time to part ways. His books had been going downhill for me for a while. I read my first King in 5th grade (Pet Sematary). My bookshelf still proudly displays a complete set of King hardcovers, but I feel no need to read anything further by him, even though I'm sure there's probably some good stuff popping out now and then. There are other things in this life that need to be read and my time keeps getting shorter and shorter so I need to spread myself around like manure. I'll always consider Mr. King a friend and revisit my favorite books by him whenever I get a chance.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I did pretty much the same as you read everything he did up through DT7 and fell off after that. Never finished Buick or Cell. However, Under the Dome is amazing. Vintage King. Something you should put on your reading list.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Yea, I don't see how any of it was rushed. And I think myself and others have put up really good defenses for why Mordred was introduced and Flagg was taken out that way. Flagg was never really Roland's problem, Roland was Roland's problem (Mordred being the physical manifestation of this, so Roland's offspring killing Flagg fits even better)). It's why he had to keep going through the cycle. Roland didn't deserve to kill Flagg. And Flagg, like most King evil doers, didn't get a glorious death, he got a sad pathetic one. King loves to pull the old okey-doke on the baddies. There's plenty of thematic reasons for Flagg's death. Whereas Boba Fett's just seemed like a joke for Lucas.

I prefer the revised book. But I read it first, and much preferred the tie-ins to the rest of the series. I also like that it works on a meta level, thanks to the the whole cycle idea. I'd love if he revised the next 3 too. It's not that different anyway.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I think I'm "Kinged Out" right now myself.... I have Under the Dome but another 1000 pager sounds like reading burnout to me. That said I just cracked open The Passage and it checks in at 750 so I guess that's a double standard :)

I felt some of the moments in the series were drawn out or corny but I also felt compelled to have to read every page from start to finish. No story short of Crime and Punishment has stuck with me longer than this set of novels.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Killing Flagg may have been thematically acceptable, but it sure wasn't satisfying. I'd argue he didn't have any real reason. He could have come up with something a lot more satisfactory without compromising the story. Hell, the whole book exposed the fact that he pictures himself as the god of his book world. He can do anything.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I never had a problem with the way Flagg died... I always just looked at it as Flagg thought he was bigger and stronger than he actually was, he was only the face of evil because we only saw the lands that he was able to be a bad ass. Once you get a glimpse in to the actual structure of the the way the bad guys work you realize Flagg is a small cog, there are much bigger players in the game. I thought the way he died fit well, he was cast aside because he wasn't really that important in the grand scheme of things.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Ron Howard and Akiva Goldsmith are going to make three movies and a tv series based on the dark tower!

http://hollywoodinsider.ew.com/2010/...he-dark-tower/

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Excellent news!

Re: The Dark Tower
 

If y'all want to be part of the Movie Talk thread: http://forum.dvdtalk.com/movie-talk/...ar-god-no.html

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Looks like we're getting a complete Dark Tower box-set.



http://www.cemeterydance.com/mm5/gra...ge_540x472.jpg

http://www.cemeterydance.com/mm5/gra...ge_540x474.jpg

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Here's how I see the series. I liken it to the MPAA ratings system. A filmmaker submits their film to the ratings board in hopes of getting an R rating. It comes back with an NC-17. You have to make changes then resubmit. You may have to do this dozens of times as they never tell you what to cut or change. Each time you submit I believe it costs you $10,000.

Now, Roland reaches the Tower yet finds himself back in the desert where he started but with the Horn of Eld. He must do it again but not the same. He must change something to get a different result. Maybe not let Jake go in the mountains. Maybe him being with you on the beach will prevent you from getting your fingers and toes bitten by the Lobstrosities.

Who knows how many times Roland has made this journey. Once? Twice? 19 times?

I think the ending was exactly what it needed to be. I'm glad King wrote this epic as I believe it will stand the test of time.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I understand why people are saying this is a great ending to the story but I have to continue to disagree. It might be a good ending IF Roland realised that this was happening and that he has a chance to make a change but without that realization, the entire story is pointless. Everyone comes up with these numbers of how many times he might have been thru this process, they make a big point of the fact that on the latest go around, he has the horn. But in fact, we have no idea how many times he has done this, you throw out numbers like once, twice or 19 times. I say 20,000 or 100,000 or 25 million. It is all speculation. To think that the horn will make a difference is more speculation, he might have had that horn 60,000 times in other cycles for all that we know.

Let me give you an analogy. Have you ever played a video game? I am going to use Miss Pac-man as my model.

You put a quarter in the game (old school) and the game lights up and Miss Pac-man can move on the screen. You can move her right or left, up or down, you can grab the fruit and you can even eat the ghost to clear a screen. Eventually you get to new screens and clear them until sometime down the road, one of the ghosts get you and you get the joy of starting over again. Now it's a great game and I have enjoyed many hours of playing it, BUT, do you think that Miss Pac-man is happy because this time she gets pushed to the right at the start instead of the left? Do you think she has the memory of starting to the left the last time? That on the last game she got the fruit or ate the ghosts before they killed her?

And so this is my point. I thought the journey of the story was great, King tells a vibrant story. But in this case, it is literally meaningless. It actually has no meaning, because it has no ending. EVERYTHING that Roland does is absolutely pointless (just like Miss Pac-man). He ended no suffering, he accomplished no goals, he saved no lives, he made no friends. EVERYTHING he did, he will have to do again and again and again for eternity as far as we can tell. He is living in hell. His existence is pointless and he is doomed to relive his pointless existence eternally. And that is why I hate the twist ending. Because it is not an ending. It is just another quarter in the slot for Roland to play again. And in the due course of time, someone is just going to unplug the machine and throw it away.

To me, and I realise this is not everyone's opinion, this "ending" is one of the worst I have ever read. There isn't hope that so many are expressing with his horn by his side this time. There is only eternal punishment of reliving this over and over again. And I wanted better for Roland. I thought he deserved that. King evidently didn't.

Last word, if any of you have seen the movie Dr Strange, there is a similar event at the end of this movie. A time loop the the bad guy doesn't want to keep living in. He decides that he will give you ANYTHING to avoid having to relive that loop for eternity. But there is a MAJOR difference here. He was aware that he was reliving this, Roland isn't. Roland and Miss Pac-man. Pawns til the end of time.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

All of that being said, I am looking forward to the movie. Just hope that they end it this time.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Except, a change was made. You're assuming the fact that he has the horn is a random occurrence, while my reading of the ending is that it heavily implies that there's a progression.

It's been a while since I read the last book, but from what I recall, Roland specifically reflected on the horn while in the Dark Tower, specifically regretting losing it. So the next time round, he has the horn.

With all the talk of Ka in the series, I see the ending as a reflection on the concept of Karma and re-incarnation. Each time Roland reaches the Tower, he's done a little better as a person, and so each time he "restarts" in an incrementally better position.

To put it into video game terms, it's a bit like the games where, once you finish, you can replay the game, but maybe you start over again with your current player stats, and the game itself is a little different.

Or another way to look at it, the ending now reminds me of the recent Doctor Who episode "Heaven Sent," and Roland is, to paraphrase The Doctor, "one hell of a bird."

Re: The Dark Tower
 

I totally understand why you HOPE the horn has meaning. And no I am not assuming that the horn being with him on this go around is a random event. What I am stating is the FACT that we don't KNOW that it is significant. And I don't agree that it implies that there is a progression.

This type of ending is called a "Sisyphean Ending". Named after Sisyphus of greek mythology. This strongly implies that Roland will never end his journey.

Ask yourself this, why did he want the horn? What does the horn do? In which situations that we saw Roland in, would the horn help him? Since Roland now has the horn, what will he do differently this go around?

The answers of course are, we dont know, we don't know, we don't know and we don't know. So you placing meaning in the fact that he has the horn is PURELY speculation and the fact that having invested so much of your time and hope in the Roland character, you WANT the horn to mean something. But there is no reason for you to think that other than your hopes, wishes and desires.

And that my friend is why I think the ending sucks. Authors tell stories and we listen, watch or read them expecting a conclusion of some sort. It doesn't have to be spelled out, THE END. It can be hanging with the understanding that the end is within reach or that it is in sight. What King did with neither, my take away was that no matter what Roland does, if he saves Jake or not, if he draws the three or not, it he rides Blaine the train or not, it doesn't matter. When he gets to the top of the tower, he will keep finding himself in the desert. And nothing in the book says differently.

In this regard, HE failed as the author. I am not being obtuse or stupid here. If a story ends and 10 different people that read it have 10 different theories about the ending, then there isn't an ending. And with this story, that's the one thing it lacks.

It would be as valid to end the story as it stands now by saying, "Roland placed the horn to his lips. He trumpeted a mighty blast, in the distance dust rose. The dust thickened into a whirlwind which towered into the skies, and at the apex Roland saw a house. The house was spinning within the whirlwind and when it landed with a crash, only the feet of the Crimson King could be seen sticking out from beneath it.Roland then walks into the dark tower."

Silly, yes. Valid ending to this story? Sure, why not. Maybe that is exactly what the horn does. Care to speculate a little?

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Sisyphus was doomed to repeat the same task unending and unchanging. Roland's journey has changed, so it's not Sisyphean.

Also, you're expecting the horn to have a practical impact on the journey somehow, which I don't think is the significance. Instead, it's a reflection on how Roland himself has changed. Previously, he was a person who left the horn where it lay without hesitation. He later regretted that. This time around, he took the horn with him, reflecting a change in his character this time around. He's slowly becoming a better person.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

Sisyphus's task was unending but not nessessarily unchanging, I mean sometimes the rock might have rolled back down on his right side, sometimes on his left, sometime over his foot. It's possible.

And I think you are projecting what you want on Roland. You say that taking the horn this time means he is somehow slowly becoming a better person. Maybe it just means he's a hoarder and he just likes stuff. Either are as likely as the other.

We could go on and on about this and there would still be no resolution. And that's the problem. King should have resolved it, not two people discussing it 10 years after he wrote it.

I am willing to look at what you are saying and say that it is possible. But nothing in the story says that you are right in what you want it to mean or that I am wrong when I say that it is just wishful thinking and speculation on your part.

Stephen King is one of the two best story tellers I have ever read. The other being Tom Clancy. But King should have had an ending to this story. I invested alot of time and some money in seeing where the story would go. The journey was great, but if he would have been within reach of me when I finished this story, I would have strangled him right there.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

This is just semantic nitpicking. the point is that Sisyphus always started the same, there was no change to how he started his task, and no hope that his journey would change in any significant manner or any hope of redemption. It was a punishment. In contrast, my interpretation of the ending of the Dark Tower allows for the chance of redemption via his changed beginning.

There is nothing in the text that definitively states my interpretation is the correct one. But since I find my interpretation more satisfying than yours, and by your own admission they're at least equally supported by the text, I'm going to opt for my interpretation.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

OK, so I pulled out a copy of Dark Tower and looked at the ending. Here's the relevant passage, and I've bolded the important line:

So the text actually explicitly states that the horn is a sign that Roland's quest isn't an unending Sisyphean endeavor, but that there's the potential for change, and even an end to his quest.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

And you made me go and pull me copy to take a look. You are correct in the quote but once again we differ on the meaning. You look at it as a promise that he MIGHT be able to find an ending. But I read back a chapter before the one you quoted and in the context of what I read it sounds more like a Siren promise. The tower promises him that there MAY be an end just like the Sirens songs promised joy and happiness and a good time to sailors if they would only sail their ships onto the rocks and swim to the Sirens.

Nothing in what you quoted above is a promise of anything. It is a coaxing to make him keep trying and trying.

Read the chapter prior to your quote, the end of that chapter after the door with Roland on it.

He opens the door and realises what is happening. Knows that he has done this many times before. Here is a quote for you.

"How many times had he climbed the stairs only to find himself peeled back, curved back, turned back? Not to the beginning (WHEN THINGS MIGHT HAVE BEEN CHANGED AND TIME'S CURSE LIFTED) but to the moment in the Mohaine desert when he finally understood that his thoughtless, questionless quest would ultimately succeed? How many times had he traveled a loop like the one in the clip that had once pinched off his navel,his own tet-ka can Gan? How many times would he travel it?

Oh,no! He screamed. Please, not again, have pity! Have mercy!

The hands pulled him forward regardless. The hand of the tower knew no mercy."

And a paragraph further,

"And each time you forget the last time. For you, each time is the first time."

That tells me it is endless. Despite the false hopes and promises being made.

Re: The Dark Tower
 

You seem hung up on Greek mythology, when it's obvious that the book series is referencing eastern mythology and philosophy, especially Karma and reincarnation.

Ask yourself, what is the point of the "siren promise"? Roland isn't going to remember the promise, and as you pointed out from the passage, he always forgets. He'd go headlong back into his quest, promise or no, because without memory of his past journeys he'd be just as determined as ever. So it's not a "siren" promise because it doesn't lure him, and it's not necessary. If King wanted it to be clearly a relentless, unending loop of an ending, he'd have left out the horn completely, and it would've fit your interpretation better. As it is, you have to deliberately take the negative interpretation that the Tower is lying to Roland about the promise of change and end, even though such a lie serves no purpose.

The lack of memory of past journeys doesn't mean the loop is endless anymore than the fact that people don't remember past lives means that the reincarnation loop is endless. It doesn't matter whether people remember their past lives, what matters is their actions in it determined the type of life they were currently born into. The progression is in the new conditions in the new life, just like the addition of the horn signifies that Roland's life has changed.

The Tower is merciless, but that doesn't mean it's cruel. His loops have a point.