www.dead-donkey.com
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/

Directors / Writers - Franchises or artists?
https://forum.dead-donkey.com/viewtopic.php?f=32&t=757		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  spudthedestroyer [ Fri Aug 01, 2003 10:03 am ]
Post subject:  Directors / Writers - Franchises or artists?
EDIT: Comment made about branding of They as "Wes Craven's" in the They thread

Has a hell of a lot of people downloading too :lol: I reckon it was the use of "Wes Craven" in the title, as he's always been a Franchise after Nightmare rather than a mark of quality.
Author:  Jack Deth [ Fri Aug 01, 2003 8:53 pm ]
Post subject: 
Yup, Wes Cravens name gets tossed around on many projects that he really doesn't have much to do with. I found this one a bit boring, but to each his own. Personally the only Craven films that I ever enjoyed were House On The Left and the original Nightmare On Elm Street. At least Craven was actually directing those.

Another name tossed around frequently in horror movies is Stephen King. Unfortunately his books are hard to make movies out of because of the massive character developement in them. That and the directors and screen writers take it upon themselves to change the stories around as they see fit. Just once I'd like to see a King book adapted to the screen and left intact rather than vivisected by some Hollywood asshole.
Author:  John_Doe [ Sat Aug 02, 2003 2:41 am ]
Post subject: 
there are a handfull of good SK adaptions IMO.
-Apt Pupil (story had much cooler ending though)
-Graveyard Shift (haven't read it)
-Shawshank Redemption
-Stand by Me
-Running Man (haven't read that either)
-Misery
-It (not very good, but decent. should've been much longer)
-Dead Zone (more I haven't read)
-Dark Half? (long time since I read and saw it)
-Children of the Corn (unread)
-Carrie
-Cat's Eye (unread)
Author:  Jack Deth [ Sat Aug 02, 2003 8:04 am ]
Post subject: 
The Dark Half directed by George A Romero was probably the best King adaption I've seen. Romero kept true to the book even down to the "Cracker" dialogue. Granted the film doesn't cover every aspect of the book. However that would be impossible to do in only two hours.
Author:  graag [ Sat Aug 02, 2003 8:50 am ]
Post subject: 
There's also The Stand (mini) - true to the book, very good. And Night Flyer, but I haven't seen it yet.
Author:  monkeysmasher [ Sat Aug 02, 2003 9:29 am ]
Post subject: 
hehe, off topic and you didnt even need me!

'they' havent watched it yet, but has never stopped me from having an opinion.
it was 'ok, i guess.'

the running man book was quite a bit different from the movie. if i read books, i;d like the book better.

too much details ,backstory, descriptions to make sk books into a 90minute lowbudget movie. those made for tv ones are decent, but they got that made for tv restrictions with violence, profanity, and booberies.

i wouldnt mind if future movies(well, i guess dvd's not the theatre/cinemas) were more interactive, kind of highlighted shovel-click on- tells the story how this shovel was used to kill dentists in the 1800's by a gang of rabbis. to much info in a book to really see all at once.
Author:  Jack Deth [ Sat Aug 02, 2003 10:09 am ]
Post subject: 
It'd be nice if HBO or Showtime remade IT and The Stand as a miniseries, but without the limitations of a regular made for TV movie. As I recall the TV version of IT really wimped out on the gore. Hell the first few pages of the book had that little kid getting his arm ripped off by the clown. While the television version just wimped out.

Barker is often a victim of bad movie making too. His short story Raw Head Rex was extremely violent, and had a much better ending than the lame assed movie that came out in the late 80's. (or early 90's I forget)
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC [ DST ]
What's blood for, if not for shedding?