La Tour sombre

I've been looking forward to seeing this movie for a few years, I've read all the books including the more recent one ('The Wind Thru the Keyhole') and other books that Walter appeared in. It's currently 2017, and anyone who hasn't learned the 'book to movie' lesson by now needs to finally learn it so that they can also enjoy movies what they are, which is an extra bonus for a book that is well liked by a lot of people. If the movie actually turns out good than all the better, but being more realistic about movies not having to live up to the books they're based on is best thing to do so you don't end up like the rest of these bitter people who leave the movie theater as quickly as possible just to come back home and write a 'nerd'tastic negative one starred review expressing all their deep down inner angst in the most pathetic form possible. Luckily I beat many of them to the punch before they tore this fun and entertaining movie apart, and I did find it entertaining thanx to having zero expectations about it, go ahead and try it next time you go to a similar movie, you'll at least temporarily enjoy yourself. Whining and complaining about trivial things isn't good for you or anyone else anyways.

I thought they did a fairly good job considering all the various challenges that this potential movie presented them, and the fact that it at one point seemed like it may never even get released or get just get much further delayed didn't make the project seem as promising as it did when first hearing about it's production a few years back for the first time. I got my expectations up very high when I first heard about it, but as time went on I would settle for just about anything decent, and 'decent' it sure was, though I'll rate the movie a 10 to make up for one or two reviews from the Negative Nancys of IMDb. I'm happy to see that Sony left this open for a sequel, It's still not a for sure thing if they'll make another, though King seems to think they will, but I'd pay a lot of money to see a movie based of the backstory from 'Wizard and Glass'.

Bottom line: Have fun, it's a fun movie whether you have read the books or not. Not a bad choice for the kids either, lot of action, no nudity, and not much cussing from what I recall, (12+ is my guess depending on who you are, ratings can be deceiving).

If you haven't read the books: Read them if you're an avid reader, you won't regret it, but if you're just an average reader then the 8 books will take you far too long to get thru and you'll probably give up and have wasted a lot of time trying. One trick is just to be disciplined enough to read every single day if possible, and it doesn't even have to be much because it will add up over the course of year, and if you were to read 10 - 15 pages per day every day you'd be able to finish 'The Dark Tower' series within one year. (Quick easy formula: 365 days per year, very roughly 365 pages per book, so 5 pages per day will get you thru 5 books per year, and not difficult at all to make that 40 pages per day, and at the end of the year you will have read 40 BOOKS! Probably more books than you've ready in your life, just got to form the habit first and go from there, keep track with a notebook to stay disciplined if you have to).

Other King suggestions: 'The Shining' Even better than the movie, and possibly underrated because of the movie's popularity, and the fact most people are too lazy to read.

'The Eyes of the Dragon' Walter is a main character, and King once again digs into the darkness of the man's psyche while weaving a great story in Medieval times.

'The Stand' The ultimate apocalyptic adventure with Walter doing what he does best, and the fate of the lives of dozens of different characters all linked to Walter thru their dreams of him, and has 1000 or so pages to all find each other and come together to somehow stop him while avoiding much betrayal and many obstacles along the beaten path that is led and aided by their other dreams of another character who is out to help them find where they need to be going.

'Different Seasons' No, it's not a story about a possessed spice rack) This book includes four novellas (short novels). Most of you will recognize of 2 or 3 of the others as those were all turned into good movies ('The Shawshank Redemption' 'Apt Pupil' and 'The Body' AKA 'Stand By Me'), and just as is usually the case are far superior to the films, and not that the films are bad at all.

It's just the reality that books always beat movies, it's no contest at all, but movies are a time for us to do something unproductive and be happy while doing it. So don't be like these sad saps who would actually pay for a movie knowing very well that they'll not have a good time. One of the secrets to life is 'to have a good time when you're able to', and if you like to laugh at bad movies that are trying to be serious then you need to finally get yourself on the MST3K and Rifftrax bandwagon.

I have not read any of the novels, but I think I would be even more upset about the amateurism of this movie, and about the murdering of those (probably) awesome novels.

First of all I would like to mention the aspects of the movie which were pretty good: -The scenery: The wastelands of Roland's world were beautiful. -The special effects/fight scenes: I was actually surprised how good the action scenes in this movie were. The special effect guys did a very good job. The fight scenes with Roland shooting bullets in slow-motion and Walter O'Dim's scenes were extremely fun to watch. -The actors: In my opinion the actors did a pretty good job. They did their best with the horrible script the writers handed to them.

And now the negative aspects: -Awful writing: I have no idea how can four (!!!) writers create a stupid dialog and story like this. It's not even the book's fault, because as I know the story is completely different than the one of the books'. -The constant switching between the two worlds, the involvement of the "asian medium lady" and her village, the repetitive usage of the Warriors' praying were so unimportant that it makes me mad. Not to mention the ending...as if it was made for 6 years olds. -Sloppy directing: The director was nominated for BAFTA Award, so I am pretty sure he just did not give a damn about making the movie at least mediocre with the absence of a proper script. The cuts in this movie (when there's no fight) are very annoying, and I am pretty sure I could have cut it to be more watchable than Nikolaj Arcel did (and I have not directed anything yet).

Summary: The books had a perfect material to create an excellent movie series, but someone decided to create an upset, a ruined cinematography from it. I am pretty sure it is the fault of the negligence of the people behind this movie (writers;director). If a Sergio Leone directed this movie with the given universe, it would have become a classic. Now it's a movie nobody will remember after a couple of months (if yes, then it would be due to their hatred for the production crew).

Imagine someone told all of Game of Thrones in one movie that was just an hour and a half, then cut out 99% of the story. :(

I did NOT read the books; I had not even heard of this movie; it's a random DVR grab from cable. I enjoyed it, despite some minor flaws.

PROS: We have some great casting -- Mathew McConaughey is creepy and effective as The Man in Black and Idris Elba is perfect as the slightly washed-up Gunslinger (capital G as there is a knightly connotation). The pacing is pleasantly fast; the director expects the audience to piece together some of the background story instead of having it entirely spoon-fed to them. I liked this approach; it exercised my brain a bit.

CONS: The underlying plot structure is quite standard, and this makes some developments rather predictable. Also, it's rather convenient that everyone in the universe speaks English.

IN SUM: It's fun and a bit different. I like the mixing of tech from different worlds. I give this seven (7) stars for escapist entertainment.

Stephen King is notoriously difficult to adapt, some of his work near-unfilmable or at least with parts that are (i.e. 'IT'). Which is why film/television adaptations are such a mixed bag.

Made up of eight books, 'The Dark Tower' book series is simply spectacular, with wildly entertaining and imaginative stories, a deft mix of genres, unparalleled attention to detail and conflict and with characters that are far more than standard clichés. Hearing that there was going to be a film, part of me was a little excited but there was even more apprehension considering the scale and length of the series on the whole. Also because of the reception the film received, being critically panned but the audience reaction being much more mixed.

After seeing it, 'The Dark Tower' to me wasn't as bad as reputed to be and could have been far worse. The complaints however are understandable and valid, contrary to what those vehemently and in some cases condescendingly say those who found problems with the film do know what they're talking about. There are merits with 'The Dark Tower', but it has a lot of problems that cannot be ignored, no matter how hard people try. Considering the track record for Stephen King adaptations, it was useless expecting a straight up adaptation on my part and the film was seen with no aim to compare the different mediums and instead judge it on its own.

There are much better adaptations of King's work, especially 'The Shawshank Redemption', 'Stand By Me', 'Misery', 'Dolores Claiborne', 'Carrie' (1976), 'Salem's Lot', 'The Shining' (Kubrick) and 'The Green Mile'. There are also far worse, such as 'Children of the Corn' (2009), 'Sleepwalkers', 'Tommyknockers', 'Thinner', 'Dreamcatcher' and 'The Langoliers' (of the ones seen, there's some to go yet). 'The Dark Tower' is towards the weaker end though. As an adaptation, it's pretty much an abortion, asking for a straight up faithful adaptation of one book was a big ask but this feels like a severely truncated cliff-notes version of one book with fleeting references to the others.

This did affect the pacing and storytelling of the film, and reinforced the notion in my mind that the books are better adapted as a series of at least two hour films or a series of mini-series. One film of just over 90 minutes, whether in comparison to the books or on its own, just doesn't cut it.

It's not an irredeemable film by all means. The acting was the best asset, with a calmly stoic, gravitas-filled and the personification of authoritative dignity Idris Elba particularly acquitting himself well. Tom Taylor is also credible, instead of bland or annoying or both he holds his own. While views on Matthew McConaughey's villain were more mixed, McConaughey to me had a few uneven moments where he was too smug (blame the writing more than him though) but mostly he was suitably sinister.

For a limited budget, 'The Dark Tower' could have looked worse. Not everything visually works, but it's skilfully photographed, atmospherically lit and has some quite authentic production design. The action is choreographed reasonably well and has suspense, excitement and tension. The music has some haunting moments and positively pulsates.

However, 'The Dark Tower' is far too short and feels very rushed as a result of cramming in a lot. The film does try to do too much and doesn't have the length to do much with any of it, which makes a lot of elements underwritten and without much impact. Only in the action does the film excite or nail-bites, the script is far too watered down, cliché ridden and half-baked to make the exposition scenes work and characterisation is severely wanting despite the valiant efforts of the cast.

Not everything works visually. Some of the editing is sloppy and the visual effects look like they were made last minute and with the worst of budget limitations. The direction shows unease with the material, while the story is choppy and the ending rushed and anti-climactic. Pacing is erratic, the exposition is clunky and very draggy while the final third is over-stuffed and was in need of slowing down.

In summation, could have been far worse and it is watchable but as an adaptation it's a disaster and judging it on its own terms sees just as many problems. Even when one is trying not to compare, which this review really tried not to and only mentioned how it fared as an adaptation in half a paragraph or something, 'The Dark Tower' is very problematic on its own.

Oh and, despite being a subjective person, don't let those defending the film make you feel like it's illegal to dislike the film and have problems with it, this whole agenda-against-critics has become out of control and uncalled for. If one likes the film fine but learn the difference between fact and opinions and be mature. 5/10 Bethany Cox