The tough things about taking a very good piece of literature and putting into a mass media format is that everyone does a comparison between the two and very seldom do people view the film as a separate piece of work. Such is the case of `The Stand' and its transition to film. The novel, which I consider King's best, was rich with character and insight that as of this date I am now re-reading it for the tenth time. King's depiction of the personalities, both minor and major, enriched the reading pleasure to such a point that, as other people have stated here, they really did not want the book to end.
Film, on the other hand, has to weave a story than sets up an expectation for the viewer that it will end, and, by the way, will end on time. A mini-series will add the extra irritation of prepping scenes that will punctuate a commercial break. Oh well. Trying hard to separate the book from the film is impossible and without further commercial interruption is my impression of the film.
The Bad Points:
Point #1: Gary Senise was too young for Stu Redman. Okay, he did a very good job but part of the contention of the book was Stu's age in relation to Frannie's and Harold's resentment that his `girl' (who was older than him) was stolen by an older man. This was key to the build up of resentment in Harold.
Point #2: Why in the world did they put two characters (Nadine and Rita) into one? Come on now, it was Rita's character that caused the revelation in Larry's character (and the death of his mother) to take in humanity.
Point #3: The genesis of Randall Flagg and Mother Abigail were not exploited. Two of the richest characters that King has ever written about were reflections of their persona in the book. This, to me, was the largest problem because, after all, it was `The Stand' between the two of them that the book was all about.
The Good Points:
Everything else. Like the translation of `For Whom the Bell Tolls' from book to film, the great book was a great book because it was a book. The film, although not great, was pretty darn good. Anyone, like myself, expecting a page-by-page, character-by-character translation of King's original work to a frame-by-frame re-enactment of `The Stand' will be disappointed, but not much. Well over the 80% of the magic that King created in the book was faithfully captured in the film for those who wish to find it.
For those who did not read the book, hey, this is a pretty darn good film and is worth your time. Forget the bad points that I mentioned, just sit back and enjoy one of the better films about the post-Apocalypse United States and the non-Max Max, non-nuclear devastation, non-invading armies, desperation of a handful of people whose souls are on the line.
Film, on the other hand, has to weave a story than sets up an expectation for the viewer that it will end, and, by the way, will end on time. A mini-series will add the extra irritation of prepping scenes that will punctuate a commercial break. Oh well. Trying hard to separate the book from the film is impossible and without further commercial interruption is my impression of the film.
The Bad Points:
Point #1: Gary Senise was too young for Stu Redman. Okay, he did a very good job but part of the contention of the book was Stu's age in relation to Frannie's and Harold's resentment that his `girl' (who was older than him) was stolen by an older man. This was key to the build up of resentment in Harold.
Point #2: Why in the world did they put two characters (Nadine and Rita) into one? Come on now, it was Rita's character that caused the revelation in Larry's character (and the death of his mother) to take in humanity.
Point #3: The genesis of Randall Flagg and Mother Abigail were not exploited. Two of the richest characters that King has ever written about were reflections of their persona in the book. This, to me, was the largest problem because, after all, it was `The Stand' between the two of them that the book was all about.
The Good Points:
Everything else. Like the translation of `For Whom the Bell Tolls' from book to film, the great book was a great book because it was a book. The film, although not great, was pretty darn good. Anyone, like myself, expecting a page-by-page, character-by-character translation of King's original work to a frame-by-frame re-enactment of `The Stand' will be disappointed, but not much. Well over the 80% of the magic that King created in the book was faithfully captured in the film for those who wish to find it.
For those who did not read the book, hey, this is a pretty darn good film and is worth your time. Forget the bad points that I mentioned, just sit back and enjoy one of the better films about the post-Apocalypse United States and the non-Max Max, non-nuclear devastation, non-invading armies, desperation of a handful of people whose souls are on the line.