MovieChat Forums > The Stand (1994) Discussion > So now the film is either on hold or aba...

So now the film is either on hold or abandoned...

posted 8 years ago by Gabe1972
15 replies | jump to latest

I was excited about the fact that they were finally going to make a proper film of the novel, but now it looks like it was put on hold or completely abandoned. Bummer. I'd love to see a real film of this if it was done right and gave the same feeling as the novel, which the miniseries certainly didn't have.

The miniseries was okay, but let's face it...it was a TV miniseries. It's awfully hard to make The Stand into a TV friendly miniseries and still have it convey the same feeling. It just didn't work.

Ugh. I've been waiting for a movie of this novel for years.

Time wounds all heels.

[–] gary_overman 8 years ago

I was excited about the fact that they were finally going to make a proper film of the novel, but now it looks like it was put on hold or completely abandoned. Bummer. I'd love to see a real film of this if it was done right and gave the same feeling as the novel, which the miniseries certainly didn't have.

The miniseries was okay, but let's face it...it was a TV miniseries. It's awfully hard to make The Stand into a TV friendly miniseries and still have it convey the same feeling. It just didn't work.

Ugh. I've been waiting for a movie of this novel for years.

Like you, I was looking forward to another effort to capture this novel on film, but not because I was disappointed in the 1994 effort. I was not.

This mini-series is one of my all-time favorite DVD's, and I thought it was an excellent (certainly not perfect) movie. Rather than a movie, perhaps they ought to think about a full season series on a premium cable service (HBO, Showtime, etc.) The story needs this much time to be adequately presented.

Your thoughts?

[–] Gabe1972 8 years ago

A premium cable service could work for a series based on this novel. It would certainly work better than a TV miniseries, IMHO. There are simply too many scenes in that novel that convey a sense of dread that can't be replicated on a standard TV network.

I think that's the major problem with the miniseries. It was enjoyable, but the feeling you get in the pit of your stomach when reading the novel just wasn't there, at least it wasn't for me. It was just too "nice". The opening scene in the novel (I think it's the opening scene...it's been a long time since reading it) of the dead in the complex is just one of the best opening scenes of any horror novel ever written. The setup just gives this complete sense of hopelessness. Plus, of course, the female zoo. They certainly weren't going to put that on TV. LOL.

Time wounds all heels.

[–] standfan 8 years ago

Gabe I have a tendency to agree with you. However, I think the miniseries was an acceptable telefilm for 1994. I don't believe it has aged well in some respects. I also don't believe that it was directed that effectively, and I think this shows.

I agree about stuff like The Zoo. There's other stuff, such as the military executing people on live television, and other parts of the novel that I am not even thinking about.

I do admit that for a long time I looked at the miniseries with rose colored glasses, and I realize that part of that was due to some of the excellent acting performances that are in the '94 miniseries. Part of what "broke" me from that was seeing the terrific directing from the likes of Frank Darabont and Rob Reiner with Stephen King's material. Re-reading the book made me wish for scenes to be done, and characters to be fleshed out as well as they are in the book.

[–] slidell333 8 years ago

I'm watching it right now on IFC and it hasn't aged well...as soon as I saw it on I knew I was taking a trip back to the 90's...gosh, I haven't seen this since the 90's. Gabe is right, a TV miniseries just can't convey the tone of the book.

You nailed it...for 1994 this was an acceptable telefilm. For the time it was fine, but we as viewers just expect more nowadays.

[–] beecore 8 years ago

A single movie about a book this long and deep would be horrible. We would need a 10 part series at least.

[–] Gabe1972 8 years ago

It all depends on what you include. Sure, if you make the entire book and include every little thing, it would never fit in a single film, but that doesn't mean they still could not make a very good, three hour film that includes the most important parts and aspects of the book. That's the problem the miniseries made. They cut out many of the parts, and in some cases justifiably so (it was public TV), that gave the book its sense of dread and corruption. With the most important parts of the book, a good film is entirely possible.

Time wounds all heels.

[–] slidell333 8 years ago

I'd like to see HBO or Showtime do an 8 or 10 part series. I really think they can do the book justice. I almost started laughing at how bad the special effects were in the mini-series....for example, when R.F. walked out the fire, or the hand out of the sky, etc...and to think I saw nothing wrong with it when it was new, but hey, we didn't know any better lol...however, the series is exactly what it is, a 90's made for TV series. Could it have been better even then? Definately.. I was kind of shocked it cost $26 million...

While they're at it maybe they can re-do "It." But def. bring back Tim Curry!

[–] Gabe1972 8 years ago

In lieu or in lack of a proper film, I wouldn't mind a series on a pay channel. They've done some great ones so far.

Time wounds all heels.

[–] standfan 8 years ago

"IT" is currently being filmed as a feature. As far as a miniseries goes, that idea has been presented, and squashed (allegedly at least in part due to Stephen King himself). There was brief talk about an 8 episode lead-in to a four part feature film series, but the moneymen aren't allowing that to happen.

[–] gary_overman 8 years ago

"IT" is currently being filmed as a feature. As far as a miniseries goes, that idea has been presented, and squashed (allegedly at least in part due to Stephen King himself). There was brief talk about an 8 episode lead-in to a four part feature film series, but the moneymen aren't allowing that to happen.

Just curious: have you heard anything about what his (King's) specific objections are?

[–] standfan 8 years ago

In one of Josh Boone's interviews, it was stated that King himself feels that the '94 miniseries is perfectly acceptable within that format. In other words, it's a feature film or bust.

[–] slidell333 8 years ago

I'm not surprised...the man hated Kubrick's "The Shining" and had to make his own version...and it was horrible! I'm sorry, but he seems to like to interject himself too much into any film/tv project.

I could see "It" as a movie but "The Stand" I'm not sure...perhaps it's just too much for a movie? In other words they'd have to cut so much out might not work. But I've been wrong before..."It" I for some reason would work as a 1:30 to 2 hour movie.

Please Mr. King, leave the movies to the movie makers...

[–] gary_overman 8 years ago

I'm not surprised...the man hated Kubrick's "The Shining" and had to make his own version...and it was horrible! I'm sorry, but he seems to like to interject himself too much into any film/tv project.

Granted that yours is the majority view, but I actually preferred the Garris version to the Kubrick, although to be honest, I was certainly underwhelmed by both of them.

The story did not appeal to me for some reason and it will be a while before I watch either of them again.

Part of it could be Kubrick even though he has done some great work (I loved Dr Strangelove, for example) as he is the one who did 2001: A Space Odyssey, which I thought (please no axes and pitchforks!) was one of the dullest, most pointless films I have ever seen.

[–] standfan 8 years ago

Part of it could be Kubrick even though he has done some great work (I loved Dr Strangelove, for example) as he is the one who did 2001: A Space Odyssey, which I thought (please no axes and pitchforks!) was one of the dullest, most pointless films I have ever seen.

To each his own, Gary. I found it to be an interesting science fiction concept behind the advancement of intelligence on our planet from an alien species.

The movie also simply brought science fiction miles ahead of where it had been previous in the motion picture industry (virtually all were b-movie garbage). This paved the way for studios to take the idea of a big budget science fiction movie seriously (something we take for granted nowadays).

I think appreciating 2001 gets down to whether or not you are willing to accept the concept behind the movie, and if you are willing to adhere to Kubrick's pacing of the movie. Most criticisms I have heard of the movie are that it is A) slow and B) "I didn't understand what the #@)@ the movie was suppose to be about". Whenever I have watched the movie, I have watched it with others, and we have always used the intermission in the movie to break and discuss what we've seen so far. I love to hear all of the opinions.

[–] gary_overman 8 years ago

To each his own, Gary. I found it to be an interesting science fiction concept behind the advancement of intelligence on our planet from an alien species.

The movie also simply brought science fiction miles ahead of where it had been previous in the motion picture industry (virtually all were b-movie garbage). This paved the way for studios to take the idea of a big budget science fiction movie seriously (something we take for granted nowadays).

I think appreciating 2001 gets down to whether or not you are willing to accept the concept behind the movie, and if you are willing to adhere to Kubrick's pacing of the movie. Most criticisms I have heard of the movie are that it is A) slow and B) "I didn't understand what the #@)@ the movie was suppose to be about". Whenever I have watched the movie, I have watched it with others, and we have always used the intermission in the movie to break and discuss what we've seen so far. I love to hear all of the opinions.

Those are my reactions to 2001: ASO as well. And not everyone is as anxious to hear differing opinions of their favorite films, it seems. I also did not care for Arlington Road and said so and was accused of being a troll, as how could anyone not just love AR? Both of them were, to me anyway, dull plodding films with 2001 being pointless and AR using the greatly over-worked plot device of a vast right-wing conspiracy.

I am not trying to provoke a reaction here, and BTW, this is how I honestly feel about both of these popular films. And I recognize that my view is the minority one, but it is still on honestly-held opinion.