First impressions


I just watched the first episode. Its major purpose seems to be introducing Stu, Fran, and Harold. It zips back and forth in time, sometimes dizzyingly. We start with Harold and the burial crew in Boulder. Then it's Harold in Ogunquit, Stu in the plague center, the trio in Boulder, Stu in Arnette, etc. And we meet Mother Abagail in one of Fran's dreams.

I suspect this will make it difficult for a viewer not already familiar with The Stand to follow the action. I've read the book several times and I got confused for a minute, believing I was watching events in Maine rather than Colorado. But it does highlight some changes in the characters.

In Maine, Harold seems little more than a teen who is the class oddball. He does have a thing for Fran, but there's none of the pervo-ickiness vibe he has in the book. This is no Norman Bates in training, just a somewhat unordinary kid. Fran's dislike for him is obvious and strong. She curses at him at one point. But she seems like no great prize. While Harold is crusing town searching for survivors she wallows in self-pity and attempts suicide. By luck Harold finds her and saves her life. Even after this, when Harold tells her of his plan to find a plague center, Fran only grudgingly acknowledges that it's a good idea. I have no doubt that if she had come up with the idea she would have left Harold behind without a second thought. And when they ride out of town together Fran's facial expression implies that she's still thinking, oh Lord, why him?

It looks like under ordinary circumstances, once Harold grew up a little -- say, six months -- his interest in Fran would vanish. But of course the flu hit. And in Boulder it's a quite different picture. When Fran, Stu, and Harold interact it seems like a warm friendship. Fran shows none of the queasy unease she felt about Harold in the book. Harold is well-liked and respected in Boulder. Yet he's putting on an act. He's half crazy. He practices grinning in the mirror in a way that leaves no doubt there's weird shit going on between his ears. He types in his journal of his plans to kill Stu. He privately goes into rages.

I have to say that I rather like this characterization. I've never liked Fran and have always considered her to be rather childish. And I've always thought Harold could have turned out all right had the flu not happened at the worst part of his adolescence. And while I don't particularly care about getting inside Fran's head, I'm left wondering about the change in Harold. If we see more details on that it could be an interesting journey into some kind of hell.

Stu seems a little too good to be true. Too confident, too extroverted. If IMDB is correct Glen is in only one episode, which indicates significant changes from the original story in several ways. Among other things, Glen was Stu's confidante and advisor, a person he felt he could tell his doubts to. This Stu doesn't seem like the sort who has doubts or needs advice.

On another note -- Mother Abagail's appearance in Fran's dream seems more startling than comforting, which makes me wonder what they're going to do with her character.

So, I dunno. I'm a little more optimistic than I was before. We'll see.

reply

It was a decent first episode.

I might hold off and watch the whole thing in one go when first season is done ...

reply

> I might hold off and watch the whole thing in one go when first season is done ...

That was my intent. I didn't realize they were releasing one episode per week, but instead thought they were putting the whole thing out there at once. CBS All Access subscriptions are free for the first seven days. I was going to watch all nine episodes within a week then cancel my subscription. Oh well, I guess I'm out $20. Maybe there's some other interesting stuff on there.

reply

All in all I thought it was quite good, of course as always with Hollywood a few dumb things like the general killing himself (why?) and the girl being so mean to the nerd with him being the only other human alive, but otherwise pretty solid.

reply

> a few dumb things like the general killing himself (why?)

Didn't the general commit suicide in the book? Seems like he did, but I can't quite remember.

> the girl being so mean to the nerd with him being the only other human alive

Yeah, that's a bit much for Fran, at least compared to the original story. But if they're assuming the audience members have read the book -- and I think that's a good guess, the whipsawing across time and place might make it incomprehensible for those who don't know the story already -- then I think it serves a good purpose. Fran is one of the heroines of the story but she's at best a flawed character. At worst, she's scheming and backbiting, justifying her actions to herself in some quite hypocritical ways. The fact that her suspicions that motivate her turn out to be correct doesn't excuse her actions. But I've seen some fans who are so enamored with her that all is forgivable. Painting her in a harsher light might overcome some fans' inclination to put her on a pedestal.

reply

The general killed himself in the original too

reply

So I have mixed emotions...

I'm a big fan of the book, but if you haven't read the book I suspect you'll be going WTF when watching this. I bet they want to stray away from the linear story that the ABC miniseries had (because people, including me, are going to compare it), but I'm not sure it's a good idea here.

So Stu is way too good looking, easy-going, and mellow. I need some tension, some fear in his eyes, some passion for God's sake. Everyone is dying. They needed a solid everyman in this role and I don't see it yet with Mardsen. Hopefully he'll surprise me.

Frannie is okay and her intro seems to me all about how she can't stand Harold and wants to be rid of him. I get it. Hopefully, they will flesh out her character more in the next episode.

My first impression of the new Harold was poor - IIRC he was supposed to be chubby and zit-faced, who starts to come into his own by losing weight and get better looking as the series progresses. This kid is thin with a clear complexion right off the bat. However, I did like that he's clearly unstable and has a serious infatuation with Frannie. He's one of the key players in the story and the actor looks like he might steal the show. Crossing fingers...

All in all, a mediocre first episode, but it's got potential. It feels a lot more intimate to me than I was suspecting. I was assuming they'd open with a huge bang showing how devastating the virus is. Perhaps they are saving that. To me the key will be showing NYC with Larry. Will they show a city in ruins or just Larry in the apartment with his dead mother?

reply

> I bet they want to stray away from the linear story that the ABC miniseries had (because people, including me, are going to compare it)

They said they've done it this way because they consider the good/evil struggle the real essence of the story and want to focus on that and lessen the superflu's role. Could be. And if so, they've got a great opportunity.

I've always felt that the novel has a very serious flaw. Now, King didn't portray the rank and file citizens of Vegas as being crazed werewolves. OK, so far so good. And while in Vegas, Dayna mused that Jenny Engstrom was someone she'd want as a best friend, and wondered what the hell she was doing in Vegas. But that's an answer we never got. I think King utterly failed in addressing that question -- why would sane, decent people willingly align themselves with evil? And if you're going to do a story about a titanic good vs. evil struggle, that question should be asked. He tried to, but the answers he came up with were far too simplistic. If this miniseries does a better job I'll be quite impressed.

> I need [...] some fear in [Stu's] eyes

I said he's too confident but I also knew there was something else bothering me about this portrayal. That's it.

> They needed a solid everyman in this role

In the novel, Stu reminisces about his dead friends and some of the good times they had, including going to a whorehouse. I can't imagine this Stu ever doing that.

> [Harold] is thin with a clear complexion right off the bat.

And he actually brushes his teeth, unlike in the book!

I wonder if they're trying to overcome the audience's inclination to dislike Harold from the start? -- the flip side of what they're doing with the Fran character. (see my reply to yvesyves above)

> I did like that [Harold is] clearly unstable

In Boulder, yes. I really didn't get that vibe from him in the Maine scenes, though. Are you saying he was unstable in those scenes? If you are, I'd like to hear your thoughts on that.

reply

A civil discussion of The Stand? Anytime! Okay, so...

I do think he was unstable in those scenes, though clearly not as bad as in Boulder. You could see the signs but he hadn't snapped yet. He was a peeping Tom/stalker, shunned by society (when he was walking through the pier and everyone was laughing at him), terrible home life and role models (his mother was a little over-the-top for me), etc. He was clearly infatuated with Frannie and couldn't get the hint she didn't want to talk to him in her yard until she barked, and then he went all-stalky as he left.

Regarding Vegas - I tend to agree with you about the people there, but they can't all be cold-hearted bastards, right? Just like not everyone in Boulder was squeaky clean. I always gathered the Vegas people were just more susceptible to Flagg's coercion, meaning they were more likely to sin. Now my memory on the book is decent but correct me if I'm wrong here: Flagg went after everyone - including Stu if I recall - and some were gimmes like Lloyd and Trashcan Man to join his side. Others, like Whitney or the cop that was in Flagg's posse - questioned their intentions after they moved there. People like Nadine and Harold were just a mess and their wills were weakened. Those people are easy pickings for Flagg too.

I'm not Christian but I know some stuff, and I always thought King was hinting at the apocalypse/rapture or The War In Heaven (Revelations I think) when God picked those he found worthy and the rest were left behind for Satan. Abigail was picking hers and leaving the rest for Flagg. Then they fought for heaven and earth.

reply

I know I'm predisposed to see Harold more kindly and Fran more harshly than most do, and maybe I'm just seeing what I want to see. And I'll watch this episode again when I watch next week's, maybe sooner, and I'll give these things a fresh look. Admittedly I'm giving Harold some slack due to circumstances (flu, mass deaths, etc), maybe more than I'm giving Fran. But overall what I see is a socially awkward teenage guy who's not one of the "cool" kids and who has a crush on a girl. Nothing pathological there.

I didn't think the peeking was that bad. It's not like he was peeking into her windows while she was inside the house, or worse, while she was inside and undressed. She was outside and so in public view (although behind a fence). I don't think what he did was any worse than if he had lived next door and was looking out the window at her. Nosy? Yes. Creepy? No.

When he was walking through the pier and people were laughing, wasn't that just after he wrecked the bike and looked like a total mess? I thought the laughing was "look at you, dude!" instead of "there's the town joke!"

Mom and sis weren't nice to him, but they were both sick as crap and might have known they were dying. It's made clear elsewhere that sis never liked him, but that's not a rare situation -- my brother and I haven't been on speaking terms for decades.

There was one scene that might have been a little creepy, when he was listening to the radio and shrugged off the DJ suiciding on the air. But I caught that as him just being grimly sarcastic to himself rather than an innate callousness. If that had happened before the flu he might have had a very different reaction. Now, after already seeing so many deaths? Just another one. The world's getting very bad, and he's toughening up.

That's how I read Ogunquit Harold -- a mixed up kid. But I'll give that another look.

(continued below)

reply

I remember Flagg tempting Nick but I don't recall him tempting Stu, but it's been a while since I read it.

> [The people in Vegas] can't all be cold-hearted bastards, right? Just like not everyone in Boulder was squeaky clean.

Right, and they shouldn't be. King got that one right.

> Others, like Whitney or the cop that was in Flagg's posse - questioned their intentions after they moved there.

Barry Dorgan, I think you mean? He might have been tricked. Flagg might have "told" him that Vegas would be a place where criminals would be treated with compassion and given the help they need, but above all else the law would be enforced and decency would be maintained -- and only after he arrived in Vegas did B.D. discover that Flagg's "decency" was crucifixion for offenders, and that putting addicts to death was "helping" them by putting them out of their misery.

I can imagine a lot of reasons why a decent person might choose Vegas over Boulder. Those reasons have the common element that they didn't fully understand what they were getting into. And there were some who split from Boulder, presumably because they didn't like what they'd gotten into. Unfortunately we'll never know why. We get POV segments with Trash, which is a fun ride, but he's hardly normal. We get Lloyd's POV and understand his motive -- revenge against fate, his lot in life, etc. But we never spend any time in Barry Dorgan's head, or Jenny Engstrom's, Shirley Dunbar's, etc. And wouldn't there be one or two counterparts to Trash in Boulder? -- "my life for you, Mother!"

That's what I think is missing from The Stand; insight into the ordinary folks in Vegas and their motives for being there. I doubt this miniseries will tackle that question, but we've already seen significant departures from the original story. If they do hit this question it will be to their credit.

reply

I promised to rewatch this and reconsider Harold. Usually when watching a miniseries like this I'll view the episodes in pairs to refresh my memory for each new one. Week 1, I'll watch episode 1. Week 2, I'll watch episode 1 then 2. Week 3, I'll watch episode 2 then 3. Et cetera.

I wanted to view this episode again when seeing #2, but wasn't able to. For whatever reason it wasn't available on the CBS service. I did manage to watch this episode again yesterday.

> I do think he was unstable in [the Ogunquit] scenes, though clearly not as bad as in Boulder.

I caught a little of that vibe this time, but not much. In the pier scene only a few were laughing at him. And although he was hurt from his crash he didn't look badly so, but on the other hand his bike was in two pieces -- a comic sight. Fran cursing at him? Over the top -- I think she could have got rid of him with simply "I'm burying my father. I'd like to be alone right now."

But there was something in general ... a look in the eyes? I dunno. I can't get CBS to work on my PC which means I have to watch this on my iPad. You can miss things on a 10" screen, and this time I looked more closely. So yeah, there was something subtle that I caught this time that I didn't last time. Not sure what it was, but it was there.

And something not so subtle. When he was angered by getting yet another rejection letter, he broke something in anger. The first time I saw that I thought it was some ordinary and cheap object. This time I saw that it was a laptop computer. Looked like a MacBook. Now, I understand that adolescent males have moments of anger. I used to be one myself. The surging testosterone can catch you in ways you don't expect. But I *never* broke a very expensive object in a moment of rage like that, and never damaged anything I personally values; I always had enough self-restraint to not do something *that* stupid. That moment shocked me a little.

So, OK. Basically a mixed up kid, but yeah, a little creepy.

reply

Right - that episode was merely hinting at his instability and anger issues. Then by showing his isolation from family and society it added a nice painting of a guy who was on the edge of a disorder.

Frankly, I got creeped out by the peeping tom part the most. It was not a passing glance. He rode his bike over there to watch her. He then went home and pleasured himself to her.

It is going to be interesting watching the ride from the East Coast to Boulder, especially when Stu and Frannie tell him they were hooking up.

reply

> I got creeped out by the peeping tom part the most. It was not a passing glance.

Yeah, that hit me a little more too; the duration of it.

> He then went home and pleasured himself to her.

Whoa ... when did that happen? I completely missed that, both times I watched it. As I recall, the two kids caught him, chased him, he wrecked his bike, carried it home looking like a mess, then cleaned up and put a bandage on his forehead.

> it added a nice painting of a guy who was on the edge of a disorder.

Hmm ... I'll reluctantly go along with that, but only because he's "on the edge." Not there yet.

I was not my high school's Harold Lauder. A college friend of mine was that guy in his high school. I wasn't, but I also wasn't in my school's social A list, so when my college friend made an observation I understood what he meant and agreed with it. He said that the worst part of being in that situation is that teens want to believe that everything is as it should be and that the outcast deserves his status. And what happens? The outcast gets stressed out from the ostracism and does something a little flaky. The other kids take this as proof that the outcast deserves to be shunned, and shuns him further. The vicious cycle continues.

One thing I've never liked about The Stand is this. It has elements of predestination. And the supernatural "drawing together" means not only the two big magnets, Abagail and Flagg, but also incidents where characters recognize each other as good or bad at first sight. OK, that's the setting. But making this character a teen encourages teen readers to see it as confirmation of their own views -- their own Harolds deserve what they get, they can know who's cool and uncool just by looking, etc; and The Stand is King's favorite work among teen readers. My buddy had a great solution to the problem. On his high school graduation night he told his classmates "F U," walked away, and never went back; and he turned out just fine.

reply

My first impression was that CBS never sent it to the network.

Maybe it could get impressive #'s.

Original covid programming...

Instead, it appears it's all a pile of shit.

And that's what it is...

The Stand (2020).

reply

I really liked the first episode. I didn't mind that it jumped back and forth in time, I actually think it worked just fine. I hope the rest of the episodes are good too.

reply

Are you already familiar with the story? And if you are, do you think it would have been confusing to someone who hasn't read the book or seen the earlier miniseries?

reply

I'm somewhat familiar with the story. I haven't read the book but I've seen the miniseries as a kid when it came out and I loved it. But my memories of it are pretty vague. It looks pretty dated now so I don't know if I wanna give it another try.

I don't think it would have been confusing to someone who hasn't read the Book or seen the earlier miniseries, at least to me it was pretty clear which scenes were set in the present and which in the past.

I watched the second episode yesterday and while I still really enjoyed it, it was not as good as the pilot. I think the biggest problem is that the scenes set in the present, in the community, seem pretty dull and uninteresting. Also it's a bit soapy at times. The stuff right after the pandemic is cool.

reply

I turned it on with low expectations. I must say that I was pleasantly surprised!

reply

If they got rid of Glen then fuck this remake

reply

I wrote that based on the IMDB credits, but those seem to be changing day by day. As of right now Glen isn't listed at all. On the other hand, I saw one mistake after watching the first episode, a character listed as being in all nine episodes who wasn't in the first one. So, we'll see.

They're definitely making some changes from the book. In episode 2, we find out that the committee isn't going to coalesce together on their own; instead Mother Abagail just wrote a list and said "these are the people to watch for as they arrive." When Larry's party arrives in Boulder, Stu is right there, and he immediately says, "which is you is Larry Underwood?" Minor characters are sometimes drastically altered; e.g., Wayne Stukey is completely different from in the book.

It wouldn't bother me so much either way if Glen was in all the episodes, was completely absent, or somewhere in between. But his absence seems to change the story. In the book, he was the driving force behind getting the community running again. It was his idea to have a census committee, to make plans to turn Boulder from a direct democracy into a republic, and so on. Unless that function is placed on another character, it seems they'd have to drop that part of the story. Which may well be the intention; from what I understand, King was never really happy with it when he wrote it, and did The Big Assassination to put the story back on track.

reply

Yeah I think I'm just gonna stick with the original

reply

Kind of mediocre. Don't like seeing Whoopee Goldberg's face at all, it has too many unrelated associations that it doesn't work and looks stupid. Series seems cartoony to me.

reply

2 Just watched the first episode on youtube and I thought it was pretty decent. I could follow it quite well because I am very familiar with the book, having read it many times.

I could see, however, that someone who is not well-acquainted with the book would likely be confused due to the constant jumping around from scene-to-scene. They would have been better off with a straightforward narration rather than telling it in flashback style.

Had they asked me, this is what I would have told them. But they didn't ask me.

reply

I specifically told them to run it by you. Are you kidding? They did not?

reply

2 You should punish them for their disobedience. I mean, how dare they?

reply