I keep hearing rumors that in this incarnation of the series Roland will already have the Horn of Eld and that, rather than a direct take on the novels, this would all be a direct sequel to the last book. Can anyone confirm this information? Personally I think it would be unwise for this to happen, allow me please to explain.
If Roland starts off with the Horn then so much will have to change that it would be nightmarish and would only vaguely resmeble the books we have come to know and love. That is always assuming that he doesn't somehow lose it early on (if he lose it then what would have been the point of him having it to begin with?). On top of that it gives Hollywood almost free reign to change whatever they want to in critical areas such as the chase through Lud or through the mountains, the train ride with Blaine (who is a pain), the fighting with the wolves et cetera ad infinitum. In the end we wouldn't get a faithful adaptation of The Dark Tower series, but a diseasaed sibling from the minds of crazy people who believe they know best how the story should be told. Him having the Horn would also screw up some of Roland's back story. This is starting to seem more and more like a convoluted mess.
It was confirmed in the previous iteration of the screenplay as written by Goldsman. He speaks of it in an interview with Bev Vincent in his concordance. There was a recent Reddit post in which a person said a friend gave him a copy of an old treatment of the screenplay, and the horn was present (if the story is to be believed).
With the additional screenwriters, it is impossible to confirm that the horn remains in the picture.
The Horn of Eld doesn't by its very presence indicate that there will be radical changes, but it does offer the possibility. It, at face value, simply means that the Tower ret-conned Roland's existence and made it so that instead of leaving the Horn at the Battle of Jericho Hill he picked it up. This could present ripples down the time stream, but it shouldn't have to since the Horn's only real function is to make a really loud honk (preferably at the scarlet fields of can-ka no rey).
The fact that it is in the hands of Hollywood producers and writers gives these individuals to toy and tinker with the source material as they will (with whatever caveats sai King has included). The Horn can't mess up the story, but the writers sure can.
reply share
I think it represents more than that. Originally(or at least as of the previous iteration), Roland pretty much neglected to retrieve the Horn because of his focus on the quest for the Dark Tower. Him having it in this iteration means that, when push came to shove, he chose to honor his word to Cuthbert rather than blindly focus on the Tower.
Living is easy with eyes closed Misunderstanding all you see
And don't forget, his original intent had been to present the horn at the Tower. That was one of the reasons he was so mad at himself for leaving it behind.
I haven't read the books in a couple of years so I'd forgotten that small detail. I plan on doing so closer to the movie's release date(if it doesn't get pushed back again, that is lol) so that they are fresh in my mind when the movie comes out.
I still stand by what I said though.
Living is easy with eyes closed Misunderstanding all you see
I don't entirely disagree with your ideas, Mojo. But what promise to Cuthbert are you referring to? I just finished book 3 and will be starting book 4 again tonight, so I might be forgetting a little nugget you're remembering. See, I always considered the Horn of Eld more a representation of sentimentality to Roland, which is why I think it would make more sense for him to leave it behind originally, but then to save it on his last trip to the Tower.
They're not necessarily canon but more of a different way of telling the story supervised by King, but they do align with the books.
I forget which one, I think it's part of the gunslinger series, the writer of the graphic novel states that because it's a different medium, they can take artistic liberties and that's what special about the dark tower - changes, no matter how small, can occur (paraphrasing). I agree with the sentiment but I understand that not everybody does. End of the day it's a story and stories change all the time. The graphic novels were awesome and well worth a read.
I'd like them stick as close to the original material as possible. The series...is just perfect. Obviously you have to change a few things but why have the Horn right off? Maybe it won't change much. Maybe he will save Jake this time? Would that screw up The Drawing? I guess since this is King's Magnum Opus(and his best work imo) he would take care to decide how he wants it done. I guess we we will just have to trust in sai King. Perhaps he will still lose it at the battle in the movie? Or is it confirmed that he has it during the whole quest(aka 7 movies)?
That is the whole point. They want more freedom in writing the movie and very nature of the story King created gave them a diegetic way to do that. This movie was never going to be a direct adaptation of the book. King himself sometimes comes out with new ideas for stories he has already published. A good example is him preferring the ending of The Mist as shown in the movie compared to the original one he wrote.
In the end we wouldn't get a faithful adaptation of The Dark Tower series, but a diseasaed sibling from the minds of crazy people who believe they know best how the story should be told. Him having the Horn would also screw up some of Roland's back story. This is starting to seem more and more like a convoluted mess.
Or...you know...a sequel to a story that had a terrible predestination paradox as it's ending.
reply share