ROTTEN TOMATOES: Another Stephen King Flick: This Time It's "Insomnia" Comments

Another Stephen King Flick: This Time It's "Insomnia"

by Scott Weinberg | July 02, 2007

Summary

No relation to the Christopher Nolan crime thriller of the same name. Back to Article

(1-25 of 25 posts) | Reply

JasAce writes:
on Jul 02 2007 09:05 AM

Sounds like one of Christan Bale's best roles from The Machinist. Wonder what came first this book or that movie?

(Reply to this)

Stathis Borans writes:
on Jul 02 2007 09:06 AM

Solid book. Will make for an awful movie. Probably about the caliber of Wrong Turn.

(Reply to this)

bluthboy2342 writes:
on Jul 02 2007 09:11 AM

the book came before the movie. im not sure how long ago but i know its been around for a quite awhile.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Jul 02 2007 11:04 AM

In reply to this comment (#883208)
Book was published in 1995 I believe. After his initial burst of genius and before the post accident renaissance. Not one of my favorite works of his, but who knows I find the quality of his books doesn't necessarily match up with the quality of the movie they become.

(Reply to this)

Agro writes:
on Jul 02 2007 11:31 AM

I think that book is chill. In the right hands it could be a really neat movie. Philip Baker Hall is perfect for the role of Ralph Roberts.

(Reply to this)

Pumpkinking14 writes:
on Jul 02 2007 01:12 PM

[b]If you know the Dark Tower...[/b]
If you're familiar with King's masterwork The Dark Tower, than you know this book is extremely important (and a great tale on its own, as well). If not-- well, you have some reading to do!

(Reply to this)

Boss Fan writes:
on Jul 02 2007 04:29 PM

Wasn't King's 2005 zombie novel "Cell" supposed to be immediately turned into a film by Dimension and released the following October; which would be almost over a year ago now? What happened to that? That sounds like one movie, zombie-ed out as we might be at the moment, that could actually be good. The King novels they keep going to lately ("Dreamcatcher," "Desperation" or "Nightmares and Dreamscapes" anyone?) have become tedious and laughable films. "1408" wasn't great but it was much better than most movies with King's name slapped on them. They need to go to the less overtly horror, more psychologically chilling stuff that has always worked in the past ("The Shining," "The Dead Zone" and "Misery" jump to mind) - imagine what the right director could do with something like "Gerald's Game" - or just do something like "Cell" which would just be a lot of horror/action fun. Every time someone tries to interpret a book like "Insomnia" we end up with, well, "Dreamcatcher," "Desperation," "Nightmares and Dreamscapes," or most any other King adaptation of the last 15 or so years.

(Reply to this)

dracus writes:
on Jul 02 2007 05:13 PM

Wicked book! Although I have to say that Insomnia will be a difficult one to turn into a movie. Now, if only someone had the guts to turn Gerald's Game into a movie and insist on keeping it true to the book.

(Reply to this)

#six writes:
on Jul 02 2007 05:27 PM

i think that done right this could be a good movie. i liked the book. i hardly remember anything, but i remember liking it. as for cell. wasnt Eli Roth directing it? i think i read someplace that production will start early next year.

(Reply to this)

Mr. Kong writes:
on Jul 02 2007 06:37 PM

I'm dissapointed with the choice of director, but Michael Hafstrom ended up surprising me with another King adaption, so I'll keep my hopes up.

And I hope there are still plans for an IT remake.

(Reply to this)

PhreazerBurn writes:
on Jul 02 2007 06:55 PM

[b]No surprise[/b]
As usual, they take a good bit of Stephen King's source material and give it to a total hack who will either butcher it or make it completely bland. This trend must end!

(Reply to this)

goldmonkee writes:
on Jul 02 2007 07:20 PM

[b]Insomnia[/b]
I'm not a fan of King, but this book was good. The movie will most likely be like, well, "Wrong Turn".

(Reply to this)

Exode writes:
on Jul 02 2007 07:47 PM

The process of translating the source material to film is too delicate for this guy to handle, but oh well, he'll be making it either way.

(Reply to this)

I Am Remote writes:
on Jul 02 2007 10:55 PM

King adaptations are hit and miss, and for some reasons, the misses stick out the most. Dreamcatcher remains one of the worst movies I've ever seen. But it's easy to forget a lot of the good ones: the green mile, cujo, shawshank, misery, a few others. A lot of the TV stuff was bad. 1408 was decent, but should fall by the misfires in the big picture.

My girlfriend read insomnia and thought that it got too ridiculous with fantastical stuff, which doesn't sound to good to me for a screen adaptation. King's stories work best with simple concepts.

(Reply to this)

pembercon writes:
on Jul 02 2007 11:41 PM

[b]Wow! I Agree![/b]
Love Stephen King. Really did (do) not like Insomnia. I agree with Mr. Weinberg. It will be interesting to see what the director can do with this material.

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Jul 03 2007 12:09 AM

I think the reason King is so hit and miss is because alot of the appeal of his novels is the writing style not necessarily the story and you can't really translate his writing style to the screen unless you do it word for word and shot for shot and that would take 18 hours.

(Reply to this)

Boss Fan writes:
on Jul 03 2007 12:32 AM

In reply to this comment (#883221)
No, that is a cop-out. It is poor filmmakers making poor films. It has nothing yt do with the fact that his writting is so superior that filmmakers can't acurately translate it to the silver screen. A few have suceeded. Most have failed.

(Reply to this)

Stathis Borans writes:
on Jul 03 2007 07:52 AM

In reply to this comment (#883222)
Agreed. I suppose one could make the translation argument if we were talking about, say, Kurt Vonnegut, but this is freaking Stephen King. I really like a lot of his work, but he's a formulaic writer, not a master wordsmith. All of the books I loved as a teen have made for horrible movies. My Personal favorites being Desperation and Pet Sematary (excluding collections, as Different Seasons and Night Shift blow all else away). Both adaptations were laughably bad.

(Reply to this)

Mr. Kong writes:
on Jul 03 2007 08:43 AM

In reply to this comment (#883216)
What about 1408? I mean, its director's resume wasn't very good but he made an excellent thriller out of 1408.

(Reply to this)

Prosper761 writes:
on Jul 03 2007 10:14 AM

In reply to this comment (#883212)
Director Eli Roth ("Hostel") is curremtly in pre-production on "Cell."

(Reply to this)

Bigbrother writes:
on Jul 03 2007 12:48 PM

In reply to this comment (#883223)
What does being a formulaic writer have to do with the way he strings words together. That's what I'm saying his stories at least the ones he put out to meet quota's are formulaic, but millions of people still read them because he has a fascinating way of telling the stories. I often enjoy his forwards as much as the stories themselves and his book "On Writing" which by all rights should be dull as dirt is actually quite fascinating just from his wordsmithing as you put it and the way his narrative flows. Something that is virtually impossible to replicate on the screen because it doesn't transfer from one medium to the next. Also why alot of comics fail when they try to replicate to closely to the comic medium and don't strike that perfect balance. I think that's why many of Kings strictly sreenplays make so much better movies than his full fledged novels.

It also sound like you're about my age and we grew up in the down portion of Kings career. Read his beginning works, The Dark Tower series, and some of his stories that aren't strictly horror stories. IMO theirs nothing formulaic about those.

I often tell people that when people look back at our generation the author we will be judged by will be Stephen King because by that time they'll have forgotten most of his lesser works (The books I refer to as his quota books) and will remember the large number of classic King stories he's produced. Tiem does this to all great authors, Bram Stoker was a very prolific author in his day, but afte this time the only one that comes down to us is Dracula. Given it's a good one to be remembered for, but a ton of his lesser works have been forgotten. I would hold up Salem's Lot and the Shining against anything Vonnegut ever wrote for both style and entertainment purposes. Then again I find Vonneguts writing style a bit eclectic and unappealing, but that's a matter of opinion. Also look at the number of works produced by each man. Compared to Vonnegut King is a treasure trove of idea's and stories. I also think Vonnegut has kinda become the literary snobs battle standard to hold up and show how hip and kitch they are. Not saying you're doing that, but I've had a million kids throw Vonnegut or Salinger in my face and when you actually question them about it they remember and are basing their argument on maybe two chapters from Slughterhouse 5 and Catcher in the Rye.

(Reply to this)

Stathis Borans writes:
on Jul 06 2007 02:07 AM

"I would hold up Salem's Lot and the Shining against anything Vonnegut ever wrote for both style and entertainment purposes."

Key in on the entertainment purposes segment, and I might agree with you. I have read virtually every Stephen King novel and every Kurt Vonnegut novel. There isn't really a comparison stylistically. Vonnegut is wildly original, and his novels hold a tremendous amount of social significance. King's work is strictly entertainment. Slaughterhouse 5 is hardly Vonnegut's best work, and comparing him to Salinger is downright insulting. Salinger wrote one novel. One. Vonnegut is largely considered the best author of the 20th century.

(Reply to this)

fulmoontat writes:
on Oct 13 2008 11:43 PM

IMHO I think this could work. I'm reading it for the 2nd time now, as I'm about to finish the dark tower series shortly, and the way king intertwines various universes in his writing is amazing.

Of course for the movie to work, the end of the story would have to be changed, or an entire series of gunslinger movies would have to be made (which would just about make me crap my pants with joy).

Of course in order for insomnia to be a success, I think the best way to do it would be the miniseries route. Like Kingdom Hospital or The Stand. The Shining (which in my opinion kicked *** in both versions. Kubrick's version rocked due to an amazing cast and visually stunning scenery. The casting for the made for tv version was laughable at best, (no offense Demornay, you'll always be the hand that rocked my cradle) but still nowhere near as creepy as Shelley Duvall. It was, however completely true to the novel. Even if the acting was... eh.. lacking.

((where was i going with this? oh yeah...))

The miniseries route would be the only way to have the amount of time to establish the character transformations which would be required to effectively tell the story, especially this one, since the first 300 pages are really nothing more than character establishment which is imperative to the story. This is not something which i could see being successfully done in montage. A series of flipping calendar pages and Ralph (the main character) waking earlier and earlier in each one... Negative. It would have to be a slower transformation to make the slip more believable. I couldn't see this movie being shorter than 6 or 7 hours.
If they tried to make this a flick for the theater, then they can count on it flopping, and flopping badly.

The visual effects better kick *** too. I mean wicked mushroom trip *** kicking at that. The story is carried heavily by the minds eye. It's a brightly colored palette of flowing imagery, and if it's not done well and at a level which will be exhausting to achieve, then it will most undoubtedly be a disappointment. Which is sad to say, because there's very few movies which have done a novel justice (very few king novels especially) and i would hate for this to turn into another "Langoliers". Well sh#t i guess i've rambled on long enough about crap i guess i really know anything about. I guess we'll see when, and if, it ever comes out.

fulmoontat

(Reply to this)

fulmoontat writes:
on Oct 13 2008 11:55 PM

IMHO I think this could work. I'm reading it for the 2nd time now, as I'm about to finish the dark tower series shortly, and the way king intertwines various universes in his writing is amazing.

Of course for the movie to work, the end of the story would have to be changed, or an entire series of gunslinger movies would have to be made (which would just about make me crap my pants with joy).

Of course in order for insomnia to be a success, I think the best way to do it would be the miniseries route. Like Kingdom Hospital or The Stand. The Shining (which in my opinion kicked *** in both versions. Kubrick's version rocked due to an amazing cast and visually stunning scenery. The casting for the made for tv version was laughable at best, (no offense Demornay, you'll always be the hand that rocked my cradle) but still nowhere near as creepy as Shelley Duvall. It was, however completely true to the novel. Even if the acting was... eh.. lacking.

((where was i going with this? oh yeah...))

The miniseries route would be the only way to have the amount of time to establish the character transformations which would be required to effectively tell the story, especially this one, since the first 300 pages are really nothing more than character establishment which is imperative to the story. This is not something which i could see being successfully done in montage. A series of flipping calendar pages and Ralph (the main character) waking earlier and earlier in each one... Negative. It would have to be a slower transformation to make the slip more believable. I couldn't see this movie being shorter than 6 or 7 hours.
If they tried to make this a flick for the theater, then they can count on it flopping, and flopping badly.

The visual effects better kick *** too. I mean wicked mushroom trip *** kicking at that. The story is carried heavily by the minds eye. It's a brightly colored palette of flowing imagery, and if it's not done well and at a level which will be exhausting to achieve, then it will most undoubtedly be a disappointment. Which is sad to say, because there's very few movies which have done a novel justice (very few king novels especially) and i would hate for this to turn into another "Langoliers". Well sh#t i guess i've rambled on long enough about crap i guess i really know anything about. I guess we'll see when, and if, it ever comes out.

fulmoontat

(Reply to this)

fulmoontat writes:
on Oct 14 2008 11:49 AM

sorry. looks like i fubard somewhere.. a back button, or forward button...who knows..

(Reply to this)

Related Links

Wrong Turn

Related Articles

Most Discussed

Latest News

Latest Interviews

Latest Features

Sponsored Links