|
The real ending is Browning's poem which is awesome anyway
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2011 12:02
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
ZoDiAC_ posted:The real ending is Browning's poem which is awesome anyway Exactly - when the whole series is read as a prequel to his poem, it's a great ending.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2011 15:44
|
|
|
When most people complain about the ending, it's usually the Crimson King fight and Patrick Danville, as well as the whole alternate universe Eddie and Jake thing, which is a bit of a cop-out. There's also the whole 'Don't read on, you won't like it' smug poo poo that King pulled. Most people generally like or don't mind the ending, as cliched and telegraphed as it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2011 16:15
|
|
|
Yeah. Maybe people just don't see the poem as the ending. I see a few problems with DT7's "ending" as it relates to the series that tie into this. Warning, effortpost time!! - Treatment of the main villains in DT7 (and resolutions for some of the ka-tet for that matter) is not satisfying - Stephen King self insertion which retcons tie-ins, particularly Insomnia, which cheapens the whole big universe feel you might have gotten from other books that formerly did "tie in" - Stephen's warning not to read on just before the ending, which muddies the waters - you could count three endings of DT7. You can feasibly go with Roland defeats the Crimson King in a hell of lacklustre non-fight with Deus Ex Danville and enters the tower. I doubt anybody stops just because King tells them to, though But if you read on you get Roland in the tower; slightly unsatisfying and predictable, the Man in Black walked across the desert and the gunslinger followed with his horn this time . . . And that's enough to make most people rage hard. Up to this is quite telegraphed, yes. But after that is Browning's poem. The real ending. The problem as I see it isn't the plot point that the Dark Tower saga is cyclical in that events are destined to be re-lived by Roland until he gets it right and what we've just read isn't quite that time but rather in my opinion what leads up to the ending, the poem, jars a bit with the series so far, and the ending is kind of muddied into three stages. But if you read the poem, and accept the bullshit before it, it makes it sort of... romantic, as opposed to  Because the poem is the last cycle, and we leave Roland with his horn, so he has progressed.Names in my ears Of all the lost adventurers my peers,--- How such a one was strong, and such was bold, And such was fortunate, yet, each of old Lost, lost! one moment knelled the woe of years. XXXIV. There they stood, ranged along the hill-sides, met To view the last of me, a living frame For one more picture! in a sheet of flame I saw them and I knew them all. And yet Dauntless the slug-horn to my lips I set, And blew. ``Childe Roland to the Dark Tower came.'' ZoDiAC_ fucked around with this message at 19:35 on Oct 4, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 4, 2011 19:32
|
|
|
This whole post is about the ending of the Dark Tower series so I'm going to just spoiler tag the whole thing: King's foreword to the book really improved my reception of the ending. When he started the Dark Tower as a young man he meant it to be the fantasy epic to end all fantasy epics, to channel the sense of wonder that movies like The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly and novels like Lord of the Rings gave him. By the end of the series he's looking back going "What the hell was I thinking  " and the book becomes almost a deconstruction of what he set out to do all those decades ago: The Crimson King is a senile old man with just a box of grenades, the Man In Black is killed like a rabbit in a trap, even the ultimate prize at the top of the tower is the realization that things could have gone so much better if he had done things differently in his youth. The ending of the Dark Tower is King as an old man shaking his head at his college-aged self.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 02:54
|
|
|
Farbtoner posted:This whole post is about the ending of the Dark Tower series so I'm going to just spoiler tag the whole thing: Wouldn't that be more of a reflection on King's failings as an author though? According to your interpretation, is King trying to say that epics are stupid or it wasn't worth the effort or something? I mean Tolkien was older than King when LOTR was published, it's not like only younger adults enjoy epic fiction, or that it's automatically frivolous. What you're saying makes sense on an interpretative level, just trying to figure out the possible motivation behind structuring it that way as a writer. Most of the time when King "demystifies" the evil he's describing, it seems like he wrote himself into a corner, as opposed to making some sort of profound statement (eg The Stand).
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 07:37
|
|
|
I need a recommendation, these are the novels I haven't read yet: Carrie Rage Firestarter Roadwork Cujo Christine Thinner Cycle of the Werewolf The Dark Half Gerald's Game Dolores Claiborne Rose Madder Desperation The Regulators The Green Mile The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon Dreamcatcher From A Buick 8 The Colorado Kid Cell Lisey's Story Blaze Is there any clear choice on what I should pick up next? People seem to dislike Lisey's Story so steer clear of that?
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 08:04
|
|
|
Roybot posted:Wouldn't that be more of a reflection on King's failings as an author though? According to your interpretation, is King trying to say that epics are stupid or it wasn't worth the effort or something? I mean Tolkien was older than King when LOTR was published, it's not like only younger adults enjoy epic fiction, or that it's automatically frivolous. But trying to ape Tolkien by writing your own mega epic book series is in fact a common conceit among younger authors.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 08:06
|
|
|
Mollymauk posted:Is there any clear choice on what I should pick up next? People seem to dislike Lisey's Story so steer clear of that? The Dark Half Cujo The Green Mile
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 08:26
|
|
|
trandorian posted:But trying to ape Tolkien by writing your own mega epic book series is in fact a common conceit among younger authors. Agreed, but that doesn't necessarily mean that anything you write that's "epic" would be copying it. The intent may have started out that way, but the series was written over decades, which is more than enough time to plan it out and approach it with your own sensibilities, especially if you've published dozens of novels and even more short stories by then. Given his track record, arbitrarily tearing down this elaborate mythology he spent decades building up just seems like typical King fickleness/lack of planning (disclosure: I actually liked the ending in context). \/\/poo poo, thank you for articulating that. talktapes fucked around with this message at 09:18 on Oct 5, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 08:53
|
|
|
Farbtoner posted:This whole post is about the ending of the Dark Tower series so I'm going to just spoiler tag the whole thing: Did you say improved your reception? Because that's one of the most depressing things I've read today. If King is really an old man shaking his head at his college aged self, then he should have retired a decade ago. That basically means that he lost whatever feeling he had about his work that used to make him a excellent writer. The first four Dark Tower were good precisely because of the sense of wonder they had. And the last three books are almost unanimously terrible because they lack the sense of wonder. How on earth could that improve your reception of the ending? Your post is telling me that perhaps if he had written the entire series when he was younger, all the books would have been as exciting and fantastic as the first couple were. Honestly, I started to have a real bad feeling about the rest of the DT series in 2003 when the revised Gunslinger was released. An older man expressing dissatisfaction with his earlier work and trying to make changes to it is never a good sign. It's a George Lucas move. And in my opinion at the time, the revised Gunslinger was less compelling due to a lot of Roland's ambiguity being removed. Roland as well as the world itself was more mysterious in the original.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 09:01
|
|
|
This all reminds me of what happened with Ursula LeGuin's Earthsea series and Tehanu; an author deconstructing their own work after everyone else has fallen in love with it. It's like giving someone a puppy, watching them grow up together, then dissecting the beloved pet in the name of science. It's sort of an interesting move on an intellectual level, but that's probably not why most readers- myself included- go for Stephen King. That being said, I kinda liked the ending. Whoever said it was all the stuff just preceding the actual ending that likely bothered people is kee-rect.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 12:54
|
|
|
Mollymauk posted:I need a recommendation, these are the novels I haven't read yet: DT Tie-in ------------- Rose Madder From A Buick 8 Same World ------------ Cujo The Dark Half Gerald's Game Realistic(?) Horror ------------------ Rage Roadwork Dolores Claiborne The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon Fantastical Horror ------------------ Carrie Firestarter Christine Thinner Cycle of the Werewolf The Green Mile Dreamcatcher Should be paried ----------------- Desperation The Regulators Post Accident, considered lower quality ------------------ The Colorado Kid Cell Lisey's Story Blaze Choose a category.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 17:55
|
|
|
Mollymauk posted:Is there any clear choice on what I should pick up next? People seem to dislike Lisey's Story so steer clear of that? Dolores Claiborne is written as a narrative and in her voice. If you stand the writing style, it's pretty good. I liked Firestarter a good bit, but I get the feeling I'm in the minority. Christine is a step above most of his novels. Really, the only ones you should run away from are: Rose Madder, The Girl Who Loved Tom Gordon and Blaze. (I haven't read Gerald's Game). Blaze was originally written in the 1970s and slightly updated upon release a few years ago. King admits it's not his best work and he's very correct on that. M - O - O - N that spells Blaze.
|
|
#
?
Oct 5, 2011 20:44
|
|
|
RC and Moon Pie posted:I liked Firestarter a good bit, but I get the feeling I'm in the minority.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2011 00:28
|
|
|
I actually just picked up Firestarter. I had just given up the ghost on some recent Anne Rice (Angel Time), and, let me tell you, even when he's not at his best, King is a like a breath of fresh air, here. I'm only 20 pages in, and I'm more engrossed in the story (and, frankly, more has gone on) than I was 75 pages into Rice.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2011 05:03
|
|
|
I hate The Stand like poison. I honestly can't understand why people love it so much. My biggest problem with it is the fact that all the characters are utterly unlikable. The only joy I got out of that book were the scenes where some of these hateful characters finally die. A lot of people seem to like Fran, but I thought she was whiny, childish and silly, and she was too subservient to her boyfriend (I forget his name, but he was also unlikable, he seemed smug and annoying) and she was too mean to Harold. Harold was the only character who even started out as likable and then he turned evil so I couldn't like him anymore either. I especially despised Nick. Oh how I hated him. He meets this underaged girl and immediately has sex with her. Then, right after the sex, all she wants to do is talk to him for five minutes and he ignores her because he's bored by what she's saying and doesn't care about what she has to say. That seems like a really rude way to treat someone he just had sex with. Then he hits her after she plays a mean prank on the magic retard. Admittedly, what she did was mean- she was just as unlikable as every other character in this book- but that's no reason to hit her. I can understand hitting a woman if it's in self defense, but he hits a woman (hell, not even a woman, an underaged girl) just because he's mad at her. Then she still wants to come with them and I think he threatens to kill her if she follows them and he just leaves her in the empty wasteland of death. Then there was the weird characterization of Dayna. She says she's a lesbian, yet she flirts with men? Then later there's some cop-out where another character says Dayna is actually bisexual. Just the way it was written really did seem like a cop-out to me- as if King couldn't conceive of a woman who didn't crave cock, so he had to make her bisexual later on. And then she goes and essentially prostitutes herself in order to be a spy for the Free Zone- very weird behavior for a person who was just recently rescued from being constantly gang-raped. I could go on and on about every one of these loathsome characters, but instead I'll say that the overall plot also disappointed me. I wanted this to be a story about the horror of the plague that destroyed most of humanity and the way the people left managed to survive in a hostile world, but that basically didn't happen. There was only a tiny bit about the plague at the beginning, and then we get like a billion pages of characters walking around and not really being in any true danger or discomfort, and then it all turns into some biblical allegory with a huge side-helping of technophobia. The technophobia really annoyed me- the characters in the Free Zone realizing that they couldn't rebuild society because that would just be making the same mistakes they'd made in the past, as if technology is inherently evil and God means us to be hand-washing our clothes and living in the dirt and getting our light from candles and anything else is unholy. And then of course there's the ridiculous deus ex machina ending that is LITERALLY a dues ex machina. And even after that ending we still have to suffer through like 100 pages of the surviving characters just walking back to the Free Zone while essentially NOTHING happens. The book just went on and on and on. It's one of only two King books that it took me two tries to read- the first time I read some of it and then got so bored that I just put it down. The second time I forced myself to read it to the end, and it was a slog all the way through. That's the other thing about that book- it's so loving BORING. I eventually forced my way through it solely out of a grim determination to read every book that King has ever written, since I've read all of his other published books except for Black House.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2011 11:06
|
|
|
Nobody likes Fran. That Nick thing is weird; if you don't like flaws in characters or shades of moral grey, than that's not the type of book you'd like to read. And the "underage girl" was so annoying that him hitting her in a post apocalyptic wasteland seemed pretty understandable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2011 14:29
|
|
|
Is The Green Mile considered horror? Sure it has some obvious gruesome creepy moments, but I saw that book as King have an excuse to explore a morbid curiosity and managed to hook a goofy "Magical Negro"/Christ metaphor into it rather than writing some straight up horror novel about a prison with a lot of awful history and a possessed electric chair. It's too bad King didn't write that other version, because I would have read the gently caress out of that.
|
|
#
?
Oct 6, 2011 19:32
|
|
|
hatelull posted:Is The Green Mile considered horror? Sure it has some obvious gruesome creepy moments, but I saw that book as King have an excuse to explore a morbid curiosity and managed to hook a goofy "Magical Negro"/Christ metaphor into it rather than writing some straight up horror novel about a prison with a lot of awful history and a possessed electric chair. Magical realism, I'd argue, instead of straight horror. The only active horror scene is the title of the third serial (The Bad Death of Edward Delacroix). Fundamentally, it's not any different than something like "A Very Old Man with Enormous Wings" or even, hurf, that turd of a John Travola movie, Michael. Someone or something with supernatural powers affects the people around them. But yeah, I agree that it was a way for King to explore a curiosity. Hell, he even says so in one of his author's notes. (Something like "because that's what people like me think about.")
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 02:36
|
|
|
I think it's in one of the authors notes that this was one of the stories he told himself to help him sleep and it just happened to be on his mind when someone mentioned the serial publication idea. I don't think King will ever do the "Horror Prison" novel though. Maybe back when he was more interested in what was in the shadows but a lot of his work now tends to be more character based than boogeyman. Also, a haunted electric chair? And I thought a lamp monster was bad. Whats it going to do, sneak out of its room at night and force people to sit on it? The idea of an executioner being a little too involved in his work or a haunted prison block sounds like old King, but the pulp novels are full of those types of books. An author (I don't recall his name) even crapped one out about a haunted office building which is really pushing the envelope. If you like domestic horror give Bentley Little a try. Some of his books are fun although the characters act in very weird ways and I couldn't really get into them. Website That seems to be an old one, here's his new one with a synopsis for the novels and a stereotypical weird looking author. Dispatch and the Mailman aren't bad for what they are. Local Group Bus fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Oct 7, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 03:23
|
|
|
Finished Under the Dome. It was pretty good outside of the dialogue of the kids. Also re-read The Eyes of the Dragon. This is my favorite King book, and his favorite work outside of The Walk. Is it [eyes] considered a Dark Tower tie in?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 05:10
|
|
|
Local Group Bus posted:
Not to derail, because this isn't The Worst Bentley Little Book Thread, but a warning to the curious: this guy is (unintentionally?) hilarious more often than he is horrific. People don't act like sane human beings (as mentioned), plus supernatural forces function according to no consistent rules at all, and really lurid, deviant sex pops up with I think increasing frequency the more books he writes. At least, maybe that's still happening, I haven't read anything by him in a few years. Anyway what I am saying is that this guy is a modern-day American Garth Marenghi. So yes read him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 05:31
|
|
|
Supreme Allah posted:Finished Under the Dome. It was pretty good outside of the dialogue of the kids. There are a couple small references to it in I think the 3rd and 4th Dark Tower books. Delain is part of the alliance of kingdoms that Gilead leads, and Roland (Deschain) mentions the king from Eyes of the Dragon having killed the last dragon. I feel like there were a few others, also. Not to mention the Flagg connection.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2011 05:52
|
|
|
So, does anybody here LOVE The Mist like I do? I don't think it's the best story Stephen King has ever written, I think it's the best thing he's ever written, period. I love the beginning where David and Billy are cleaning up after the storm and the tumultuous relationship between the country-living writer (David) and the big-city lawyer (Brent). The realistic tension where David expresses condolences when Brent's classic car is crushed by a car even though Brent tried suing David about a tree. David's kid Billy isn't some magical retard; at first he's just a jubilant kid crashing around the wreckage of a storm. He wants mom and dad to come check out the totally awesome debris of what used to be the families boathouse and runs everywhere. The only thing he has to beware of is a downed power-line and some rusty nails. David himself is equally realistic: he's a level-headed artist. He's not a crack shot with a gun, he's not ex-special forces. He's a middle-class self-described sellout who appreciates the hard work that goes into creating art while feeling the driving need to provide for his family. He's a good dad. And then we get the scenario itself; it's not expounded upon that much. It just kind of happens. Apparently the military tore a dimension open to another world, possibly tied to some monstrous universe from The Dark Tower but that's completely besides the point. Monsters are in the mist, and the mist surrounds a grocery store filled with GREAT characters. You've all probably read it (and if you haven't YOU NEED TO because it's really awesome) but I think The Mist has the strongest ending of pretty much all his books. They escape... but they don't really escape. Salvation might lay in Hartford, but that's just something they heard on a garbled radio transmission. I really love The Mist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2011 04:41
|
|
|
I love the mist but I wasn't too impressed with the father sleeping with someone else while worried about his wife. I understand the explanations (fear and uncertainty can make people do out of character things, but I don't think either have actually made me want to have sex with someone) but I just don't get that part of the character. It's a great novella and the mix of suburban normality and absurd monsters reminds me a lot of Ramsay Campbells stuff, but I just never got to like the main character or understand why he did what he did it just seemed like a pointless sexual scenario and doesn't really lead anywhere. Compare it to Johnny Smith and Sarah(?) in the dead zone. Their relationship is much more developed, well of course it is because it's a novel, but really, that's not so true. Smith is out of the book for a long time at the start and she's moved on and yet I can understand what's between both those characters and recognise what that afternoon meant to them a lot more than I can the quick need for comfort sex in The Mist. Aside from that it's great b-grade horror movie stuff, something like a well written novelisation of one of those old 1950s big monster movies. Local Group Bus fucked around with this message at 05:14 on Oct 8, 2011 |
|
#
?
Oct 8, 2011 05:04
|
|
|
Local Group Bus posted:I love the mist but I wasn't too impressed with the father sleeping with someone else while worried about his wife. I understand the explanations (fear and uncertainty can make people do out of character things, but I don't think either have actually made me want to have sex with someone) but I just don't get that part of the character. For what it's worth, King claims that's the only part of the story that doesn't sit well with him either. Danse Macabre is the best King book for bathroom readin'.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2011 05:05
|
|
|
Isn't one of the changes to the film that they don't sleep together? Unless I'm remembering incorrectly the offer is there, but it never happens. Anyway, I'm reading 'On Writing' for the first time and it's a pretty great resource actually. Yes we know King's feelings on adverbs, but he also says almost straight away that he's as guilty as anyone else, he just wishes that he wasn't. It's also interesting to get his thoughts on 'Carrie', in that as a character she still leaves him utterly cold towards her, which is my problem with it too. Though the story he tells about the two schoolgirls he knew that inspired Carrie is a little bit heartbreaking.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2011 11:52
|
|
|
DeseretRain posted:Then he hits her after she plays a mean prank on the magic retard. Admittedly, what she did was mean- she was just as unlikable as every other character in this book- but that's no reason to hit her. Scaring Tom Cullen away from one of the few people in post Apocalyptic America who's willing to look after him (and not, say, shoot him in the face or tell him to go gently caress himself) kind of goes beyond "mean prank" and into the borders of "condemning to death". This is a guy so handicapped he doesn't know not to make himself ill with fruit or understand the concept of Pepto Bismol, remember. I agree that Frannie is godawfully unpleasant, though. And the whole Harold Lauder thing never really struck me as ringing true. Like, if you're faking being a decent dude to the extent that a sizeable percentage of the world's remaining population want you to be a government person and everyone loves you and calls you Hawk, then you'd end up being that kind of person. IN MY HUMBLE OPINION.
|
|
#
?
Oct 9, 2011 15:06
|
|
|
Darko posted:Nobody likes Fran. That Nick thing is weird; if you don't like flaws in characters or shades of moral grey, than that's not the type of book you'd like to read. And the "underage girl" was so annoying that him hitting her in a post apocalyptic wasteland seemed pretty understandable. She also shot at them with a rifle as they were leaving. Incidentally, I'm about 40% through The Stand, and it's my first King book other than Cell. I gotta say, whatever king-isms might get obnoxious, I'm really enjoying it, plodding pace and all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 01:34
|
|
|
A lot of the stuff in "weird things our grandparents say" in GBS reminds me of the discussion about King-isms in this thread. People just seem to get more repetitive as they get older. I liked Dark Half until I read Ebert's review of the movie where he says: Ebert posted:Another disappointment is that so little is done with the George Stark character, who is also played by Timothy Hutton, in a dual role that allows him to definitively shed his nice-guy image. Isn't there something wonderfully macabre (or darkly funny, anyway) about a creature who starts life as an unfinished embryo, ends up as a mad slasher, and would really rather be writing pulp fiction? ...and realized how much of a missed opportunity it was.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 03:21
|
|
|
jfjnpxmy posted:I agree that Frannie is godawfully unpleasant, though. And the whole Harold Lauder thing never really struck me as ringing true. Like, if you're faking being a decent dude to the extent that a sizeable percentage of the world's remaining population want you to be a government person and everyone loves you and calls you Hawk, then you'd end up being that kind of person. IN MY HUMBLE OPINION. Well a guy here hasn't gotten that far yet, so I'll spoil this, but from what I remember, Harold did kind of become a nice person, but Flagg working through...who was it...Nadine influenced him enough to do his ridiculous bomb thing. Allowed to do his own thing, he really would have been okay.
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 15:47
|
|
|
Harold got to gently caress Nadine in the rear end and mouth so I dunno what he was so pissed about
|
|
#
?
Oct 10, 2011 22:38
|
|
|
ZoDiAC_ posted:Harold got to gently caress Nadine in the rear end and mouth so I dunno what he was so pissed about Really, if anything Harold should have been dragging rear end from all that kinky non-vaginal sex he was having with Nadine. It's amazing he was able to concentrate on doing his regular job, let alone planning to make a bomb.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 00:10
|
|
|
Tumble posted:So, does anybody here LOVE The Mist like I do? I don't think it's the best story Stephen King has ever written, I think it's the best thing he's ever written, period.   I am in total agreement. I read some of King's novels as a kid, read The Mist, could never find another work of his to live up to it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 04:05
|
|
Knight of the
|
Sir Prancelot posted:What up Mist buddy? The Mist owns. The novella is really good, and (is this considered heresy around here?) so is the movie. They're different, of course, owing to the basic differences between book and film. But that doesn't make one inherently better than the other. I went into both cold about the time the movie came out. I read the novella, then the movie. A few months later, I re-watched the movie, then re-read the book. They're both good stories. I don't find one's ending superior to the other. The best part of the movie's ending, where the father kills everyone but himself in an act of mercy, including his son, before running out of bullets is that it makes the crazy Christian cult lady right. Not that I agree with the sentiment, but that it's another layer of irony on top of a story shrouded in metaphor. In the movie version, she's right. It does take a sacrifice, an almost Abrahamic sacrifice to win the day. The book's ending is more bleak overall and still entirely fitting. I love the group's final trek into the unknown. My imagination comes up with a thousand different results, each of which is surely more awesome and terrifying than the story that preceeded it. It's a good ending. And so is the movie's.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 13:29
|
|
|
Grandpa Pap posted:Really, if anything Harold should have been dragging rear end from all that kinky non-vaginal sex he was having with Nadine. It's amazing he was able to concentrate on doing his regular job, let alone planning to make a bomb. He's 16 too so that motherfucker should have been happy as a clam Best Stand character is Lloyd
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 14:55
|
|
|
I liked Glenn and his response to Flagg when they meet. That's probably my favourite part of the book actually. Glenn is such a well written character that I had no problem imagining his reaction and the start of the "Wests" downfall really begins with Lloyds reaction to the order Flagg gives him. The whole, "You're the boogeyman? Oh dear, we were all so afraid of you!" release of tension and the following laughter was inspired. I love how well it works in relation to Harold and Nadines expectations of Flagg as some kind of amazing and inspired leader when really all he was is the natural tendency for chaos to fall apart. Flagg fucks so many things up in that book that Boulder would have been in very big trouble had he just not been in charge at all.
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 16:15
|
|
|
Yeah Glenn is cool. Following on from what you were saying, via wiki:quote:Flagg offers Glen his freedom if he will "get down on (his) knees and beg for it." Glen refuses, laughing at the Dark Man for being so transparent, upon which Flagg orders Lloyd Henreid to execute him. "It’s all right, Mr. Henreid", Glen says as he dies, "you don’t know any better." Badass!
|
|
#
?
Oct 11, 2011 18:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 12:23 |
|
|
I just finished Bag of Bones and don't understand something. So Presumably the reason Devore wanted Kyra so badly was so he could take her off the TR and away from Sara's vengeful spirit. But then why does Rogette still try to kill Kyra even after Sara's influence has been negated
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2011 06:37
|
|