Can you talk about how you became involved in the TV
adaptation of "Under the Dome"?
I'd actually heard from a friend early on that Stephen King namechecks [me in the book]. So I read the book largely out of my own giant ego to begin with, but also because I'm a tremendous Stephen King fan. As I was reading it, looking for my own name, I was also falling in love with the story. I thought it was so compelling and I loved the world.
When I heard that DreamWorks wanted to use the book as a launching pad to tell this story as an ongoing series, not as a miniseries, that's when I got excited. I loved the book, but I didn't want to just tell it over again and do a literal adaptation. For a while [the TV show was developed for] Showtime, and they were great. They were really supportive of it, and [then they headed] sort of in the "Homeland" direction, and maybe something that was genre wasn't a great fit. But [Showtime president] David Nevins kindly called CBS and said, "Hey, maybe you guys should take a look at this." And it came together very quickly at CBS.
There are quite a few Stephen King movie and TV adaptations out there, and I don't think I'm being too harsh by saying that not a lot of them are actually top-tier or do a great job of capturing what people love about his work. Why do you think that is?
Well, I think any adaptation is hard. I think it's always tough when you jump from one medium to another, particularly with horror. In a novel, you get to make that monster in your head, and in film and TV, there's no hiding behind your audience's imagination. You have to show it, and you definitely lose something.
But at the same time, there have been adaptations like "Stand by Me," which is exquisite. It just so perfectly captures what was great about that book and did something new with it, as well. I think Stephen King is probably not a huge fan of [Stanley] Kubrick's "Shining," but I loved that movie and I loved that book. I can see why they both work, even though they're very different.
Read full interview at HuffPost
I'd actually heard from a friend early on that Stephen King namechecks [me in the book]. So I read the book largely out of my own giant ego to begin with, but also because I'm a tremendous Stephen King fan. As I was reading it, looking for my own name, I was also falling in love with the story. I thought it was so compelling and I loved the world.
When I heard that DreamWorks wanted to use the book as a launching pad to tell this story as an ongoing series, not as a miniseries, that's when I got excited. I loved the book, but I didn't want to just tell it over again and do a literal adaptation. For a while [the TV show was developed for] Showtime, and they were great. They were really supportive of it, and [then they headed] sort of in the "Homeland" direction, and maybe something that was genre wasn't a great fit. But [Showtime president] David Nevins kindly called CBS and said, "Hey, maybe you guys should take a look at this." And it came together very quickly at CBS.
There are quite a few Stephen King movie and TV adaptations out there, and I don't think I'm being too harsh by saying that not a lot of them are actually top-tier or do a great job of capturing what people love about his work. Why do you think that is?
Well, I think any adaptation is hard. I think it's always tough when you jump from one medium to another, particularly with horror. In a novel, you get to make that monster in your head, and in film and TV, there's no hiding behind your audience's imagination. You have to show it, and you definitely lose something.
But at the same time, there have been adaptations like "Stand by Me," which is exquisite. It just so perfectly captures what was great about that book and did something new with it, as well. I think Stephen King is probably not a huge fan of [Stanley] Kubrick's "Shining," but I loved that movie and I loved that book. I can see why they both work, even though they're very different.
Read full interview at HuffPost
Streaming Options
