Marten’s screen time is pretty limited overall. Maybe they could hire Glover, shoot the beginning and ending Marten stuff, and then if he goes batshit insane they could get another guy for the Flagg stuff in the middle of the story. It would actually fit the story better than keeping Glover throughout.
So apparently Ron Howard likes the idea of Viggo as Roland. Others he apparently likes: Daniel Craig, Hugh Jackman and Jon Hamm.
Whoa - and did we know King had announced a possible 8th book in the series called The Wind Through the Keyhole?
I'm down with Viggo, he's very . . . nondescript. Fits easily into characters, I mean, without much "Hey it's Viggo!" baggage, per the slapfight in the Hobbit thread. Craig might have trouble seeming human enough, Jackman is a bit too soft, Hamm to happy, Brolin too redneck. Viggo is about right, he looks like a dried up cowboy but he can pull off the knight-errant personality of Roland.
I knew there was supposed to be another entry in the series, but I hadn't heard a name. If I'm not mistaken it is expected to take place some time between the 4th and 5th book, won't feature the main ka-tet, but might have a cameo by Oy.
We have a brief thread somewhere in the books section about that book (dunno if they are the same), but I'll be damned if I can find it with the new google search, and when I run an advanced search it feels like I'm bringing the whole site down since the results take so long.
I don't think Viggo has the voice for it, although he could potentially look and act the part otherwise. Roland needs more gravel.
In Dark Tower collector nerd news: Friend of mine received a Donald M. Grant 1st edition of The Gunslinger from his girlfriend as a Christmas gift. Pretty awesome.
Viggo is actually a bit of a chameleon - his pre-LOTR roles are pretty diverse. He wouldn't be the worst casting, and has a grizzled look. It seems unlikely that any of those people mentioned would commit to this project for the extent necessary (2 seasons of TV plus the movies).
I'm stuck- I can't picture anyone but Clint Eastwood. That's the only guy I see, even when i first read The Gunslinger, and now he's too old for it.
I dunno, Roland always sounded tired to me, not gravelly like Clint. Soft-spoken, world-weary, manic-depressed. I'd just like to reiterate that I'm still available for the role. I'll walk to California for it, should be Hollywood thin by the time I get there.
Unforgiven Clint. Gravelly and world-weary.
You'd make a better Eddie.
Right personality, but way too old. Roland is only forty or so in the books, not a tough sixty-five. I would also say he's not resigned or confused, he's obsessed and half-mad from his long chase. Haunted, with occasional showers of optimism.
Yeah, and I think that's my problem. The Roland in my head is too old.
Just cast Jackie Earle Haley. Done.
Ugh. No. I said handsome but not pretty, remember? He's neither. :)
I still think Andrew Lincoln could pull it off it Viggo's unavailable.
What about someone like Billy Crudup? Or Christian Bale? Too delicate in appearance?
No, I think you have the right of it. Roland is around 50 by appearance. At best, a very old mid-40s.
Well, in The Gunslinger he wasn't quite so old until the chat with The Man in Black at the end of the book. Then near the end of the series he begins to age much more rapidly. But there is a big fat chunk of story that takes place where looking mid 40s sounds about right.
And up until a certain point in the novels, it seems like he's aging pretty rapidly. At least my perception of him got older and older as the books went on.
I definitely had to keep readjusting my mental image of him. I kept picturing him as Eastwood around 40, but the descriptions of Roland in the last three books point to a much older-looking man.
I think he was younger in The Gunslinger, but it was my impression that A LOT of time passed after he caught up to Walter.
Wasn't it given as 10 years in the book?
And then this:
Was it? It's been a while. I remember that Walter was a skeleton when he woke up, but wasn't it left kind of ambiguous? Maybe it was a trick or something?
I really need to read it again.